SELF-IDENTtTY ACROSS CULTURES:

.A COMPARISON OF CANADA AND J.4P.W

Christopher Lo

A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements

for the degree of Master of Ans

Graduate Department of Psychology

University of Toronto

C Copyright by Christopher Lo (700 1 )

National Library I*i of Canada Bibliothèque nationale du Canada

Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographic Services services bibliographiques

395 Wellington Street 395, nie Wellington Ottawa ON KlAON4 Ottawa ON K1 A ON4 canada Canada

The author has granted a non- exclusive licence allowing the National Library of Canada to reproduce, loan, distribute or seil copies of this thesis in microfonn, paper or electronic formats.

The author retains ownership of the copyright in this thesis. Neither the thesis nor substantial extracts from it may be printed or otherwise reproduced without the author's permission.

L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive permettant à la Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou vendre des copies de cette thèse sous la fome de microfiche/film, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique.

L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement reproduits sans son autorisation.

Self-Identity across Cultures:

.4 Cornparison of Canada and Japan

C hristopher Lo

Master of Arts (300 1 )

Department of Psychology

University of Toronto

Abstract

This stucîy focuses on cultural differencrs in self-identity and its expression. Self-idrntity

is the awareness of one's own prrsonhood and the qualitirs that constitutr it. Cnivrrsity students

in Canada and Japan endorsed categorical responses to questions about their esperience of self.

such as whether their self-identity varies across contexts. is rxpressed in their brhaviour. and the

desirability of this expression. Japanese were more likely than Canadians to report experiencing

relative variability in their beliefs about themselves across situations. However. Japanese were

no different from Canadians in reporting that they stnve to express their self-identity in

behaviour and that they experience frustration when unable to do so. Japanese and Canadians

also reported highly similar profiles in self-identity expression across activity domains (e.g..

when alone. being with close fnends). Implications for what is universal and what is culture-

specific in the experience of persona1 identity is discussed.

Acknowledgements

My thanks to:

Romin Tafarodi. rny supervisor. for his tireless guidance and editing:

Krnneth Dion. rny subsidiary advisor. for his patience:

My parents and aunts for al1 their support:

.And Verity for coming with me along the way.

Table of Contents

Introduction

Method

Results

Discussion

Re ferences

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Figure 1

Appendix

List of Tables

m..

List of Figures

List of Appendices

...

This survey study rxarnined the expression of' self-identity in two cultures. The two

cultures. those of Japan and Canada are characterized by highly dissimilar sociohistorîcal roots

in conceiving the self. From the survey results. t intended to confimi both the experience of a

relatively stable self-identity in both cultures and expected cultural differences in its expression

across contexts. On the exploratory side. 1 examined possible cultural differences in the

lifestyles of students. Before addressing the issue of cultural variance in self-understanding. a

number of conceptual clarifications are required.

Sel f-ldentin:

People have many beliefs about who they are. One ma- dispute the validity of thesr

beliefs and the extent to which they cause behaviour. but not the fact that they include enduring

abstractions. The term "identity" in conjunction with self refers to subjective identification of the

present self ( i.e.. sel f-awareness or sel f-consciousness) with mernories of past selves ( i .c..

episodic mernorieska form of experienced continuity. This continuity is more than just a

vague sense of being the sarne person as before: it includes the sense that one retains man. of the

sarne physical. psychologicai, and behaviord characteristics through one's life. Thus. important

aspects of one's persona1 and social identity are seen to persist through time.

Beyond content and continuity. self-identity also entails structure. M e n people

cornplain that they do not know who they are anymore. we understand that what is at issue is not

the absence of self-conception. but a loss of unity and purpose afforded by an integrated self-

conception (McAdarns. 1997).

Aspects of one's self-identity uiil be differentially activated depending on contrxt. For

example. let us assume that a woman is both a teacher and a newlywed. When she is teaching.

we may see very little of the newlywed in her actions. She may not even stop to think of herself

as a newlywed while in the classroom. At no point. however. would we be willing to say that her

self-identity does not include the belief that she is a newlywed. The aspects of self-identity that

are activated to form the working self-concept of the moment may show great contextual

variation. but this does not discount the existence of a stable underlying self-identity.

The stability of self-idrntity does not preclude change. The contents of self-identity are

continually being affirmed. disconfirmed. and modified as the individual acts upon the

environment and interprets the outcornes of those actions. Freely chosen action is a pnmary

means to self-discovery. Often. it is only after pursuing a course of action and perceiving its

consequences do we understand its significance for who we think we are (Bem. 1972: Turner.

1976: Turner & Billings. 1 99 1 : Turner & Gordon. 1 98 1 : Turner & Schutte. 1 98 1 ).

The Ori~ins of Self-Identitv

Before proceeding to the question of culture. 1 would like to address the development of

self-identity. The defining feature of the self is reflexivity. the capabiiity of the thinkrr to focus

attention on itself. becoming both the subject and object of consciousness. Full self-

consciousness is not present at binh. but devrlops through the interplay betwecn phylogenetic

endowment. social interaction. and laquage. Mead (1 934) aniculated the emergrnce of self as

the distillation of a "generalized other" from the perspectives of speci fic others toward oneself.

The generalized other is societp's external viewpoint of the individual as intemalized by the

individual. providing the capacity for reflexive thought. Watson ( 1990) outlined the stage-like

development of this socialized capacity from infancy to earl y childhood. starting with

differentiation of the "1" From other causal agents and ending with a cornplex mental

representation of social ro le networks. Human beings appear predisposed to dev elop the abi lity

to think about their own personhood and to construct an enduring identity that they present to

themselves and others.

Accordinç to Deci and Ryan (1990). development of the self is directed toward

"organismic integration". Integration involves the dynamic of differentiation (e-g.. claboration of

abilities and interests) and integration under an increasingly complex but cohsrent organization.

Consistent with this. Rosenberg ( 1986) described the developmental trend from childhood to

adolescence as one of increasing structural cornplexity and hierarchical organization.

Development is directed at achieving an acceptable highcr-order structure. This requires the

coherence and consistency of separate rlements of self-knowledge. To achievc this. people

actively select which aspects of self-relevant information to attend to and elaboratè on. olien

discounting that which does not "fit."

The emrrgeence of self-identity is integral to a normal. healthy consciousness. Through

memory. we cannot help but apprehend the continuity of our exprriencr across place and time.

and corne to characterize the agent of that experience as having certain substantive propenies.

Thus. there inevitably arises a sense of oneself as a continuous singularity with intemal and

extemal attri butes.

Japanese Sel f-Identi tv

Most anal'ical and empincal investigations of self-identity have retlected Western

intellectual traditions. L a s is known about the nature of self-identity in non-Western cultures.

An. examination of the self in an alien culture presents considerable challenges. Self-

understanding within one conceptual system is dificult to interpret by observrrs standing within

another conceptual system. As Shweder and Boume ( 1982) pointed out:

We would. however. like to confess. right here. that not infrequentl? ive are lefi in a

muddled condition. especially when we are told. without e'repsis. such incredible things

as. eg.. the Bongo-Bongo believe that their sorcerers are bushcats. their minds are

located in their knees. and their father is a tree. or when we read. e-g.. that the Guki-

Gama cannot distinguish between the products of their imagination and the objects of

their perceptions.

Many anthropological accounts lack intelIigibility. One does not know what to

make of them; whether to treat them as accurate reports about the confused and/or

erroneous beliefs of others or dismiss them as bad transIations: whether to search for

common understandings hidden behind superficial idiomatic differences: or whether

alternatively. to generously assume that the ideas of the other form a coherent system

derived from premises. or related purposes. that the anthropoIogist has failed to

appreciate. (pp. 158- 159)

Psychological accounts of cross-cultural differences in cognition. emotion. and motivation can

be similari- difficult to interpret. The case of the Japanese is a prime exampic. .\fier reading the

dominant psychological perspective on the Japanese self. one cannot help but take away the

message that they possçss aualitativelv different selves than do North .Americans.

Markus and Kitayama ( 199 1 ) argue that the Japanese possess "an interdependent srlf

[that] cannot be properly characterized as a bounded whole. for it changes structure with the

nature of the particular social context. Within each particular social situation. the self can be

differently instantiated" (p. 227). Such a srlf is highly variable. being intcrpersonally connected

and dependent on context. The motivational character of this interdependent self is a desire to

maintain harmonious group relations and interdependence with others. As such. it is argued.

others are not clearly differentiatrd from the self. Rather. they are included aithin its bounds.

bloreover. the obscured self-other bound- entails that one's interna1 attributes (e.g.. abilities.

personality characteristics. opinions) are subordinate in relevance and imponance to situation-

specific characteristics that ernerge through social interaction (Kitayama & Markus. 1999:

Markus & Kitayama. 199 1 ).

The foregoing argument has generated the daim that the Japanese do not apply the folk

concept of "dispositionalism" in understanding others. According to this account. the highly

contextualized nature of personality in Japan makes it rather difficult to describe oneself or

others in tems of stable. enduring traits (Kitayama & Markus. 1999). Evidence for a weak or

absent hndarnental attribution error in cultures which emphasize social interdependence-lndia

(Miller. 1981: Shweder & Boume. 1987). China (Morris & Peng. 1994). Hong Kong (Lee.

Hallahan. & Herzog. 1996). and Japan (Kitayama & Masuda 1 9 9 7 t i s consistent with this

claim.

Kitayama and Markus ( 1999) have proposed that the Japanese self is really a multiplicity

of selves: "Because there are man' possible social contexts for an'; single person. each

individual is likely to develop multiple representations of selves in social relationships. ... The

self is perceivcd as part of multiple social units. One switches bstween these social units in

accordance with the nature of the social situations one happens to be in" (p. 266). Distinct self-

representations may consist of contradictory elements. but since they are not simultanrously

activated and reflected on. little dissonance is experienced.

