Life’s recurring challenges and the fundamental dimensions: An integration and its implications for cultural differences and similarities

We propose that two psychological dimensions, one relevant to relationships and group life (communion, C) and the other to skill acquisition, talent, and accomplishment (agency, A), aid people in interpreting their social worlds. Moreover, our analysis demonstrates the privileged nature of the C dimension and its relative stability compared to the A dimension across contexts and cultures. In Study 1 we use a standard compilation of culturally universal practices and show that the C dimension accounts for the majority of these universals, implying that the meaning of A traits varies more across cultures than that of C traits. In Studies 2 and 3, we provide evidence for this proposal using different judgment paradigms and cultural groups. The findings indicate that there is greater similarity and consensus in how people make sense of and judge information from the C than A dimension. We discuss the findings in terms of the recurring challenges people face over time as a result of living in groups. Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Two core challenges humans have faced over millennia are on the one hand being accepted by others and becoming socially connected and on the other having to manifest skills, competencies, and status, given available opportunities (cf. Chance, 1988; Hogan, 1983). We argue that these two evolutionary necessities underlie the fundamental dimensions of communion and agency discovered and used by researchers to describe various psychological phenomena in personality and social psychology and related disciplines (e.g., Bakan, 1966; Bales, 1950; Leary, 1957; Osgood, Suci, & Tannenbaum, 1957; for reviews see Abele & Wojciszke, 2007; Fiske, Cuddy, & Glick, 2007; Judd, James-Hawkins, Yzerbyt, & Kashima, 2005; Ybarra, Chan, & Park., 2001). In addition to integrating the idea of life’s recurring challenges with these fundamental dimensions, our analysis shows and explains why the communion dimension is privileged in terms of what people think about and how they regulate behavior, and it also predicts and explains why the way people make sense of traits and behaviors related to the agency dimension, compared to those related to the communion dimension, will vary more across contexts, including cultural ones. The first challenge, connecting with others and being accepted, is addressed by the communion dimension (C), which deals with behavioral tendencies such as honesty and kindness and those relevant to group living and a sense of right and wrong in interpersonal relationships. All groups, whether familial, cultural, or those that comprise a larger organization, exert pressure on their members to get along and abide by group norms (cf. Homans, 1961; Monane, 1967). Because social rejection is debilitating in many ways (Baumeister & Leary, 1995; Ybarra, 2002; Ybarra, Burnstein, Winkielman, Keller, Manis, Chan, & Rodriguez, 2008), people generally carry with them the imprint of sociality and the motivation to be good group members regardless of situation or context—thus communion should be a pervasive dimension in much of human life. of Psychology and Research Center for Group Dynamics, University of Michigan, 525 East University [email protected] s, Ltd. Received 30 September 2007 Accepted 26 June 2008 1084 Oscar Ybarra et al. The second challenge, acquiring skills, talent, and status, is addressed through the agency dimension (A), which deals with characteristics and behavioral tendencies such as intelligence, competence, and diligence (also see Ybarra et al., 2001). An essential feature of the agency dimension is that talents and skills are not manifested in a social vacuum, as knowledge and solutions to technical or ecological problems cannot be transmitted without the ability to learn from others (Whiten & van Schaik, 2007). Related to this, and unlike the C aspects of behavior, which are expected of all group members, any particular agency-related problem (e.g., the need for protection) or opportunity (e.g., exploiting a resource) should involve only a subset of people or necessitate specific skills and the division of labor. Thus, the occasions for expressing or attaining certain skills, and the status and recognition that results from such displays, may be more limited and tied to the situation (Wish & Kaplan, 1977). So, in terms of communion, most if not all people can strive to behave (whether genuinely or not) like good group members. In terms of agency, though, different behaviors and skills are likely to be elicited from different members depending on the context. IS ONE DIMENSION PRIVILEGED? SOCIAL COGNITION AND THE NATURE OF GROUP LIFE Although behavior and cognition are sensitive to the circumstances and contingencies in people’s lives, this does not preclude that one dimension serves as a default by which people view the world, make decisions about it, and regulate behavior. We propose that the C dimension is primary and serves as this default (also see Ybarra et al., 2001). There are various reasons why the C dimension should be privileged. As discussed earlier, groups pressure members toward following norms (cf. Homans, 1961; Monane, 1967), and people strive to be accepted as good group members (cf. Baumeister & Leary, 1995). In these extended groups, reciprocal altruism is crucial (Trivers, 1971), as group life is based on getting along and depending on relatives but also non-relatives. Therefore, monitoring others’ communion-related behaviors should be more important than monitoring agency-related behaviors because C information reflects whether or not others intend to reciprocate and abide by norms (Ybarra, 2002; Ybarra & Stephan, 1996, 1999; also see Cosmides, 1989). Agency-related information is important in evaluating others, but it is less informative about their commitment to the group. Thus, being sensitive to information about others’ C characteristics and behaviors helps sustain indirect reciprocity. This sensitivity should lead to the C dimension being the primary dimension of interest for people in making sense of their surroundings and regulating behavior. Research from our laboratory (Ybarra et al., 2001) is consistent with this suggestion. We tested how quickly people could recognize stimuli related to the C and A dimensions. We reasoned that if people tend to be more concerned with the C rather than the A aspects of behavior, then the C category and associates should be more accessible in memory, which should facilitate the identification of stimuli related to the C dimension compared to the A dimension. Our findings supported this proposal, as both older and younger adults engaged in a lexical decision task responded faster to words related to the C dimension than the A dimension (Ybarra et al., 2001). Other related findings have shown that even after very short exposures, people make more reliable C than A judgments (Willis & Todorov, 2006). Further, perceivers have greater interest in C than A information in interpersonal judgment (Wojciszke, Bazinska, & Jaworski, 1998), and when judgments are based on both dimensions, the C aspects of the information are weighted more than the A aspects (e.g., De Bruin & Van Lange, 1999; Lingle & Ostrom, 1979; Martijn, Spears, Van der Pligt, & Jakobs, 1992; Wojciszke et al., 1998; Ybarra, 2001). The above findings are consistent with the idea that the C dimension is privileged in information processing for different reasons. In developing the present analysis, for our first study we wanted to provide additional and distinct evidence for this proposal. STUDY 1: CONTENT ANALYSIS OF CULTURAL UNIVERSALS