LDRS 591 Activity 8.2
Category: Uncategorized
What makes you happy?: A comparison of self reported criteria of happiness between two cultures.
Dong Yul Lee, Sung Hee Park, Max R. Uhlemann, Philip Patsula
Introduction
The authors found out that most prior studies about happiness so far had been done by studying pre determined domains of happiness or satisfaction. They questioned whether the criteria for happiness varied in different cultures, and sought to find out whether criteria for determining happiness were different in a ‘collectivist’ that in an ‘individualistic’ socicety. They hypothesized that the criteria for happiness would likely vary depending on culture, personal values and goals.
Methods
Participants:They enrolled 403 university students from teacher-training programs from a Canadian and a Korean university each (203 Canadian and 200 Korean). 15 students were eliminated, data from 388 students was used for the results. The median age of Canadian students was 23.4, and that of Korean students was 22.7. The two cities from which the subjects were chosen had similar populations and hence they assumed similar socio-political characteristics . ( population of the Canadian city, London, was 350,000;and the Korean city,Chung-joo , was 400,000).
Measures:The Happiness Questionnaire (HQ), and Life Goal Survey (LGS) was administered. their responses were read by a pair of graduate judges in each country, who had received 10 hours of training.
Results
Canadian students showed a higher score on the happiness scale and the percent time participants felt happy. However the 2 groups applied the same standard in ranking categories for the HQ and LGS. For both groups, the two most important categories were health and goal/mission in life, while the two least important categories were stress-free life and financial/materialistic wealth.
Conclusions
The researchers found that even though the respondents from the two countries differ in their overall perception of happiness, they applied the same criteria as determinants of their happiness. This result was contrary to what they had hypothesized. There was also another unexpected finding; ‘family’ was the most frequently mentioned criteria in the Canadian sample, as opposed to the Korean sample. The authors admitted to their weakness-that chosing the sample from teacher-trainees could have led to selection bias; they did not control for the definition of ‘family’ in the Korean sample given the understanding that the definition is undergoing in a change; the LGS was constructed only based on responses from the Canadian students (not the current sample).
Personal comments
I chose this study because I thought it could provide me insight into whether there is a cultural difference to the importance given to components of the ‘formula’ to happiness? This study compared the criteria in 2 very different cultures and the researchers hypothesized that the their criteria would be different. Their assumption was that Korea being a so-called ‘collectivist’ society would probably measure happiness by a different set of criteria than an ‘individualistic’ society like Canada. Contrary to the author’s beliefs the criteria used by the subjects in the 2 studies were similar. The results of this study make one wonder whether the results of this study are because of the recent change in definition of family that they acknowledge that Korea is going through? Are traditionally ‘collectivistic’ societies now undergoing a change in their values because of modernization aka westernization? I think a follow up study where the subjects are an older demographic might help answer some of these questions.
Reference
Dong Yul, L., & Sung Hee, P, Uhlemann, M.R., Patsula, P. (2000). What makes you happy?: A comparison of self reported criteria of happiness between two cultures. Social Indicators Research, 50(3), 351.
I often wonder how can I optimize my time to get the most out of my day? How can I find time for the activities I like doing for myself , while balancing my family and work responsibilities? As per Trochim (2001), concept mapping is “general method that can be used to help any individual or group to describe their ideas about some topic in a pictorial form”. In this assignment our topic was ‘Me’. I found that talking about myself in concrete terms was not easy. I know the vague ‘me’, but putting myself down in the form of a ‘concept map’, and then formulating questions about things that are important to me, was a totally new concept.
Research questions is curved lines
The following questions arose , in no particular sequence of importance:
- What is the optimal time one should spend working from home , if at all ? What proportion of one’s work day is reasonable to be spent commuting to and from work? Of course, the ideal would be to live next to work, but we all know what is more often than not impossible.
- For me time spent with family is important for my emotional well being. Some days, there is a conflict between my desire to do some activities that are centered around me, and not the family. What is the optimum ‘me’ time that a person requires per day. Does it have to be everyday, or is a big chunk of time at the end of the week an adequate substitute ?
- Balanced diet and exercise are universally accepted to be the 2 most important factors in helping one maintain their health. I have recently been wondering if there is a possible change in the relative importance of these 2 as one grows older ? I have definitely noticed that I need to exercise more to keep my weight in check.
- How does one factor in mental health in the overall personal satisfaction/happiness scale ?
The one prominent question to me out of these is the one about mental health and happiness. We may call it satisfaction. I wonder if there are any validated and researched tools out there that can objectively measure one’s happiness/ satisfaction, and the factors that contribute to it ? Or if this idea of happiness is purely subjective, and immeasurable? What is the impact of happiness/satisfaction on one’s overall health? Are there cultural differences in the importance given to individual components of the formula to happiness?To find answers to this question I would be looking at literature in the fields of psychology, psychiatry, health and fitness, and maybe spirituality.
References
Trochim, 2001. http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/conmap.php.
This is in reponse to the following post by Timothy DeHaan
Timothy mentions he has had first hand experience working with an unethical leader, which seems to have influenced his choices and behavior. He relates that this led to Timothy and the other staff not wanting to have further relationship with this person. I wonder what influence this had on Timothy’s leadership practice?
Lately we have been hearing of a lot of unethical and inauthentic leadership practices by famous leaders, celebrities etc. This is in large part because of increased awareness amongst followers and also because of advancements in media and reporting. It made me wonder what makes a leader resort to unethical practice? Is it inherent, related to their personality ? Is it opportunity ? Or maybe both ? Is there a universal, well validated tool that is available to organizations to measure a persons integrity before considering them for promotion?