The implications of this characterization of the Japanese self are quite radical. For one. it

implicitly denies the existence of a single. persistent self-identity. If the Japanese self is not

expenenced as a collection of enduring interna1 attributes. because such attributes are de-

emphasized or ipored. then there remains little that would provide phenomenal cohesion and

continuity. The suggestion that the Japanese do not abstract a stable. tram-situationai self-

identity or "averaged personality" fiom episodic memory is problematic for at least three

reasons. First. such a self would threaten mental health by undermining the continuity of

consciousness and the integrative functioning of the organism. Second. such a de-centered self

would actually prevent effective social interchange by obscurhg the self-other boundary that is

so critical to successful communication with others. Third. the self-presentational demands of

modulating oneself to fit the demands of the social situation require clear and accurate

knowledge of what one brings to the situation. including one's pre-existent personality. the very

thing that is denied in the radical account of a de-centered Japanese self. I will elaboratr on each

of these problems in tum.

Self-Identitv as Intecral to Mental Health

Self-identity is a necrssary component of a healthy human consciousness. regardless of

culture. As discussed earlier. two basic rlements give rise to a self-identity: the continuity of

self-consciousness rhrough memory and the fundamentai motive to integrate information about

the self. M e n either of thrse are cornpromised by disease. injury. or environmental challenge.

psychopathology results. In fact. only in cases of brain damage or mental disorder do we find

clear fragmentation of self and loss of self-identity (Bruner. 1997: Kihlstrom. 1997: Mc..\dams.

1 997). An example of this is multiple personality disorder (MPD). Here we see dissociations

across distinct identities that contradict the unity and continuity of self-consciousness. .A person

suffering with MPD map awake one moming and sense no continuity at al1 xith the person who

awoke in the same body the moming before. The problem is the lack of a single. unifying self-

identi ty.

In psychoanalysis. mental illness has been interpreted as resulting from the expulsion.

repression. or non-integration of mental contents from the conscious self (Eagle. 1991).

Incoherence or maladaptive oqanization of one's self-identity is proposed to have negative

consequences. Similady. narrative approaches to understanding the construction of self-identity

have emphasized the process ofachieving coherence fiom the diversity of life events and self-

perceptions (Bruner. 1997: McAdam. 199 1 ). Culture guides one in perceiving which themes

and elements are appropnate for weaving into a persona1 narrative that describes who one is and

what one has experienced over time. According to this perspective. it makes linle sense to

suggest that culture prevents or impedes the formation of self-identity. Rather. it directs it

through discursive noms that channel how self-identity is both privately retlected on and

communicated to others. Inability to achieve such a unified narrative. or seKidentity. is

associated with confusion. alienation. and psychological dpsfunction. AI1 of this suggests that

the absence of a central self-identity in Japan would have serious nrgative consequences for the

general health of the population. There is no evidence. however. of greater prevalencr of such

problems in Japan than in North America.

The Self-Other Boundm in Social Interaction

According to the spatial metaphor of Kitayama and blarkus ( 1999). the Japanese self-

other boundary is weak and permeable. The Japanese self. ihey clairn. is not full' differentiated

from others. Dunng social interaction. this would imply. if not a rnerging of selws. then the

formation of a "selî" that is neither fullg one's own nor that of the other. Such a self would be

tied to the situation. and to the social interaction ensuing within it. Upon leaving the interaction.

this self would presumably dissolve. revealing a lack of self-identity. The putative hnction of

the weak self-other boundary. according to the authors. is that it promotes harmonious

interdependence with others.

This distorts the truth that al1 social interaction is necessarily a negotiation between

separate identities. each with its own thoughts and motivations which are distinguished and

compared with those of the othen. In normal interaction. one is always able to differentiate

one's own mental products fiom those of others. Effective communication requires

simultaneous awareness of what one's own intentions are and how these expressed intentions

mil1 be understood in the consciousness of the other. Even when engaging in complex

perspective- or role-taking with the aim of anticipating the actions of others. one never confuses

whose intentions and expectations are whose. Meaningful dialogue and coordination of action

could not othenvise take place.

Let us examine the case of autism. This disorder has been explained as a failure to

develop a theory of mind. the capacity to anribute mental states (cg.. intentions) to self and

others (Fnth & Happé. 1999). Autistics lack introspective awareness: they cannot adequately

reflect on their oun mental experiences. For instance. they do not distinguish well between

actions that the. intrnded and those they did not. Autistics ofien do not know thry are about to

act until they do (i.s.. actions just seem to "happen"). In other instances. they may not know why

they acted in a paxticular way. This inability to comprehend one's mental world is accompanied

by otien profound deficits in undentanding and predicting the thoughts and motivations of

others.

Markus and Kitayama's description of the Japanese self appears to represent a "reverse"

form of autism. Japanese are characterized as being concemed with the mental states of others to

the extent that they disregard their oun. producing lack of clarity between what is self and what

is other. and how the two relate to each other. This is not a health? state of affain: mature

interaction requires the interplay of at least two distinct minds that recognize their distinction

enough to respond to each other in a meaningful way that fûlfills the social goals of both.

Interaction is ofien for the purpose of transaction. People most ofien cornrnunicate with othen

toward some end. informational or othenvise. If upon entering an interaction. one loses

awareness of the persona1 identity that was motivated to initiate the interaction. then it is hard to

imagine what directs the interchange. The problem is wone if we assume that everyonr in the

interaction is lefi similarly bereft of his or her pre-existent self-identity.

There may well be greater attention to the thoughts. intentions. needs. and expectations of

others in Japanese as compared to Nonh American society. Nevertheless. such a cultural

difference in no way suggests that the self-other boundary is any less distinct and incorruptible in

Japan.

Self-Identitv .4Ilows for Competent Self-Presentation

Individuals exhibit in their behaviour consistencies that are rxperienced as enduring

attributes (e.g.. temperament). Even Hume. who disputed the reality of the self in his " bundle"

theop. recognized that each person has a distinctive "character" that reduces to regularities in the

person's behaviour (Popper. 1977. pp. 101- 103). Character or personality can eithrr help or

hinder an individual's conscious efforts in an. given social situation. To avoid bcing

undermined by one's own personality in social contexts. it is important that one have accuratr

knowledge of who one is and how one appears to others at baseline. Such knowlrdpr can then

be used to guide self-presentation. informing the suppression of certain characteristics and the

amplification of others. toward realizing one's social goals. Thus. even the collectivist

imperatives of harmony. accommodation. and interdependence can only be achieved if one has a

clear self-identity upon entering a situation. thereby knowing who "not to be" as social demands

present themselves. For example. if a person is aware that she tends to talk a lot. then this

recognition will enable her to consciously suppress her talkativenrss in a situation where such

behaviour is inappropriate or offensive to othen. In other words. successful self-regulation.

Japanese or otherwise. requires a valid self-identity. This irony is inconsistent with the claim

that the Japanese must have a weaker self-identity because of their heightened sensitivity to

social cues. There is nothing inherent to a strong and stable self-identity that would challenge

one's strivings to be responsive to others.

The foregoing problems with the argument apinst a unitary Japanese self-identity invite

the question of why prominent theonsts have been led to present such a radical claim. The

answer may lie in the wide gap that separates public expression from private experience in Japan.

Cultural DitTerences in the Public-Private Divide

There is ample evidence that the self is presented and discussed differently in Japan than

in North America. Do such differences in social behaviour. however. imply that the basic

experience of selfhood also differs? Let us consider the example of self-cstcem.

Aftrr reviewing rvidence that the Japanese do not exhibit the same pattern of self-

promoting biases as do North Americans. Heine. Lehrnan. Markus. and Kitayama ( 1999)

concluded that the Japanese lack a need for self-esteem. possessing instead a pronouncrd

tendency for self-criticism. In making this provocative claim. the authors inferred backwards

from self-presentational behaviour to the private experience of the self. The obvious tlaw in

such reasoning is that what is presented ma. be less reflective of private experience in Japan than

it is in North America. Afier ail. even the most severe public self-deprecation dors not entai1

imer hurnilip. Heine et a l 3 reasoning gives insuscient attention to the possibility that an?

basic motive. including self-esteem. may be expressed in very different ways across cultures.

reflecting the distinct social constraints and opportunity structures of each culture. More

eenerally. different expressions do not imply that the self is fundamentally different in structure C

or îùnction across cultures.

The temptation to ascribe a qualitatively distinct self to the Japanese may stem from the

tight regulation of the presented self that govems so much of social behaviour in that culture.

Given this regulation or control. the correspondence of private thought and sentiment with public

identity is necessarily weaker in Japan than in Nonh America where self-presentation is less

restncted by normative proscriptions.

Doi ( l98Y 1988) captured this cultural difference in discussing the Japanese dichotomy

of "omote" and "uratt. Omote refers to what is displayed on the outside. the appcarance of

things. and its meaning in classical Japanese is the face. Ura refers to what is not shown. the

inside. and classically. the heart. mind. or soul. Doi believed that the duality of omote-ura is

fundamental to Japanese thought and central to how Japanese approach social relations. The

related concepts of "tatemae" and "home" apply specifically to motivation. Tatemae is an

expression of omote and it is defincd as "the principles or rules that have been established as

natural and propertt (Doi. l98W 988. pp. 35-26). These are the public. acceptable reasons for an

action. Honne. in contrast. extends from ura and refers to the individual's unspoken and hidden

motives. The Japanese are fully awre that what is displayed in public to othcrs may not

represent the individual's private thoughts. Doi argues that this "double-sidedness" is a

particularly prominent aspect of the Japanese psyche. In contrast. Western culture emphasizes

the qualities of authenticity and sincerity. prescribing that what one displays in public should

most often correspond to one's private opinion (Trilling. 1971 ).

Maintenance of the public-private divide is consistent with Japanese values. including a

reverence for ritual and formalism. intoIerance of deviation from the norrn. and maintenance of

group h m o n y (Benedict. 1946). In a society where conduct in man. situations is highly

scripted. it is not surprising that socialization stresses the value of keeping one's thoughts and

opinions to oneself.

In sum. the much greater correspondence of public behaviour with private experience in

Nonh Amenca than in Japan presents the possibility that the distinctiveness of Japanese self-

identity may have been overstated in previous accounts. This study was designed as an initial

examination of the experience of self-identity in Japan. to gauge the true extent to which it

mimors or contrats with self-identity in North America. To accomplish this. Japanese and

Canadian university studcnts were asked to give categorical and open-ended responses to

questions about their self-identity. In this thesis. I will discuss only the categorical responses.

