Tightness shifts in the U.S. and China: Implications of tightening or loosening norms during the coronavirus pandemic

IF 4.8 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Social and Personality Psychology Compass Pub Date : 2023-08-31 DOI:10.1111/spc3.12883
Quinnehtukqut McLamore, Stylianos Syropoulos, Mengyao Li, Ezra Fabian Mentrup, B. Leidner, K. Young, Wai Lan Victoria Yeung, Tasneem Mohammad, Jennifer Tamkin, Lam Ha Ngyuen, Julia Baracewicz
{"title":"Tightness shifts in the U.S. and China: Implications of tightening or loosening norms during the coronavirus pandemic","authors":"Quinnehtukqut McLamore, Stylianos Syropoulos, Mengyao Li, Ezra Fabian Mentrup, B. Leidner, K. Young, Wai Lan Victoria Yeung, Tasneem Mohammad, Jennifer Tamkin, Lam Ha Ngyuen, Julia Baracewicz","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12883","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Emergent research identifies cultural tightness‐looseness as an important factor for understanding cross‐national outcome differences during the coronavirus pandemic. Because perceived tightness‐looseness can be measured as an individual‐level difference rather than a nation‐level difference, and because tightness‐looseness may shift during large‐scale crises, we investigated whether such shifts occurred early in the coronavirus pandemic in both China (a relatively tight nation, n = 3642) and the U.S. (a relatively loose nation, n = 3583) across three cohorts. Tightness increased across cohorts in China and reduced across cohorts in the U.S. These changes transmitted corresponding indirect effects whereby compliance and institutional trust (scientific and government) about the pandemic were increased in China across cohorts, but decreased in the U.S. across cohorts. These patterns extend advice that national governments can increase compliance and trust via “tightening” by cautioning against norm‐setters signaling the reverse (that norms about compliance are loose) given the outcomes observed in the U.S. samples.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12883","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Emergent research identifies cultural tightness‐looseness as an important factor for understanding cross‐national outcome differences during the coronavirus pandemic. Because perceived tightness‐looseness can be measured as an individual‐level difference rather than a nation‐level difference, and because tightness‐looseness may shift during large‐scale crises, we investigated whether such shifts occurred early in the coronavirus pandemic in both China (a relatively tight nation, n = 3642) and the U.S. (a relatively loose nation, n = 3583) across three cohorts. Tightness increased across cohorts in China and reduced across cohorts in the U.S. These changes transmitted corresponding indirect effects whereby compliance and institutional trust (scientific and government) about the pandemic were increased in China across cohorts, but decreased in the U.S. across cohorts. These patterns extend advice that national governments can increase compliance and trust via “tightening” by cautioning against norm‐setters signaling the reverse (that norms about compliance are loose) given the outcomes observed in the U.S. samples.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国和中国的紧缩变化:冠状病毒大流行期间收紧或放松规范的影响
新兴研究发现,文化的松紧性是理解冠状病毒大流行期间跨国结果差异的重要因素。由于感知到的松紧度可以作为个体水平的差异而不是国家水平的差异来衡量,并且由于松紧度在大规模危机期间可能会发生变化,因此我们调查了中国(相对宽松的国家,n = 3642)和美国(相对宽松的国家,n = 3583)在冠状病毒大流行早期是否发生了这种变化。这些变化传递了相应的间接影响,即中国各队列中对大流行的依从性和机构信任(科学和政府)增加,而美国各队列中则减少。这些模式延伸了以下建议:鉴于在美国样本中观察到的结果,各国政府可以通过警告规范制定者发出相反的信号(关于合规的规范是宽松的),通过“收紧”来增加合规和信任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Social and Personality Psychology Compass
Social and Personality Psychology Compass Psychology-Social Psychology
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
2.20%
发文量
59
期刊最新文献
The role of White identity in anti‐racist allyship On the experience of goals: Differentiating goal‐generic value from goal‐specific value The unseen pillar of behavior: A review of maintenance goals Spiritual capital and spiritual entrepreneurship: The new spiritualities and the processes of subjectivation Carving to excise, carving to create: Conversations on creating and sustaining safe spaces in higher education
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1