| Literature DB >> 36248459 |
Zhen-Dong Wang1, Yi-Meng Wang2, Huan Guo3,4, Qian Zhang5.
Abstract
As the primary value system in Chinese culture for almost 2,000 years, Confucianism has profoundly influenced the mindset of Chinese people. Cultural psychology studies have highlighted that individuals with different cultural backgrounds vary in their preferences for certain personality traits, such as self-construal, and their metacognitive characteristics, such as thinking modes. Compared with Western cultures, Chinese culture shows a preference for the interdependent self and holistic thinking. To investigate the relationship between the relational-interdependent self, holistic thinking, and traditional Chinese values (which are represented by Confucian values), we surveyed 327 Chinese adults using the Confucian Traditional Values Survey, Holistic Thinking Scale, and Relational-Interdependent Self-Construal Scale. The results show that Confucian values positively influence both holistic thinking and the relational-interdependent self, the latter of which partially mediates the positive relationship between Confucian values and holistic thinking. This study deepens the understanding of the psychological features of Chinese culture.Entities:
Keywords: Confucian values; holistic thinking; relational-interdependent self; self; thinking mode
Year: 2022 PMID: 36248459 PMCID: PMC9562088 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.958088
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
FIGURE 1Hypothetical model for Confucian values, relational-interdependent self, and holistic thinking.
Correlation matrix for Confucian values, holistic thinking, and relational-interdependent self.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
| 1. Confucian values | – | |||||||||
| 2. Familism | 0.88 | – | ||||||||
| 3. Modesty and humility | 0.88 | 0.65 | – | |||||||
| 4. Face-saving relationships | 0.82 | 0.54 | 0.73 | – | ||||||
| 5. Unity and harmony | 0.86 | 0.85 | 0.66 | 0.55 | – | |||||
| 6. Tenacity and diligence | 0.67 | 0.53 | 0.63 | 0.50 | 0.50 | – | ||||
| 7. Holistic thinking | 0.41 | 0.30 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.30 | 0.28 | – | |||
| 8. Connectivity | 0.34 | 0.28 | 0.31 | 0.26 | 0.32 | 0.22 | 0.76 | – | ||
| 9. Change | 0.32 | 0.24 | 0.32 | 0.27 | 0.24 | 0.22 | 0.77 | 0.44 | – | |
| 10. Contradiction | 0.26 | 0.17 | 0.28 | 0.27 | 0.14 | 0.19 | 0.72 | 0.36 | 0.23 | – |
| 11. Relational-interdependent self | 0.46 | 0.38 | 0.40 | 0.35 | 0.40 | 0.26 | 0.55 | 0.46 | 0.42 | 0.36 |
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
Model fit index.
| χ2 |
| χ2/ | RMSEA [90% CI] | TLI | CFI | SRMR | |
| Model | 44.204 | 24 | 1.841 | 0.049 [0.025, 0.071] | 0.980 | 0.986 | 0.028 |
CFI, confirmatory fit index; CI, confidence interval; df, degrees of freedom; TLI, Tucker–Lewis index; RMSEA, root mean square error of approximation; SRMR, standardized root mean square residual.
FIGURE 2Structural model of the mediating effect of the relational-interdependent self on the relationship between Confucian values and holistic thinking. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
FIGURE 3Latent variable path of the linear equation model. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01. C1–C5 represent the five factors of Confucian values (C1, familism; C2, modesty and humility; C3, face-saving relationships; C4, unity and harmony; C5, tenacity and diligence); H1–H3 represent the three dimensions of holistic thinking (H1, connectivity; H2, change; H3, contradiction).
Path effects analysis.
| Mediating effects paths | Estimated value | SE | 99% CI |
| Total effect (CV→RISC→HT) | 0.539 | 0.067 | [0.358, 0.699] |
| Indirect effect (CV→RISC→HT) | 0.249 | 0.040 | [0.159, 0.375] |
| Direct effect (CV→HT) | 0.290 | 0.069 | [0.112, 0.546] |
aThe difference is significant if the confidence interval does not contain 0, and vice versa. CI, confidence interval; SE, standard error.