Je vertrek voorbereiden of je verzekering afsluiten bij studie, stage of onderzoek in het buitenland
Study or work abroad? check your insurance options with The JoHo Foundation
The role of the self in responses to health communications: a cultural perspective van Sherman et. al. (2011) - Article
Summary with the article: The role of the self in responses to health communications: a cultural perspective by Sherman et. al. (2011)
Health problems are of a pancultural nature and because of this, some researchers think that there might be a pancultural health solution. Every country needs to deal with problems of oral health, smoking-related illnesses and many other problems. Many problems arise from issues of self-regulation and health problems can be changed by changing health behaviours. Researchers need to find a way to put health communications together with dimensions of the self, in order to change health behaviours. In this article, the writers argue that a cultural consideration of the self can help create more effective health messages. A cultural consideration of the self means how people see themselves in relation to other people and their goals.
The writers are obviously looking at the culture, but they are also looking at psychological theories that will help them to find good features of health messages and that help them to find which psychological aspects are the most relevant to look at. More and more studies show that messages are more persuasive when the content of the message matches the recipient’s affective, cognitive or motivational characteristics. So the variability in how people respond to health messages can be ascribed to the matching of the messages to affective, cognitive or motivational characteristics. Culture in its turn, has an impact on these psychological characteristics.
The self and culture
There are many differences between cultures and cultural psychologists and anthropologists have proposed many constructs to account for some of those differences. They created the constructs of individualism and collectivism. The constructs of individualism and collectivism are useful to show cultural differences in how people see themselves in relation to others.
The United Kingdom and United States are examples of individualistic cultures. In this culture, the independent self is the dominant form of the self. This self has self-defining attributes to fulfil personal autonomy and self-expression. The people in these cultures see themselves as agents and they see themselves determining their decisions and actions. In these cultures individuals are more motivated to pursue opportunities than to not make mistakes.
The collectivist cultures are basically the opposite of the individualistic countries. Many East-Asian countries are collectivistic and the dominant model of the self is an interdependent self. This self is defined by social relations and membership in groups and the self is all embedded within the social context. People in these cultures are more relational and their decisions are based on mutual obligations and fulfilling the in-group expectations. People from this culture want to fit in with their group and want to keep the peace and quiet between group members.
Keeping their responsibilities and avoiding behaviours that disrupt others is where they focus on. In collectivistic cultures people are more focused on not making mistakes than to pursue opportunities. They rather try to avoid negative outcomes than try to achieve the positive outcome they want to achieve.
Crafting health messages
In order to put culturally congruent health messages together, one must find characteristics that vary cross-culturally. One must also examine whether framing messages matching those characteristics are more persuasive and lead to health behaviour change. The regulatory focus theory found that individuals from collectivistic cultures are more focused on prevention and sensitive to the presence or absence of negative outcomes. People from individualistic cultures focus more on promotion and are sensitive to the presence or absence of positive outcomes. This means that health messages that emphasize the potential losses associated with not performing a behaviour might be more effective among people from collectivistic cultures and messages that emphasize the potential gains with performing a behaviour might be more effective among people from individualistic cultures. These two types of messages can also be called loos-frame messages and gain-frame messages. Studies have shown that people who are more avoidance orientated are more persuaded by loss-frame health messages and individuals who are more approach oriented are more persuaded by gain-framed health messages. Gain-frame and loss-frame health messages may be differentially effective as a function of culture.
There have been many studies testing the cultural congruency hypothesis. One of these studies looked at dental health. The participants in these studies were from collectivistic cultural backgrounds (East Asia) or individualistic cultural backgrounds (Britain). They received one of two messages about flossing recommendations. These recommendations either focused on the benefits of flossing (this is the gain-frame) or the costs of not flossing (loss-frame). People from individualistic cultures had more positive attitudes towards flossing and more intention to floss when they were presented with the gain-framed message. Participants from collectivistic cultures could be more persuaded by the loss-frame messages. Other research has looked at matching aspects of health messages to cultural differences in self-construal. People with an independent self are more motivated to achieve personal goals, so they should also be more motivated to perform health behaviours when the message is framed in terms of personal consequences. People with a more interdependent self will be more motivated by messages emphasizing relational consequences. One study supporting this was about caffeine use. Women read an article linking caffeine use to negative health outcomes. Women with a strong interdependent self-construal and who were exposed to health messages that emphasized interpersonal consequences had higher perceived levels of personal risk.
