1 Center for Developmental & Applied Psychological Science, The Faculty of Humanities, Aalborg University, VBN2 NASUD, The Faculty of Humanities, Aalborg University, VBN3 Department of Communication and Psychology, The Faculty of Humanities, Aalborg University, VBN4 The Faculty of Humanities, Aalborg University, VBN5 unknown6 Ministry of Interior7 University Paris V Rene Descartes8 National University of Singapore9 University of Rome La Sapienza10 University of Sheffield11 Gnauthstr. 20, 35394 Giessen12 Universidad Centroamericana “José Simeón Cañas”13 Warsaw School of Social Psychology14 Budapest University of Technology and Economics15 Trinity College Dublin16 University of Indonesia17 University of Malaya18 Auburn University19 Rubens 43-102, Col. San Juan cp 03730, Mexico City20 University of Allahabad21 Thammasat University22 University of Athens23 University of Valencia, Valencian Institute of Economic Research (IVIE)24 University of Valencia25 Universidad del Rosario26 University of Bern27 Federal University of Ceara28 University of the Philippines, Quezon City29 American University in Cairo30 Chinese Academy of Sciences31 National University of Singapore32 University of Rome La Sapienza33 University of Sheffield34 Budapest University of Technology and Economics35 Trinity College Dublin36 University of Indonesia37 University of Malaya38 Auburn University39 University of Allahabad40 Thammasat University41 University of Athens42 Universidad del Rosario43 University of Bern44 American University in Cairo45 Chinese Academy of Sciences
A Validation Study of the GLOBE Scale and Out-Group Humane Orientation in 25 Countries
We validate, extend, and empirically and theoretically criticize the cultural dimension of humane orientation of the project GLOBE (Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness Research Program). Theoretically, humane orientation is not just a one-dimensionally positive concept about being caring, altruistic, and kind to others as discussed by Kabasakal and Bodur (2004), but there is also a certain ambivalence to this concept. We suggest differentiating humane orientation toward in-group members from humane orientation toward out-group members. A multicountry construct validation study used student samples from 25 countries that were either high or low in humane orientation (N = 876) and studied their relation to the traditional GLOBE scale and other cultural-level measures (agreeableness, religiosity, authoritarianism, and welfare state score). Findings revealed a strong correlation between humane orientation and agreeableness, welfare state score, and religiosity. Out-group humane orientation proved to be the more relevant subfacet of the original humane orientation construct, suggesting that future research on humane orientation should make use of this measure instead of the vague original scale. The ambivalent character of out-group humane orientation is displayed in its positive correlation to high authoritarianism. Patriotism was used as a control variable for noncritical acceptance of one’s society but did not change the correlations. Our findings are discussed as an example of how rigid expectations and a lack of tolerance for diversity may help explain the ambivalent nature of humane orientation.
Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 2013, Vol 44, Issue 4, p. 535-551