Asian Journal of Social Psychology (2007), 10, 22–31 DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-839X.2006.00207.

Asian social psychology: Looking in and looking out

Colleen Ward
School of Psychology, Centre for Applied Cross-Cultural Research, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington,
New Zealand

The present paper examines the role, status and development of Asian social psychology from four perspectives:
(i) looking back; (ii) looking in; (iii) looking out; and (iv) looking forward. Looking back elaborates early
attempts to ‘add Asians’ to social psychology and replicate classic social psychological research in Asian
contexts. Looking in describes more sophisticated developments in Asian social psychology including the
indigenization of theory, methods and measurements. Looking out critically examines the position of Asian
social psychology in the international arena and discusses its impact on the discipline more broadly. Finally,
looking forward makes some cautious predictions about the future of Asian social psychology in both regional
and international spheres.

Key words: Asian social psychology, indigenous psychology.

Introduction the peoples among whom I have lived. My insights have

grown since the early days when I faced a class of bright
As the Asian Association of Social Psychology enters its and eager Malaysian psychology students with the realiza-
second decade it seems timely to reflect upon our past, tion that the American texts available were of limited utility
present and future. Are we players on the world stage? Have for their educational pursuits but with little idea of what to
we made a difference? Where have we been and where are put in their place. But even with increased insight, I still
we going? often have more questions than answers about the para-
Although I am privileged to engage in the critical analy- doxes in Asian social psychology, one of the most obvious
sis of Asian social psychology, I feel a particularly unsuit- ones being ‘How is it that I find myself the incoming
able choice for such an activity. Why? I cannot read, write President of the Asian Association of Social Psychology?’
or understand Chinese, the world’s most widely spoken More important than indulging myself in the contemplation
language. Nor can I speak Hindi, although half a billion of that unexpected turn of events, in the present paper, I will
other people can. My Asian language ability extends only to consider questions such as: what is Asian social psychol-
pasar Malay and not far beyond ini berapa? ‘How much?’ ogy, how is it evolving and where do we want to go?
and ini mahal! ‘That’s expensive!’. It would be politically I’ll start with a broad and inclusive definition of Asian
correct to refer to me as linguistically challenged and com- social psychology as social psychology that is about
pletely appropriate to acknowledge that my exposure to Asians, or social psychology done with, by or for Asians,
Asian social psychology is limited to readily accessible although I don’t believe that this gets at the core of Asian
English publications and the occasional Chinese abstract social psychology, and I will refine the definition later in the
kindly translated by obliging graduate students. Conse- paper. This broad definition, however, allows me to trace
quently, my musings on Asian social psychology reflect a some of the historical developments and then to hone in on
limited perspective on the field and a narrow slice of the some examples of theory and research that I believe are at
psychological pie. the heart of Asian social psychology. This definition also
Having said that, they also reflect the thoughts and obser- permits me to include vagabonds like myself among Asian
vations of someone who has had the pleasure of 15 years of social psychologists.
academic work in Asia and a genuine desire to understand I have adopted complementary perspectives in my reflec-
tions on Asian social psychology: looking in and looking
Correspondence: Colleen Ward, School of Psychology, Centre out. This allows me to ‘peer into’ Asian social psychology
for Applied Cross-Cultural Research, Victoria University of Well- (from the vantage point of someone who is not truly an
ington, Wellington, New Zealand. Email: Colleen.Ward@ insider), but also to look outwards from Asia–Pacific to the
vuw.ac.nz rest of the world to contemplate Asian contributions to a
Paper presented at the Sixth Biennial Conference of the Asian global social psychology. ‘Looking in’ and ‘looking out’ I
Association of Social Psychology, 2–5 April, 2005, Wellington, observe many parallels between activities in Asian social
New Zealand. psychology and my excursions into feminist psychology
Received 2 April 2005; accepted 15 May 2006. from the mid-1970s to early 1990s. I also see some

© 2007 The Author

© 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd with the Asian Association of Social Psychology and the Japanese Group Dynamics Association
Asian social psychology 23