Nowadays, we live in a multicultural world and people are exposed to multiple cultural influences at different times and this causes different aspects of the self-concept to be salient. There are also studies that have found that matching health messages to cultural themes does not lead to greater persuasion. One study looked at the individual consequences associated with sexually transmitted diseases. These individual consequences were found to be less effective for White Americans than a message that focused on relational consequences. This study shows that increased personal relevance could lead to greater defensive processing. This is especially the case for self-threatening health information. Future research must therefore identify when information framed to be congruent to the self leads to greater acceptance and when it leads to greater defensiveness. Research should figure out under which circumstances the self-construal needs to be primed to increase the effectiveness of matched health messages.
Cultural congruent self-affirmation
Researchers have tried to increase health persuasion by having people complete self-affirmations by providing them with threatening health information. According to the self-affirmation theory, the goal of the self-system is to maintain an image of self-integrity rather than responding to specific threats. People might respond defensively to threatening health messages and because of this, it might be difficult to promote positive health behaviours. A recent study has shown that a graphic cigarette advertisement to make negative associations with smoking might actually evoke defensive responses and lead to a bigger desire to smoke! However, when self-affirmation is provided, this defensive response might be reduced. In one study, heavy smokers completed a self-affirmation (moments in their life that they saw the value of kindness) and they were more accepting of anti-smoking information than heavy smokers who didn’t complete self-affirmation. They also increased their intentions to reduce smoking and also were more likely to take a brochure on how to quit smoking.
However, one must take the cultural generalizability into account, because research has found that self-affirmation has no effect on people from an East-Asian cultural background. Self-affirmation needs to be reshaped to fit the collectivistic cultures. One study matched the affirmation to the culture of the individual and kept the content of the message constant. Some of the affirmations led individuals to focus on approaching positives or on avoiding negatives. The researchers chose this distinction, because health decisions often have approach/avoidance conflicts. Also, research has found that there are cultural differences in the attention people pay to approach-oriented and avoidance-oriented information. East Asians were more attentive to avoidance-oriented information, while North Americans were more attentive to approach-oriented information. The results showed that an affirmation focused on how values can help people approach positive things were more effective at changing health behaviours amongst White Americans, while an affirmation focused on how values can help people avoid negative things was more effective among Asian Americans.
Organizing framework
In social and personality psychology, the self is one of the most important constructs. Self processes have a big influence on a person, they directly affect emotion, memory, motivation and behaviour. All those processes are central to health persuasion and culturally variant and the self can therefore give us a useful framework for understanding when psychological constructs will be effective or ineffective in attempts of health persuasion. The writers of this paper encourage researchers to look at the cultural background of the participants. They also encourage researchers to use a non-college student population. This will give the researchers a broader, more diverse population.
Join World Supporter
Join World Supporter
- for free to follow other supporters, see more content and use the tools
- for €10,- by becoming a member to see all content
Log in or create your free account
Why create an account?
- Your WorldSupporter account gives you access to all functionalities of the platform
- Once you are logged in, you can:
- Save pages to your favorites
- Give feedback or share contributions
- participate in discussions
- share your own contributions through the 7 WorldSupporter tools
Follow the author: Social Science Supporter
Planning to go abroad?
Live, Study, Travel, Help or Work abroad?
More contributions of WorldSupporter author: Social Science Supporter
WorldSupporter Resources
Article Summary of Acculturation, Social Identity, and Social Cognition: A New Perspective - Padilla & Perez - 2003
Article Summary of Acculturation, Social Identity, and Social Cognition: A New Perspective - Padilla & Perez - 2003
This article discusses psychological acculturation, focusing on the internal processes of change experienced by immigrants when they come into contact with the host culture. The article aims to present a new model of acculturation that incorporates recent work in social and cognitive psychology. They provide a brief overview of the current state of acculturation research, highlighting its deficiencies. The new model of acculturation is based on four pillars: social cognition, cultural competence, social identity, and social stigma. The article emphasizes the significance of social stigma and explores how individuals cope with the challenges of being different due to factors like skin color, language, and ethnic background. The article concludes by proposing a fresh approach to stimulate further theoretical and empirical research in the field of acculturation.
What is the history of acculturation research?
Acculturation research focuses on the process by which newcomers to a culture incorporate themselves into the mainstream society.
