Cultural Thinking Orientation & the Bullwhip Effect: Does the Way We Make Decisions Impact Supply & Demand?

Economists and researchers have long studied consumer thought and decision-making in order to understand supply and demand.

They’ve uncovered a phenomenon called the “bullwhip effect.”

This is a supply chain event where small oscillations in demand at the retail level result in increasingly larger oscillations in demand at other supplier levels, such wholesale, distributer, raw material, and manufacturer levels.

When you consider this phenomenon, visualize the cracking of a whip.

A small flick of the wrist sends a wave outwards.

Panic-Buying & The Market

One example of the bullwhip effect is panic-buying.

Consider the instinct to buy up all the toilet paper and hand sanitizer during the COVID pandemic. 

As stores struggled to keep their shelves stocked, orders increased, and manufacturers worked hard to meet that demand.

But eventually, they overproduce, as consumers stop panicking and ease up on the supply.

This is one way the bullwhip effect manifests.

But does our cultural thinking orientation influence this, as well?

Researchers of this study were interested in the dynamics of a culture’s holistic versus analytic thinking orientation – and what its relationship is to the bullwhip effect.

The Hypothesis: Holistic Thinking Reduces Bullwhip Effect

The hypothesis of the study posits that a stronger holistic thinking orientation might be associated with a reduction in the bullwhip effect. 

This is because holistic thinkers tend to make more extensive use of information, and higher reported information use might also be linked to a reduced bullwhip effect.

The Study’s Results: The Short Answer is ‘No’

Using the “beer game” – a simulation designed around the complexities of supply chain management – researchers found no evidence supporting the hypothesized relationship between the overall holistic versus analytic thinking orientation and the bullwhip effect.

One possible explanation for this lack of correlation could be cognitive limitations faced by individuals when dealing with an abundance of information in the beer game. 

If both holistic and analytic thinkers have similar cognitive capacities, neither thinking orientation may have an advantage in handling the overwhelming information. 

As a result, even if holistic thinkers focused more on contextual information, they might not integrate it into decision-making to a greater extent than analytic thinkers due to these cognitive constraints. 

This is further supported by the finding that the thinking orientation did not correlate with the reported use of information, indicating that both groups utilized available contextual information similarly.

What the research found was that thinking orientation didn’t impact this relationship on the whole…although, it did impact the decision-making of different subdomains of thinkers.

The Subdomains

A negative correlation was observed between a specific subdomain of the holistic versus analytic thinking orientation and the bullwhip effect. 

This indicates that certain aspects of decision-makers‘ thinking styles might indeed influence supply chain variability.

When considering the subdomains of the holistic versus analytic thinking orientation, the relationship between the subdomain concerning causal attribution and the bullwhip effect stood out. 

Decision-makers who assumed less complex causal relationships performed worse in terms of the bullwhip effect.

Moreover, the study revealed that holistic thinking did not correlate with reported information use. 

Instead, only the reported use of specific information demonstrated a negative association with the bullwhip effect. 

This finding implies that the nature and relevance of the information being utilized might be critical in mitigating supply chain fluctuations.

This study of the dynamics within supply chains can serve as a basis for developing more effective strategies to manage demand variability.

A balanced combination of holistic and analytic thinking might yield the most beneficial outcomes, with a focus on immediate processes (analytic thinking) while considering more distant processes to some extent (holistic thinking).

Cognition and Information Design: How Different Cultures Use the WWW

In the realm of online user experiences, culture’s impact on information design and usability has often been overlooked, even though studies have shown its relevance to user preferences and performance. 

Communication researchers seek to shed light on this crucial aspect and explore whether users navigate and prefer websites created by designers from their own cultural backgrounds.

This study proposed to enhance computer-mediated communication by acknowledging and accommodating the diverse cognitive styles that arise from different cultural influences. 

East Asian cultures have been associated with holistic cognitive styles, while Western cultures tend to exhibit more analytical cognitive approaches. 

Leveraging this contrast, researchers put forth the concept of “cultural cognitive design,” which delves into how cognitive styles shaped by culture lead to distinct ways of organizing and designing information for the web. 

Cultures Use the Internet Differently

Studies in information technology have uncovered a correlation between culture’s influence on cognitive styles and individuals’ information-seeking behavior online.