The historical dominance of Western European culture. and its individualistic tradition. in

Canada identifies it as an appropriate Nonh .American contrat to the hierarchical. coilectivistic

culture of Japan. If the fundamental differences in self-identity sugpsted by some are not

apparent here. then the validity of such daims will bç drawn into question. The study \vas

designed to compare studenrs in the nvo cultures on: 1 ) belief in a single. endunng self-identity.

2) expression of self-identity in various activity domains. and 3) attitudes tonard direct

expression of self-identity in behaviour. 1 predicted that students in the two cultures would be

similar in their recognition of an cnduring self-identity but thar the Japanrse would report

expressing this self-identity in fewer activity domains than would Canadians. This prediction

reHects the greater social constraints on self-presentation in Japan. In addition. I predicted th, Lt

the Japanese would be lrss favorable toward full and consistent expression of self-identity in

behavior. given the greater social cost of such autonomy in their culture.

Method

Participants

Participants were 161 (1 01 wornen and 60 men) European Canadians students at the

University of Toronto and 100 (50 men and 50 women) Japanese students at Tokyo University.

The age range was 18-25 years. with group means of 19.09. 19.28. 19.74. 19.40 for European

Canadian men and women. and Japanese women and men. respectively. -411 European Canadian

participants had lived in Canada for at least 5 years and al1 Japanese participants had spent less

than 5 years in Western countries (nearly al1 had never lived outside Japan).

Materials and Procedure

Participants completed a self-instructional questionnaire designed to assess aspects of

self-identity (see Appendix). -411 items to b r discussed involve caregorical responses. The items

ask: who knows the respondent best: whether self-identity is expressed in specific activity

domains (e.g.. "paid rmployment." "time with parents"): how much time is spent in eac h of

those domains: whrthrr self-idrntity is consistent across contexts: whether sustained expression

of self-identitp in outward behaviour is desirable: whether past rxperirnces of self-identity

expressionllack of expression felt goodhad: whether there is a motivation for self-identity

expression: whether Iack of self-identity expression is genenlly experienced as unpleasant: and

whether thinking about self-identity is experienced as odd.

The questionnaire required approximately 30 minutes to complete. Afienvard.

participants were debriefed as to the nature and purpose of the study.

Results

Polytomous logistic regression was used for confirmatory data analysis and

correspondence analysis was used for exploratory investigation. Given the s?tclusive use of

categorical responses. it was not meaningful to screen for univariate or multivariate outliers.

Confirmatorv Analvsis

Logistic regression examines the relative Iikelihood of categorical responses as a function

of some combination of categorical a d o r continuous predictors. No assumptions about the

distributions of the predictors are required. The model is essentially non-linear. based on loeits.

Logits are natural-log-transformed odds ratios. ïhus. the logistic regression equation models the

likelihood of an observation falling in one response category rather than another as a tiinction of

its values on some set of predictors. The regression parameters for these predicton are

calculated using ma~imum likelihood estimation.

Self-Standin9 Items. AH twelve items analyzed below are non-ordered. trichotornous.

categorical variables. The response options were "yes." 710." and "undecided." As such. a

generalized logit model was applied. This model interprets the three response options as having

no inherent ordering and computes srparate response functions for each non-rrdundant

(orthogonal) odds. With three response options. this translates into two non-redundant odds and

therefore two response functions per item. The specific form of the odds is a matter of choice

and should be guided by ease of interpretation. 1 chose the likelihood of responding "no" rather

than -'yes." and "undecidrd" rather than "yes." as the basis of the two responsr functions.

resprctively. A significant cultural difference on the first odds (logit 1) for an item would

indicate a true difference in belief (or at lcast self-reoorted beliet). A significant differencr on

the second odds (logit 2) is more difficult to interpret. as it could indicate a true difference in

belief across cultures. a poorer understanding of the question in one culture than the othrr. or

greater aversion or resistance to answering the question in one culture than the other. Hence. if

cultural differences in responses to an item are limited to the likelihood of saying "undecided"

rather than "yes." then this is not suficient justification for claiming a substantive difference in

beliefs about the self.

The predicton for both response functions were cultural group (Canadian. Japanese).

gender (women. men). and the Culture x Gender interaction. The repeated application of logistic

regression to twelvr separate response variables demands control of Type 1 error. Overall alpha

for this set of items was constrained to .O5 by setting regression-wise alpha to the Bonferroni-

corrected value of .O04 Only those regression parameters associated with pvalues srnaller than

this critical value were decornposed and interpreted.

The responss frequency tables for the twelve questions appear in Table 1. Initial titting

of satunted models (al1 three predicton) yielded no significant Culture x Grnder interactions.

.411 interaction ternis were therefore dropped and results are reported for the reduced models. In

each case. the likelihood ratio %' test tvas non-significant. supponing the predictiw sufficiency

of the reduced model. Notably. the main rffect for gender was not significant in any of the

twelve reduced models. This left onlg differences as a hnction of cultural group. nhich I focus

on for the remainder of this section by considenng each question in tum.

Question l(a) asks the respondent if hisher self-knowlrdge is more accurate than an-

other person's knowledge of himher. No cultural difference was expected. In contrast. there

was an overall effect for culture. %' ( 2 ) = 33-17. Q < .0001. Recall that there are two independent

response functions for this effect. corresponding to logits 1 (w'no" vs. "yes") and 2 ('-undecided"

vs. "yes"). The decomposition of the culture effect revealed that both lopit 1. B = -.88. %' ( 1 ) =

1 9.1 1. p c .O00 1. and logit 2. B = -.93. ( 1 ) = 2 1.48. p < .O00 1 . were signi tkant. Translated

into simple probability. these results indicate that the Japanese were 4.63 times more likely than

the Canadians to respond "no" rather than "yes" (odds = -44 vs. .l O). and 5-45 times more likely

than the Canadians to respond 'iindecided" rather than '-yes" (odds = .48 vs. .09). and that both

these cultural differences were highly significant. More generally. the most comrnon response to

this question for both the Japanese and Canadians was "yes" (52% and 84%. respectively).

Question I(c) asks if the respondent understands the reasons for hisher own actions

better than others understand the reasons for hisher actions. No cultural difference was

expected. In contrast. there was an overall effect for culture. X' (2) = 1 7.05. Q = .0002. The

decomposition revealed that both logit 1. B = - . 7 4 %' ( 1 ) = 14.19. p = .0007. and logit 2. B = -

.49. X' ( 1) = 4.64. p = -03. were significant. Judging from the relative signiticance of the

coefficients. the Japanese tendency to respond "no" rather than "yes" accounts for most of the

overall effect. Specifically. the Japanese were 4.1 6 times more likely than the Canadians to

respond "no" rather than "yes" (odds = 2 6 vs. .09). and 2.81 times more likely to respond

"undecided" rather than "yes" (odds = 2 0 vs. .07). Beyond these differences. the most common

response for both the Japanese and Canadians was "yes" (64% and 86%. respectively).

Question 3(a) asks the respondent if he/she possesses a stable self-identity across social

contexts and variable prescnted selves. No cultural ditErence was cxprcted. In contrast. there

was an overall effect for culture. X2 (2) = 27.5 1. E < .O00 1. The decomposition revealed that

both logit 1. B = -.77. X 2 ( 1 ) = 26.25. g < .O00 1. and logit 2. B = -34. %' ( 1 ) = 6.86. e = .009.

were significant. More specifically. the Japanese were 4.8 1 times more likely than the

Canadians to respond "no" rather than yes" (odds = 1.36 vs. 2 8 ) . and 2.94 times more likely to

respond "undecide&' rather than "yes" (odds = .4I vs. .Id). The most comrnon response was

'-no" for the Japanese (39%) and "yes" for the Canadians (70%).

Question 3(b) asks the respondent if a stable self-identity is desirable. No cultural

difference was expected. In contrast. there \vas an overall effect for culture. X' (2) = 15.96. =

.0003. Decomposition revealed that logit 1 was not significant. B = -.08.1' (1) = 23. p = 5 3 .

whereas logit 2 was significant. B = -.65. X 2 ( 1 ) = 15.52. p < .O00 1. Thus. the Japanese and

Canadians did not differ in their tendency to answer "no" rather than "yes" (odds = .41 VS. 34).

but the Japanese were 5.65 times more likely to respond "undecided" rather than "yes" (odds =

-76 vs. .13). Even so. the most comrnon response for both the Japanese and Canadians was "yes"

(46% and 65%. respectively).

Question 3 c ) asks the respondent if it is desirable to always express one's self-identity in

behaviour. The Japanese were predicted to disagree more with this statement. in line with the

greater emphasis on self-control and social modulation in Japan. Consistent with this. there \vas C

an overall effect for culture. %' (2) = 16.19. p = ,0003. Decomposition revealed that bath logit 1.

B = -.60. X 2 ( 1 ) = 12.89. p = .0003. and logit 2. B = 4 3 . ( 1 ) = 13.01. p = .0003. were -

significant. More specifically. the Japanese were 3.32 times more likely than the Canadians to

respond "no" rather than "yes" (odds = 3.12 vs. -94). and 3.52 timrs more likely to respond

"undecided" rather than "yes" (odds = 1.76 vs. 30). The most common response for the

Japanese was "no" (53%). The Canadians. in contrat. were split fairly e\,enly between -'noo* and

"yês" (39% and 4 1 %. respective1 y).

Question 4 b ) asks if the respondent felt good about himsçlf/herself durinq a self-reported

expenence where hisher self-identity was clearly expressed in behaviour. No cultural difference

was expected. In contrast. there was an overall sffect for culture. %' (2) = 19.50.2 < .0001.

Decomposition revealed that both logit 1. B = 4 6 . ( 1 ) = 9.98. < .O00 1. and logit 2. B = -

.70. X' ( 1 ) = l 2 . X g = .O004 were significant. Specifically. the Japanese were 3 J O times more

likely than the Canadians to respond "no" rather than " y s " (odds = 3 0 vs. .OS) and 3 -96 times

more likely to respond "undecided" rather than "yes" (odds = .34 vs. -09). The most common

response for both the Japanese and Canadians was '-yes.' (6 1 % and 86%. respectively).