Early theorists like Robert Park proposed a three-stage model of contact, accommodation, and assimilation. Anthropologists later expanded on this model, emphasizing the concept of acculturation and its effects on cultural patterns. Researchers added a psychological dimension, considering factors such as value systems, developmental sequences, and role determinants. Berry's model introduced the idea of different adaptation strategies, including assimilation, integration, rejection, and deculturation.
Further studies explored multidimensional and quantitative models, highlighting cultural awareness and ethnic loyalty as key factors. Discrimination and perceived power imbalances also influenced the acculturation process. Individual characteristics, personality traits, and personal preferences play a role in acculturation, which can involve active involvement in either culture or a balance between both.
Current social psychological research offers new insights into understanding the complexity of individual and group processes involved in acculturation.
What is the terminology of the new vision of acculturation research?
To understand the new perspective on cultural adaption that is presented in this article, it is important to understand what the following terms mean:
- Social Cognition Social cognition refers to the study of mental processes involved in social interactions. It focuses on how ordinary people think about others and how they perceive their own thoughts about people. Social cognition research emphasizes the role of motivation and intention in shaping perception and cognition.
- Cultural Competence. Cultural competence refers to the ability to function effectively in a culture by understanding and adopting its values, beliefs, customs, and language. It involves adapting to the majority culture while maintaining one's own cultural identity. Cultural competence plays a crucial role in acculturation, particularly for immigrants experiencing cultural transitions.
- Social Identity. Social identity theory states that individuals' behavior is influenced by their identification with larger societal groups, such as cultures, organizations, or social categories. People's thoughts and behaviors are guided by their group membership, and social identities are socially constructed based on individuals' group references. Social identity influences acculturation, as individuals' identification with a particular group can impact their willingness to acculturate.
- Social Dominance. Social dominance theory suggests that social hierarchies exist in all societies and cultures. Individual orientations toward social dominance vary, and hierarchies are sustained through cultural ideologies that legitimize and centralize social class distinctions, gender roles, and other forms of dominance. Social dominance theory explains intergroup relations and the role of power and hierarchy in maintaining group differences.
- Social Stigma. Social stigma refers to the devaluation or disapproval of individuals who possess attributes that are negatively perceived by society. Stigmatization occurs when individuals are associated with attributes that lead to devaluation in a particular social context. Stigmatized individuals may face prejudice, discrimination, and negative perceptions. Stigma can be visible (e.g., race) or concealable (e.g., certain ethnicities) and affects individuals' thoughts, feelings, and behavior.
These constructs are interconnected and play significant roles in understanding cultural adaptation and acculturation processes. Cultural competence, social identity, social dominance, and social stigma influence individuals' experiences, motivations, and behaviors as they navigate cultural transitions and interact with the dominant culture.
How do people cope with social stigma?
People who belong to stigmatized groups are sensitive to information in their environment that can influence how they interpret negative reactions or evaluations from others. They may be more inclined to attribute these negative outcomes to prejudice and discrimination. However, some research suggests that stigmatized individuals are hesitant to blame discrimination even when there is evidence to support it. This reluctance can be attributed to the psychological costs associated with making such attributions. It can lower their social self-esteem, decrease their perceived control over outcomes, and strain interpersonal relationships.
The willingness of stigmatized individuals to attribute negative outcomes to discrimination may be influenced by their perception of control over their stigmatized condition. If they believe their stigmatization is their own fault or under their control, they are less likely to blame prejudice and discrimination for negative outcomes. Additionally, ideologies related to personal responsibility can predict which stigmatized individuals and groups are unwilling to attribute negative outcomes to discrimination. For example, if individuals believe in a just system that rewards hard work and considers group differences in social status fair, they are less likely to perceive discrimination based on their ethnicity.
The salience of stigmatized group identity and the degree of identification with the group also impact how stigmatized individuals perceive themselves as targets of discrimination. Highly identified individuals are more likely to notice intergroup inequalities, label them as unjust, and attribute discrimination to their group membership. However, it's important to note that their consciousness of discrimination may contribute to their stronger social identity as a member of a stigmatized group. This perception of discrimination can fuel the search for greater affinity to their heritage culture among later generations of ethnics.
Stigmatized individuals may protect their personal self-esteem by making social comparisons with others who share their stigmatized status. By comparing themselves to others who are likely to have similar poor outcomes, they can reduce perceptions of discrimination. People tend to make interpersonal comparisons with in-group members because they are more readily available and salient in their environments. The prevalence of ethnic enclaves, support groups, and affiliations with similar others is influenced by the benefits of connecting with those who share a stigmatizing attribute.
