Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Values and Group Boundaries A Novel Measurement Technique
Rengin B. Firat, Ph.D.Evolution, Cognition and Culture Lab.
University of Lyon, France
July 14, 2015ESRA Annual Conference
Reykjavik, ICELAND
Steven Hitlin, PhDDept. of Sociology
University of Iowa, USA
Hye Won KwonDept. of Sociology
University of Iowa, USA
OUTLINE
• Theoretical & empirical framework
• A novel measurement technique
• Results from US and France
• Tentative Conclusions
Theoretical Framework: Values and Morality
1 Schwartz 1992; 1994; 2009; Schwartz and Bilsky 1987; Bardi and Schwartz 2003; Schwartz and Bardi 2001; Schwartz and Boehnke 2004
1- Universally Shared Basic Values1
Cognitive structures that orient behavior towards desirable states and goals.
10 basic valued underlined by distinct motivations: achievement, power, self-direction, stimulation, hedonism, conformity, traditionalism, security, universalism, benevolence
2- Culturally Structured
Morality: more than ‘right’ and ‘wrong’; a complex social system reflecting power relationships.1
Moral Boundaries:2
Symbolic boundaries (mental lines) drawn on the basis of moral character.
Theoretical Framework: Values and Morality
1 Abend 2011, Hitlin 2008, Firat & McPherson 2010.2 Lamont 1992, 2000, Sayer 2005, Stets & Carter 2011, Stets et al. 2008.
Distinguish what is right from wrong, but
also separate ‘us’ from ‘them’.
These boundaries might motivate socio-political behavior as well as social attitudes like tolerance.
Research Questions
• What is the relationship between group identities and morality?
• What types of values are associated with group boundaries?
• Inter-cultural variability: U.S., Turkey, France, and S. Korea.
Moral Schemas, Cultural Conflict, and Socio-Political Action
University of IowaIowa City, U.S.A.
Istanbul UniversityIstanbul, TURKEY
University of LyonLyon, FRANCE
Hanyang UniversitySeoul, S. KOREA
METHODS
• PHASE 1: SURVEY
• PHASE 2
Availability Sampling:
U.S. (Iowa, N = 637)
Turkey (Istanbul, Projected N = 450)
Nationally Representative Surveys:
France (N = 455)
U.S. (N = 450)
S. Korea (Projected N = 450)
Turkey (Projected N = 450)
Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI)U.S. (Projected N = 30)
Turkey (Projected N = 30)
METHODS: MORAL SCHEMA SURVEY
• Several batteries measuring moral values, group memberships, political and civic engagement.
A Novel Measurement for Moral Boundaries:
1- In-group: 3 most important groups when they think of themselves. occupation, race, gender, age, religion, political party, nationality, family status, social class, and the part of their country they live in.
2- Out-group: 3 groups they would NOT like to have as neighbors. different race, different political orientation, immigrants, homosexuals, different religion, different social class, different age and different language.
FRANCE: Muslims
Results
Descriptives: USA (Quota Sampling on gender, age, income):•N = 422•50% women•79% White•77% Bachelor’s degree•Average age = 50 (s.d. = 16.9)
France (Quota Sampling on gender, age, income):•N = 406•49% women•87% White•51% Bachelor’s degree•Average age = 47 (s.d. = 16.2)
MOST IMPORTANT GROUPS
US FRANCE
family family
occupation occupation
religiongender
MOST IMPORTANT VALUES FOR THE IN-GROUP
MOST IMPORTANT VALUES FOR THE IN-GROUP, BY GROUP TYPE
So what?
Summary Results & Conclusions
• Family first, then work! But more so for Americans…
• Same groups, different values?
• Value boundaries more polarized in the US than France
• Value boundaries matter for civic and social life
Going forward1- Data coming in from Turkey and S. Korea2- Analyses by group types3- Mental mechanisms: fMRI
AcknowledgmentsCo-authors:Steven Hitlin (University of Iowa)Hye Won Kwon (University of Iowa)
Research Assistants:Ethan Rogers (University of Iowa)Natalie Veldhouse (University of Iowa)Daniel Chung (University of Iowa)
Research collaborators:Deniz Buyukgok (Istanbul University)Hakan Gurvit (Istanbul University)Vincent Magnotta (University of Iowa)Dan Tranel (University of Iowa)Sanghah Kim (Hanyang University)
* This research is funded by the U.S. Department of Defense, Minerva Initiative
SELF VALUES
LEAST PREFERRED GROUPS
US FRANCE
Ethnicity Combined:-Race/ethnicity+Language+Immigrants+Religion:
46.9%
Ethnicity Combined:-Race/ethnicity+Language+Immigrants+Religion+Muslims:
56.2%