Question 4(c) asks if the respondent felt good about himselfhenelf immediately after a

self-reponed experience where his/her self-identity was clearly expressed in behaviour. Again.

no cultural difference was expected. In contrast. there was an overall effect for culture. X2 (2) =

12.60. e = .O02 Decomposition revealed that both logit 1. B = 4 8 . %' ( 1 ) = 5.64. p = .O?. and

logit 2. B = -39. %' (1 ) = 8.74. Q = . O O X were significant. The Japanese were 2.78 times more

likely than the Canadians to respond "no" rather than "yes" (odds = 2 7 vs. . I O ) and 3.36 times

more likely to respond "undecided" rather than "yes" (odds = 3 0 vs. .09). The most cornmon

response for both the Japanese and Canadians was "yes" (64% and 84%. respectively).

Question j (b ) asks if the respondent felt bad about himself/henelf dunng a self-reported

rxperience where his/hrr self-idrntity was clearly inconsistent with behaviour. The Canadians

were expected to feel worse in such instance. and therefore agrer more with this statrment. given

the greater value placed on belief-behavior consistency in the West. In contnst. no overall cffrct

for culture was found. %' ( 2 ) = 4.18. p = .12. The most common response for both the Japanrse

and Canadians was "yes" (58% and 54%. respectively).

Question j(c) asks if the respondent felt bad about himself/herself immediately aRer a

self-reported exprrience where his/her self-identity was clearly inconsistent with behaviour.

Again. greater agreement was expected for the Canadians than for the Japanese. In contrast. no

overall effect for culture was found. %"(2) = 4.5 1. p = . I 1. The most common response for both

the Japanese and Canadians was "pes" (60% for both groups).

Question 6(a) asks if the respondent consciously stt-ives to express hisiher self-identity in

behaviour. For the sarne reason stated above. the Canadians were expected to agree more with

this statement. In contrast. the overall effect for culture was not significant. X' (2) = 7.83. p =

.02. The rnost cornmon response for both the Japanese and Canadians was "yes" (41% and 59%.

respective1 y ).

Question 6(b) asks if the respondent feels hstrated or dissatisfied when unable to

express his/her self-identity in behaviour. Again. the Canadians were rxpected to tind such

instances more avenive. In contrast. the overall effect for culture was not significant. %' (2) =

2.64. p = 2 7 . The most common response for both the Japanese and Canadians was "-es" (69%

and 79%. respectively ).

Question 7 asks the respondent if helshe found it odd or strange to rhink about the topic

of self-identity in the course of completing the questionnaire. 1 predicted that the Japanese

would be more likely to agree with this statement. given the greatrr attention to. and discussion

of. the decontextualized inner self in the West than in Japan. Consistent wîth this. thrre was an

overall effect for culture. X 2 ( 2 ) = 25.74.2 < .O00 1. Decomposition rrvealrd that logit 1 was

signi ficant. B = .79. X2 ( 1 ) = 24.84. p < .O00 1. whereas logit 2 was not. B = 3 5 . ( 1 ) = 2.43. p =

.12. Specifically. the Canadians were 5.06 tirnes more likely than the Japanrsc to respond "no"

rather than "yes" (odds = 5.30 vs. 1.05). but did not differ in the tendency to answer "undecided

rather than '-).esg- (odds = -70 vs. 3). The most common response for the Canadians was '-no"

(76%). The Japanese were split fairly evenly between "no" and "-es" (44% and 42%.

respec tivel y ).

Self-Idcntin; Expression. Question ?(a) lists sixteen activity domains and asks the

respondent if he/she usually expresses hisher self-identity within each domain. The response

options are "yes." "no." and "undecided." As before. a generalized logit mode1 was applied to

examine group differences in the tendency to choose one option over anothrr. This arnounted to

sixteen separate logistic regressions. with cultural group. gender. and the Culture x Gender

interaction entered as p-edicton in each case. A Bonferroni-corrected regression-wise alpha

level of -003 was used to constrain overall alpha to .O5 for this set of items. Only those

regession parameters associated with p-values smaller than this critical value were decomposed

and interpreted. Note that the sample sizes vary across regressions. as some individuals marked

one or more activity domains as inapplicable.

The response frequency tables for al1 sixteen items appear in Table 2. Initial testing of

the saturated models (al1 three predictors included) yielded no significant Culture x Grnder

interactions. All interaction terms were therefore dropped and results are reponrd for the

reduced models. In each case. the likelihood ratio X 2 test was non-significant. supponing the

predictive sufficiency of the reduced model. As before. the main effect for gendrr was not

significant in an. of the reduced models. This leaves only dit'ferences as a function of cultural

croup. which 1 focus on for the remainder of this section. C

The general prediction was that the Japanese would report experiencing self-identity

expression in fewer activic domains than would the Canadians. Where self-presrntaiional

concems could be assumed to be weak. horvever. both groups were expected to report self-

identity expression. This would be most likely for time spent with close friends. time spent with

siblings. solitary hobbies. time spent with romantic partnen. and free time spent alone.

Domain 1 asks if the respondent usually expenences self-identity expression during time

spent w i h close friends. -4s can be seen in Table 2. no Japanese females responded "no" to this

item. The presence of a cell frequency of zero precludes maximum likelihood estimation of the

regression parameten. To solve this problem. "no" and "undecided" responses to this item were

collapsed into a single response category. The simplified iogistic regression produced a single

response function rnodeling the odds of responding "no or undecided" rather than "yes."

Consistent with the predicted cultural pan. on this domain. the effect for culture \vas not

significant. x2 (1. N = 260) = -06. p = .8 1. The most common response for both the Japanese and

Canadians was "ycs" (92% and 93%. respective1 y).

Domain 2 addresses tirne spent with acquaintances. Here. an overall effect for culture

was found. X 2 (2. N = 260) = 18-93. < .0001. Decomposition revealed that logit 1 (**no" vs.

y s " ) was not significant. B = -. 15. %' ( 1.8 = 260) = -9 1. = 34. whereas logit 2 (.*undecidrd

vs. **yes") was significant. B = -.69. X 2 ( 1.3 = 160) = 17.33. p < .O00 1. Specitically. the

Japanese did not differ from the Canadians in their tendency to answer "no" rather than "yes"

(odds = 1.12 YS. .8 1 ). but were 3 -93 tirnes more likely to respond "undecided" rather than o'yes"

(odds = 1.69 YS. -45). The most common response \vas "undecided" for the Japanese (44%) and

'-yes" for the Canadians (45%).

Domain 3 addresses coursework and attending classes. No owrall effect for culture was

found. X 2 ( 2 . N = 26 1 ) = 1 1.17. p = .O04 although the non-significance \vas marginal. The

japanesr were split evenly between "no" and '-yrs" (38% for both responsçs). The most

common response for the Canadians was ");es" (57%).

Domain 4 addresses time spent with parents. No overall effect for culture \vas found. x'

(7. N = 260) = 1.97. p = 2 7 . The most cornmon response for borh the Japanese and Canadians

was "yes" (64% and 72%. respectively).

Domain 5 addresses time spent with siblings. No cultural differencr was rxprcted for

this relatively informal dornain. In contrast. there was an overall effect for culture. %' (2. N =

229) = 14-36. p = .0008. Decornposition revealed that logit 1 was not significant. B = - . O 5 X Z ( 1.

N = 229) = -04. p = -84. whereas logit 2 was significant. B = -.M. (1. N = 139) = 14.28. g = -

.O002 The Japanese did not differ from the Canadians in their tendency to answer *-no" rather

than '-yes" (odds = -14 vs. .12). but were 5.85 times more likely to respond "undecided" rather

than "yes" (odds = -40 vs. -07). The most comrnon response for both the Japanese and

Canadians was "yes" (65% and 84%. respectively).

Domain 6 addresses time spent with extended family. There was an overall effect for

culture here. %' (2. '1 = 716) = 23.65. p < -0001. Decomposition revealed that both logit 1. B = -

.71. X 2 (1. '1 = 7-16) = lj.88. ,0001. and logit 2.8 = -.89. X' (1. = 146) = 21.71. < .000i.

were significant. The Japanese were 4.27 times more likrly than the Canadians to respond "no"

rather han "yes" (odds = 2.93 vs. .68) and 5.87 times more likely to respond **undecidedW~ rather

than "yes" (odds = 2.57 vs. -44). The most common response was "no" for the Japanese (45%)

and "?es" for the Canadians (-17%).

Domain 7 addresses participation in sporting activities. There \vas an overall sffect for

culture. X 2 ( 2 . 3 = 2-19) = 12.8-1. e = .O02 Decomposition revealed that logit 1 was not

significant. B = .47. %' ( 1. N = 149) = 3.8 1.2 = -05. wherras logit 2 was signi ficant. B = -.46. x 2

( 1.3 = 249) = 6.87. p = ,009. The Japanese did not differ from the Canadians in their tendency

to ansiver "no" rather than "yes" (odds = . l3 vs. 30). but were 7.36 times more likely to respond

m-undecided" rather than "yes" (odds = .-Il vs. .17). The most common response for both the

Japanese and Canadians was "yes" (65% and 68%. respectively).

Domain 8 addresses solitary hobbies. Again. a zero ce11 frequency requircd the use of a

single response category combining "no" and "undecidd responses. There was no effect for

culture. as expected for this non-social. informal domain. %' ( 1. N = 160) = 3-25. Q = .07. The

most cornrnon response for both the Japanese and the Canadians was 'yes" (92% and 86%.

respectively ).

Domain 9 addresses social hobbies. Here too. no overall effect for culture was found. %'

(2. N = 250) = 10.46.2 = .005. The most common response for both the Japanese and the

Canadians was '?;es" (59% and 74%. respectively).

Dornain 10 addresses time spent with romantic partnen. No overall effect for culture

was expected or found. (2. N = 2 18) = 9.62.2 = .008. The most cornmon response for both

the Japanese and the Canadians was "yes" (61% and 76%. respectively).