The effects of stigma on self-concept depend on the specific features of the social context. Temporary changes in self-concept can occur, especially when encountering role models or mentors from the mainstream social group. Stigmatized individuals may make greater efforts to identify with the mainstream group in such situations. The social context plays a significant role in determining the activation of specific aspects of self-concept.
Stigmatized individuals may also experience attribution ambiguity, where they are uncertain whether the behavior directed at them by majority group members is a response to their social identity or their individual qualities. This ambiguity can have negative effects, leading to cautious behavior and reservation in interpersonal interactions. Some individuals may choose to hide their social identity, resulting in perceptions of shyness or poor self-concept.
Stigma poses a threat to individuals' sense of safety, and coping strategies such as in-group social comparisons, attributions to prejudice, and disengagement from the source of discrimination help stigmatized individuals maintain a sense of worth despite devaluation. Stigma also influences how individuals perceive and interpret their social world. The construction of social identities and the meanings associated with them involve cognitive processes and sense-making. Stereotypes play a role in shaping impressions, judgments, and behaviors towards stigmatized individuals, and coping strategies emerge from interpretations of social contexts and events.
What stance do the authors of this article take?
The authors believe that the current psychological models of acculturation, developed over three decades of research, have limited value. These models have several shortcomings:
- They have a static view of intergroup relations and fail to address the important motivations behind acculturation.
- They assume that acculturation is a uniform process for all newcomer groups, regardless of race, culture, or social status.
- The methodology used in these models relies heavily on self-reported preferences for language use, entertainment practices, and friendship patterns, which may not provide a comprehensive understanding of acculturation.
Instead, the authors propose that a conceptual framework based on social cognitions, social identity, and social stigma offers a better understanding of the acculturation process. International migration has a profound impact on individuals' self-identity, requiring them to redefine and reconstruct their personal and social identities in new cultural contexts. Immigrants develop various social identities related to both the host culture and their heritage culture.
Within the new social context, newcomers form perceptions of the expectations that the dominant group has of them. These perceptions influence the process of redefining their identity and the extent to which they choose to acculturate and become members of the host culture.
Acculturation research so far has been limited to correlational studies due to how acculturation has been defined and measured. The authors view acculturation as a dynamic social process that occurs through interactions between newcomers and members of the host culture. The social identities brought by immigrants and the identities they develop in the new environment shape their social cognitions, which, in turn, guide their behaviors, preferences, and strategies for adapting to the new culture.
As outsiders, immigrants often have less political power and influence and may face negative stigmatization from the dominant group. The dominant group's attitudes and perceptions toward different newcomer groups can vary, leading to different stereotypes and stigmas. The physical similarity of immigrants to the majority group can also affect the stigmas they experience.
It's important to note that newcomers may not always have the freedom to pursue their preferred acculturation strategy, as the expectations of the host culture can influence their acculturation and adaptation. Social stigmas play a significant role in shaping immigrants' strategies and cultural competencies during the acculturation process. Immigrants' cognitions of in-group and out-group relations, including stigmas, impact their acculturation and adaptation strategies.
Further research is needed to understand how immigrants' social cognitions and stigmas affect their acculturation and adaptation strategies, as well as their motivation to engage in the new culture. Exploring how immigrants cope with social stigmas and why individuals respond differently to the same stigma are important areas of study. Additionally, the influence of physical and cultural similarity to the host culture on the types of social stigmas endured by different immigrant groups should be examined.
Opvoedingsondersteuning bij de preventie en aanpak van overgewicht: de rol van opvoedstijlen - Bastiaans, Baerveldt, Jansen (2012) - Artikel
Opvoedingsondersteuning bij de preventie en aanpak van overgewicht: de rol van opvoedstijlen - Bastiaans, Baerveldt, Jansen (2012) - Artikel
Inleiding
Overgewicht bij kinderen lijkt een steeds urgenter probleem te worden: de afgelopen 25 jaar is het aantal kinderen met overgewicht in Nederland verdubbeld. Deze kinderen hebben een grotere kans op medische en psychosociale problemen.