similarities in the patterns of development in cross-cultural available on the peoples of Asia. In short, more than half of
psychology, where I have situated myself over the last the world’s population was invisible in the international
quarter of a century. These insights come from positioning arena of psychological research.
oneself and one’s scholarly voice as ‘the other’ in an inter- As is often the case under these conditions, the first wave
national arena that is dominated by American experimental of research involves adding peoples to psychology. Female
social psychology, underpinned by its individualist assump- psychologists added women, and Asian psychologists
tions, hard core empiricism and the implicit belief that it is added other Asians. One context in which this occurred was
everyone else who has ‘culture’. But let’s begin at the the replication of ‘classic’ social psychological studies with
beginning . . . Asian participants. In a review of these Smith and Bond
It is reasonable to start from the position that in order for (1998) tell us that there is at least some evidence of social
the world to understand Asian social psychology, Asians loafing found in India, Taiwan, Malaysia, Japan, and Thai-
must first understand themselves. This position emphasizes land, but that the preference for and effectiveness of demo-
the need to develop indigenous Asian psychologies. Of cratic leadership does not replicate in Hong Kong and
course, there is a debate as to what indigenous psychologies India. According to Bond (1988, p. 9), the replication and
are and are not, and many would argue that by their very external validation of psychological constructs across cul-
nature the boundaries of indigenous psychologies are nec- tural boundaries have been viewed with interest by Ameri-
essarily blurry. Nevertheless, I turn to the late Virgilio can psychologists, who welcome the ‘ready extensions of
Enriquez (1990a, b) of the Philippines for guidance on the the known into the perplexing.’
process and outcomes of indigenizing psychology. Occasionally, meta-analyses of replications have been
Enriquez emphasized that indigenous psychologies undertaken. For example, Bond and Smith’s (1996) exami-
understand behaviour and experience from an indigenous nation of the Asch paradigm reported that the averaged
perspective. He recognized and distinguished the processes effect size for the conformity effect appears larger in Japan
of indigenization from within and indigenization from (1.42) and Hong Kong (1.93) than in the USA (0.90) and in
without. The first approach starts within a culture and from Asch’s own studies (1.16). More commonly, however,
the outset attempts to understand that culture in its own social psychological research engaged in rather unsophis-
terms, including the appropriate selection of topics for ticated comparisons between Asian and non-Asian samples
study, theory-building and even the methodological tools from which rather simplistic, if not completely erroneous,
used for psychological investigations. The second approach conclusions were drawn. East Asians are more external in
relies on the importation and alteration of models and theo- their locus of control orientation; East Asians have lower
ries from other cultures. Both processes are alive and well self-esteem; and East Asians have a weaker need for
in contemporary Asian social psychology and will be used achievement.
as the organizing principle of this paper. I also draw inspi- Early replication studies and naïve intergroup compari-
ration from David Ho’s (1990) dialogue between Dr East sons are limited on both methodological and conceptual
and Dr West on the indigenization of psychology. But grounds. While it may be reassuring if a ‘classic’ psycho-
before commenting on contemporary movements in Asian logical phenomenon is replicated with Asian samples,
social psychology, a brief mention will be made of its failure to replicate is almost uninterpretable. The same criti-
prologue. This is not to suggest that firm dates can be cism applies to naïve cross-cultural comparisons where the
applied to distinguish early and later versions of social probability of finding a difference is high and the probabil-
psychology in Asia, to imply that the developments neces- ity of explaining it is low without good theory and appro-
sarily have occurred in a systematic, linear fashion or at the priate research design.
same rate across various Asian countries. Rather I point out But there are wider and, dare I say, political issues that
important aspects of earlier research that were widely emerge from just ‘adding Asians’ to psychological
apparent before today’s more sophisticated approaches to research. The first is that Americans become the implicit
Asian social psychology emerged. yardstick against which others are measured. The second
relates to lack of regard for the fundamental relevance of
the constructs that are uncritically exported for the purposes
Asian social psychology: Looking back of external validation or comparison. This concern was
articulated by Virgilio Enriquez (1990b, p. 211) who noted
Dr West states: ‘It seems to me that we need to build up a that ‘A growing number of social scientists have been wary
body of knowledge about Asians to start with. . . .’ (Ho, of the inappropriateness or even patent inapplicability of
1990, p. 140). Western models in the Third World setting’ (p. 211).
Part of the concern for relevance arises from the pure-
One of the earliest problems confronted by Asian social applied distinction in psychology. I remember my own
psychologists was the minimal amount of information astonishment in 1979 when I joined the Science University

© 2007 The Author

© 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd with the Asian Association of Social Psychology and the Japanese Group Dynamics Association
24 Colleen Ward

of Malaysia to find a topic of discussion in my first Aca- merely on the basis of their cultural origin. Indeed, he notes
demic Board meeting – ‘Are we now teaching psychology that uncritical rejection of Western theories is as dangerous
because it is relevant at this university or because we as their uncritical acceptance. While social psychological
merely have someone who can teach it?’ I now understand theories may be imported from North America and Western
the question. Although it didn’t take me the full quarter of Europe to Asian contexts, this should be done in a manner
a century to comprehend it, I certainly pondered it for more that reflects an indigenous perspective and addresses issues
than a couple of years. such as content relevance, test translation and modifica-
In many developing countries in Asia the utility of psy- tions, and theoretical appropriateness. This constitutes indi-
chology is largely evaluated in terms of its application. genization from without. Alternatively, indigenization may
What can psychology do for community development? To occur from within, with culture as the source rather than the
eradicate poverty? To increase literacy? And what do the target of indigenization. In these instances, identification
Asch paradigm or Milgrim’s obedience experiment have to of key constructs forms the basis of the process, moving
do with all of this? In 1982, the late Durganand Sinha towards their operationalization and examination by cultur-
(1982) contemplated these issues and suggested that psy- ally appropriate methods. Enriquez goes on to talk about
chology is suffering from a crisis of social relevance. He cross-indigenous perspectives, where indigenous psycholo-
argued that developing countries will not welcome - or gies from multiple sources are tested across cultures in a
even tolerate - research without the prospect of tangible movement towards a global psychology. This last approach
returns. He went further ‘to assert that most psychological will be considered in a later section. We will look first at
theories, concepts and data appear irrelevant as far as the examples of indigenization from without and then from
problems of national development are concerned’ (p. 373). within as a means of theory development and examine their
Despite these criticisms of the previous era, an important outcomes for understanding Asians in their own terms - as
benefit of ‘adding Asians’ to psychology has been to move a prelude to a global social psychology.
beyond the ‘invisible’Asian. The more optimistic may even
suggest that Asians can learn something about who they are
by learning about who they are not! But adding Asians to
Developments in theory
psychology is not sufficient - either for understanding the
psychology of Asian peoples or for raising wider awareness
Indigenization from without
about what would be involved in achieving a global social
psychology. While there are residual examples of the Developments in research on the classic self-serving bias in
add-on approach in Asian social psychology even today, we Asian societies provide an excellent example of indigeniz-
have largely moved beyond this to understand Asians in ing theory from without. Early comparative research gave
their own terms and to highlight the topics of inquiry that little support to the presence of a self-serving bias in Asian
are most relevant and important to Asian societies. samples (e.g. Kashima & Triandis, 1986; Fletcher & Ward,
1988) at least when self-serving was defined in terms of
internal attributions for one’s positive or successful behav-
Asian social psychology: Looking in iours and external attributions for negative or unsuccessful
ones. These findings were complemented by discussions
Dr East replies: ‘Yes, but the body of knowledge would that contrasted self-enhancement biases found in Western
assume very different shapes and colors depending upon societies and self-effacement (or modesty) biases in East
whether we adopt perspectives indigenous to Asia or per- Asian cultures (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). Contemporary
spectives borrowed from the West’ (Ho, 1990, p. 140). research, however, is designed more for testing hypotheses
about the cultural differences in attributional patterns,
A discussion of current trends in Asian social rather than reconfirming the observations that Chinese,
psychology - a psychology that understands Asians in their Japanese and Koreans are less likely to engage in internal
own terms - involves reference to theory, measurement and attributions for successful behaviours than are North
application. A comprehensive review of the developments Americans. As can be observed in the 2003 special issue of
in Asian social psychology is beyond the scope of this the Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, the hypotheses
paper. Rather, I have selected examples within the field to have examined the importance of modesty versus the cen-
highlight the points I wish to make about relatively recent trality of others to account for these differences (Kurman,
developments. 2003), variations in bias as a function of public and private
The distinction made by Enriquez (1990b) of indigeni- conditions (Kudo & Numazaki, 2003) and direct and indi-
zation from within and indigenization from without forms a rect means of expression (Muramoto, 2003). At a higher
starting point for this discussion. Enriquez begins with the level of abstraction, a debate has been continuing as to
acknowledgment that theories should not be disregarded whether ‘self-enhancement’ biases are absent or largely