Domain 1 1 addresses paid employment. There was an overall effect for culture here. %'

(7. = 230) = 11.04. 2 = -0009. Decomposition revealed that both logit 1. B = -3 1. %' ( 1. N =

3 0 ) = 9.55. p = .002. and logit 7. B = -.72. %-' ( 1. N = 230) = 10.96. = .0009. were significant.

Judging by the relative significance of the coefficients. the preater tendency of the Japanese to

respond "undrcided" rather than "yes" accounted for rnost of the e ffrct. Speci ficall y. the

Japanese were 1.85 times more likrly than the Canadians io answer "no" rather than "ys" (odds

= 2.16 vs. .76) and 4.36 times more likely to answer "undecided rather than "yes" (odds = -89

vs. 2 1 ). The most cornmon response was --no" for the Japanese (53%) and "yes" for the

Canadians ( 5 1 %).

Dornain 12 addresses volunteer work and community service. There was an overall

effect for culture. X2 (2. = 176) = 11.12. p = -0009. Decomposition revealed that logit 1 was

not significant. B = -.X- ( 1. N = 176) = 3.17. g = .08. whereas logit 2 \vas significant. B = -

-82. %' (1.3 = 176) = 14.1 1. = ,0002. The lapanese did not difrer from the Canadians in their

tendency to answer "no" rather than '-yes" (odds = 1 .O7 vs. -49). but were 5.2 1 times more likrly

to answer '-undecided" rather than "yes" (odds = 1.36 vs. 2 6 ) . The most common response was

"undecided" for the Japanese (40%) and --yes" for the Canadians (57%).

Domain 13 addresses religious or spiritual activities. No overall effect for culture was

found. (2. N = 1 5 5 ) = -53. Q = .77. The Japanese were split fairly evenl y between "no" and

"yes" (58% and 41%. respectively). The most common response for the Canadians was "yes"

(48%).

Domain 14 addresses one-on-one interaction with teachers. No overail effect for culture

was found. X2 (2. N = 213) = 3.07. = 2 2 . The most common response was *-no" for the

Japanese (44%) and "yes" for the Canadians (42%).

Domain 15 addresses visits to medical doctors or mentai health profrssionals. No overall

effect for culture was found. x2 (2. N = 187) = 2.68. g = 2 6 . The most common response for

both the Japanese and Canadians was "no" (39% and 47%. respectively ).

Domain 16 addresses free time spent alone. No cultural difference was expected here

and none was found. %' (2. N = 261 ) = 3.25. = 2 0 . The most common response for both the

Japanrse and Canadians was "yes" (87% and 92%. respectively).

The overall pattern is clear. Contr.; to the prediction that self-identity is eapressed in

Fewer activity domains in Japan than in Canada. the results point to similarit). in self-identit):

expression for university students in both countries. There were no significant cultural

differences in responses for ten of the sixteen activity domains. bloreover. four of the sis

cultural differences found were attributable to the Japanese tendency to answer "undrcided"

rather than "yes." Only in two domains. time spent with extended family and paid employment.

were the Japanese clearly less likely than were Canadians to report self-identity expression.

Exploratory Analvsis

Who knows vou best? Table 3 display the response frequencies for question 1 (b). Only

those who answered either -*yes" or -'no" to I(a) were required to respond to 1 (b). If the

respondent answered "yes" to 1 (a). then he/she was asked which person. a f er himselfherself.

knows himher best. The most common response for Japanese women was "mother" (65%).

Japanese men were split fairly evenly between "mother*' and -'fnend0' (4 1% and -14%.

respectively). The most common response for both Canadian men and women was mother (33%

and 3 8%. respectively ).

If a respondent answered "no" to I (a). then helshe was asked which person knows

h i d e r best. The most common response was "mother" for both Japanesr women (38%) and

men (57%). The most common response was "frîend for the admittedly tiny sample of threr

Canadian men (67%). Canadian women were split fairly evenly between "spouse or romantic

partnrr" and "friend" (50% and 40%. respectively).

Lifestvle. Question I(b) asks how much time the respondent has devoted ovèr the past

year to each of the sixteen activity domains used in ?(a). The intsnt here was to gain a

descriptive sense of any differences in lifestyle that separate the Japanese and Canadians. The

four response options are "none." "vety litt le." "some." and "a lot."

Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) was used. MCA is a procedure for

multidimensional analysis of qualitative data (see Greenacre. 1984: Nishisato. 1994). Responses

to any number of categorical variables are arranged into a Bun frequrncy table and overall

9nenia" is defined as the ovenll %' value representing ceIl drviations from rxpectrd tiequencies

calculated from row and column totals. Analogous to factor analysis. a limited number (the

smaller of the number of rows and columns. minus 1 ) of multivariate dimensions are

orthogonally extracted to account for the inertia. It is hoped that a small number of dimensions.

rxtracted in order of magnitude of inertia accounted for. will account for the buik of association

that exists in the table. affording a simplified structure. The categorical variables c m thrn be

ploned against pairs of the resulting dimensions. allowing their relations to be visually presentrd

in Euclidean space.

1 applied MCA here to examine the associative structure of responses to the lifestyle

items (time spent in the sixteen activity domains). A 4-category variable representing participant

eroup (Canadian and Japanese men and viomen) was incorporated into the Burt table. These CI

catepries were plotted alongside the response options to the sixteen items to detemine if the

groups diverged in any clear association with distinct response clusters representing lifestyle

differences. '4s this method is purely descriptive. visual examination of the resulting plots is

sufficient to infonn interpretation.

The results revealed that the rxtracted dimensions werr highly fragmented. The first four

dimensions were responsible for 7.0%. 4.9%. 4.1%. and -1.0% of the inertia. tespectivrly.

Dimensions beyond thçse individuallp accounted for too littlc of the inertia to justic plotting.

Two-dimensional plots were created to visualize the associations of the response and group

categories with the four dimensions (see Figure 1 ). A s cm be seen from the six plots. nowhere

did the four groups appear to diverge in a pronounced manner. This implies that whatevrr the

associations among response categories. these patterns did not differ across the four groups. In

other words. the lifestgles of the four groups of students appeared to be quite similar.

Discussion

1 hypothesized that both Japanese and Canadians rxperience a stable. tram-situational

self-identity and that its expression and interpretation differ across the two cultures in ways that

are consistent with the social dynarnics of rach culture. The primary goal of the study was to

examine these claims by comparing Japanese and Canadian responses to a sel f-identity sun-eu.

The results divrrged significantly from predictions. Nonetheless. they presented a no less

consistent and interesting account of cultural differences.

Self-Knowledee

The persistence of pnvate self-identitp implies a certain stance toward one's oun self-

knowledge. narnely. belief in its validity. Although philosophical and religious differences rxist

across C U ~ N ~ ~ S in the spiritual value placed on self-knowledge. individuals might be expected to

be similarly confident in the accuracy of their subjective understanding of themselves. The same

could be said of awareness of the causes of one's own actions. For this reason. 1 predicted linle

cultural difference on the questions addressing self-knowledge. The majority in both groups did

believe in the primacy of their self-knowledge over others' knowledge of them. Most

individuals in both groups also claimed that they understand the reasons for thrir actions better

than othen understand the reasons for their actions. Nonetheless. contrary to prediction. cultural

differences cmerged. The Japanese were significantly more likely than the Canadians to reply

that others know thrm better than they know themselves. and that othrrs understand the causes of

their behavior better than they themselves do. The Japanese were also significantly more likcly

to respond that they could not decide on these questions.

It appears that the Japanese. relative to Canadians. have a greater mistrust of their self-

understanding relative to the accuracy of others' insight into them. One implication is that the

Japanese are relatively more open to the influence of others in self-identity formation. Even so.

it should be noted that a majority of the Japanese claim suprrior self-knowlrdge.

recommending against over-intrrpretation of this cultural difference.

Students from the MO cultures were consistent in claiming their mother understood them

better than did others. This raises the question of how much overlap eltists between individuals'

self-knowledge and their mothers' knowledge of them. If high overlap c m be assumed. this

suggests the utility of using mothen' knowledge as a cnterion is assessing the accuracy of self-

reports.

The Nature of Self-Identitv

There were three key predictions in this study regarding the eltperience of self-identity

and beliefs about it. The first and most central prediction was that there would be little cultural

difference in the extent to which private self-identity was experienced as a stable. underlying set

of beliefs about the self. Second. little difference was expected in the reponed desirability of

possessing such a stable self-identity. given its adaptiveness as a "center of pravity" in the

organization of experience. Third. it was predicted that the Japanese would be lrss positive than

Canadians toward the idea of sustained expression of pnvate self-identity in brhaviour. This last

prediction reflects the strong emphasis in Japanese culture on tixed rules of social conduct and

the value of sel f-restraint. Inappropriate expression of one's sel f-identity in Japan is costl y. at

Ieast more so than in Canada.

Disconfirming the main prediction. the Japanese were significantly more likely than the

Canadians to deny constancy of private self-identity across contexts. For many Japanese. the

'.imer self' did not remain the sarne from situation to situation. This. in hct. \vas the most

common Japanese response. whereas most Canadians reported constancy of self-idrntity. The

Japanese were also significantly more likely to respond that they were uncertain as to their

answer.

Regarding the desirability of a stable self-identity. a cultural difference did emerge but it

reduced to a greater Japanese tendency to answer that they were undecided. Lhcertaintv. in and

of itself. is not good evidence of a diflerence in belief. Moreover. the most comrnon response for

both groups was that a stable self-identity is generally a good thing.

When asked if it is desirable to always express one's self-identity in one's behaviour. the

Japanese and Canadians differed in line with prediction. The Japanese were more likely than the

Canadians to disagree that this was desirable. and were also more likely to respond that they

were undecided. tn fact. a majority of the Japanese disagreed. Even for the Canadians. however.

responses were quite evenly split between "no" and "yes." indicating that even Westemers

appreciate the need for seiective self-expression.

