Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-sq2k7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-13T01:42:31.314Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Gender and Individualism-Collectivism on Directness of Refusal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2015

Rebecca P. Ang  and
Eddie C. Kuo
Rebecca P. Ang*
Affiliation:
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Eddie C. Kuo
Affiliation:
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
*
Psychological Studies Academic Group, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, 1 Nanyang Walk, Singapore 637616. Email: phrang@nie.edu.sg
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The effects of gender and individualism-collectivism on directness of refusal were examined on a Singapore sample. A 2 × 2 (Gender X Individualism-Collectivism) ANOVA revealed a significant interaction effect between gender and cultural orientation. Specifically, male individualists preferred more direct refusal strategies and male collectivists preferred more indirect refusal strategies compared to both female individualists and collectivists. Implications of the results and the limitations of the study were discussed.

Information

Type
Short Papers
Information
South Pacific Journal of Psychology , Volume 14 , 2003 , pp. 76 - 80
Copyright
Copyright © University of Papua New Guinea and Massey University, New Zealand/Aotearoa 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bettencourt, B. A., & Miller, N. (1996). Gender differences in aggression as a function of provocation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 422–447.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bresnahan, M., Cai, D. A., & Rivers, A. (1994). Saying no in Chinese and English: Cultural similarities and differences in strategies of refusal. Asian Journal of Communication, 4, 52–76.Google Scholar
Bresnahan, M., Liu, W. Y., Chang, H. J., Liao, C.-C., & Futrell, S. (1994, 11). Resistance: A taxonomy of tactics for refusal for use in cross-cultural research. Paper presented at the Speech Communication Association Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
Central Intelligence Agency. (2001). The World Factbook. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
Cross, S. E., & Madson, L. (1997). Models of the self: Self contruals and gender. Psychological Bulletin, 122, 5–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaines, S. O., Marelich, W.D., Bledsoe, K. L., Steers, W. N., Henderson, M.C., Granrose, C. S., et al. (1997). Links between race/ethnicity and cultural values as mediated by racial/ethnic identity and moderated by gender. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1460–1476.Google Scholar
Gire, J. T., & Carment, D. W. (1993). Dealing with disputes: The influence of individualism-collectivism. Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 81–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in public: Microstudies of the public order. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Holtgraves, T. (1997). Styles of language use: Individual and cultural variability in conversational indirectness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 624–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holtgraves, T. M., & Yang, J. N. (1992). The interpersonal underpinnings of request strategies: General principles and differences due to culture and gender. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 246–256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kashima, Y., Yamaguchi, S., Kim, U., Choi, S. C., Gelfand, M. J., & Yuki, M. (1995). Culture, gender, and self: A perspective from individualism-collectivism research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 925–937 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leung, K., & Lind, E. A. (1986). Procedural justice and culture: Effects of culture, gender, and investigator status on procedural preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 1134–1140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, S. -C. (1994). Beyond individualism/collectivism: New cultural dimension of values. In Kim, U., Triandis, H. C., Kagitcibasi, C., S., –Choi, C., & Yoon, G. (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications (pp. 85–122). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Singh, R., & Vasoo, S. (1994). Collectivism as a dimension of personality (Tech. Rep. No. RP90009). Singapore: National University of Singapore, Department of Social Work and Psychology.Google Scholar
Ting-Toomey, S., Gao, G., Trubisky, P., Yang, Z., Kim, H. S., Lin, S. et al. (1991). Culture, face maintenance, and styles of handling interpersonal conflict: A study in five cultures. International Journal of Conflict Management, 2, 275–296.Google Scholar
Triandis, H. C. (1984). Cross-cultural studies of individualism and collectivism. In Berman, J. (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 41–133). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Wagner, J. A. (1995). Studies of individualism-collectivism: Effects of cooperation in groups. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 152–172.Google Scholar