Shalom H. Schwartz

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shalom H. Schwartz (12/2007)

Shalom H. Schwartz (* around 1940 in Hempstead , New York ) ( Hebrew שלום שוורץ) is an American - Israeli social psychologist , intercultural researcher, and author of a theory of universal human values .

Life

Shalom Schwartz studied Hebrew at a rabbinical school from 1952 to 1962 and graduated with a master's degree in Hebrew literature. From 1959 to 1960 he stayed at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem . From 1958 to 1962 he studied at Columbia University , where he earned a master's degree in social psychology and group development. Schwartz received his PhD in social psychology from the University of Michigan in 1967. He then taught at the University of Wisconsin – Madison , where he became a professor in 1973 . From 1971 to 1973 Schwartz was visiting professor of psychology at the Hebrew University. In 1979 Schwartz moved to Israel and took on a professorship in psychology there. After his retirement in 2002, he has held the chair of Leon and Clara Sznajderman Professor of Psychology (since 1989) .

Schwartz is married and has three children.

Theory of General Human Values

In a well-received article from 2006, Schwartz asked whether there are universal values ​​that apply across the great cultures. He designed a value model and postulated a number of values ​​that all people should have in common in different ways. His research focus was on the structure of values ​​and their relationship to one another. He analyzed the basic questions that societies have to answer about living together. He called the opposites that emerged from this study endpoints of dimensions. They allow cultures to be distinguished from one another. Schwartz distinguished three basic questions:

Prototypical structure of cultural dimensions according to SH Schwartz. The same colors represent opposing end poles of the same dimensions.

1. What is the relationship between the individual and the collective? Here it becomes clear whether in a society individual freedom has priority over group interests. Both are in a conflict of goals. Schwartz calls this dimension “the need for autonomy versus the striving for integration”. The need for autonomy is expressed, for example, in curiosity, openness to new things and creativity, but also in an exciting, varied life. In cultures that are closer to the pole of striving for integration, the maintenance of group harmony, in particular respect for authorities and family tradition, are valued. Schwartz calls these dimensions: the need for autonomy versus the striving for integration .

2. How is the continued existence of the company ensured? This can happen either through a hierarchical social structure with a strong unequal distribution of power and strict sanctions, or through an egalitarian structure with more equal people and voluntary cooperation. Schwartz calls these dimensions willingness to subordinate versus a claim to equality .

3. How do you deal with the natural and social environment? In this dimension, the aim can either be to blend in harmoniously with the social and natural environment or, on the other hand, to control the environment or to control the social environment. Schwartz calls this dimension the desire for harmony versus the need for control . According to Schwartz, cultures differ from one another in these three dimensions, which each show contradicting endpoints. Schwartz describes this as a value structure .

Schwartz checked his theory empirically. To do this, he used a total of 56 different value concepts. These include, for example, freedom , honesty , equality , or authority , influence , wealth . It was noteworthy that the empirically found answers to the value questions fit very well into the aforementioned dimensions without the respondents knowing these dimensions. The three first example values ​​of freedom - honesty - equality therefore all fit the pole of the equality claim of the dimension willingness to subordinate versus the claim to equality , while the values authority - have influence - wealth fit the opposite pole of willingness to subordinate this dimension. So there were few respondents who z. B. simultaneously considered the value of freedom and the value of authority to be important to them. Accordingly, all 56 values ​​could be fitted into the previously created value structure. That was a clear result in a complex context.

Schwartz was also able to create a world map of values ​​from the value structure with the value dimensions. To do this, he added cultural regions of the earth, which are similar in their values, to the end poles of the value dimensions. As expected, Europe ranks among neighboring Poles, for example, with a claim to equality and the need for intellectual autonomy , while the Muslim Middle East, Sub-Saharan Africa and South and Southeast Asia ranks strongly among neighboring Poles, striving for integration and willingness to submit .

Awards

Fonts

  • with Wolfgang Bilsky : Toward a theory of the universal content and structure of values: Extensions and cross cultural replications. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 58/1990, 878-891.
  • Universals in the content and structure of values: Theory and empirical tests in 20 countries. In: M. Zanna (Ed.): Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25) (pp. 1-65). New York: Academic Press 1992
  • Are there universal aspects in the content and structure of values? , in: Journal of Social Issues, 50/1994, 19–45.
  • Value Priorities and Behavior: Applying a Theory of Integrated Value Systems. In: C. Seligman, JM Olson, & MP Zanna (Eds.): The Psychology of Values: The Ontario Symposium , Vol. 8 (pp. 1-24). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum 1996
  • with A. Bardi: Influences of adaptation to communist rule on value priorities in Eastern Europe , Political Psychology, 18/1997, pp. 385-410.
  • with A. Lehmann and S. Roccas: Multimethod probes of basic human values , in: J. Adamopoulos and Y. Kashima, (eds.): Social Psychology and Culture Context: Essays in Honor of Harry C. Triandis . Newbury Park, CA: Sage 1999
  • with A. Bardi: Moral dialogue across cultures: An empirical perspective. In: EW Lehman (Ed.): Autonomy and order: A communitarian anthology. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield 2000
  • with G. Melech, A. Lehmann, S. Burgess and M. Harris: Extending the cross-cultural validity of the theory of basic human values ​​with a different method of measurement , Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 32/2001, pp. 519-542.
  • A proposal for measuring value orientations across nations in ESS Europeansocialsurvey (ESS)
  • with K. Boehnke: Evaluating the structure of human values ​​with confirmatory factor analysis , Journal of Research in Personality, 38/2004, pp. 230-255.
  • with T. Rubel: Sex differences in value priorities: Cross-cultural and multi-method studies. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 89/2005, pp. 1010-1028.
  • Value orientations: Measurement, antecedents and consequences across nations. In: R. Jowell, C. Roberts, R. Fitzgerald, & G. Eva (Eds.): Measuring attitudes cross-nationally - lessons from the European Social Survey . London: Sage 2006
  • A Theory of Cultural Value Orientations: Explication and Applications . Comparative Sociology, 2006, Vol. 5, issue 2-3; 137-182
  • Culture matters - National value cultures, sources and consequences . In: R. Wyer, C. Chiu & Y. Hong (Eds.): Understanding culture - Theory, research and application. New York, Psychology Press, 2009.

Web links

See also

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Shalom H. Schwartz: A Theory of Cultural Value Orientations: Explication and Applications. Comparative Sociology, 2006, Vol. 5, issue 2-3; 137-82
  2. Ulrich Kühnen: Cultivated animals - human behavior between culture and evolution. Springer Spectrum, 2015
  3. ^ Hebrew U. Prof. Shalom Schwartz awarded the 2007 Israel Prize in psychology
  4. ^ Israel Prize Official Site (in Hebrew) - Recipients' CV's . Retrieved October 20, 2013.
  5. ^ Israel Prize Official Site (in Hebrew) - Judges' Rationale for Grant to Recipients . Retrieved October 20, 2013.