Ntogether. the results suggest a somewhat more cornplex rxperience of self-identity in

Japan and Canada than expected. The claim that Japanese culture requires relativcly more self-

modulation of behaviour was supported. This difference in social conduci apprars to have even

more profound consequencrs than expected. however. as it is accompanird by a weakrr sense of

vans-situational constancy of self on the pan of the Japanese. This is so despite cvidence that

constancy of self-identity (but not expression) is as desired by the Japanese as it is by Canadians.

One interpretation of this pattern is that the greater demands on the Japanese to adjust their self-

presentations across contexts results in the sense that private self-identity is itself changing in

some important way. This wouid sugpest a profound cultural shaping of consciousness.

Sel f-Identitv Espression across Contexts

It was expectrd that the Japanese would report expressing their self-identities in fewer

activity domains than would the Canadians. Once again. this prediction is in recognition of the

meater self-presentational demands in Japanese culture. In addition. the Japanese and Canadians C

were expected to sirnilarlp report self-identity expression in five specific domains where self-

presentational concems were assumed to be minimal.

The predicted difference \vas disconfined. Specificall y. the res ults revealed that the

Japanese were remarkably similar to the Canadians in their profiles of self-identity expression

across domains. Cultural differences emerged in only six out of sixteen domains. and four of

these differences reduced to greater uncenainty on the part of the Japanese. To reiterate. this

increased tendency to respond "undecided" does not by itself support a divergence between

Japanese and Canadian beliefs. In short. then. the Japanese and Canadians appear to express

their self-identities in much the same way across domains

The predicted comrnonality was confirtned. There were no cultural differences of any

kind on four of the five "informal" domains. On the tifth. time spent with siblings. the Japanese

differed only insofar as the) were more undecided in their responses. Thus. individuals from

both cultures trnded to agree that the. are able to express who the? privately brlieve the! are

when constraints on self-presentation are minimal. Consistent with this. the only clrar cultural

differences ernerged on time spent with extended family and in paid employment. The direction

of difference. with less self-identity expression reponed by the Japanese. is artributable to the

greater emphasis on decorum and propnety that characterizes these domains in Japan than in the

West.

Li festvle

.4n exploratoc examination of the amount of time spent in each activity domain was also

conducted. In the present context. this amounts to a cultural cornparison of student lifestyle. .4

descriptke analysis revealed no obvious cultural or gender differences in this regard. Overail.

universic students in the two countries appear to spend their time in highly comparable ways.

which is perhaps not so surprising g i ~ e n the universality of student culture. Moreover. self-

identity expression in day-to-day life appears to be as common for the Japanese as it is for

Canadians.

How is it that such a '-tight0' and '-vertical" culture as Japan's can allow for as much self-

expression as that of Canada? The answer may lie in the Japanese expenence of variabilit?: in

their beliefs about themselves across contexts. That is. because the Japanese self-identity

tluctuates to a greater extent from one situation to the next. a widrr set of behaviours can be

construed as expressive of that self-identity. It may also be that the Japanese tend to construe

acts of self-regulation as expressions of persona1 values. and thsrefore integral to who they are as

individuals. The increased sel f-presentational demands placed on the Japanese individual may

not be perceived in al1 cases as external. corrcive pressures. but rather. as an opponunity for self-

defining conformity. This ma. help explain why the Japanese report as much self-identity

expression as do Canadians.

Ernotional Reactions to Self-ldentity Expression

No cultural differences were expected in the trndency to report feeling good about

oneself dunng or after an experience in which one's self-identity was expressrd in one's

behaviour. On the other hand. the Canadians were predicted to be more likely to report feeling

bad during and after instances where iheir behavior was clearly inconsistent with their self- -

identity. This latter prediction followed from the assumption that such public-prime disparities

would be more common and less crîtically virwed in Japan than in Canada. and hence.

experîenced as more aversive by Canadians.

The results present a somewhat different pattern. Although a majority of both Canadians

and Japanese reported feeling good dunng and after a self-reported. identity-consistent episode.

the Japanese were somewhat less likely to do so. The Japanese were also more likely to be

undecided on the question. Surprisingly. no cultural difTerence was evident in the reports of

feeling bad dunng and afier identity-inconsistent episodes. .4 majority of both groups reported

feeling bad. If these results are taken at face value. they suggest that Canadians experience

greater emotional benefits than do the Japanese when "expressing themselves" but fer1 no wone

when unable to do so. Of course. the possibility of greater modesty on the Japanese may have

dampened their tendency to say that they felt good about themselves. Hence. the specific

difference found here should be interpreted with caution.

Motivation

The predictions for self-related motivation were that the Japanese would be less likrly to

report striving for self-idrntity expression. and also less likely to report feeling bad when these

strivings were blocked or hstrated. Again. this followed from the greater constraints on social

conduct in Japan. which presumably leaves individuals accustomed to. and comfonable with.

self-restraint. Contrary to this reasoning. no cultural differences were found on this topic. Whrn

asked if they consciously strive to express their self-identities. most Japanese and Canadians

responded that they do. M e n asked if they feel fmstrated when unable to express their self-

identities. most Japanese and Canadians açain responded that they do. This suggests that the

need for self-identity expression may be more universal than has beçn assumed. more a

psychological impentive than a cultunlly determinrd tendencx. Future research should examine

this possibility.

Thinking about Self- tdentitv

It was predicted that the Japanese would have greater difficulty thinking about questions

of self-identity because the self in general is not as cornmon a theme in Japanese discourse as it

is in Canadian discoune. Consistent with this. the Japanese were significantlp. more likely than

the Canadians to report that they found the topic of self-identity strange to think about. at least in

the rnanner demanded by the questionnaire. Even so. this cultural difference was not

overwhelming. The Japanese were split quite evenly between agreement and disagreement with

the statement that thinking about one's self-identity was odd or unusual.

The cultural difference on this dimension may explain the overall tendency for the

Japanese to be more undecided than were the Canadians in their responses. lnsofar as the

Japanese were less accustomed to such detailed questions about their experiencr of a

decontextualized. "inner" self. they would be more likely to find the questions confusing or

vague. Fortunately. the categoricai response format used helped distinguish this tendency from

response patterns suggesting real di fferences in belief. Li ken-type scales. where indecision

translates into movement toward the scalr midpoint. would have confounded the two.

Summarv

Man. of the predictions were based on the idea that the nature of Japanese society

suggests a relatively occluded self-identity. as phenomenally real as that of Westerners but less

ofien expressed because of social constnint. Here. the stability of this self-identity would be

maintained at the expensr of tolerating greater disparities between outward behaviour and private

belief. The disconfirmation of most of these predictions suggests that this cultural

c haracterization may be mistaken or at least exaggerated.

In contrast. the findings present a portrait of the Japanese as not markedly different from

the Canadians. Admittedly. their beliefs about thçmselves do tluctuate more than do those of

Canadians. but this is accompanied by a similar profile of self-identity expression. Individuals

from both groups feel that the? most obviously express the person they think they are when

either alone or with close friends. Funhermore. Japanese and Canadians appear very similar in

their self-related motivations. Both groups strive to express their self-identity in behaviour and

feel frustrated when unable to do so.

Beyond this unexpectedly high degree of similarity. there remains the question of how

the content of self-identity diffen across the hvo cultures. The present findings at ieast suggest

that we should not be surprised to find more commonality than difference even here. Future

researc h will tell.

Limitations

An obvious limitation of this study is the exclusive reliance on self-reports. An? sume);

methodology is staked on the ability and willingness of individuals to accuratel? descnbe their

beliefs. attitudes. and experiences. The extent to which the reports of the Japanrse and Canadian

students who participated in the present study mirror their privatr. past "reality" is unknown.

Even self-reports. however. can provide insight. however indirect. into the cultural orientation of

the individuals concemed.

A second concrm is the limited genèralizability of the conclusions. 1 sarnpkd the

responses of undergraduate studrnts at top universities in Japan and Canada. Hoa. typically

Japanese. or Canadian. are these populations? Moreover. is it even usrful to assume a nonnative

"Japanese" or "Canadian" cultural orientation. given the wide range of generational. regional.

and sub-cultural variation that exists within both countries? 1 maintain that it is usrtùl. but also

recognize that vie should never disregard the possibility that greatrr psychological variation

exists within a country than between that country and another. Future research will reveal

whether this is true for Canada and Japan.

.4 third concern is the cross-cultural equivalçnce of translated constructs. Back-

translation techniques. although helpful in this regard. do not ensure that respondents in the two

cultures end up answenng exactly the sarne questions. Insofar as critical constructs related to

self-identity have strong emic cornponents. comparing responses to questions that feature these

constructs can be problematic. However. even problematic findings c m contribute to the

creation of self-identity-related constructs that are more exportable across cultures. The present

findings are no exception.

Concluding: Rernarks

The central idea that motivated this study \vas the assumption of universal aspects of

selthood that underlie cultural differences in how that selthood is interpreted and expressed.

Ironically. the findings cast doubt on what was assumed to be univenal (i.r.. the perceived

stability of self-identity ). while suggesting that di fferences in interpretation and expression were

minimal. This inverts the inner-outer asymrnetry implied abow. where self-identity was

assumed to be culturally inwiant on the wwinsids" but culturally reflective on the --outside."

Rather. it wodd appear that the Japanese and Canadians are most dissimilar at their most private

level of self-awareness and most similar at the public level. This hints at a very different relation

between self and society than is often assumed.

References

Bem. D. J. ( 1972). Self-perception theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.). Advances in

ex~erimental social ~svcholoev. Vol. 6 (pp. 1-62). New York: Academic Press.

Benedict. R. ( 1946). The chn;santhemum and the sword: Patterns of Iapanese culture.

Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Bmner. J. (1997). A narrative mode1 of self-construction. In J.D. Snodgrass & R.L.

Thompson (Eds.). The self across psvcholo-~v: Self-recognition. self-awareness. and the self-

concept (pp. 145-161). New York: New York Acadrmy of Sciences.

Deci. E.L.. & Ryan. R.M. ( 1990). A motivational approach to self: Integration in

penonality. In R. Dieustbier (Series and Vol. Ed.). Nebraska Svm~osium on motivation: Vol.

