The nature and utility of cultural tightness-looseness: evidence for reconsideration

• 成果类型: Article; Early Access
• 署名作者: Minkov, Michael; Akaliyski, Plamen; Kaasa, Anneli; Welzel, Christian
• 署名单位: Varna University of Management; Universidad ESAN; Lingnan University; University of Tartu; Leuphana University Luneburg; University of Silesia in Katowice; HSE University (National Research University Higher School of Economics)
• 刊物名称: JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS STUDIES
• ISSN/ISSBN: 0047-2506
• DOI: 10.1057/s41267-025-00803-0
• 发表日期: 2025
• 关键词: Cultural dimensions; NORMS; Tightness-looseness; Individualism collectivism

摘要

Numerous studies focus on the tightness-looseness (TL) dimension of national culture, reporting important implications for business and management. However, the main TL measure has generated a number of theoretical and empirical concerns. It likely reflects unfounded national auto-stereotypes, the conceptual boundary between TL and individualism-collectivism (IC) is blurred, respondents in different societies have different TL-related concepts, and TL yields mostly low and often insignificant correlations with its presumed correlates. Using the latest TL data from Eriksson, Gelfand, and associates, we find that some TL items are uncorrelated with aggregates of corresponding self-reports. TL is not predicted by its main presumed antecedents, and has marginal or no effects on its presumed main consequences, including all metanorms (reported frequencies of reactions to inappropriate behavior). Our results challenge the validity of measures of culture based on respondents' generalized impressions of their compatriots. We suggest a revision of TL theory in which much of the TL concept can be subsumed under IC. We highlight the fact that a society can be tight in one domain and loose in another, which depends largely on its IC position. De nombreuses recherches se focalisent sur la dimension de la rigidit & eacute;-souplesse (Tightness-Looseness - TL) de la culture nationale, apportant des implications importantes pour le commerce et la gestion. N & eacute;anmoins, la principale mesure de la TL a suscit & eacute; un certain nombre de pr & eacute;occupations th & eacute;oriques et empiriques. Elle refl & egrave;te probablement des auto-st & eacute;r & eacute;otypes nationaux infond & eacute;s, la fronti & egrave;re conceptuelle entre la TL et l'individualisme-collectivisme (IC) est floue, les r & eacute;pondants dans diverses soci & eacute;t & eacute;s ont diff & eacute;rents concepts li & eacute;s & agrave; la TL, et cette derni & egrave;re pr & eacute;sente principalement des corr & eacute;lations faibles et souvent insignifiantes avec ses corr & eacute;lats pr & eacute;sum & eacute;s. En utilisant les derni & egrave;res donn & eacute;es sur la TL fournies par Eriksson, Gelfand et leurs collaborateurs, nous constatons que certains & eacute;l & eacute;ments de la TL ne sont pas corr & eacute;l & eacute;s avec les agr & eacute;gats des auto-& eacute;valuations correspondantes. La TL n'est pas pr & eacute;dite par ses principaux ant & eacute;c & eacute;dents pr & eacute;sum & eacute;s, et a des effets marginaux ou inexistants sur ses principales cons & eacute;quences pr & eacute;sum & eacute;es, y compris toutes les m & eacute;tanormes (fr & eacute;quences rapport & eacute;es des r & eacute;actions face & agrave; des comportements inappropri & eacute;s). Nos r & eacute;sultats remettent en question la validit & eacute; des mesures de la culture bas & eacute;es sur les impressions g & eacute;n & eacute;ralis & eacute;es des r & eacute;pondants & agrave; propos de leurs compatriotes. Nous sugg & eacute;rons une r & eacute;vision de la th & eacute;orie de la TL, dans laquelle une grande partie du concept de TL peut & ecirc;tre subsum & eacute;e sous l'IC. Nous soulignons le fait qu'une soci & eacute;t & eacute; peut & ecirc;tre rigide dans un domaine et souple dans un autre, ce qui d & eacute;pend largement de sa position en mati & egrave;re d'IC. M & uacute;ltiples estudios se centran en la dimensi & oacute;n de rigidez-laxitud (TK, por sus iniciales en ingl & eacute;s) de la cultura nacional, reportando