Cognitive Styles & Online Learning – A representative study by Chen and Macredie (2002) highlighted how cognitive style impacts online learning, revealing that users with different cognitive preferences exhibit varying learning inclinations when navigating hypermedia systems. 

Graff et al. (2004) also examined how individual differences in cognitive styles are significantly linked to nationality, urging the design of online learning modules to consider the impact of learning styles on attitudes.

Communication Technology & Social Relationships – Lin’s (2003) mediated communication model emphasized the integral role of communication technology in shaping the social relationships of its users. 

Further, Chau et al. (2002) presented a four-factor model based on the diverse online behaviors of cross-cultural users, demonstrating that Hong Kong users tend to use the Web for social communication more frequently than US users. 

These insights carry profound implications for site designers who aim to cater to an international audience.

Creating web content for millions of global users necessitates careful organization that considers cultural differences. 

Ultimately, a user-centered approach acknowledging cultural nuances becomes the key to delivering a rich and meaningful online experience for people worldwide.

The Experimental Study

In an experimental setting, participants in the present study were asked to evaluate the quality of six different websites using a culturally influenced appraisal process. 

This in-lab test seemingly evoked emotional responses from the participants due to the open-ended and qualitative nature of the research questions, allowing for deeper consideration compared to typical performance-based studies. 

The participants’ reflections played a crucial role in cultural cognition, where affect became intertwined with attitudes, expectations, and motivations

While long-established cultural traits shape cognitive processes, spontaneous emotional responses based on evolving values can rapidly alter behavior. 

The in-lab experiment provided participants with time to reflect on their experience with the websites, leading to affective appraisals. 

At the same time, an online experiment by Faiola & Matei (2005b) showed that participants from the same culture as the web designer completed tasks more quickly. 

Introducing the influence of cultural preference triggered emotional processes of appraisal. 

Additionally, the participants’ cognitive performance in the online experiment exhibited a strong relationship between web design and national origin. 

The cultural preferences of the participants aligned with their developed cultural cognitive processes, indicating that emotional responses heavily influenced participant web preferences.

Interpreting the Results

The findings suggested that individuals with a holistic cognitive style tend to adopt a global approach to learning and organizing information, identifying clear interrelationships among topics during the discovery process. 

Chinese designers, for instance, may create implicit relationships between different parts of a web menu system. 

On the other hand, individuals with an analytic cognitive style, like Americans, emphasize the division of information into hierarchical categories, keeping most information hidden within the hierarchy.

These cognitive patterns, influenced by cultural styles, significantly impact content design. 

By embracing cultural diversity in information design, the online user experience can be enriched, and developers can foster more inclusive digital environments.

Family Change Theory: Modernization Synthesizes Eastern & Western Family Models

Families evolve at multiple levels.

At least, that’s what Kagitcibasi’s (2007) family change theory suggests.

These levels are defined by cultural orientations, living conditions, and family structures.

Before we delve into this recent research, let’s define the levels of Family Change Theory.

Levels of Family Change Theory

  • Level 1: The first level involves the overall cultural orientation and socio-ecological conditions. Whether it’s individualism versus collectivism or the urban-rural divide, these factors shape the very fabric of family structures (i.e. the close-knit extended families of collectivist societies or the independent nuclear families of individualistic cultures).
  • Level 2: The second level is the heart of family change theory. Here, the structure of families, according to their cultural and socio-economic factors, is centric. From high or low fertility rates to the presence of material and emotional interdependencies, these aspects create certain cultural family dynamics.
  • Level 3: The third level involves the family systems. Here, parents’ socialization values and practices sculpt the developing self and value orientations of their children. The essential distinction between material and emotional interdependencies becomes apparent. In this model, emotional closeness and relationship orientation remain the same, while personal autonomy, no longer a threat, rises according to the modern work environment.

The Study & the Model of Emotional Interdependence

This study focuses on the last level of Family Change Theory: the model of emotional interdependence.

In independent Western cultures, autonomy reigns supreme.

Material and emotional interdependencies are de-emphasized, as modern social security systems offer economic independence.

Meanwhile, across the vast non-Western, collectivist territories, the family model of (total) interdependence thrives. 

Here, extended families and high fertility levels abound. 

Children are valued for both emotional and utilitarian reasons, shouldering the responsibility of supporting the family and caring for their elders. 

Material and emotional interdependencies reign, as personal autonomy takes a backseat.

