Pancultural self-enhancement reloaded: a meta-analytic reply to Heine (2005).
C. Sedikides, L. Gaertner, and Y. Toguchi (2003) reported findings favoring the universality of self-enhancement. S. J. Heine (2005) challenged the authors' research on evidential and logical grounds. In response, the authors carried out 2 meta-analytic investigations. The results backed the C. Sedikides et al. (2003) theory and findings. Both Westerners and Easterners self-enhanced tactically. Westerners self-enhanced on attributes relevant to the cultural ideal of individualism, whereas Easterners self-enhanced on attributes relevant to the cultural ideal of collectivism (in both cases, because of the personal importance of the ideal). Self-enhancement motivation is universal, although its manifestations are strategically sensitive to cultural context. The authors respond to other aspects of Heine's critique by discussing why researchers should empirically validate the comparison dimension (individualistic vs. collectivistic) and defending why the better-than-average effect is a valid measure of self-enhancement.
Sedikides
Constantine
C
Center for Research on Self and Identity, School of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, England. cs2@soton.ac.uk
Gaertner
Lowell
L
Vevea
Jack L
JL
D001208:Asia; D001290:Attitude / Q000208:ethnology*; D003431:Cross-Cultural Comparison; D003469:Culture; D005060:Europe; D006801:Humans; D012649:Self Concept; D012928:Social Desirability