Timothy quotes Van Burne ( 2013) “another way to promote ethical behaviors is to ensure that there is a safe way for staff and stakeholders to hold the leadership ethically accountable” . How does one do this ? I think this can be achieved by organizations putting in place whistleblower protection and non retaliation practices for reporting wrongdoing.
Reference
Van Buren, J.A. ( 2013, March 29). Retrieved November 6, 2017, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ks2QGoIq5nA .
Van Buren defines ethics as “principles, values and beliefs that define what is right and what is wrong behavior”. She further postulates that leaders set up the moral tone for organization, and that staff respond to moral clues from their leaders . All leaders will have to face some ethical or moral challenge in their roles , likely more often than once . Their actions during the challenging time will set the tone for the behavior of the rest of the organization. She lays out that leaders can create an ethical culture by – being a role model, communicating ethical standards, promoting effective financial management, providing ethical training, institutional ethical culture, provide protective mechanisms to employees who bring forth their concerns about ethics violations. The principles that lay the foundation for the development of sound ethical leadership ( Northouse, 2016, p. 341) are – respect for others , serving others, showing justice, manifesting honesty, and building community . All the readings I have come across so far stress that one should “treat others the way in which you like to be treated”
The concept of authenticity originates in Greek philosophy “to thine own self be true” ( Avolio & Gardner, 2005) . More recently it is defined as “the extent to which one is true to the self “( Erickson, 1995; Trilling, 1972) or, “one’s relationship with oneself” (Erickson, 1995, p. 124). As per Kernis ( 2003) , core elements of authenticity are : self-awareness, unbiased processing, relational authenticity, and authentic behavior/action. As per Shamir& Eilam (2005), authentic leaders have the following four characteristics : 1. they are true to themselves (rather than conforming to the expectations of others); 2. they are motivated by personal convictions; 3. they lead from their own personal point of view, i.e. they are original ; 4. the actions of authentic leaders are based on their personal values and convictions.
“Authentic leadership development involves ongoing processes whereby leaders and followers gain self-awareness and establish open, transparent, trusting and genuine relationships, which in part may be shaped and impacted by planned interventions such as training “, (Avolio, 2005) . They propose a number of components of authentic leadership, including leader and follower components. I believe that ‘positive psychological capital’ and ‘positive moral capital’ in leaders is inherent; one either has it, or doesn’t. On the other hand ‘leader self awareness’ and ‘ leader self regulation’ can be inculcated by training . They propose that ‘ follower self awareness’ and ‘follower development’ can lead to followers aligning their ideas with the leader. I think this is contradictory to the premise of authenticity which is ‘ being true to oneself’ . Isnt it too presumptuous to believe that a follower’s beliefs will always align with those of the leader? How does one reconcile with being true to themselves and also following a leader whose beliefs one does not necessarily agree with ?
In section 4.1 where the authors differentiate authentic leadership from transformation leadership, they postulate that authentic leaders have ” a deep sense of self; they know where they stand on important issues, values and beliefs. With that base they stay their course and convey to others, oftentimes through actions, not just words, what they represent in terms of principles, values and ethics”, whereas transformational leaders “may be able to transform others and organizations, through a powerful, positive vision, an intellectually stimulating idea, attention to uplifting the needs of followers and by having a clear sense of purpose” ( Avolio & Gardner, 2005) . In these terms authentic leadership seems very dogged and inflexible to me, whereas transformational leadership seems to have the power to influence (convince) followers, which to my understanding is the very basis of leadership. If I was to recommend a model of leadership to my organization, it would be transformational leadership.
References
Avolio, B. & Gardner, W. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 315-338.
Erickson, R.J. (1995). The importance of authenticity for self and society. Symbolic Interaction, 18 (2), pp.121-144
Kernis, M.H . (2003). Toward a conceptualization of optimal self-esteem. Psychological Inquiry, 14, pp. 1-26.
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership theory and practice . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Shamir, B., Eilam, G. (2005) . What’s your story: A life-stories approach to authentic leadership development. The Leadership Quarterly
Trilling, L. (1972). Sincerity and Authenticity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Van Buren, J.A. ( 2013, March 29). Retrieved November 6, 2017, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ks2QGoIq5nA .
This is in response to MrWIlliamsphysed’s post :
Rank, Talk, Write – Unit 3 – LA1 – BP1
Reading their summary of the article, I was very intrigued by the term ‘ Information Literacy’ . Not being from the education field myself, I was curious to find how this term was defined. Seems like this is a relatively new concept. The article mentions that it was first described in 1974 by Zurkowski . Zurkowski described information literate individuals as those “who are trained in the application of information resources to their work” (cited in Kurbanoğlu, 2010). “Another feature distinguishing information literacy from other types of literacy is its not being restricted to a certain discipline or subject area”. (Kurbanoğlu, 2010, p. 740).
Tom also makes a very interesting observation in his summary that the study identified that USA and UK place higher value on information literacy in their teacher training . It would be interesting to find out ultimately how teacher competencies and student results compared , if someone were to conduct a study comparing the teachers in these 2 countries with the Eastern European countries that this study was conducted in .
I also think that a very important consideration here is that access to resources ( or lack thereof) is a very big factor in a lot of less developed countries . This is applicable to teachers, educational institutions and students .
References:
Kurbanoğlu, S. (2010). Bilgi okuryazarlığı: Kavramsal bir analiz (Information literacy: A conceptual analysis). Türk Kütüphaneciliği, 24(4), 723-747.
Sağlam, A., Çankaya, I., Üçer, H. & Çetin, M. (2017) The effect of information literacy on teachers’ critical thinking disposition. Journal of Education and Learning, v6 n3 p31-40 20172.
Welcome to TWU Digital Learning Commons. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!
Recent Comments