The model of emotional interdependence, on the other hand, is a synthesis of these contrasting models.

As modernization processes sweep through interdependent family cultures, material interdependencies wane, and traditional hierarchies crumble. 

Yet, emotional closeness and relationship orientation remain, fostering a balance where personal autonomy coexists harmoniously with family bonds.

Results

Using these models, researchers studied two generations of three diverse cultures – Germany, Turkey, and India.

A total of 919 mother-adolescent dyads were submitted to the study.

Three distinct clusters were revealed, each representing a distinct family model: independence, interdependence, and the synthesis of the two, emotional interdependence. 

The discovery of this emotionally interdependent value pattern was an empirically groundbreaking validation of family change theory.

The second significant revelation came from the comparisons across cultures, social strata, and regions within Turkey and India. 

As anticipated by family change theory, the preferences for these family models differed significantly among the three cultures and even within regions and generations. 

The allure of specific family models appeared to be influenced by cultural backgrounds and the ever-evolving societal landscape.

The third key insight emerged from the examination of intergenerational value similarity within families. 

The study revealed that while there was significant similarity in family models across cultures, the level of generational resemblance was not extraordinarily high. 

This suggests that family models are subject to relative transmission within individual families, offering insights into the complexities of cultural stability and change.

However, what truly captivated the researchers was the family model of emotional interdependence. 

It blended emotional and material interdependencies, presenting a compelling transitional phenomenon. 

In this model, family members emphasized strong emotional bonds, while material interdependencies (and traditional hierarchies) seemed to wane due to the impact of modernization processes. 

This balance of emotional closeness and rising autonomy orientation challenged conventional assumptions, hinting at the possibility of evolving family dynamics.

While the cross-sectional design of the study presented some limitations, it offered a fascinating glimpse into the cultural traditions and societal changes within families. 

The intriguing question of whether the family model of emotional interdependence might eventually lead to the independent family model opens up new horizons for future research.

Self-Assertive Interdependence: The Paradox of Arab Culture

How does one become self-assertive in an interdependent culture?

It might seem like a paradox.

After all, interdependent cultures generally prioritize harmony over self.

Being bold or self-assertive might be seen as “rocking the boat.”

But Arab culture is the exception that proves the rule.

Although it’s a treasure trove of rich heritage, Arab culture is often overlooked in the realms of cultural psychology

This study explores a unique interdependence, infused with a self-assertiveness that sets Arabs apart.

How Landscape Shapes Culture

Picture a world shaped by harsh ecological and climatic environments, where survival hinges upon the protection and unity of tribal groups

Within the tapestry of Arabian cultures, a code of honor emerges, demanding respect and trustworthiness as integral traits of every individual. 

As this study’s hypothesis takes shape, the pieces align.

East Meets West

Study 1 reveals the captivating psychological profile of Arabs, bridging the gap between East and West

Like their Eastern counterparts, Arabs showcase interdependence and holism, embracing the profound connections that bind us. 

But, in a fascinating twist, they combine this interdependence with a self-assertiveness akin to Western cultures

These cultural intricacies defy simplistic categorizations.

Motives Behind Self-Assertiveness

Study 2 and Study 3 paint an even more vivid picture, illuminating the underlying motivations that drive self-assertiveness in Arabs and Westerners. 

For Arabs, their self-assertiveness serves the greater cause of interdependence, amplifying their sense of unity and communal strength

On the other hand, Westerners channel their self-assertiveness towards independence, valuing individual autonomy as a cornerstone of their cultural fabric.

Nuance is Everything

The authors’ work marks a significant milestone in the ever-evolving landscape of cultural psychology.

Beyond the conventional East versus West, interdependence versus independence paradigm, it uncovers the nuanced complexities of Arab culture. 

The study contributes to a deeper understanding of human diversity and the interplay between socioecological environments and cultural identities.

How Much Does Culture Influence Gender Stereotypes

Does culture influence the way that we perceive gender?

Or are masculine and feminine gender roles and stereotypes universal?

Three compelling studies unveil the influence of cultural values on the contents of these stereotypes, shedding light on the dynamic interplay between society and our perceptions of gender.

Study 1: Women as Interdependent, Men as Independent

At first glance, the authors of Study 1 expected two straightforward main effects. 