Het al dan niet ontwikkelen van overgewicht lijkt onder invloed te zijn van de opvoedingsstijl van ouders. Zo heeft een permissieve opvoedingsstijl een hoger risico op overgewicht bij kinderen tot gevolg. Deze opvoedingsstijl wordt gekenmerkt door warmte en sensitiviteit, maar ouders met deze stijl hebben lage verwachtingen over zelfcontrole en discipline bij hun kinderen. 37% van de ouders in Nederland hanteren deze opvoedingsstijl.
Ouders met een autoritaire opvoedingsstijl worden gekenmerkt door een grote controle over hun kinderen, maar zijn weinig betrokken. Door hun striktheid in het bepalen van regels over eten en bewegen kunnen kinderen hun eetgedrag slecht reguleren en beleven zij minder plezier in bewegen. Deze kinderen hebben een verhoogd risico op overgewicht en obesitas.
Kinderen van ouders met een autoritatieve opvoedingsstijl hebben het laagste risico op overgewicht. De ouders zijn betrokken, hebben duidelijke regels, hebben een gezond voedselaanbod en helpen kinderen zelf te bepalen wat en hoeveel ze eten. In Nederland gebruikt 51% van de ouders deze opvoedingsstijl.
Hoewel er bekend is dat de opvoedingsstijl van ouders invloed heeft op het gewicht van kinderen en de mate waarin en de wijze waarop opvoedingsondersteuning effectief kan zijn, is minder bekend over de behoefte van ouders aan ondersteuning in hun opvoeding met betrekking tot overgewicht.
Het huidige onderzoek is uitgevoerd om dit beter in kaart te brengen, met de volgende vraagstellingen:
- Wat doen ouders om kinderen te stimuleren tot een gezond eet- en beweegpatroon?
- Welke behoefte(s) aan ondersteuning hebben ouders daarbij?
- Aan welke criteria dient die opvoedingsondersteuning te voldoen?
Methode
Achttien ouders zijn geïnterviewd met een halfgestructureerd interview over de eet- en beweeggewoonten van hun kinderen, de problemen hierbij, welke oplossingen ze toepassen en waarbij ze hierin ondersteuning zouden willen hebben. De behoeften aan ondersteuning werden in categorieën ondergebracht met het ASE-model (A=attitude en kennis, S=sociale norm, E=eigeneffectiviteit).
Resultaten
Er is in dit onderzoek een verband tussen de opvoedingsstijl en de aard van de gewenste ondersteuning. In het huidige onderzoek hadden alle kinderen met overgewicht ouders die een permissieve opvoedingsstijl hanteren. Hoewel deze ouders over voldoende kennis beschikten met betrekking tot voeding en beweging werden problemen hierin niet effectief behandeld, door het kind voedsel te laten weigeren of ongezonder voedsel te laten eten. Voor die ouders is een reden om niet in te grijpen dat de ouders henzelf niet in staat achtten het gedrag te kunnen veranderen. Ouders met de autoritatieve opvoedingsstijl stelden duidelijke regels over eten, zoals het aantal tussendoortjes, onderhandelden met hun kinderen en probeerden zelf het goede voorbeeld te geven.
Er was geen duidelijke vraag naar ondersteuning op de gebieden van attitude of kennis (A in het ASE model), als ook de sociale norm (S in het ASE model). Desondanks zou een aantal ouders baat hebben bij ondersteuning in bovenstaande gebieden, omdat zij het eetprobleem niet als zodanig herkennen en de risico’s op overgewicht onderschatten. Daarnaast hebben, behalve de ouders, ook andere familieleden invloed op het eetgedrag van de kinderen, die bijvoorbeeld de regels over eten van de ouders ondermijnen.
Ouders wilden wel ondersteuning bij hun opvoedingsgedrag, omdat zij naar hun eigen mening niet beschikken over de vaardigheden om kinderen te stimuleren tot een gezondere leefstijl, ook wel eigeneffectiviteit genoemd. Dit gebrek aan eigeneffectiviteit wilden zij graag aanpakken. Deze behoefte groeide naarmate het kind meer overgewicht heeft. Ook de moeite met ingrijpen is een probleem wat zij wilden aanpakken.
Conclusie
Het onderzoek geeft duiding aan een betere ondersteuning van ouders voor een goede opvoeding. Het is zinvol om de opvoedingsstijl in kaart te brengen om te verduidelijken welke ondersteuning passend is. Daarnaast is het bij permissieve ouders nuttig om de opvoedingsstijl te veranderen, en voornamelijk te ondersteunen in de eigeneffectiviteit.
Add new contribution