Republic of the Philippines
BATANGAS STATE UNIVERSITY JPLPC-Malvar
Malvar, Batangas
Tel. Nos.: (043) 778-2170/ (043) 406-0830 loc. 124
Website Address: [Link]
Course Code PSY 308
Course Description Culture and Psychology
Week 6
MODULE 9: CULTURE, SELF, AND IDENTITY
Module Introduction
In this module, we begin our exploration of the relationship between culture, self, and
identity, first focusing on the notion of the self. The concept of self is an important first step to
exploring social behavior because it organizes information about oneself. Then, we will define
and discuss identity. Our final topic is the nature of attributions, which are the causal reasons we
come up with to explain behaviors and events.
Intended Learning Objectives
At the end of the lesson, the student should be able to:
1. Understand the concept of self and where does the self-concept originated.
2. Explain the types of identity and discuss the multicultural identities.
3. Identify attribution and the cultural differences in attributional styles.
Module Content
9.1 CULTURE AND SELF
Defining Self
One of the most powerful and pervasive concepts in psychology is the self-concept.
Other terms that denote the same concept are self-image, self-construal, self-appraisal, or just
self. We define self-concept as the cognitive representations of one’s own self, that is, the ideas
or images that one has about oneself and how and why one behaves. Self is a psychological
construct that people create in order to help themselves understand themselves and their world
better. We may not consciously think about our self very much; yet how we understand our sense
of self is intimately tied to how we understand the world around us and our relationships with
others in that world. Whether conscious or not, our concept of self is an integral part of our lives.
Think about some descriptions of yourself. You may believe you are an optimist or a
pessimist, extroverted or introverted. We use these labels as shorthand descriptions to
characterize ourselves. Suppose a young woman tells you she is “sociable.” An array of
underlying meanings is attached to this one-word description. Descriptive labels such as this
usually imply that (1) we have this attribute within us, just as we possess other attributes such as
abilities, attitudes, perceived rights, or interests; (2) our past actions, feelings, or thoughts have
close connections with this attribute; and (3) our future actions, plans, feelings, or thoughts will
be controlled or guided by this attribute and can be predicted more or less accurately by it. In
short, if someone describes him or herself as “sociable,” we know that her concept of self is
rooted in rich and contextualized beliefs about actions, thoughts, feelings, motives, and plans.
The concept of self as “sociable” may be central to one’s self-definition, enjoying a special status
as a salient identity (Stryker, 1986) or self-schema (Markus, 1977).
Page | 1
A sense of self is critically important to determining our own thoughts, feelings, and
actions, and to how we view the world, ourselves, and others in that world, including our
relationships with other people, places, things, and events. In short, our sense of self is at the core
of our being, unconsciously and automatically influencing our thoughts, actions, and feelings.
Each individual carries and uses these perceived internal attributes to guide his or her thoughts
and actions in different social situations.
Where Does the Self-Concept Originate?
The concept of self is an important product of human cultures. We made a distinction
between cultural practices and cultural worldviews. Cultural practices, on one hand, refer to the
discrete, observable, objective, and behavioral aspects of human activities in which people
engage related to culture. For example, parent-child sleeping arrangements are an example of a
cultural practice, as would be the specific ways in which people of a culture manage their
emotional expressions in a social context. Cultural practices refer to the doing of culture.
Cultural worldviews, on the other hand, are belief systems about one’s culture. They are
cognitive generalizations about how one’s culture is or should be, regardless of whether those
generalized images are true or not. They are the product of several uniquely human abilities.
Humans are unique in that we have the cognitive ability to know that (1) the self exists and is an
intentional agent, (2) that other selves exist and they are also intentional agents, and (3) that
others make judgments about oneself as an intentional agent. Humans also have cognitive skills
that allow for long-term memory and hypothetical thinking about the future. Humans uniquely
use symbolic and verbal language, and create narratives of their lives and cultures. These verbal
descriptions can be oral or written, and are social constructions of reality expressed in consensual
ideologies about one’s culture. One of these descriptions is the self, which is a cognitively
constructed perception of reality.