  • 1) East Asians would be perceived as more interdependent compared to their Western counterparts
  • 2) Within each culture, men would be seen as more independent than women—a pattern deeply entrenched in our societal fabric. 

Study 1 begins with Americans, who perceive men as less interdependent than women. 

But in Korea, the script actually flips, defying the “universal” gender stereotype of male independence. 

Koreans, in their unique cultural lens, perceive men as more interdependent than women, revealing the nuance between cultural values and gender perceptions.

As it turns out, men embody the traits that hold sway in their respective societies.

Study 2: Bicultural Norms Align According to Language

Study 2 introduces us to the world of bicultural Korean Americans, navigating the transition between languages and cultural frames. 

As they complete surveys, the language they use becomes a catalyst for transformation. 

In English, men are perceived as less interdependent, aligning with American cultural norms

However, in Korean, men are seen as more interdependent, mirroring the values of their Korean heritage.

Study 3: Gender Stereotypes Morph According to Dominant Cultural Preferences

Study 3 sees American college students take center stage. 

Ambitiousness and sociability emerge as focal points, representing the cultural values cherished at their respective universities. 

These values shape perceptions of a male student. 

Whatever trait is hailed as the pinnacle of cultural importance becomes the beacon through which his character is judged. 

Culture, like a master sculptor, molds the contents of gender stereotypes with a deft hand.

Conclusion

These studies ignite a flame of understanding, illuminating the dialogue between culture and gender perceptions. 

They reveal the malleability of stereotypes, challenged by the diverse tapestry of human experiences shaped by culture. 

As we continue to place gender and culture, we delve deeper into the realm of societal influence, recognizing the power cultural values hold in shaping our perceptions of masculinity and femininity.

How Does Personal Control & Relationship Strain Affect Well-Being in Independent/Interdependent Cultures

Do you feel personal control contributes most to your health and well-being?

How does relational strain come into play?

To investigate the relationship between culture and well-being, a cross-cultural survey was conducted, focusing on two hypotheses and the two very different cultures of Japan and America

The Hypotheses

The first hypothesis suggests that individuals are influenced by the predominant cultural norms of either independence (emphasizing personal control) in the United States or interdependence (emphasizing relational harmony) in Japan.

The second hypothesis proposes that individuals attain well-being and health by aligning with the cultural mandates of their respective societies. 

Ethnocentricity & Previous Studies

Previous studies, predominantly conducted in North America, have consistently found that personal control and mastery are strong predictors of well-being and health (Lachman and Weaver, 1998; Schneiderman et al., 2001). 

However, this may be a somewhat ethnocentric view.

The present research, utilizing diverse age groups from both the United States and Japan, reveals that the impact of these factors is contingent on cultural context

While biological factors certainly play a role in health, this survey highlights the significant influence of culture-specific psychological variables, such as personal control and relational harmony or strain, on various health outcomes.

The Results

Consistent with the first hypothesis, it was found that Americans who felt their personal control was compromised and Japanese individuals experiencing strained relationships reported higher levels of perceived constraint.

As expected, the study revealed that the strongest predictor of well-being and health in the United States was personal control, whereas in Japan, the absence of relational strain played a significant role.

The data revealed relatively small but statistically significant effects of relational harmony or relational strain on wellbeing and health among Americans. 

The overall results highlight the existence of culturally distinct pathways to achieving positive life outcomes.

In the United States, personal control emerges as a crucial factor, whereas in Japan, the absence of relational strain is key. 

These findings underscore the influence of cultural values on individual well-being and emphasize the importance of understanding cultural nuances when studying and promoting positive life outcomes.

Does Emotional Support Positively Benefit Well-Being? That May Depend on Culture

When you hear “emotional support,” you might think of positive actions like understanding, encouragement, compassion, and comfort.

Emotional support is commonly seen as essential for forming and maintaining friendships, providing a sense of help, tangible support, and self-worth. 

Existing studies have highlighted the positive impact of emotional support on health and well-being, emphasizing its role in combating loneliness and improving overall health outcomes.

Interestingly, some researchers have found that the perception of emotional support does not always lead to positive effects on subjective well-being and can even have adverse effects. 

According to Fisher et al. (1982)

“Recipients of support often ‘experience negative consequences including feelings of failure, inferiority, and dependency’ and thus ‘in many instances “[they] bite the hands that feed them”’ (p. 27).”