38. Perspectives on motivation (pp. 237-2883. Lincoln. NE: University of Nebraska Press.

Doi. T. (1988). The anatomv of selt The individual versus societv (MA. Harbison.

Trans.). Tokyo: Kodansha International. (Original work published 1985)

Eagle. M.N. ( 199 1 ). Pspchoanalytic conceptions of the self. In J. Strauss & G.R. Goethals

(Eds.). The self: Interdisci~harv a~proaches (pp. 49-65). New York: Spnnger-Veriag.

Frith. U.. & Happé. F. ( 1 999). Theory of mind and sel~consciousness: M a t is it like to

be autistic? Mind and Language. 14. 1-22.

Gohan. E. (1959). The oresentation of self in evendav Me. New York: Doubleday and

Company.

Greenacre. M. J. ( 1984). Theory and ap~lications of correspondence analvsis. London:

Academic Press.

Harré. R. ( 199 1 ). The discursive production of selves. Thson; and Psvchologv. 1.5 1-63.

Heine. S.J.. Lehrnan. DR.. Markus. H.R.. & Kitayama S. ( 1999). 1s there a universal

need for positive self-regard? Psvchological Review. 106. 766-794.

Katayama S.. & Masuda. T. ( 1997). [A cultural-mediation mode1 of social inference:

Correspondence bias in Japan]. In K. Kashiwagi. S. Kitayama & H. Anima (Eds.). [Cultural

psychology: Theory and researc hl (pp. 109- 1 Y). Tokyo: University of To kyo Press. ( Ln

Japanese)

Kitayama. S.. & Markus. H.R. ( 1999). Yin and Yang of the Japanese self: The cultural

psychology of personality coherence. In D. Cewone & Y. Shoda (Eds.). The coherence of

personality: Social-cornitive bases of consistencv. variabilitv. and oroanization (pp. 2-12-302).

New York: Guilford Press.

Lee. F.. Hallahan. M.. & Herzog. T. ( 1996). Explaining real-life events: How culture and

domain shape attributions. Personalitv and Social Psvcholotlv Bulletin. 22. 7 2 - 7 4 .

Markus. HA.. & Kitayama. S. ( 199 1 ). Culture and self: Implications for cognition.

motion. and motivation. Psvcholoeical Review. 98. ,X-?S.

McAdarns. D.P. ( 199 1 ). Self and story. In D.J. Ozer. & 1.M. Healy Jr.. & . L I . Stewrt

(Eds.). Perspectives in personalitv. Vol. 3. Part B: Approaches to undrrstandinr lives (pp. 133-

1 59). London. UK: Jessica Kingsley.

McAdarns. D.P. (1997). The case for unity in the (post)modem self: A modest proposal.

In R.D. Ashmore & L. Jussim (Eds.) Self and identitv: Fundamental issues. Vol. 1 (pp. 46-78).

New York: Oxford University Press.

Mead. G.H. ( 1934). Mind. self. and societv from the standpoint of a social behaviorist.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Miller. J.G. (1984). Culture and the development of everyday social explanation. Journal

of Personality and Social Psvcholo~v. 46.961 -978.

Moms. M.W.. & Peng. K. (1994). Culture and cause: Amencan and Chinese attributions

for social and physical events. Journal of Social and Personalitv Psvcholo~v. 67.949-97 1.

Nishisato. S. (1 994). Elements of dual scaling: An introduction to ~ractical data analvsis.

Hillsdale. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Popper. KR.. & Eccles. J.C. ( 1977). The self and its brain. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Rosenburg. M. ( 1986). Self-concept from middle childhood through adolescence. In J.

Suls & A.G. Greenwald (Eds.). Psvchological perspectives on the self. Vol. 3 (pp. 107- 136).

HilIsdale. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Schell. T.L.. Klein. S.B.. & Babey. S.H. ( 1996). Testing a hierarchical mode1 of self-

knowledpe. Psychological Science. 7. 1 70- 1 73.

Shweder. R.A.. & Boume. E.J. (1984). Does the concept of the psrson vary cross-

culturally? In R A . Shweder & R A . LeVine (Eds.). Culture theon;: Essavs on mind. self. and

tmotion (pp. 158-1 99). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Spiro. M.€. (1993). 1s the Western conception of the self "peculiar" within the context of

the world cultures? Ethos. 21. 107-153.

Trilling. L. ( 1 97 1 ). Sinceritv and authenticitv. Cambridge. MA: Hanard Uniiwsity

Press.

Turner. R.H. ( 1976). The real self: From institution to impulse. Amencan Journal of

Sociolo~v. S 1. 989- 1 O 16.

Turner. R.H.. & Billings. V.B. ( 1991 ) The social contexts of self-feeling In J.A. Howard

& P.L. Callero (Eds.). The self-societv dvnamic: Cognition. emotion. and action (pp. 103-1 22).

New York: Cambridge University Press.

Turner. R.H. & Gordon. S. (1 98 1 ). The boundaries of the self: The relatioiiship of

authenticity to inauthenticity in the self-conception. In M.D. Lynch. A.A. Norem-Hebeisen. &

K. Gergen (Eds). The self-concept: Advances in theorv and research (pp. 39-57). Cambridge.

MA: Ballinger Press.

Turner. R.H.. & Schutte. J. (198 1). The tme-self method for studying the self conception.

Svmbolic Interaction. 4. 1-20.

Watson. M.W. ( 1990). Aspects of selFdevelopment as reflected in children's role-

playing. In D. Cichetti & M. Beeghl?. (Eds.). The self in transition: Infancv to childhood ( pp.

265-2803. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Table 1

Question l ( a ) : Do you be l i eve t h a t you know you rse l f more accura te ly than any o ther l i v i n g person i n your l i f e knows you?

Frequency n l i Y 1 c - f 10 / 10 1 81 1

'Group: c - f = Canadian women; c-m = Canadian men; j - f = Japanese women; j-m = Japanese men. "Response: n = no; u = undecided; y = yes.

Quest ion t ( c ) : Do you be l i eve t h a t you understand the reasons f o r your ac t ions b e t t e r than any o ther l i v i n g person i n your l i f e understands the reasons f o r your act ions?

Group Aesponse Frequency / n ! 1 Y

c - f c-m j - f

1 - m

Quest ion 3 ( a ) : Despite t h i s v a r i a b i l i t y l n your ac t i on you t h i n k t h a t t he b e l i e f s t h a t you ho ld about who you across the a c t i v i t y domains?

and the views t h a t others have of you, do are ( you r i nne r s e l f ) remain the same

Group Response

1 1 I 1

C - f j 16 i 9 ! 76 1 c-m 1 16 l 7 ! 37 / I - f ~ 24 1 9 i 171

Quest ion 3 ( b ) : Do you t h i n k t h a t i t genera l l y would be a good t h i n g i f a persan's inner se l f remained the same across the above a c t i v i t y domains?

Group Response Frequency 1 n 1 u 1 Y 1

!

c - f l

c-m i I

j - f :: 1

i 6 j - m i , 13 j

Quest ion 3 ( c ) : Do you t h i n k t h a t i t gene ra l l y would be a good thing i f a person's i n n e r se l f were always expressed i n h i s o r her ac t i ons?

Group Response ~ r e q u e n c y 1 n

C - m 24 27 j - f 22 20 j - m 1 O

Question 4 ( b ) : Did you f e e l good about yourse l f d u r i n q t he event o r experience t h a t you descr ibed

Question 4 ( c ) : Did you f e e l good about yourse l f immediately f o l l o w i n g the event o r experience t h a t you described above i n ques t ion 4 ( a ) ?

above i n quest ion 4 ( a ) ?

Group Response

Group Response

Frequency

Frequency 1 n ! 1 1

j Y 1

n

Question 5 ( b ) : Did you f e e l bad about yourse l f d u r i n q the event o r experlence t h a t yau descr ibed above l n quest ion S (a )?

I 1

c - f i 9 c -m 2 j - f

3 1 10 j - m I 1;j 11

Group Response Frequency n i Y i

Quest ion 5 ( c ) : Did you f e e l bad about yourse l f immediately f o l l o w i n q t he event o r experience t h a t you descr ibed above i n quest ion 5 ( a ) ?

Group Response Frequency 1 n I i Y 1 c - f c -m j - f j - m

Question 6 ( a ) : I n general , do you consciously at tempt t o express your i nne r se l f i n your ac t i ons as much as i s possib le?

Group Response Frequency ( n

l l u j I Y ! c - f

I I 20 a o l e l 1

c - m 1 14 12 1 34 l 1 - f 1 16 15 /

19 / j - m ! 19 1 9 1 2 2 1

Question 6 ( b ) : I n general , do you tend t o f e e l f r u s t r a t e d , uncomfortable, d l s s a t i s f i e d , o r o therw ise unhappy when you are no t ab le t o adequately express your i nne r s e l f i n your ac t ions?

Group F requency

Response

Question 7: A U t he above quest ions r e f e r r e d t o your i nne r s e l f and i t s expression i n your behaviour . D id you f i n d it awkward, strange, o r unna tu ra l t o t h i n k about this t op i c?

Group Response Frequency / n 1 ; Y i c - f c-m

1 - f

j - m

Table 2

Domain 1: Time w i t h c lose f r i e n d s

Frequency u T o t a l

6 2 4

1

c - f c-m j - f j - m

'Group "Response Frequency n / u i y

1

T o t a l

c - f c - m j - f j - m

*Group: c - f = Canadian women; c-m = Canadian men; -*Response: n = no; u = undeclded; y = yes.

j - f = Japanese women; 1-m = Japanese men.

Domain 2: Time w i t h acquaintances

Group Response Frequency j n i u ' Y j T o t a l

c - f 1 38 i 19 c - m 2 0 1 12

1 - f ! 11 1 24

j - m 1 l a / 20

Domain 3: Coursework and a t tend lng classes

Group Response Frequency 1 n / Y T o t a l

Domain 4: Time w i t h parents

Group Frequency

Response n

9

7 7 1 13

Y 1 T o t a l !

