From one mind to many: the emerging science of cultural norms

Difficulty-as-Improvement: The Courage to Keep Going in the Face of Life's Difficulties

When a task or goal is hard to think about or do, people can infer that it is a waste of their time (difficulty-as-impossibility) or valuable to them (difficulty-as-importance). Separate from chosen tasks and goals, life can present unchosen difficulties. Building on identity-based motivation theory, people can see these as opportunities for self-betterment (difficulty-as-improvement). People use this language when they recall or communicate about difficulties (autobiographical memories, Study 1; "Common Crawl" corpus, Study 2). Our difficulty mindset measures are culture-general (Australia, Canada, China, India, Iran, New Zealand, Turkey, the United States, Studies 3-15, N = 3,532). People in Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic (WEIRD)-er countries slightly agree with difficulty-as-improvement. Religious, spiritual, conservative people, believers in karma and a just world, and people from less-WEIRD countries score higher. People who endorse difficulty-as-importance see themselves as conscientious, virtuous, and leading lives of purpose. So do endorsers of difficulty-as-improvement-who also see themselves as optimists (all scores lower for difficulty-as-impossibility endorsers).

Emotion Norms Are Unique

Emotion norms shape the pursuit, regulation, and experience of emotions, yet much about their nature remains unknown. Like other types of social norms, emotion norms reflect intersubjective consensus, vary in both content and strength, and benefit the well-being of people who adhere to them. However, we propose that emotion norms may also be a unique type of social norm. First, whereas social norms typically target behaviors, emotion norms can target both expressive behavior and subjective states. Second, whereas it may be possible to identify universally held social norms, norms for emotions may lack any universality. Finally, whereas social norms are typically stronger in more collectivist cultures, emotion norms appear to be stronger in more individualist cultures. For each of the potentially distinct features of emotion norms suggested above, we highlight new directions for future research.

Threatened humanity in a tight world: Cultural tightness results in self-objectification

Self-objectification can be considered as a specific kind of self-dehumanization that consists of a perception of oneself as more instrument-like than human-like and a decreased self-attribution of mental states. Self-objectification is commonly observed, and its contributing factors need to be better understood. In the present research, we examined whether cultural tightness, which entails strong social norms and punishments for deviant behaviors, is an antecedent to self-objectification. Our hypotheses were confirmed by four studies, involving quasi-experiments and fully controlled experiments ( N = 2,693). In particular, Chinese college students living in a region with a tight culture (compared to a loose culture, Study 1), American employees working in an industry with a tight corporate culture (compared to a loose culture, Study 2), American participants who were induced to support cultural tightness (vs. cultural looseness, Study 3), and those who were situated in a simulated tight culture (vs. a loose culture, Study 4) all showed increased levels of self-objectification. As such, they acknowledged their personhood less and focused more on their instrumentality. Implications are discussed.

How culture influences consumer creativity: A dual perspective of multiculturalism and loose-tight culture

In the context of globalization, consumers with multicultural experiences are increasingly involved in the process of value creation, yet there is a lack of understanding of how multiculturalism affects consumer creativity. Based on the dual perspectives of multiculturalism and loose-tight culture, this paper illustrates the mechanism of multicultural experience on consumer creativity and the moderating effect of loose-tight culture on this relationship. Two studies (a questionnaire study and an experimental study) were conducted to validate the theoretical model. The results revealed that multicultural experiences enhance consumer creativity, cognitive complexity mediates the relationship between the two, and loose-tight culture moderates the relationship between multicultural experiences and consumer creativity. The loose culture scenario has a positive enhancement effect, the tight culture scenario has a negative weakening effect, and the interaction between multicultural experiences and loose-tight culture affects consumer creativity through cognitive complexity. The results of this study provide a new perspective on the relationship between culture and consumer creativity, expanding the study of culture and consumer creativity from the cultural value dimension to the social norm dimension, enriching the research on creativity as a cognitive process at the consumer level, and providing guidance and reference for companies to better stimulate and utilize consumer creativity.