The concept of self is part of one’s cultural worldviews because how one sees oneself in
relation to the rest of the world is an integral part of one’s culture. Like cultural worldviews, the
concept of self is also a cognitive generalization about one’s nature, whether that belief is
grounded in reality or not. The concept of self aids in addressing needs for affiliation and
uniqueness, and explains the importance of understanding values as guiding principles within a
specific culture (Schwartz, 2004; Schwartz & Bardi, 2001). Concepts of self are social
constructions “that consist of viewing oneself as living up to specific contingencies of value …
that are derived from the culture at large but are integrated into a unique individualized
worldview by each person” (Pyszczynski, Greenberg, Solomon, Arndt, & Schimel, 2004).
9.2 CULTURE AND IDENTITY
Types of Identities
Identity is a term used to refer to the way individuals understand themselves and are
recognized by others. Psychologists generally differentiate three large classes of identity. One is
personal identity, which refers to the qualities and attributes that distinguish oneself from
others. This type of identity is closely akin to the concept of self described above. Collective
identities refer to our recognition that we belong to social categories, such as occupation,
religion, or culture. Relational identities refer to our qualities of ourselves in relation to others.
Identities are cognized creations of the human mind and are important because they fulfill
a universal need to belong to social groups. Collective identities in particular occur because
humans have a universal need for affiliation. Addressing this need helps us create meaningful
and lasting relationships.
Thus the fundamental need to affiliate with others leads to the secondary need to belong
to social groups. These relationships, in turn, help us reproduce, ensuring survival; they also help
us to live longer, healthier, and happier lives. Multiple studies, in fact, have shown that
individuals accepted into social groups have better physical and psychological consequences;
those rejected by social groups have more negative consequences (Baumeister, Ciarocco, &
Twenge, 2005). Ostracized and isolated individuals exhibit a wide range of distress.
We create many different types of collective identities, including gender identity and
occupational identity. Some types of identities that are most relevant to our discussion are
cultural, ethnic, and racial identities, which refer to our recognizing that we belong to specific
Page | 2
cultures, ethnicities, and races. We also have national identities, which refer to our recognition
that we belong to a specific nation or country. Identity can also be distinguished by language
group in a region; in Montreal, for example, individuals are often identified as Anglophones,
Francophones, or Allophones.
Although identities are universal, the specific content of any individual’s or group’s
identity is culturally determined. How one identifies with a particular identity is influenced
heavily by the meanings and associations attributed by his or her culture to various groups.
Identity is strongly shaped by narratives (Hammack, 2008), and narratives are stories that are
infused with cultural meaning. U.S. Americans, for instance, are accustomed to identifying
themselves with ethnic or racial categories (e.g., Hispanic/Latino, African American, Asian
American, etc.). But these categories themselves are partially products of American cultures’
history of immigration and the meanings attributed to that history. Because this history and
cultural meaning is unique to the U.S., individuals in many other countries and cultures don’t
identify themselves with these same social groups.
Multicultural Identities
As culture is a psychological construct—a shared system of rules—it is conceivable that
people have not just a single cultural identity, but in some circumstances, two or more such
identities. These multicultural identities are becoming increasingly commonplace in today’s
world, with borders between cultural groups becoming less rigid, increased communication and
interaction among people of different cultural groups, and more intercultural marriages. If culture
is defined as a psychological construct, the existence of multicultural identities suggests the
existence of multiple psychocultural systems of representations in the minds of multicultural
individuals.
Recall that bicultural individuals have multiple cultural systems in their minds and access
one or the other depending on the context in which they are in. This is known as cultural frame
switching (Benet-Martinez, Leu, Lee, & Morris, 2002; Hong, Morris, Chiu, & Benet-Martinez,
2000).
Studies have also documented a cultural reaffirmation effect among multicultural
individuals living in multicultural societies. For example, Kosmitzki (1996) examined
monocultural and bicultural Germans and Americans, who made traitattribute ratings of
themselves, their native cultural group, and their adoptive cultural group. The bicultural
individuals endorse even more traditional values associated with their native culture than did
native monocultural individuals in those native cultures.
