TY - JOUR

T1 - Dimensions and Dynamics of National Culture

T2 - Synthesizing Hofstede With Inglehart

AU - Beugelsdijk, Sjoerd

AU - Welzel, Chris

N1 - The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The first author thanks the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) for their financial support (VIDI-452-11-010)

PY - 2018/11/1

Y1 - 2018/11/1

N2 - Cross-national research on cultural differences across space and time intersects multiple disciplines but the prominence of concepts varies by academic fields. Hofstede’s dimensional concept of culture, to begin with, dominates in cross-cultural psychology and international management. Inglehart’s dynamic concept of culture, by contrast, prevails in sociology and political science. We argue that this disciplinary division is unfortunate because the two concepts are complementary, for which reason a synthesis rectifies their mutual weaknesses. Indeed, while Hofstede’s dimensional concept neglects cultural dynamics, Inglehart’s dynamic concept is dimensionally reductionist. We demonstrate empirically that combining these two concepts leads to an improved understanding of cultural differences. Inspired by Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, we use data from the European Value Studies and World Values Surveys for 495,011 individuals born between 1900 and 1999 in 110 countries and then show that change on these dimensions proceeds as Inglehart and his collaborators suggest. Most notably, younger generations have become more individualistic and more joyous. But even though economic development and generational replacement drive this cultural change, roughly half of the variation in national cultural orientations is unique to each country, due to lasting intercept differences in developmental trajectories that trace back to remote historic drivers. We discuss the implications for cross-national cultural research.

AB - Cross-national research on cultural differences across space and time intersects multiple disciplines but the prominence of concepts varies by academic fields. Hofstede’s dimensional concept of culture, to begin with, dominates in cross-cultural psychology and international management. Inglehart’s dynamic concept of culture, by contrast, prevails in sociology and political science. We argue that this disciplinary division is unfortunate because the two concepts are complementary, for which reason a synthesis rectifies their mutual weaknesses. Indeed, while Hofstede’s dimensional concept neglects cultural dynamics, Inglehart’s dynamic concept is dimensionally reductionist. We demonstrate empirically that combining these two concepts leads to an improved understanding of cultural differences. Inspired by Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, we use data from the European Value Studies and World Values Surveys for 495,011 individuals born between 1900 and 1999 in 110 countries and then show that change on these dimensions proceeds as Inglehart and his collaborators suggest. Most notably, younger generations have become more individualistic and more joyous. But even though economic development and generational replacement drive this cultural change, roughly half of the variation in national cultural orientations is unique to each country, due to lasting intercept differences in developmental trajectories that trace back to remote historic drivers. We discuss the implications for cross-national cultural research.

KW - culture

KW - European Values Studies

KW - generation

KW - globalization

KW - Hofstede

KW - Inglehart

KW - modernization theory

KW - World Values Survey

KW - Politics

KW - Cultural studies

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85055031969&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0022022118798505

DO - 10.1177/0022022118798505

M3 - Journal articles

C2 - 30369633

AN - SCOPUS:85055031969

VL - 49

SP - 1469

EP - 1505

JO - Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology

JF - Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology

SN - 0022-0221

IS - 10

ER -