Following the crowd in times of crisis: Descriptive norms predict physical distancing, stockpiling, and prosocial behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic

Individuals engage in a variety of behavioral responses to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic, from complying with or transgressing against physical distancing regulations, to stockpiling or prosocial behavior. We predicted that particularly descriptive social norms are important in driving pandemic-related behavior as they offer guidelines in times of insecurity and crisis. To investigate this assumption, we conducted a longitudinal survey with two measurement points ( n = 1,907) in Germany during the spring of 2020. Results show that descriptive norms (perceived behavior of close others) positively predicted future transgression against distancing regulations, stockpiling, and prosocial behavior over time. In our analysis, we account for previous behavior as well as other potential predictors (subjective threat, personality). In sum, our findings highlight the power of descriptive norms in increasing compliance with pandemic-related regulations and promoting future prosocial behavior.

False beliefs can bootstrap cooperative communities through social norms

Building cooperative communities is a crucial problem for human societies. Much research suggests that cooperation is facilitated by knowing who the cooperators and defectors are, and being able to respond accordingly. As such, anonymous games are thought to hinder cooperation. Here, we show that this conclusion is altered dramatically in the presence of conditional cooperation norms and heterogeneous beliefs about others' behaviours. Specifically, we show that inaccurate beliefs about other players' behaviours can foster and stabilise cooperation via social norms. To show this, we combine a community's population dynamics with the behavioural dynamics of their members. In our model, individuals can join a community based on beliefs generated by public signals regarding the level of cooperation within, and decide to cooperate or not depending on these beliefs. These signals may overstate how much cooperation there really is. We show that even if individuals eventually learn the true level of cooperation, the initially false beliefs can trigger a dynamic that sustains high levels of cooperation. We also characterise how the rates of joining, leaving and learning in the community affect the cooperation level and community size simultaneously. Our results illustrate how false beliefs and social norms can help build cooperative communities.

Changing Social Norms: the Importance of "Organized Diffusion" for Scaling Up Community Health Promotion and Women Empowerment Interventions

Some harmful practices are sustained by social norms-collective beliefs about what people expect from each other. Practitioners and researchers alike have been investigating the potential of social norms theory to inform the design of effective interventions addressing these practices in low- and middle-income countries. One approach commonly used to facilitate social norms change is community-based dialogs and trainings. This approach has often been criticized for not being cost-effective, as it usually includes a relatively small number of direct participants and does not allow for scaling-up strategies. In spite of some evidence (as for instance, the SASA! Program) that community dialogs can achieve social norms change, little exists in the literature about how exactly participants in community dialogs engage others in their networks to achieve change. In this paper, we look at the potential of "organized diffusion" as a cost-effective strategy to expand the positive effects of community-based interventions to participants' networks, achieving sustainable normative shifts. We provide quantitative evidence from three case studies-Community Empowerment Program in Mali, Change Starts at Home in Nepal, and Voices for Change in Nigeria-showing that participants in community-based interventions can be effectively empowered to share their new knowledge and understandings systematically with others in their networks, eventually facilitating social norms change. Future community-based interventions intending to achieve social norms change would benefit from integrating ways to help participants engage others in their network in transformative conversations. Doing so has the potential to generate additional impact with little additional investment.

Gender norms and social norms: differences, similarities and why they matter in prevention science

Two streams of theory and practice on gender equity have begun to elide. The first is work conducted to change social norms, particularly using theory that emerged from studies in social psychology. The second is work done on gender norms, emerging historically from feminist scholars working to counter gender inequality. As these two streams of work intersect, conceptual clarity is needed to understand differences and similarities between these two traditions. Increased clarity will improve efforts to address harmful norms and practices. In this article, we review similarities and differences between social and gender norms, reviewing the history of the concepts and identifying key tension points of contrast. We identified six areas of comparison that might be helpful for practitioners working for the promotion of global health as they make sense of social and gender norms. We then offer a definition of gender norms for practitioners and researchers working at the intersection between these two theories. Our definition draws from the two different streams of thought of how norms influence people's actions, acknowledging the double nature of gender norms: beliefs nested in people's minds and embedded in institutions that profoundly affect health-related behaviours and shape differential access to health services.

