comparative value priorities of chinese and new zealand

for any dimension. For two borderline dimensions (p>0.06), males indicated a higher
preference for Production Emphasis (working hard), and females indicated a higher
preference for Demand Reconciliation (managing conflicting demands in the work
system).
Concerning gender differences on the SVS individual value dimensions for Guangzhou
City, the analysis of variance test indicates two significant gender differences for mean
rankings, Hedonism and Power, as seen in Figure 5.41. Female participants indicate a
significantly lower preference for Hedonism and a significantly higher preference for
Power.
These results in Guangzhou appear to support a role congruity and Cognitive
Dissonance interpretation of women placing greater emphasis on the male role traits in
leadership than men. This will be discussed further in Chapter 5.
In Figures 5.41 and 5.432 we see that for mean comparisons using analysis of variance,
the male and female means for the Guangzhou SVS57 have similar patterns of
significance and rankings, not as predicted. This small sample indicates some
tendencies that are near 0.05 significance. The females rank Achievement higher than
the males, and the males have higher means for Benevolence and Hedonism than the
females.
Figure 5.41 ANOVA for Gender Differences for the Guangzhou Sample SVS
Dimension Scores
N for Males = 151, N for Females = 69
GZ Centred Scores Rank Means Rank Means SD SD F value Sig.
Males Males Females Females Males Females
Conformity 1 0.27 1 0.42 0.68 0.76 2.38 0.124
Benevolence 2 0.20 7 0.09 0.59 0.67 1.56 0.212
Power 3 0.19 2 0.37 0.74 0.59 3.46 0.064
Stimulation 4 0.18 5 0.26 0.82 0.87 0.49 0.486
Tradition 5 0.17 3 0.28 0.59 0.57 1.74 0.189
Self Direction 6 0.15 4 0.27 0.68 0.70 1.41 0.237
Universalism 7 -0.01 8 -0.05 0.45 0.43 0.28 0.600
Achievement 8 -0.02 6 0.17 0.69 0.83 3.17 0.076
Security 9 -0.04 9 -0.07 0.84 0.67 0.05 0.816
Hedonism 10 -0.13 10 -0.44 0.80 1.15 5.19 0.024
262