Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T19:31:06.790Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Culturally Relevant Meanings of the Protestant Work Ethic and Attitudes towards Poor Persons

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 October 2018

Allan B. I. Bernardo Open the ORCID record for Allan B. I. Bernardo [Opens in a new window] ,
Sheri R. Levy  and
Ashley E. Lytle
Allan B. I. Bernardo*
Affiliation:
University of Macau (Macau, SAR China)
Sheri R. Levy
Affiliation:
Stony Brook University (USA)
Ashley E. Lytle
Affiliation:
Stevens Institute of Technology (USA)
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Allan B. I. Bernardo. University of Macau. Faculty of Social Sciences. Department of Psychology. Avenida da Universidade, Room E21–3060 Humanities and Social Sciences Building, Taipa, (Macau SAR China). E-mail: allanbibernardo@umac.mo
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Protestant work ethic (PWE), or the belief that hard work leads to success, is a popular belief across cultures. Much work indicates that PWE contributes to negative evaluations of disadvantaged groups presumably through the notion that they deserve their disadvantage for not working hard enough (“PWE-Justifier”). But there is another dimension of PWE that expresses the belief that everyone could succeed through hard work (“PWE-Equalizer”). We propose that the PWE-Justifier is meaningful in cultures that emphasize individualism and personal responsibility, but not in others. In a cross-cultural study, we compare how PWE-Justifier relates to evaluations of poor persons in the USA (individualist culture) and the Philippines (low individualist culture). In the USA sample, regression analysis indicated that internal attributions of poverty mediated the relationships of PWE-Justifier with negative stereotypes (R2 = .32) and with negative attitudes towards poor persons (R2 = .13). Bootstrapping analysis indicated that both indirect effects of PWE-Justifier were significant: Negative stereotypes, B = .17, SE = .03, p < .0001, 95% CI [.11, .24]; negative attitudes, B = 2.52, SE = 1.11, p = .014, 95% CI [0.49, 4.84]. The results were not found in the Philippine sample, where instead, PWE-Equalizer negatively predicted negative attitudes (R2 = .05) and positively predicted empathy (R2 = .05) for poor persons. The results are discussed in terms of how the negative consequences of PWE may derive from the cultural syndrome of individualism that emphasizes personal control and responsibility.

Keywords

attitudescultureindividualismpovertyProtestant work ethic
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 21 , 2018 , E40
Copyright
Copyright © Universidad Complutense de Madrid and Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos de Madrid 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Funding information: Fulbright Fellowship, University of Macau MYRG2014–00099–FSS

‡

The original version of this article was published with an incorrect author name. A notice detailing this has been published and the error rectified in the online PDF and HTML copies