9.3 CULTURE AND ATTRIBUTIONS
What Are Attributions, and Where Do They Come From?
Attributions are the inferences people make about the causes of events and their own
and others’ behaviors. Attributions represent the ways we understand the world around us and
the behavior of others. You might attribute a friend’s failure to show up for a date to
irresponsibility, too much traffic, or just forgetting. You might attribute your success on an exam
to your effort or to luck.
Attributions allow us to explain things, to put things in order, and to make sense of the
world. Attributions are based on the unique human cognitive ability to understand that oneself
and others are intentional agents. Because these cognitive abilities are universal to humans, the
process of making attributions is a universal psychological process. That is, all people of all
cultures make attributions. There is, in fact, probably a universal need to know—a universal
motive for humans to derive meaning from events and behaviors. This would explain why
humans personalize inanimate objects or random acts of nature (e.g., hurricanes) and make
causal inferences— attributions—about them. By creating attributions about such things, we
exert psychological control over the world. Immediately after the terror attacks of September
11th, 2001, for instance, searching for meaning in the attacks led to a high stress response
(greater post-traumatic stress response symptoms); finding meaning in the attacks also led to
better adjustment, less stress symptoms, and less fear of future attacks (Updegraff, Silver, &
Holman, 2008).
Page | 3
The study of attributions has a rich history in social psychology. Researchers distinguish
among the types of attributions people make. For instance, an important concept in attribution
research is the distinction between internal and external attributions. Internal attributions
specify the cause of behavior within a person; these are also known as dispositional
attributions, because they are attributions about people’s dispositions. External attributions
locate the cause of behavior outside a person, such as other people, nature, or acts of God; these
are also known as situational dispositions.
Cultural Differences in Attributional Styles
Because attributions are creations of the mind, they may or may not be rooted in an
objective reality and are influenced by culture. Attributions are subjected to many possible biases
in ways of thinking. One of these biases is known as the fundamental attribution error (Ross,
1977), which refers to bias toward inferences about an actor’s disposition even if the presence of
very obvious situational constraints has been termed. Fundamental attribution error is also
known as correspondence bias. One of the earliest studies to show this bias was Jones and
Harris’s (1967) study of attributions about an essay supporting Fidel Castro in Cuba. Participants
inferred that the author must have a favorable attitude toward Castro. Furthermore, such
dispositional inferences occurred even when obvious situational constraints were present. The
subjects in this study inferred a pro-Castro attitude even when they were explicitly told that the
person was assigned to write a pro- Castro essay and no choice was given. The subjects ignored
these situational constraints and erroneously drew inferences about the author’s disposition.
Another type of attributional bias is known as self-serving bias. This is the tendency to
attribute one’s successes to personal factors and one’s failures to situational factors (Heider,
1976). If you fail an exam, for instance, you may attribute your failure to a poorly constructed
test, lousy teaching, distractions, or a bad week at home (situational causes). If you ace an exam,
however, you are more likely to attribute your success to effort, intelligence, or ability
(dispositional causes). Research for many decades has shown that Americans often exhibit a
selfserving bias in their attributional styles. But there have been many studies that demonstrate
cross-cultural differences in this bias. Hau and Salili (1991), for example, asked junior and senior
high school students in Hong Kong to rate the importance and meaning of 13 specific causes of
academic performance. Effort, interest, and ability—all internal attributions—were rated the
most important causes, regardless of success or failure. Research from the United States would
have predicted that these dimensions would be important in making attributions of success but
not failure.
End of Module Assessment
Online Recitation – This will incorporate a video conference within online teaching to give
learning a more personal touch. During scheduled brief online interviews, students can
demonstrate their proficiency in most essential topics. (Google Meet/FB Messenger)
Online Learning Journals – As one of the online activities, a journal creation is where students
write regularly about their own learning. Online learning journals can be as simple as a Word
document.
Learning Reference
Matsumoto, D. & Juang, L. (2013). Culture and psychology (5th ed). Belmont, CA: Cengage.
Page | 4
