Differences between tight and loose cultures: a 33-nation study
Science • Vol/Iss. 332 • American Association for the Advancement of Science • New York, Ny • Published In • Pages: 1100-1104 •
By Gelfand, Michele J., Raver, Jana L., Nishii, Lisa, Leslie, Lisa M., Lun, Janetta, Lim, Beng Chong, Duan, Lili, Almaliach, Assaf, Ang, Soon, Arnadottir, Jakobina, Aycan, Zeynep, Boehnke, Klaus, Boski, Pawel, Cabecinhas, Rosa, Chan, Darius, Chhokar, Jagdeep, D’Amato, Alessia, Ferrer, Montse, Fischlmayr, Iris C., Fischer, Ronald, Fülöp, Marta, Georgas, James, Kashima, Emiko S., Kashima, Yoshishima, Kim, Kibum, Lempereur, Alain, Marquez, Patricia, Othman, Rozhan, Overlaet, Bert, Panagiotopoulou, Penny, Peltzer, Karl, Perez-Florizno, Lorena R., Ponomarenko, Larisa, Realo, Anu, Schei, Vidar, Schmitt, Manfred, Smith, Peter B., Soomro, Nazar, Szabo, Erna, Taveesin, Nalinee, Toyama, Midori, Van de Vliert, Evert, Vohra, Naharika, Ward, Colleen, Yamaguchi, Susum
Hypothesis
Natural disaster vulnerability is positively correlated with tightness-looseness (p. 1101).
Test Name | Support | Significance | Coefficient | Tail |
---|---|---|---|---|
Correlation | Supported | p<.01 | .47 | Two-tailed |
Variable Name | Variable Type | OCM Term(s) |
---|---|---|
Prevalence Of Natural Disasters | Independent | Disasters |
Tightness-looseness In Norms | Dependent | Norms, Social Control, Sanctions, Social Offenses |