Cultural differences in values as self-guides

Wing-Yee Cheung, Gregory R. Maio, Kerry J. Rees, Shanmukh Kamble, Sangeetha Mane

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

10 Citations (SciVal)


Three studies tested whether individualism–collectivism moderates the extent to which values are endorsed as ideal self-guides and ought self-guides, and the consequences for regulatory focus and emotion. Across Studies 1 and 2, individualists endorsed values that are relatively central to the self as stronger ideals than oughts, whereas collectivists endorsed them as ideals and oughts to a similar degree. Study 2 found that individualists justified central values using reasons that were more promotion focused than prevention focused, whereas collectivists used similar amount of prevention-focused and promotion-focused reasons. In Study 3, individualists felt more dejected after violating a central (vs. peripheral) value and more agitated after violating a peripheral (vs. central) value. Collectivists felt a similar amount of dejection regardless of values centrality and more agitation after violating central (vs. peripheral) values. Overall, culture has important implications for how we regulate values that are central or peripheral to our self-concept
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)769–781
Number of pages13
JournalPersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Issue number6
Early online date4 May 2016
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2016


  • Values
  • Cultural values
  • Self Concept

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology


Dive into the research topics of 'Cultural differences in values as self-guides'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this