Interactive effects of levels of individualism–collectivism on cooperation: a meta-analysis

Name: Interactive effects of levels of individualism–collectivism on cooperation: a meta-analysis
Author: Marcus, Justin, Le, H.

İsim	Interactive effects of levels of individualism–collectivism on cooperation: a meta-analysis
Yazar	Marcus, Justin, Le, H.
Basım Tarihi:	2013-08
Basım Yeri	- Wiley
Konu	Individualism, Collectivism, Cooperation, Levels of analyses, Meta-analysis
Tür	Süreli Yayın
Dil	İngilizce
Dijital	Evet
Yazma	Hayır
Kütüphane:	Özyeğin Üniversitesi
Demirbaş Numarası	1099-1379
Kayıt Numarası	e37a537e-100b-4234-a0ff-2a3cc5b314c0
Lokasyon	Psychology
Tarih	2013-08
Notlar	Due to copyright restrictions, the access to the full text of this article is only available via subscription.
Örnek Metin	We examined the interactive effects of levels of individualism–collectivism (I–C) on cooperation at work by meta-analytically combining results obtained from 201 studies, representing 225 independent samples. I–C was operationalized at the individual, organizational, and societal levels of analyses. Cooperation was conceptualized at both individual and group levels of analysis. Both cooperative behavior and performance were included as outcomes. The correlation between individual-level I–C and cooperation/performance was stronger in collectivistic as opposed to individualistic societies. Similarly, the correlation between organizational-level I–C and cooperation was stronger in collectivistic societies. Results also indicated that individual-level and organizational-level I–C, but not societal-level I–C, were moderately related to study outcomes. Examination of other potential moderators indicated that neither study setting, I–C dimensionality, nor performance measurement type (objective vs subjective measures) altered these relations. However, a conceptual match between I–C and cooperation was a moderator such that effect sizes were generally larger when I–C and outcomes were both measured at the same level of analysis. Overall, our results indicate that I–C is both theoretically and empirically distinct across the various levels of analyses and that it may be a better predictor of outcomes in collectivistic as opposed to individualistic societies.
DOI	10.1002/job.1875
Cilt	34

Kaynağa git Özyeğin Üniversitesi

Aramaya Dön

Özyeğin Üniversitesi

Kaynağa git

Interactive effects of levels of individualism–collectivism on cooperation: a meta-analysis

Yazar Marcus, Justin, Le, H.

Basım Tarihi 2013-08

Basım Yeri - Wiley

Konu Individualism, Collectivism, Cooperation, Levels of analyses, Meta-analysis

Tür Süreli Yayın

Dil İngilizce

Dijital Evet

Yazma Hayır

Kütüphane Özyeğin Üniversitesi

Demirbaş Numarası 1099-1379

Kayıt Numarası e37a537e-100b-4234-a0ff-2a3cc5b314c0

Lokasyon Psychology

Tarih 2013-08

Notlar Due to copyright restrictions, the access to the full text of this article is only available via subscription.

Örnek Metin We examined the interactive effects of levels of individualism–collectivism (I–C) on cooperation at work by meta-analytically combining results obtained from 201 studies, representing 225 independent samples. I–C was operationalized at the individual, organizational, and societal levels of analyses. Cooperation was conceptualized at both individual and group levels of analysis. Both cooperative behavior and performance were included as outcomes. The correlation between individual-level I–C and cooperation/performance was stronger in collectivistic as opposed to individualistic societies. Similarly, the correlation between organizational-level I–C and cooperation was stronger in collectivistic societies. Results also indicated that individual-level and organizational-level I–C, but not societal-level I–C, were moderately related to study outcomes. Examination of other potential moderators indicated that neither study setting, I–C dimensionality, nor performance measurement type (objective vs subjective measures) altered these relations. However, a conceptual match between I–C and cooperation was a moderator such that effect sizes were generally larger when I–C and outcomes were both measured at the same level of analysis. Overall, our results indicate that I–C is both theoretically and empirically distinct across the various levels of analyses and that it may be a better predictor of outcomes in collectivistic as opposed to individualistic societies.

DOI 10.1002/job.1875

Cilt 34