© 2007 The Author

© 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd with the Asian Association of Social Psychology and the Japanese Group Dynamics Association
Asian social psychology 25

attenuated in Asian societies or whether they are manifest & Kim, 1997) which connotes prestige, dignity, honour and
in different cultural forms. I favour the latter interpretation. reputation. More important to people of high status and
Indeed, almost 20 years ago, Fletcher and Ward (1988, p. regulated by social norms, chemyon is maintained by
234) noted: ‘Whether an attributional bias is self-serving or oneself and enhanced by others. It incorporates basic eti-
not will presumably depend upon the structure of the self quette, exchange rules and rules of propriety, particularly in
being served.’ formal and public settings. Interestingly, the notion of face-
Another example of indigenization from without comes works has permeated the Western literature, at least in the
in the form of research on the need for achievement in field of communication, where Ting-Toomey (2004) argues
Chinese cultures. Yu’s (1996) review of achievement moti- that all cultures engage in interactive processes to maintain
vation noted that McClelland’s theory and measures were and negotiate face, but that the cultural dimensions of vari-
widely imported for use in Taiwan; however, his framework ability, particularly individualism-collectivism and power
was criticized by Yang and Yu (1988, cited in Yu, 1996) distance, influence the preference for self-versus-other
who noted that the theory failed to take cultural context into facework. Furthermore, these preferences are manifest in
account. However, in keeping with Enriquez’s caution making requests, gaining compliance, offering apologies
about uncritically rejecting Western theories, a new dimen- and complements, making decisions, showing politeness
sion was added, and the notion of a Social-Oriented and dealing with conflicts.
Achievement Motivation (SOAM) beyond the Individual- Another example is found in theory and research on
Oriented Achievement Motivation (IOAM) took shape. It amae, introduced in Doi’s (1973) pioneering book and fol-
was argued that the two domains are present in Chinese lowed with interest by Western and Japanese researchers.
societies, but they are independent and vary in intensity. Yamaguchi (2004) has done much to advance theorizing on
Research supports the orthogonal nature of the two this topic with his discussion of amae as ‘the presumption
domains and suggests that the close relationship between on others for indulgence and acceptance’ (p. 29). He iden-
the need for face, social skills and SOAM reveals the tified additional key features of amae, supported by a test of
unique characteristics of Chinese achievement motivation. ecological validity, including the presumed acceptance of
It is also interesting to note in light of the previous discus- an inappropriate request or behaviour. A key difference in
sion that in the case of SOAM, success leads to causal Yamaguchi’s theorizing, however, is the conceptualization
attributions that are socially oriented, such as the interven- of amae as a control strategy, rather than a dependence
tion of a significant other, maintenance of good social rela- response, and an elaboration of various forms of secondary
tions, collective efforts and yuan, compared to IOAM control, which have been examined more widely by Asian
which is linked to causal attributions that emphasize an scholars, including Chang (Chang, Chua, & Toh, 1997). In
individual orientation, including ability and effort (Yu, his own words: ‘With successful amae, less powerful
1996). people can exert control over their environment without
disrupting personal harmony’ (p. 31).
Indigenization from within
Indigenous measurements and methods
Asian scholars are noted internationally for their work in
indigenous psychology (Kim & Berry, 1993) and, accord- Both indigenizing from within and indigenizing from
ing to Leung (2007, this issue of the Journal, pp. 8–15), without rely upon the availability of reliable and valid mea-
they are heavily cited in this arena. This section highlights sures to assess the constructs of interest, and a number of
selected theory and research on indigenous constructs as Asian scholars have concentrated on the construction and
examples of indigenizing Asian social psychology from validation of culturally appropriate measures. Indigenizing
within. Examples include work on face (mientze, chemyon, from without has raised issues about the universality of the
taimien) and amae, related to dependence and attachment. Big Five personality dimensions, in particular, the robust-
Hwang (1987) proposed a theory of Chinese social ness of the Openness factor for Chinese populations
behaviour, emphasizing social interactions in terms of face (McCrae, Costa, & Yik, 1996). But even with an impressive
(mientze) and favor (ren qing). Based on Confucian ethics, performance of the NEO-PI across Asian cultures, the ques-
he conceptualized dyadic interactions in terms of a ‘peti- tion remains as to whether these five factors adequately tap
tioner’ and a resource allocator with emphasis on guanxi core personality domains of Chinese. Wang, Hong, and
(relationships). An important aspect of his theory concerns Zhou (2005) have noted that: (i) the structures of adjectives
the Chinese ‘other orientation’, including persistent used to describe personality in English and Chinese are
concern about the opinion of others, strong conformity, significantly different; and (ii) the absolute number of per-
concern about social norms and high regard for reputation, sonality adjectives is fewer in Chinese than English. They
all relating to the notion of face. Similar work has arisen in have also argued that lexical studies suggest that Chinese
Korea with respect to the construct of chemyon (Choi, Kim personality consists of seven, rather than five, factors.