This apparent contradiction prompted this study published by sage, exploring the cultural underpinnings of the benefits or absence of benefits associated with perceived emotional support.

Independence-Interdependence Theory

Drawing on the independence-interdependence theory of cultural self, the researchers argue that in cultures that value independence, the direct link between perceived emotional support and well-being may be compromised. 

This is because perceiving oneself as dependent on support can conflict with the importance placed on independence. 

On the other hand, in cultures that prioritize interdependence, perceived emotional support is expected to have clear and positive effects on well-being.

To test this hypothesis, the study examines subjective well-being and reported physical health among college students (Study 1) and nonstudent adults (Study 2). 

By considering different cultural contexts, the research aims to shed light on the role of culture in shaping the effectiveness of perceived emotional support in promoting well-being.

The Study

Study 1 found that among Euro-American college students, the positive effect of perceived emotional support on subjective well-being was weak and virtually nonexistent once self-esteem was taken into account. 

On the other hand, in testing Japanese and Filipinos in Asia, even after controlling for self-esteem, perceived emotional support positively predicted subjective well-being

Study 2 extended the research by examining Japanese and American adults in midlife. 

The results supported Study 1.

The evidence suggests that cultural orientations towards independence or interdependence influence the way individuals perceive and benefit from emotional support. 

Those cultures that are more interdependent are more likely to benefit from perceived emotional support in terms of well-being and physical health.

These findings have implications for understanding the role of cultural context in shaping social support processes and interventions to promote well-being.

Coronavirus: How Did Culture Impact Compliance?

The coronavirus pandemic taught us many things about human nature.

We are a social people. Toilet paper is important. And many people hate covering their face.

It also showed us that the way different countries dealt with the pandemic proved more or less effective and largely dependent upon compliance from the population.

New research aimed to explore attitudes towards health compliance and psychological responses within the context of cultural frameworks of individualism and collectivism

Cultural Orientation

The findings, based on data from Chinese university students, revealed that cultural orientations significantly predicted attitudes toward compliance and psychological responses.

The study found a high overall endorsement of restrictive measures. 

Compared to Japanese and American counterparts, Chinese participants exhibited the highest acceptance of society-level preventive measures. 

This strong compliance with social distancing can be attributed to the strict isolation measures implemented by the Chinese government. 

However, despite behavioral compliance, participants might have had personal reservations about individual-level precautions, such as wearing gloves when shopping or disclosing travel history.

Predictors of Compliance

Several predictors shed light on Chinese participants’ attitudes toward compliance. 

Gender was one such predictor, with female students demonstrating a greater willingness to comply than males.

Additionally, cultural orientations at the individual level played a significant role. 

Vertical collectivism (VC) predicted positive attitudes towards compliance, as it fostered a strong group identity and respect for authority

Horizontal collectivism (HC), while promoting in-group commitment, did not lead to the same level of acceptance of preventive measures. 

Individualistic orientations had mixed effects, with horizontal individualism (HI) positively predicting compliance and vertical individualism (VI) predicting less favorable attitudes toward compliance.

Contrary to previous research on epidemics, the study found that concerns about the virus did not notably predict positive attitudes toward compliance. 

Instead, psychological distress was positively predicted by VI and VC, indicating that those who valued uniqueness and competition or strong group identity experienced more negative psychological effects. 

In contrast, HC predicted less psychological distress, suggesting that individuals emphasizing equal responsibility within their in-group experienced fewer mental health problems.

Chinese college students were more willing to comply with preventive measures if they had higher VC and HI cultural orientations.

Trust

While trust was linked to attitudes towards compliance and psychological distress, it did not notably predict these variables in the regression models. 

This indicates that individual-level cultural orientations were more influential in explaining compliance attitudes and psychological responses than interpersonal trust.

The study highlighted the importance of considering psychological distress and cultural orientations in public health interventions to promote public cooperation. 

By incorporating individuals’ beliefs and concerns, effective strategies can be developed to fight infectious diseases without compromising democratic values.

Values & Communication: How Cultural Perspective Colors Our Speech

You’re flying to London, and you’re sitting by someone from another culture on the plane.

You decide to try and strike up a conversation.

You start chitchatting, sharing about your visit to London, asking about their final destination, wondering what their plans are…but they seem reluctant to speak.

They avoid eye contact and offer only short answers. After a while, you catch a clue and give them the solace of silence.

