26.11.2012 Views

comparative value priorities of chinese and new zealand

comparative value priorities of chinese and new zealand

comparative value priorities of chinese and new zealand

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

SVS<br />

Dimension<br />

GZ:<br />

alpha for<br />

dimension<br />

Comments NZ: alpha<br />

for<br />

dimension<br />

Comments<br />

0.72 Self-Indulgent has a<br />

Pleasure <strong>and</strong> Enjoying Life items<br />

significantly lower<br />

vs. Self-Indulgent; Self-Indulgent<br />

mean than the other<br />

has a negative connotation<br />

amongst Chinese business<br />

people, <strong>and</strong> has a significantly<br />

lower mean than the other two<br />

items.<br />

two items.<br />

Hedonism 0.45 Poor alpha <strong>and</strong> poor item fit for<br />

Tradition 0.69 0.64 Item-to-scale statistics<br />

indicate a poor fit for<br />

Respect for Tradition,<br />

compared to Moderate,<br />

Humble, <strong>and</strong><br />

Accepting My Portion<br />

in Life<br />

Universalism 0.88 0.78<br />

Power 0.78 0.63<br />

Self-<br />

Direction<br />

0.81 0.65<br />

Security 0.78 0.63<br />

Stimulation 0.69 0.68<br />

Further investigations <strong>of</strong> reliability <strong>and</strong> validity were carried out in China using focus<br />

groups.<br />

SVS Focus Group Studies in China<br />

Two focus groups were arranged in China to complete then discuss the SVS. In<br />

discussing the SVS the participants indicated that the qualifying phrase occasionally<br />

contradicted the specification word or phrase. Given the vagaries <strong>of</strong> the interaction <strong>and</strong><br />

reciprocal causality <strong>of</strong> meaning amongst language <strong>and</strong> culture, cross-cultural focus<br />

group analysis is a problematic process. One comment on the SVS item<br />

“PRESERVING MY PUBLIC IMAGE (protecting my “face”)” was that<br />

PRESERVING MY PUBLIC IMAGE to protect one’s face taints the idea <strong>of</strong> Face.<br />

Gaining Face should stem from virtuous acts, <strong>and</strong> one should not engage in the acts with<br />

the specific objective <strong>of</strong> gaining or protecting Face. The two ideas were acceptable<br />

<strong>value</strong>s alone, but when combined led to a behaviour that some participants interpreted<br />

180

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!