References

Bernardo, A. B. I. (2013). Social dominance orientation and attitudes towards the poor: Contrasting lower and higher socioeconomic groups in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 46(1), 39–69.Google Scholar
Chao, M. M., & Wong, J. K. W. (2014). Culture and everyday sense making. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 17, 112–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiu, C. Y., & Hong, Y. Y. (2007). Cultural processes: Basic principles. In Kruglanski, A. W. & Higgins, E. T. (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 785–806). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Choi, I., Nisbett, R. E., & Norenzayan, A. (1999). Causal attribution across cultures: Variation and universality. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 47–63. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.1.47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christopher, A. N., & Schlenker, B. R. (2005). The Protestant work ethic and attributions of responsibility: Applications of the triangle model. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35(7), 1502–1518. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02181.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Church, A. T. (1987). Personality research in a non-Western culture: The Philippines. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 272–292. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.102.2.272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clemente, J. A. R., Daganzo, M. A. A., Bernardo, A. B. I., & Pangan, C. A. C. (2017). Filipino adolescents’ conceptions of socioeconomic mobility: A consensual qualitative research. Child Indicators Research, 10, 117–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-016-9370-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cozzarelli, C., Wilkinson, A. V., & Tagler, M. J. (2001). Attitudes toward the poor and attributions for poverty. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 207–227. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herek, G. M., & Capitanio, J. P. (1999). Sex differences in how heterosexuals think about lesbians and gay men: Evidence from survey context effects. Journal of Sex Research, 36, 348–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499909552007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hine, D. W., Montiel, C. J., Cooksey, R. W., & Lewko, J. H. (2005). Mental models of poverty in developing nations: A causal mapping analysis using a Canada-Philippines contrast. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 283–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022104273652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hong, Y.-Y., Levy, S. R., & Chiu, C.-Y. (2001). The contribution of the lay theories approach to the study of groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 98–106. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0502_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imada, T. (2012). Cultural narratives of individualism and collectivism: A content analysis of textbook stories in the United States and Japan. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43(4), 576–591. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022110383312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kashima, Y. (2014). Meaning, grounding, and the construction of social reality. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 17(2), 81–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluegel, J. R., & Smith, E. R. (1986). Beliefs about inequality: Americans’ views of what is and what ought to be. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Levy, S. R., West, T. L., & Ramírez, L. (2005). Lay theories and intergroup relations: A social-developmental perspective. European Review of Social Psychology, 16, 189–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280500397234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, S. R., West, T. L., Ramirez, L., & Karafantis, D. M. (2006). The Protestant work ethic: A lay theory with dual intergroup implications. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 9, 95–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430206059874CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littrell, J., & Diwan, S. (1998). Social workers’ attitudes toward welfare reform: Comparing aid to families with dependent children to work programs. Journal of Applied Social Sciences, 22(2), 137–149.Google Scholar
Masuda, T., & Kitayama, S. (2004). Perceiver-induced constraint and attitude attribution in Japan and the US: A case for the cultural dependence of the correspondence bias. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 409–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2003.08.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metz, T. (2015). How the West was one: The Western as individualist, the African as communitarian. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 47(11), 1175–1184. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2014.991502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minkov, M., Dutt, P., Schachner, M., Morales, O., Sanchez, C., Jandosova, J., … Mudd, B. (2017). A revision of Hofstede’s individualism-collectivism dimension: A new national index from a 56-country study. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management, 24, 386–404. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCSM-11-2016-0197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mockabee, S. T., Wald, K. D., & Leege, D. C. (2011). In search of a religious left. In Aldrich, J. H., & McGraw, K. M. (Eds.), Improving public opinion surveys: Improving innovation and the American national election studies (pp. 278–298). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Morris, M. W., & Peng, K. (1994). Culture and cause: American and Chinese attributions for social and physical events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(6), 949–971. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.6.949CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramírez, L., & Levy, S. R. (2010). Sentido común y conflicto: Impacto de las teorías legas sobre relaciones intergrupales [Common sense and conflict: Impact of lay theories on intergroup relationships]. Universitas Psychologica, 9(2), 331–343.Google Scholar
Ramírez, L., Levy, S. R., Velilla, E., & Hughes, J. M. (2010). Considering the roles of culture and social status: The Protestant work ethic and egalitarianism. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 42(3), 381–390.Google Scholar
Rosenthal, L., Levy, S. R., & Moyer, A. (2011). Protestant work ethic’s relation to intergroup and policy attitudes: A meta-analytic review. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(7), 874–885. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenthal, L., London, B., Levy, S. R., Lobel, M., & Herrera-Alcazar, A. (2011). The relation between the protestant work ethic and undergraduate women’s perceived identity compatibility in nontraditional majors. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 11, 241–262. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-2415.2011.01264.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Somerman, F. B. (1993). Value, attitude, and belief determinants of willingness to accept a facility for the homeless. Journal of Social Distress and the Homeless, 2(3), 177–192. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01066147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Triandis, H. C. (1996). The psychological measurement of cultural syndromes. American Psychologist, 51, 407–415. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.51.4.407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuason, M. T. G. (2008). Those who were born poor: A qualitative study of Philippine poverty. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55(2), 158–171. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.55.2.158CrossRefGoogle Scholar