© 2007 The Author

© 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd with the Asian Association of Social Psychology and the Japanese Group Dynamics Association
26 Colleen Ward

These include extraversion, kindness, behaviour styles (e.g. Makakapwa (Concern for Others) contains the largest
self-constraint, composure), talents (e.g. persistence, deci- number of terms in the PSRF but does not appear to be
siveness), emotionality, human relations (e.g. warmth, gen- unique to the Philippines.
erosity) and ways of life (e.g. ambitiousness). While the cultural appropriateness of measurements has
The structure and assessment of the Chinese personality been discussed at length in Asian social psychology as well
have also been considered by Cheung et al. (1996) in their as in the cross-cultural arena more broadly, indigenous
construction of the Chinese Personality Assessment Inven- methods, on the whole, have received less attention. The
tory (CPAI). The researchers started emically and derived more obvious limitations of conventional methods, such as
indigenous constructs based on Chinese literature, person- the use of paper and pencil surveys with illiterate respon-
ality research on Chinese people, and self-descriptions by dents, have been pointed out. In rare instances, however,
Chinese themselves. This resulted in the construction of a Asian researchers have discussed the development and
22-scale personality assessment inventory with four higher refinement of indigenous Asian methods. An exception to
order factors: Dependability, Interpersonal Relatedness, this trend is found in the work of Rogelia Pe-Pua (1990)
Social Potency, and Individualism. The Interpersonal who has described the use of pagtatanong-tanong or asking
Relationships factor particularly is largely defined by questions in research with rural Filipino research partici-
indigenous constructs including Harmony, Ren Qing pants. The method is qualitative in nature and resembles
(relationship orientation), Face, Thrift, Flexibility and participant observation research, where the nature and
Modernization. In later research, the CPAI was merged course of the investigation are mutually determined by the
with the NEO, and in joint factor analysis Relationship researcher and the participants, who share the emerging
Orientation emerged as distinct from the Big Five dimen- knowledge in an ethically and socially responsible manner.
sions. More recently, the CPAI has been examined with
Chinese and Euro-Americans to examine the cultural
Indigenous applications
uniqueness of this dimension (Lin & Church, 2004), exem-
plifying the cross-indigenous approach advocated by A key feature of Asian social psychology is its emphasis on
Enriquez to achieve a global psychology. Lin and Church application. Sinha and Kao’s (1988) book Social Values
(2004) suggested that the dimension was not culturally and Development: Asian Perspectives offered a glimpse of
unique but more salient in or characteristic of those who applied psychology across Asia, including China, India,
retain or identify with traditional Chinese cultures (see Bangladesh, Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, the Philippines,
Leung (2007, this issue of the Journal, pp. 8–15) for global Malaysia, Indonesia, Hong Kong, and Japan. Of course,
implications). today, the emphasis on application is not equally strong
Filipino psychologists are also well known for their work across all Asian nations; rather, it has been of primary
on indigenous personality traits and measures. Ortega and importance in the developing countries of Asia. Both India
Guanzon-Lapena (1997) noted that more than 200 indig- and the Philippines have a rich tradition of social psycho-
enous measures have been developed in the Philippines, logical theory and research geared towards national devel-
although often unpublished and not widely available. opment (Enriquez, 1993; Sinha, 1993). Indeed, Enriquez
Perhaps best known in the international arena is the exem- (1990a) identified social awareness and involvement as dic-
plary work by Church and Katigbak (2000) who used mul- tated by the objective analysis of social issues and problems
tiple emic resources in the construction of their indigenous as one of four core features of the psychological movement
instruments. These included a series of studies developing a in the Philippines. The same can be said to a lesser extent
taxonomy of trait adjectives for Tagalog; lexically based for Malaysia and Indonesia. For example, the proceedings
studies of the Filipino personality structure; and examina- of the Third Asian Regional Conference of the International
tion of informants’ conceptions of healthy and unhealthy Association for Cross-cultural Psychology held in Malaysia
personality traits. They then developed and refined an were published in 1990 under the title of Psychology and
inventory that measured the indigenous dimensions derived Socio-economic Development. The content of the recent
and combined approaches testing their indigenous model IACCP proceedings from Indonesia also reflects a notable
and the five-factor model in both American and Filipino emphasis on applied topics, including work by Indonesian
samples. The indigenous scale (Philippine Student authors.
Research Form; PSRF) identified six dimensions: Broad- In the forward to Misra’s (1990) Applied Social Psychol-
mindedness, Responsibility, Social Potency, Concern for ogy in India he noted that the traditional practice of psy-
Others, Affective Well-being, and Emotional Control. chology in India has ‘distracted the discipline from a larger
Church and Katigbak (2000) found considerable overlap social purpose’. Emphasis in his book is placed on positive
between the NEO and the indigenous measure, although social change, and consideration is given to topics such as
there was some suggestion that the salience and importance health, poverty, social violence, national identity, social
of the domains vary across cultures. For example, mobility, marginalization, crowding, population research,

© 2007 The Author

© 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd with the Asian Association of Social Psychology and the Japanese Group Dynamics Association
Asian social psychology 27

and the psychology of deprivation. Misra argued that 2001; Cheung, Cheung, Leung, Ward, & Leong, 2003; Lin
studies in areas such as these demonstrate the commitment & Church, 2004). Most studies of this sort, however, are
of Indian psychologists to conducting socially relevant more modest. Included among these are an examination of
research. The third volume of Pandey’s (2004) Psychology guan in Hong Kong, USA and Pakistan (Stewart, Bond,
in India Revisited: Developments in the Discipline shares Kennard, Ho, & Zaman, 2002), a look at kiasu in Sin-
this emphasis on the application of psychology to meeting gapore and Australia (Ho, Munro, & Carr, 1997), and face
national needs and priorities, including discussions of in conflict resolution in China, Taiwan and the USA (Ting-
poverty, intergroup relations and the environment. Toomey et al., 1991).
The Asian Journal of Social Psychology has been respon- Asian peoples have also been represented in international
sive to the demand for applied psychology, and one of its and cross-cultural research that both allows the positioning
special issues has been devoted to coping with Severe Acute of several cultures along variables of interest and addresses
Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). A glance at our 2005 con- fundamental questions about the dimensions of cultural
ference programme also reflects a strong emphasis on variability in norms, values and beliefs. Obvious examples
applied social psychological research: literacy, education of this include Hofstede’s (1980) and Schwartz’s (1992)
and academic achievement; science, technology and research on values and Gelfand’s work in progress on cul-
society; Asian virtual culture on the Internet; community tural looseness-tightness norms. Some of these interna-
psychology, including volunteerism; political psychology tional initiatives have originated in Asia with Leung and
and peace keeping. Bond’s work on social axioms being an excellent example
of research that is making a significant impact in the inter-
national psychological literature (Leung et al., 2002; Bond
Asian social psychology: Looking out et al., 2004). Cross-indigenization and the emergence of a
global social psychology are still distant goals, but a sig-
Cross-indigenization and movement to a nificant movement in this direction has come from the
global psychology Asian region.

