A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CULTURAL GLOBALIZATION WITH INDIVIDUALISM AND COLLECTIVISM (RESEARCH SUBJECT: SHIRAZ CITY)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".