MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2197689642

A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CULTURAL GLOBALIZATION WITH INDIVIDUALISM AND COLLECTIVISM (RESEARCH SUBJECT: SHIRAZ CITY)

2014· article· en· W2197689642 sur OpenAlexaff
Bizhan Khajenoori, Parnian Leila, Maziar Jafari

Notice bibliographique

RevueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueCultural Differences and Values
Établissements canadiensUniversité Laval
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésIndividualismCollectivismGlobalizationSociologyIndividualistic cultureCultural globalizationModernitySocial scienceSocial psychologyPsychologyPolitical scienceLaw
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction The globalization culture refers to liberal broadcasting of culture, advances in IT, and changes in value systems, meaning systems and practices and lifestyles of communities. One of the effects of cultural globalization, which can be reproduced in the framework of the new values and lifestyles, is individualism. As a modern concept, individualism stands in contrast to collectivism and with its "I" (instead of "we") guides human behavior. Although the passion and commitment to the goals of the group form the basis of any social gathering, in individualistic societies, people tend to act based on their individual interests. Thus, the prevalence of individualism in the era of cultural globalization can hinder social development and lead to such problems as social isolation, reduction of the convergence and mutual trust, narcissism, selfishness, creation of very fragile and unstable social relations, family fragmentation, etc. Among different age groups of society, the youth tend to have a higher level of cultural receptivity and more contacts with the symbols and instruments of modernity and global ideas. Hence, the study of cultural globalization and individualism among this particular group is of crucial importance. Materials and Methods This study is based on quantitative approach in which the youth's tendency towards individualism and collectivism is measured in the city of Shiraz according to a theoretical framework composed of Giddens's views about globalization and lifestyle and Triandes' theory about individualism and collectivism. The study method was survey and the data was collected by a research-made questionnaire. Sample size includes 533 young citizens of Shiraz who were selected by random quota sampling method. Formal validity and construct validity of the instrument were obtained by operationalization of lifestyle, individualism and collectivism as research variables; we used factor analysis to guarantee construct validity. The variable of individualism has four dimensions of self-reliance, competitiveness, ambition and emotional distance, whereas collectivism variable has three dimensions of unity and integration, self-sacrifice and interdependence. Discussion of Results and Conclusions The results of the study show that individualism has a significant correlation with lifestyle in general and modern recreational lifestyle, figurative lifestyle, friendly lifestyle and lifestyle focused on body management in particular. Also, collectivism has a significant correlation with modern recreational lifestyle, religious lifestyle and recreational – traditional lifestyle and lifestyle in general. Such correlations confirm the theoretical framework and principles of the study, which talk about the modern nature of individualism. Considering today's modern culture, which is associated with an abundance economy and the variety of selections, it is possible to talk about different lifestyles because the youth play a role in creating different styles and preferences in fields such as body management, how to pass recreation time, cooperation pattern, etc. Such differences make it possible for the youth to easily show behaviors which are specific to certain lifestyles and are simultaneously different from others. As a result of such diversity in lifestyles, the youth experience less homogeneity and similarity and more feelings of independence, distinguished status, and individuality.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,008
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0020,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,687
Tête enseignante GPT0,642
Écart entre enseignants0,045 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Même sujetCultural Differences and ValuesTravaux en français237 207