Dr West: ‘Cross-fertilization, leading to creative synthesis, Politics and power in the global arena
of native and foreign ideas, can only be of benefit to science’
(Ho, 1990, p. 146). Dr East: ‘Among social scientists it is the psychologist who
appears to be most encapsulated in his intellectual horizons
Enriquez (1990b) discussed the development of a global by provincialism and attendant cultural myopia. I call atten-
psychology through ‘cross-indigenization’, where ‘differ- tion to the highly imbalanced flow of information between
ent cultures of the world are tapped as sources of cultural Western and Asian psychologists’ (Ho, 1990, p. 153).
knowledge’ (p. 215). More specifically, psychologies that
have been indigenously developed from within may be There are numerous examples of Asian social psychology
placed on the world stage, transported and tested in other moving into the international arena with significant poten-
cultural contexts. Of course, this has been occurring for tial for making major contributions to a global social
decades with the export of indigenous American psychol- psychology. But the ultimate success in achieving this
ogy to other countries, but Enriquez makes the point that objective rests on a shared goal and visioning of a global
parallel processes should be occurring on a global basis. social psychology and the awareness and acceptance of
Asian social psychologists and personality theorists Asian initiatives. Asia fares relatively well in the interna-
have been significant contributors to the development of tional arena of psychologists who concern themselves with
this movement. Michael Bond’s work with the Chinese cultural issues (Leung, 2007, this issue of the Journal, pp.
Culture Connection (1987) is an excellent example where 8–15). Indeed, as early as 1982, Sinha argued that outside
Chinese values were transported and tested across 22 of the USA, Asia was making the most significant contri-
countries, value dimensions extracted and compared with butions to cross-cultural psychology in the English-
Hofstede’s (1980) four dimensions of cultural variability. speaking world. Furthermore, recent analysis of the
Hofstede (2007, this issue of the Journal, pp. 16–21) has publications of the Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology
commented on the impact of this ‘decentered’ research on has shown that the journal’s content has moved more
his own theorizing and the emergence of a fifth universal towards social psychology than any other domain (Brouw-
dimension of national cultures: ‘long-term versus short- ers, Van Hemert, Breugelmans, & Van de Vijver, 2004).
term orientation’. More recently, the English version of the When the aspirations towards a global psychology and the
Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory by Cheung recognition of Asian initiatives are considered in the
et al. (1996) has been exported to Singapore and the USA context of the dominant American base in social psychol-
as well as compared to the NEO’s Big Five (Cheung et al., ogy, however, the prospects are not as rosy.

© 2007 The Author

© 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd with the Asian Association of Social Psychology and the Japanese Group Dynamics Association
28 Colleen Ward

Certainly it is true that some Asian social psychologists chology of the West, Asian social psychology seems to be
publish in APA outlets, and a number of these are relatively more likely take into account the influence of social context
highly cited (Leung, 2007, this issue of the Journal, pp. on behavior, pay more attention to socially relevant issues,
8–15), but when one looks at the publications as a whole, and to adopt more diverse research methodologies.’ I
Asian social psychology on the American scene is still next applaud this diversity. It reflects the needs and priorities of
to invisible. Even taking a broad and inclusive perspective Asian peoples. Yet, I fear that the social psychology of
on Asian social psychology, our content analysis of Journal Asian peoples in the international arena may be narrowing
of Personality and Social Psychology from 1995 to 2004 to the American lab-based experimental paradigm where
revealed that 4.1% of the research published included Asian culture becomes just one more quasi independent variable.
participants and 7.4% included Asian authors.1 There are two philosophical and political problems with
Given my own research interests, I note with some this trend. First, I am concerned that Asians (particularly
amusement that acculturation, the changes resulting from the Chinese and Japanese who participating in comparative
continuous first-hand intercultural contact, is largely research) will now be cast into the role of ‘other’. No doubt
responsible for putting Asian social psychology on the the understanding of the social psychology of Asian
American map. More specifically, bright and talented Asian peoples is more sophisticated now than 20 years ago when
graduate students have enlightened and inspired North ‘other’ or different also implied inferiority in both cultural
American academics, resulting in a (re) discovery of culture and gender psychology. Nonetheless, the current trend of
and the widening of its conceptualization beyond minority comparing Asians with North Americans and classifying
groups in the USA. The classic and highly cited paper by them in terms of opposites mirrors the latter’s inclination
Markus and Kitayama (1991) is an excellent example of towards dualistic thought, the distinction of a and b, of this
this process. My contention is even more clearly borne out and that, of East and West, of individualism and collectiv-
in the introduction to Nisbett’s (2003) book The Geography ism. Three potential consequences of this approach deserve
of Thought. Nisbett states: ‘A few years back, a brilliant further consideration. First, such dichotomous taxonomies,
student from China began to work with me on questions of while abounding in Western intellectual thought, may not
social psychology and reasoning. One day early in our represent an Asian perspective on the relationship between
acquaintance he said, “You know the difference between Eastern and Western social psychology and their contribu-
you and me is that I think the world is a circle, and you tions to a global psychology (Nisbett, 2003). Second, the
think it’s a line” ’(p. xiii). Nisbett then goes on to explain question arises as to whether Asians can enter the holy
how he gave this student an attentive hearing, embarked sanctum of American social psychology without being
upon readings in comparative literature from philosophers, compared to Americans. Can they be understood in their
historians and anthropologists and found their ‘assertions to own terms? Third and relatedly, will American psychology
be revolutionary in their implications’. These ‘revolution- always remain the implicit yardstick against which other
ary assertions’, although almost certainly known all along psychologies are measured?
by Kaiping Peng, launched a new programme of interna- The second philosophical and political issue concerns
tional research across the USA, Korea and China. the question ‘who can do Asian social psychology?’ North
Bits and pieces of Asian social psychology are now American psychologists have little hesitation to include
finding their way into mainstream American journals. For Asian research participants in their studies and to interpret
example, discussion of self-serving biases in Asian samples their findings with confidence. Of course, the assumptions
has reached Psychological Bulletin (Mezulis, Abramson, underlying logical positivism that guide American social
Hyde, & Hankin 2004) and the Journal of Personality and psychology suggest that anyone can objectively and com-
Social Psychology where the cultural construction of the petently research anyone else, so for many, the ‘who’ ques-
self-enhancement bias has been considered (Heine & tion may seem superfluous. To date, the Asian Journal of
Lehman, 1997). In a number of instances, the publications Social Psychology has consciously adopted an inclusive
include multicultural and multinational researchers, such as response to the question with 36% of its publications
Sedikides, Gaertner and Toguchi’s (2003) study that found authored by multicultural research teams and 14% authored
Americans and independents self-enhance on individualis- exclusively by Western scholars.2 Some investigators,
tic attributes and Japanese and interdependents self- however, emphasize the cultural context as influencing the
enhance on collectivist attributes. questions we ask and the solutions we reach, and many
But the appearance of social psychological phenomena believe it is an important question as to whether non-Asians
in Asia in American journals has both costs and benefits. As can really do Asian social psychology.
the social psychology of Asian peoples enters the global I struggled with a similar question some 20 years
arena via American social psychology, it takes a form and ago - can men do feminist psychology? The answer to both
shape that may or may not reflect its Asian essence. Indeed, questions, of course, depends upon how you define Asian
Leung (2000, p. iii) noted that: ‘Compared to social psy- social psychology or feminist psychology. My previous