78 100 60 :: 50

30 50

c - f c - m j - f j -m

Domain 5: Tirne w i t h s i b l i n g s (b ro thers and s i s t e r s )

Group Response Frequency ' T o t a l 1 2 9 33 89 44 5 1

6 14 25 8 45

Domain 6: Time w i t h extended fam i l y (grandparents, uncles, aunts, cousins)

Group Response Frequency n i 1 Y 1

Domain 7 : P a r t i c i p a t i n g i n spor ts and o ther phys i ca l a c t i v i t i e s

Group Response Frequency 1 n 1 u ! y T o t a l

t I

c - f c - m j - f

j -m

Domain 8: S o l i t a r y hobbies

Group Response Frequency / n

I

I u i Y / T o t a l

c - f 9 c - m l

! 6

j - f i O j - m I 3

Group Response

Frequencylnlu c - f c-rn j - f j -in

Domain 9: S o c i a l hobbies

Group Frequency

c - f c-m j - f j - m

Response n 1 u l y 1 T o t a l

Domain 10: Time w i t h romantic pa r t ne rs ( da t i ng , r e l a t i ansh ips , o r spouse)

Group Response Frequency n / c - f c-m

1 - f

1 - m

y T o t a l

97 5 4

25 1 38 1 6 29

Domain 11 : Paid employment

Group Response Frequency n I I u l Y i T o t a l

I

c - f c - m j - f j - m

Oomain 12: Volunteer work o r community se rv i ce

Gro up Response

Frequency! i i

c - f 2 4 1 12 c -m I

1 12 7

j - f 1 6 i 11

j -III 1 9 1 8

Domain 13: Relrg lous o r s p i r i t u a l a c t i v l t i e s

Group Response

Y i T o t a l - 47 1 83

45 1 O 26 27 4 j 21

Frequency n 1 u Y T o t a l

I l I c - f 23 1 40 1 79

13 ' 17

j - f j - m 1 7

39 19 18

Dornain 14: One-on-one i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h t e a c h e r s / i n s t r u c t o r s

Group Response Frequency ( n

c - f c-m j - f j -m

Oomain 15: V i s i t s t o medical doctors

Group Frequency

c - f c -m j - f

1 -m

18 14 14 9

o r menta

T o t a l %l 12 100 47 56

1 4 1 40

h e a l t h p r o f e s s i o n a l s

Response n I / Y

j T o t a l

OOmain 16: F ree t ime spent a lone

Group Response Frequency n ! u Y 1 T o t a l

1

Table 3

Question l ( b ) :

I f you answered ' yes ' above, then who, a f t e r you rse l f , is t he l i v i n g person t h a t knows you best?

Group Response Frequency / mother 1 f a ther

c - f c - m j - f j - m

t ! 1 I

T o t a l 74 14

s i b l i n g 1 r e l a t l v e 1 pa r t ne r T o t a l

Group Response ~ r e q u e n c y l f r i e n d 1 t eacher i r n . h . ~ . ~ I o ther ! T o t a l

I

C - f 81 c - m I O 1 2 1 5 5

1 - f O ( 20 j - m ! O I 32

l I

T o t a l 50 1 1 2 188

I f you answered 'no ' above, then who 1s the l i v i n g person t h a t you be l i eve knows ]ou b e t t e r than you know you rse l f ?

Group Response ~ requency mother 1 f a ther I s i b l i n g 1 r e l a t i v e / p a r t ner i T o t a l

1 I

T o t a l 11 1 2 O 7 36

Group Response

l 1 I I t T o t a l 12 O O 3 36

~requency 1 f r i e n d / teacher

*m.h.p. = mental hea l t h p ro fess iona l .

m.h.p.*i o ther / T o t a l i I

t 1

c - f O 1 10

c-m j - f 4 O I O / 2 1 16 j - m I 7

Figure 1

Plot of Dimension 1 X Dimension 3

Plot of Dimension 1 X Dimension 3

Plot of Dimension 1 X Dimension 4

Plot of Dimension 2 X Dimension 3

Plot of Dimension 2 X Dimension 4

Appendix

Self Survey

Part 1. Please take a few minutes to consider the person that you think you are. That is. consider the beliefs that you have about yoursrlf. Keep in mind that other people in your life may not see you as you see yourwlf. For example. you may believe that you are a religious person despite the fact that no one else sees you as such. We are interested here in your beliefs about yourself. regardless of the extent to which these beliefs are shared by ~ h e people in your life that know you.

Once you have considered who you believe yourself to be. pleasr: answer the following questions. Note that there are no "correct" or "incorrect" responses to an- of these questions. You should feel completelp fret: to giw your true personal opinions and judgments. Be as honest and accurate as possible. It is important that you respond to al1 questions. even if you are unsure of your response.

I(a). Do pou believe that you know yourself more accurately than any other living person in your life knows you? (Check only one of the options below.)

- no ves - *

- undecided

l(b). If you answered "no" above. then who is the living person that you believe knows you bener than you know yourself? If you answered "yes" above. thrn who. aftsr yourself. is the living person that knous you best? (Check only one of the options below.)

- mother - father - sibling

other reIative - spouse or romantic partner - friend - teacher - mental health professional - other (please specify)

I(c). Do you believe that pou understand the reasons for your actions better than any other living person in p u r life understands the reasons for your actions? (Check only one of the options below. )

- no - yes - undecided

The person that you believe yourself to be. regardless of what othen think of you. is your "inaer self." At times. this inner self is clearly expressed in your speech and behaviour. When this happens. we c m say that your actions express the person you think you are. For exarnple. let us imagine that an important part of your imer self is your belief that you possess a great sense of humour. If so. then we can say that an important part of your inner self is expressed when you tell jokes that make people laugh. At other times. however. aspects of the situation or your own choices prevent your inner self from being expressed in pour speech and behaviour. When this happens. we c m say that your actions do not express the person pou think you are. For example. imagine that pou lose your great sense of humour altogether afier learning that ?ou have failed an important exam. During the time that you are unable to be funny. we c m sap that an important part of your inner self is not expressed. Now that you understand what we mean by inner self. please answer the following questions.

,(a). The inner self is expressed to different deprees in different areas of our lives. The specific pattern of expression is unique for every individual. Think ovrr the last 12 months of your iife and. for each of the following activity domains. decide whether your actions generally o r usually expressed your inner self. For each activity domain. indicate your response bg chrcking only one of the three options that appear beside it. If an activity domain dors not applp to you at al1 (if you have not engaged in such activi ties during the past 1 2 months). then leave i t blank.

yes undecided time with close friends time with acquaintances coursework and attending classes time with parents time with siblings (brothers and sisters) time with extended farniiy (grandparents. unclcs. aunts. cousins) participating in sports or other physical activities hobbies (solitary) hobbies (social) time with romantic partners (dating. relationships. or spouse) paid employment volunteer work or community service religious or spiritual activities one-on-one interaction with teachers/instructors visits to medical docton or mental health professionals free time spent alone

Z(b). How much time have you spent in each of the above activity domains over the past 12 months? For each activity domain. indicate your response by checking only one of the four options that appear beside it.

some

- -

a lot

time with close friends time with acquaintances coursework and attending classes time with parents time with siblings (Srothen and sisters) time with extended family participating in sports or other physical activities hobbies (solitary) hobbies (social) iime with rornantic partners (dating. relationships. spouse) paid employment volunteer work or community service relipious or spiritual activities one-on-one interaction with teachers/instructors visits to medical doctors or mental health professionals fier time spent alone

3a) . People tend to act differently across the above activity domains. For exarnple. the mannrr in which you tppically speak and behave when you are uith your teachers probably differs frorn the manner in which y u typically speak and behave when 'ou are with your close fi-iends. What others believe about ';ou may also differ across the activity domains. For exarnple. your classmates might view you very differently than do your parents. Despite this variability in your action and the views that others have of you. do you think that the beliefs that you hold about who you are (your imer self) remain the same across the activity domains? (Check only one of the options below.)

- no ves - -

- undecided

3(b). Do you think that it gnerally would be a good thing if a person's inner self remained the sarne across the above activity domains? (Check only one of the options below.)

- no ves --

- undecided

Please briefly explain why you answered the above question [3(b)] as you did. Use only the space provided and &-rite clearly.

; (c ) . Do you think that it generally would be a good thing if a person's i ~ r r self were always expressed in his or her actions? (Check only one of the options below. )

- no ves - -

- undecided

Please briefly explain why you answered space provided and write clearly.

the above question [3(c)] as ?ou did. L.'se only the

4(a). Now think back over the past 12 months of your life and select an occasion when your imer self was clearly and fully expressed in your actions. Btiefly descnbe what you were doing at the time that allowed for this expression and what and who (if anyone) was involved. Again. we would like to know an event or experience in the past 12 months that best reflects the person you think you are. Use only the space provided and wnte clearly.

4 . Did you feel good about yoursrlf during the event or rxperience that pou drscribed above in question ?(a)? (Check only one of the options belon-.)

- no

- yes - undecided

4(c). Did you feel good about yourself immediately following the event or esperirnce described above in question 4(a)? (Check only one of the options below.)

that ).OU

- no yes

- undecided

j(a). Now think back over the past 12 months of your life and select an occasion when your actions were clearly inconsistent with your inner self. Briefly describe exactly what you were doing at the time that produced this inconsistency and what and who (if anyone) was involved. Again. we would like to know an event or experience in the past 12 months that is least reflective of the person you think you are. Use only the space provided and wite clearly.

j(b). Did you feel bad about yourself during the rvent or rxperirnce that ?ou dcscnbed above in question j(a)'? (Check only one of the options below.)

yes - - undecided

j(c). Did you feel bad about younelf immediately following the cvent or experiencc that you described above in question j(a)? (Check only one of the options below.)

no - ves --

- undecided

6(a). In general. do you consciously attempt to express your imer self in your actions as much as is possible? (Check only one of the options below.)

no - ves --

- undecided

6(b). In general. do you tend to feel fnistrated. uncornfortable. dissatisfied. or otherwise unhappy when you are not able to adequately express your inner self in your actions? (Check only one of the options below.)

- y es - undecided

7. All the above questions referred to your inner self and its expression in your behaviour. Did you find it awkward. strange. or unnatural to think about this topic? (Check only one of the options below.)

- no - yes - undecided