Improving Interpretability of Subjective Assessments About Psychological Phenomena: A Review and Cross-Cultural Meta-Analysis

Attempts to understand subjectivity have historically involved distinguishing the strengths of subjective methods (e.g., survey ratings from informants) from those of alternative methods (e.g., observational/performance-based tasks). Yet a movement is underway in Psychology that considers the merits of intersubjectivity: Understanding the space between two or more informant’s subjective impressions of a common person or phenomenon. In mental health research, understanding differences between subjective impressions have less to do with informants’ characteristics and more to do with the social environments or contexts germane to the people or phenomena examined. Our article focuses on one relatively understudied social environment: the cultural context. We draw from seminal work on psychological universals, as well as emerging work on cultural norms (i.e., cultural tightness) to understand intersubjectivity effects through a cross-cultural lens. We report a meta-analysis of 314 studies of intersubjectivity effects in mental health, revealing that (a) this work involves independent research teams in more than 30 countries, (b) informants rating a target person’s mental health (e.g., parent and teacher ratings of a child’s behavior) commonly provide diverging estimates of that person’s mental health, and (c) greater convergence between subjective reports relates to a “tighter” or more norms-bound culture. Our article illustrates strategies for understanding divergence between subjective reports. In particular, we highlight theoretical and methodological frameworks for examining patterns of divergence between subjective reports in relation to data from nonsubjective methods. We also describe how research on intersubjectivity informs efforts to improve the interpretability of subjective assessments in multiple subdisciplines in Psychology.

Revenge: A Multilevel Review and Synthesis

Why do people take revenge? This question can be difficult to answer. Vengeance seems interpersonally destructive and antithetical to many of the most basic human instincts. However, an emerging body of social scientific research has begun to illustrate a logic to revenge, demonstrating why revenge evolved in humans and when and how people take revenge. We review this evidence and suggest that future studies on revenge would benefit from a multilevel perspective in which individual acts of revenge exist within higher-level cultural systems, with the potential to instigate change in these systems over time. With this framework, we can better understand the interplay between revenge's psychological properties and its role in cultural evolution.

Expanding the interpretive power of psychological science by attending to culture

A lack of interpretive power (i.e., the ability to understand individuals' experiences and behaviors in relation to their cultural contexts) undermines psychology's understanding of diverse psychological phenomena. Building interpretive power requires attending to cultural influences in research. We describe three characteristics of research that lacks interpretive power: normalizing and overgeneralizing from behaviors and processes of people in Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) contexts; making non-WEIRD people and processes invisible; and misapplying WEIRD findings in non-WEIRD contexts. We also describe research in which leveraging interpretive power prevented these negative consequences. Finally, using the culture-cycle framework, we outline a vision for creating culture change within psychology by implementing culture-conscious practices to guide the formation of research questions, empirical design, and data analysis and interpretation.

Theory and practice of social norms interventions: eight common pitfalls

BACKGROUND

Recently, Global Health practitioners, scholars, and donors have expressed increased interest in "changing social norms" as a strategy to promote health and well-being in low and mid-income countries (LMIC). Despite this burgeoning interest, the ability of practitioners to use social norm theory to inform health interventions varies widely.

MAIN BODY

Here, we identify eight pitfalls that practitioners must avoid as they plan to integrate a social norms perspective in their interventions, as well as eight learnings. These learnings are: 1) Social norms and attitudes are different; 2) Social norms and attitudes can coincide; 3) Protective norms can offer important resources for achieving effective social improvement in people's health-related practices; 4) Harmful practices are sustained by a matrix of factors that need to be understood in their interactions; 5) The prevalence of a norm is not necessarily a sign of its strength; 6) Social norms can exert both direct and indirect influence; 7) Publicising the prevalence of a harmful practice can make things worse; 8) People-led social norm change is both the right and the smart thing to do.

CONCLUSIONS

As the understanding of how norms evolve in LMIC advances, practitioners will develop greater understanding of what works to help people lead change in harmful norms within their contexts. Awareness of these pitfalls has helped several of them increase the effectiveness of their interventions addressing social norms in the field. We are confident that others will benefit from these reflections as well.