Premium
Cultural differences in reward allocation: Is collectivism the explanation?
Author(s) -
Hui C. Harry,
Triandis Harry C.,
Yee Candice
Publication year - 1991
Publication title -
british journal of social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.855
H-Index - 98
eISSN - 2044-8309
pISSN - 0144-6665
DOI - 10.1111/j.2044-8309.1991.tb00931.x
Subject(s) - generosity , collectivism , egalitarianism , psychology , social psychology , personality , individualism , economics , politics , law , market economy , political science , philosophy , theology
This article examines how reward allocation behaviour is influenced by culture (Chinese vs. American), personality differences (psychological individualism vs. collectivism), social relationships (allocation to one's friend vs. colleague at work), and availability of resources (limited vs. unlimited). Subjects made monetary allocation to themselves and to a partner in a hypothetical situation. Two kinds of deviation from proportional allocation were distinguished. They were egalitarianism and generosity. Results showed that subjects tended to be more egalitarian in their allocation when their contribution had been high. As a group, Chinese subjects were more generous (using an allocation rule that was to the partner's advantage) than American subjects, especially when dealing with friends. Furthermore, when there was no limit on the amount of reward to be distributed, Chinese subjects were more egalitarian than the Americans. Finally, the Chinese subjects' egalitarian tendency away from proportional distribution of rewards was curtailed when collectivism was statistically controlled. However, the same statistical procedure did not reduce their tendency toward generosity. The role of collectivism as an explanation for cross‐cultural differences in reward allocation is discussed.