© 2007 The Author

© 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd with the Asian Association of Social Psychology and the Japanese Group Dynamics Association
Asian social psychology 29

struggle culminated in the compromise position - men can chology? Should Asian psychologists prioritize regional
do feminist psychology and non-Asians can do Asian social needs over contributions to a global psychology? Must
psychology, but in the end and with all other things being Asians understand themselves first before effort is
equal, they are not likely to do it as well as women and expended in getting the West to understand the majority of
Asians, respectively. Of course, the ‘outsiders’ can apply the world’s population? Or are Asian social psychologists
scientific methodology to the study of women and Asian ultimately more interested in shaping and moulding a
peoples, and they can have an intellectual appreciation of global social psychology? These are key questions.
core issues and the “others’” perspective, but in the end, they Regional and global goals need not be mutually exclu-
often lack the insight and intuitive understanding of behav- sive, but their relative emphasis has implications for the
iour borne out of ‘living the life’ in another reality. Conse- dissemination of knowledge and the visibility of Asian
quently, although the experimental component of doing social psychology. If Asian social psychologists place pri-
research with women or Asian peoples may be sharp and ority on issues of regional importance - understanding
sophisticated, the experiential component is lacking and, in Asians in their own terms, the development of indigen-
the end, both contribute to the research endeavour and its ous psychologies, social action research for a better
outcomes. Indeed, we all undertake research through tinted society - their work will advance the development of Asian
lenses that may facilitate or impede the effective and mean- social psychology, but their theories and research are likely
ingful investigation of psychological phenomena (Hofstede, to have limited impact in the international arena. On the
2007, this issue of the Journal, pp. 16–21). My fear is now other hand, if Asian social psychologists can ‘spin’ their
that American psychologists have discovered Asian social research in a way that it not only addresses regional issues
psychology, they are going to instruct Asians how to do it. of concern, but also demonstrates its implications for a
global psychology, its visibility will be enhanced markedly.
In short, cross-indigenization originating from Asian rather
Evaluating Asian social psychology: than Western perspectives can fulfil both goals.
Looking forward To date, the progress of Asian social psychology has been
relatively modest in the larger international arena, and it still
Dr West: Neither (Asian or Western conceptualizations) falls short of Kim’s (2000) aspiration of becoming a third
when taken alone, is capable of yielding a complete account force in psychology. Nevertheless, I suspect it will become
of the total complexity of psychological phenomena (p. increasingly visible, facilitated by the growth of cross-
158). cultural psychology more broadly and the greater emphasis
on theory testing and the careful selection of research par-
The Asian Association of Social Psychology set three goals ticipants from within the discipline (Brouwers et al., 2004).
for itself when it was launched in 1995: (i) to promote the Its visibility will also be affected by socio-political factors in
development of social psychological research and its appli- the ‘real world’ outside of academia. In short, the future
cation in Asia-Pacific; (ii) to provide opportunities for stu- international success of Asian social psychology is likely to
dents to pursue education and careers in social psychology; be fuelled, at least in part, by the practical need to know.
and (iii) to serve as an academic forum for social psycholo- There are increasing pressures for us to understand and
gists in Asia-Pacific. I believe these goals have been interact effectively with each other, and Asian social psy-
achieved many times over. A decade of the Asian Journal of chology can contribute to meeting this demand.
Social Psychology, six international conferences, and four Acknowledging that Asian social psychology is likely to
volumes of Progress in Asian Social Psychology attest to develop a stronger presence in the international arena, the
the vibrancy in the field. Research has become more sophis- question that follows is ‘How should Asian social psychol-
ticated in terms of indigenization and application. Theories ogy make its presence felt?’ Greater visibility could occur
have been refined; multi-method approaches have been through the narrowing of the scope of Asian social psychol-
adopted. Significant progress has undoubtedly been made ogy and the movement towards becoming a subset of
in the regional development of Asian social psychology - a American experimental social psychology; alternatively,
social psychology that understands Asians in their own greater visibility could reflect genuine cross-indigenization
terms, prioritizes culturally relevant topics and theories, and an evolution of a global social psychology.
adopts culturally appropriate methods and measures, and The former option is indicative of the American coloni-
fosters applied research that is socially relevant. zation of psychology and reflective of a clash between
So where to in the future? It seems to me that intertwined political and intellectual forces. It has its utility, but is
issues bearing on future developments relate to the consum- ultimately limited in what it can deliver. The latter option
ers of Asian social psychology and the ultimate goal of has far greater potential for the attainment of a truly global
Asian social psychologists. Who needs to understand social psychology, even though a truly global psychology is
Asians? Who is the target audience for Asian social psy- a very distant goal.

