Individualism, collectivism, and emotion regulation: a cross-cultural examination among young adults from seven countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Individualism and collectivism are dimensions of cultural variation thought to shape differences in emotion regulation tendencies, yet research to date has examined these cultural dimensions as country-level features, emphasizing variability across nations. The present study takes the approach of examining cultural differences within nations as predictors of emotion regulation strategies, shifting the perspective instead to individual differences. This present study aimed to address how individual endorsement of individualism-collectivism (i.e. prioritizing individual versus group goals) and vertical-horizontal attitudes (preference for hierarchy versus equality) are associated with use of emotion regulation strategies (i.e., reappraisal and suppression) among college students from seven countries ( n = 5,900; female = 70.80%). Overall, we found that individual differences in individualism-collectivism and vertical-horizontal attitudes had strong connections with young adults’ emotion regulation styles. Results of our multivariate (i.e., all variables were simultaneously examined) regression model revealed: a) higher endorsement of horizontal individualism and horizontal collectivism were associated with higher use of reappraisal strategies; b) higher endorsement of horizontal individualism and vertical collectivism were associated with higher use of suppression strategies; while higher endorsement of horizontal collectivism was associated with lower use of suppression strategies. A multi-group model supported the generalizability of these associations across countries. These findings demonstrate the value of approaching cultural differences in emotion regulation from an individual differences framework, and not assuming country-level differences are representative of individuals’ affective experiences. Further work is needed examining models within-country to examine cultural variation in individualism vs collectivism compared to country-level norms.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".