MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388610644 · doi:10.36923/jicc.v18i2.759

Revisiting Individualism-Collectivism A Cross-Cultural Comparison among College Students in Four Countries

2018· article· en· W4388610644 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jung-Soo Yi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intercultural Communication · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollectivismIndividualismConstructiveCross-culturalValue (mathematics)Hofstede's cultural dimensions theoryCultural diversityPsychologyCultural valuesSocial psychologyDimension (graph theory)SociologySocial sciencePolitical scienceAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to investigate the validity, fruitfulness, and constructive potential of Individualism-collectivism dimension in the contemporary world. With increasing interrelationship among countries and improvement of technologies and transportations, value differences among cultures might not be as significant as what people thought before. A questionnaire was constructed, tested, and distributed to 2,000 college students in South Korea, Japan, Canada, and the United States. Among the 1,547 questionnaires returned, 1,495 were included in the analysis. Although differences in cultural values still exist among college students in all four countries, the findings of the present study indicate meaningful implications on cultural changes in the modern world. To draw more accurate guidelines on cultural tendencies, the present study suggests that further investigations should explore other factors such as age, occupations, education, degrees of contact with people in other cultures, and use of technologies and media.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.112
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.348 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intercultural CommunicationSame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207