© 2007 The Author

© 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd with the Asian Association of Social Psychology and the Japanese Group Dynamics Association
30 Colleen Ward

Along these lines, I once heard a well-known cross- Cheung, F. M., Leung, K., Zhang, J., et al. (2001). Indigenous
cultural psychologist say that the major goal of a cross- Chinese personality constructs: Is the five factor model com-
cultural psychologist should be ‘to do himself out of a plete? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 407–433.
job.’3 What he meant was that a psychology that reflects a Cheung, F. M., Cheung, S. F., Leung, K., Ward, C. & Leong, F.
(2003). The English version of the Chinese Personality Assess-
genuine and integrated understanding of the cultural influ-
ment Inventory. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34,
ences on human behaviour (including the human behav-
433–452.
iour of psychologists) would not need a discipline area Chinese Culture Connection. (1987). Chinese values and the
labelled ‘cross-cultural’. Culture would already be em- search for culture-free dimensions of culture. Journal of Cross-
bedded in our understanding of human behaviour. One Cultural Psychology, 18, 143–164.
might make similar statements about Asian social psy- Choi, S.-C., Kim, U. & Kim, D.-I. D. (1997). Multi-faceted analy-
chology. The historical trends of adding Asians to psy- ses of chemyon (‘social face’): An indigenous Korean perspec-
chology and developing Asian theories, methods and tive. In: K. Leung, U. Kim, S. Yamaguchi & Y. Kashima, eds.
measures have clearly demonstrated the need for a cultur- Progress in Asian Social Psychology, Vol. 1, pp. 3–22. Sin-
ally sensitive psychology. If we can continue to advance gapore: John Wiley.
in these areas and integrate Asian theory and research into Church, A. T. & Katigbak, M. S. (2000). Filipino Personality:
Indigenous and Cross-Cultural Studies. Manila: De La Salle
our discipline more broadly, Asian social psychology, as
University Press.
such, may ultimately diminish in significance. This is
Doi, T. (1973). The Anatomy of Dependence. Tokyo: Kodansha.
something we need to consider carefully for both the Enriquez, V. G. (1990a). Towards a liberation psychology. In: V.
future of Asian social psychology and the attainment of a G. Enriquez, ed. Indigenous Psychology: A Book of Readings,
truly global social psychology. pp. 123–136. Quezon City, the Philippines: Philippine Psychol-
ogy Research and Training House.
Enriquez, V. G. (1990b). Cross-indigenous methods and perspec-
End notes tives. In: V. G. Enriquez, ed. Indigenous Psychology: A Book of
Readings, pp. 210–230. Quezon City, the Philippines: Philip-
1. Content analysis was based on abstracts, titles and author list. pine Psychology Research and Training House.
2. Content analysis did not include special issues or editorial Enriquez, V. G. (1993). Developing a Filipino psychology. In: U.
comments. Kim & J. W. Berry, eds. Indigenous Psychologies: Research
3. I attribute these words, or something to that effect, to Walter J. and Experience in Cultural Context, pp. 152–169. Newbury
Lonner. I am indebted to C.Y. Chiu, who reviewed an earlier Park, CA: Sage.
version of this paper. His comments prompted me to revive this Fletcher, G. J. O. & Ward, C. (1988). Attribution theory and
recollection. processes: A cross-cultural perspective. In: M. H. Bond, ed. The
Cross-Cultural Challenge to Social Psychology, pp. 230–244.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
References Heine, S. J. & Lehman, S. R. (1997). The cultural construction
of self enhancement: Examination of group serving biases.
Bond, M. H. (1988). Introduction. In: M. H. Bond, ed. The Cross- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1268–
Cultural Challenge to Social Psychology, pp. 9–13. Newbury 1283.
Park, CA: Sage. Ho, D. F. Y. (1990). Asian psychology: An East-West Dialogue on
Bond, R. A. & Smith, P. B. (1996). Culture and conformity: A Indigenization. In: V. G. Enriquez, ed. Indigenous Psychology:
meta-analysis of studies using the Asch line judgment task. A Book of Readings, pp. 137–172. Quezon City, the Philippines:
Psychological Bulletin, 119, 111–137. Philippine Psychology Research and Training House.
Bond, M. H., Leung, K., Au, A. et al. (2004). Culture-level Ho, S. W., Munro, D. & Carr, S. C. (1997). Kiasuism across
dimensions of social axioms and their correlates across 41 cultures: Singapore and Australia. In: J. C. Lasry, J. G. Adair &
cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 548–570. K. L. Dion, eds. Latest Contributions to Cross-Cultural Psy-
Brouwers, S. A., Van Hemert, D. A., Breugelmans, S. M. & Van chology, pp. 212–227. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.
de Vijver, F. J. R. (2004). A historical analysis of empirical Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s Consequences: International Dif-
studies published in the Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology. ferences in Work Related Values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 251–262. Hofstede, G. (2007). A European in Asia. Asian Journal of Social
Chang, W. C., Chua, W. L. & Toh, Y. (1997). The concept of Psychology, 10, 16–21.
psychological control in the Asian context. In: K. Leung, U. Hwang, K. K. (1987). Face and favor: The Chinese power game.
Kim, S. Yamaguchi & Y. Kashima, eds. Progress in Asian American Journal of Sociology, 92, 944–974.
Social Psychology, Vol. 1, pp. 95–118. Singapore: John Wiley. Kashima, Y. & Triandis, H. C. (1986). The self-serving bias in
Cheung, F. M., Leung, K., Fan, R. M., Song, W., Zhang, J. X. & attributions as a coping strategy: A cross-cultural study. Journal
Zhang, J. P. (1996). Development of the Chinese Personality of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 17, 83–97.
Assessment Inventory. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Kim, U. (2000). Outgoing editor’s preface. Asian Journal of
27, 181–199. Social Psychology, 3, i–ii.