implicaciones importantes para los negocios y la gesti & oacute;n. Sin embargo, la principal medida de rigidez-laxitud ha generado una serie de preocupaciones te & oacute;ricas y emp & iacute;ricas. Es probable que refleje autoestereotipos nacionales infundados, el l & iacute;mite conceptual entre rigidez-laxitud e individualismo-colectivismo (IC por sus siglas en ingles) es difuso, los encuestados en diferentes sociedades tienen conceptos relacionados con rigidez-laxitud distintos, y la rigidez-laxitud arroja en su mayor & iacute;a correlaciones bajas y, a menudo, insignificantes con sus correlatos presuntos. Utilizando los & uacute;ltimos datos de rigidez-laxitud de Eriksson, Gelfand y colaboradores, encontramos que algunos & iacute;tems de RF no est & aacute;n correlacionados con los agregados de los correspondientes autorreportes. La rigidez-laxitud no es predicha por sus principales antecedentes presuntos y tiene efectos marginales o nulos sobre sus principales consecuencias presuntas, incluidas todas las metanormas (frecuencias reportadas de reacciones ante comportamientos inapropiados). Nuestros resultados cuestionan la validez de las medidas de cultura basadas en las impresiones generalizadas de los encuestados sobre sus compatriotas. Sugerimos una revisi & oacute;n de la teor & iacute;a de rigidez-laxitud en la que gran parte del concepto de rigidez-laxitud puede subsumirse bajo el individualismo-colectivismo. Destacamos el hecho de que una sociedad puede ser r & iacute;gida en un dominio y laxa en otro, lo cual depende en gran medida de su posici & oacute;n en individualismo-colectivismo. In & uacute;meros estudos focam na dimens & atilde;o rigidez-laxidade (TL) da cultura nacional, relatando implica & ccedil;& otilde;es importantes para os neg & oacute;cios e a gest & atilde;o. No entanto, a principal medida de TL gerou uma s & eacute;rie de preocupa & ccedil;& otilde;es te & oacute;ricas e emp & iacute;ricas. Ela provavelmente reflete autoestere & oacute;tipos nacionais infundados, a fronteira conceitual entre TL e individualismo-coletivismo (IC) n & atilde;o & eacute; clara, respondentes em diferentes sociedades possuem conceitos distintos relacionados & agrave; TL, e TL apresenta, comumente, baixas e insignificantes correla & ccedil;& otilde;es com seus supostos correlatos. Utilizando os dados mais recentes de TL de Eriksson, Gelfand e colaboradores, descobrimos que alguns itens de TL n & atilde;o possuem correla & ccedil;& atilde;o com agregados de autorrelatos correspondentes. TL n & atilde;o & eacute; prevista por seus principais antecedentes presumidos e tem efeitos marginais ou inexistentes sobre suas principais supostas consequ & ecirc;ncias, incluindo todas metanormas (frequ & ecirc;ncias relatadas de rea & ccedil;& otilde;es a comportamentos inadequados). Nossos resultados desafiam a validade de medidas de cultura baseadas em impress & otilde;es generalizadas de respondentes sobre seus compatriotas. Sugerimos uma revis & atilde;o da teoria de TL, na qual grande parte do conceito de TL pode ser incorporada ao IC. Destacamos o fato de que uma sociedade pode ser r & iacute;gida em um dom & iacute;nio e laxa em outro, o que depende amplamente de sua posi & ccedil;& atilde;o em rela & ccedil;& atilde;o ao IC. (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(TL)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)TL(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), TL(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)-(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(IC)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)TL(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)TL(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)Eriksson,Gelfand(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)TL(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)TL(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).TL(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)TL(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)TL(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)IC(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic):(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)IC(sic)(sic).