You walk away from the attempt at small talk with the impression that they’re shy.

While you may be right that they’re more introverted, their communication style may also simply be part of their culture.

In this study in the International Education Journal, titled “Why do they not talk?”, unique habits of communication were found in individualist and collectivist cultures.

The study evaluated the communication tactics of Australian and Chinese students to discover the distinct cultural differences that set each apart.

The Australians

The Australian students demonstrated a more independent self, emphasizing individuality in their communication. 

They expressed themselves openly and asserted their unique inner qualities in interactions with friends, parents, and in class. 

Their behavior was guided by their individual personalities rather than predefined roles. 

They appeared nonchalant about others’ opinions, focusing on being their own person while still desiring their parents’ pride.

The Chinese

In contrast, the Chinese students displayed a high degree of self-monitoring. 

They exhibited an interdependent self, prioritizing group harmony and considering others’ perceptions.

They were sensitive to others’ feelings and often hesitated to voice their opinions, particularly in class or group settings, for fear of imposing on others. 

Some researchers suggested that their attentiveness to others’ expectations might compromise their verbal fluency and creative expression. 

Additionally, the Chinese students tended to downplay their abilities and engage in self-effacement, adhering to societal expectations and valuing humility.

The Chinese students also demonstrated a strong inclination toward affiliating with groups that shared their language and cultural background. 

This sense of security and belonging contributed to their intense focus on working collectively and cooperatively as a group. 

It’s important to note that interdependence does not negate individual judgment, opinions, or abilities.

Instead, it highlights the adaptive nature of Chinese students who navigate interpersonal situations by balancing their self-awareness and agency.

As one student put it,

“As long as I know I am good, enough already. We were not brought up to brag about ourselves.”

Individualism vs. Collectivism

To sum up, the Australian students emphasized their individuality and personal expression in communication, while the Chinese students prioritized group harmony and were attuned to others’ perceptions. 

This is common in individualist versus collectivist cultures.

These cultural differences shape communication styles and strategies, highlighting the diverse ways in which individuals navigate social interactions.

The Theory of a Universal Structure of Human Values

What values do you consider “collectivist”? How about “individualist”?

If you had to explain your own values, under which headline would they fall?

This study examines the values of American, Indian, and Japanese populations. 

The intent of this cross-cultural research was to measure the individualist, collectivist, and mixed values in each culture to see where they fell.

First off, what constitutes an “individualist” versus a “collectivist” value?

The Values

The researchers used the theory of a universal structure of human values, proposed by Schwartz and Bilsky in 1987 (revised in 1992).

Each value is labeled individualist, collectivist, or mixed and are as follows:

  • Power: Attainment of social status, dominance, and control. (Individualist)
  • Achievement: Personal success and competence. (I)
  • Hedonism: Pleasure and enjoyment. (I)
  • Stimulation: Excitement, novelty, and a thrilling life. (I)
  • Self-Direction: Independent thought, action, and autonomy. (I)
  • Benevolence: Preserving and improving the welfare of others. (Collectivist)
  • Tradition: Respect for and acceptance of cultural customs and traditions. (C)
  • Conformity: Restraint of behaviors to maintain social order and harmony. (C)
  • Universalism: Understanding, tolerance, and protection for the welfare of all. (Mixed)
  • Security: Stability of self, relationships, and society. (M)
  • Spirituality: Finding meaning, inner harmony, and having a spiritual life. (M)

These values encompass a range of motivations and goals that individuals may prioritize in their lives.

The Results

Along with these value types were subcategories of value traits. 

And of these value traits, Americans, Indians, and Japanese participants were compatible in 14 of the 22 individualist values.

Of the collectivist values, participants were compatible in 13 out of 15.

Lastly, of the mixed values, there was compatibility in 9 out of 15 (and absolutely none regarding spiritual values).

The American participants, as expected, scored high on individualist values and mixed types. They had a preference for standing out from the crowd. 

Indians, on the other hand, were drawn to collectivist and mixed values. They believed in the power of unity. 

The Japanese students threw a bit of a curveball. They didn’t follow any clear pattern of individualism or collectivism.

This study suggests that no country – including the United States, India, or Japan – can be neatly labeled as just individualist or collectivist. Each has a melting pot of values.

Independent variables like gender, race, income, or media usage may also help us understand why individualistic and collectivist orientations coexist in the same cultures.