© 2007 The Author

© 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd with the Asian Association of Social Psychology and the Japanese Group Dynamics Association
Asian social psychology 31

Kim, U. & Berry, J. W., eds. (1993). Indigenous Psychologies: Pandey, J. (2004). Psychology in India Revisited: Developments
Research and Experience in Cultural Context. Newbury Park, in the Discipline. New Delhi: Sage.
CA: Sage. Pe-Pua, R. (1990). Pagtatanong-tanong: A method for cross-
Kudo, E. & Numazaki, M. (2003). Explicit and direct self-serving cultural research. In: V. G. Enriquez, ed. Indigenous Psychol-
bias in Japan: Re-examination of self-serving bias for success ogy: A Book of Readings, pp. 231–249. Quezon City, the
and failure. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34, 511–521. Philippines: Philippine Psychology Research and Training
Kurman, J. (2003). Why is self-enhancement low in certain col- House.
lectivist cultures? An investigation of competing explanations. Schwartz, S. (1992). The universal content and structure of values:
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34, 496–510. Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In: M.
Leung, K. (2000). Incoming editor’s preface. Asian Journal of P. Zanna, ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,
Social Psychology, 3, iii–iv. Vol. 25, pp. 1–65. New York: Academic Press.
Leung, K. (2007). Asian social psychology: Achievements, Sedikides, C., Gaertner, L. & Toguchi, Y. (2003). Pan-cultural
threats, and opportunities. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, self-enhancement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
10, 8–15. ogy, 84, 60–79.
Leung, K., Bond, M. H., Reimel de Carrasquel, S., et al. (2002). Sinha, D. (1982). What is relevant in cross-cultural psychology?
Social axioms: The search for universal dimensions of general In: R. Rath, H. S. Asthana, D. Sinha & J. B. H. Sinha, eds.
beliefs about how the world functions. Journal of Cross- Diversity and Unity in Cross-Cultural Psychology, pp. 352–
Cultural Psychology, 33, 286–302. 359. Lisse, the Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Lin, E. J.-L. & Church, A. T. (2004). Are indigenous Chinese Sinha, D. (1993). Indigenization of psychology in India and its
personality dimensions culture specific? An investigation of the relevance. In: U. Kim & J. W. Berry, eds. Indigenous Psycholo-
Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory in Chinese Ameri- gies: Research and Experience in Cultural Context, pp. 30–43.
can and European American samples. Journal of Cross- Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Cultural Psychology, 35, 586–605. Sinha, D. & Kao, H. S. R. (1988). Social Values and Development:
McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T. Jr & Yik, M. S. M. (1996). Universal Asian Perspectives. New Delhi: Sage.
aspects of the Chinese personality structure. In: M. H. Bond, ed. Smith, P. B. & Bond, M. H. (1998). Social Psychology Across
The Handbook of Chinese Psychology, pp. 189–207. Hong Cultures, 2nd edn. London: Prentice Hall.
Kong: Oxford University Press. Stewart, S. M., Bond, M. H., Kennard, B. D., Ho, L. M. & Zaman,
Markus, H. & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Impli- R. M. (2002). Does the Chinese construct of guan export to the
cations for cognition, emotion and motivation. Psychological West? International Journal of Psychology, 37, 74–82.
Review, 98, 224–253. Ting-Toomey, S. (2004). Translating conflict face-negotiation
Mezulis, A. H., Abramson, L. Y., Hyde, J. & Hankin, B. L. theory into practice. In: D. Landis, J. M. Bennett & M. J.
(2004). Is there a universal positivity bias in attributions? A Bennett, eds. Handbook of Intercultural Training, 3rd edn, pp.
meta-analytic review of individual, developmental and cultural 219–248. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
differences in self-serving attributional bias. Psychological Ting-Toomey, S., Gao, G., Trubisky, P., et al. (1991). Culture,
Bulletin, 130, 711–747. face maintenance and styles of handling interpersonal conflict:
Misra, G., ed. (1990). Applied Social Psychology in India. New A study in five cultures. Journal of Conflict Management, 2,
Delhi: Sage. 275–296.
Muramoto, Y. (2003). An indirect self-enhancement in relation- Wang, D., Hong, C. & Zhou. C. (2005). Measuring the personality
ship among Japanese. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, of Chinese: QZPS versus NEO PI-R. Asian Journal of Social
34, 552–567. Psychology, 8, 97–122.
Nisbett, R. E. (2003). The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Yamaguchi, S. (2004). Further clarifications of the concept of
Westerners Think Differently and Why. New York: The Free amae in relation to dependence and attachment. Human Devel-
Press. opment, 47, 28–33.
Ortega, S. & Guanzon-Lapena, M. A. (1997). Locally Developed Yu, A.-B. (1996). Ultimate life concerns, self and Chinese
Psychological Tests: A Critical Review. Paper presented at the achievement motivation. In: M. H. Bond, ed. The Handbook of
19th annual scientific meeting of the National Academy of Chinese Psychology, pp. 247–262. Hong Kong: Oxford Uni-
Science and Technology, Bicutan, Manila. versity Press.

© 2007 The Author

© 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd with the Asian Association of Social Psychology and the Japanese Group Dynamics Association