Tải bản đầy đủ
Emotional Experience of Individualist-Collectivist Workgroups: Findings From a Study of 14 Multinationals Located in Australia

Emotional Experience of Individualist-Collectivist Workgroups: Findings From a Study of 14 Multinationals Located in Australia

Tải bản đầy đủ

88

F UJ I M O T O , H A RTE L , PAN I P U C C I

typing, prejudice, and discrimination (Linnehan & Konrad, 1999) . Further,
affect-based theories are adopted rarely in empirical studies of diversity within
organizations, despite the well-established affective basis for prejudice (cf.
Ashkanasy, Hartel, & Daus, 2002) .
In this chapter, we underscore the importance of taking an emotions per­
spective on the study and management of diversity. In particular, we show how
cognitive and affective reactions to dissimilar others impact on individual,
group and organizational outcomes such as hope, intergroup anxiety, trust,
perceived fairness, deviant behavior and task performance. We also demon­
strate how the characteristics of an organization's climate and human resource
(HR) policies and practices influence the likelihood of individuals having neg­
ative affective reactions (prejudice) to dissimilar others, and the negative emo­
tional consequences of poor relationships.

THE VALUE OF DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT
Studies of both organizational and national diversity have demonstrated that a
major deterrent to realizing the positive potential cultural diversity has to offer
is prejudice between people whose race or ethnicity is dissimilar to that of
dominating employee groups in positions of power and influence (e.g., Boch­
ner & Hesketh, 1994; Fullerton, 1987) . Through the perception of similarity/
dissimilarity, observable differences (such as age, gender, and race) are sub­
ject to categorization processes (Brickson, 2000; Graves & Powell, 1995; Har­
tel & Fujimoto, 1 999; Linnehan & Konrad, 1999) . These processes activate
stereotypes and beliefs about certain people. Prejudice is a "social emotion
triggered by beliefs about a group's characteristics and relationship to one's
own group . . . negative beliefs lead to negative emotions" (Linnehan & Kon­
rad, 1999, p. 403). The costs of this prejudice include psychological pain, phys­
ical suffering, economic costs, lost opportunities, and denial of the rights to
life, liberty, and hope (Snyder & Miene, 1994) . Creating openness to perceived
differences through managing diversity is proposed to combat these negative
experiences. Thus, managing cultural diversity not only improves the opera­
tional aspect of the organization, it improves the emotional experience of em­
ployees' work life, which is reflected in such things as hope, confidence, satis­
faction, and reduced levels of stress, anxiety, and tensions in the workplace
(Fujimoto & Hartel, 2002) .
In the past, governments have fostered organizations' acceptance of diver­
sity through equity policies such as Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO)
and Affirmative Action (AA) . However, such legal and regulatory interventions
have been viewed as ambiguous and ineffective in improving the quality of

5.

89

E M O T I O NAL EXP E R I E N C E O F I - C W O R KG R O U P S

work life of employees (Gilbert & Ivancevich, 2000) . It is, therefore, important
for organizations to go beyond simply satisfying legal mandates, to formulate
and implement diversity-open policies and practices that best suit their organ­
ization's demographic composition. In recognition of this need, there is an ex­
panding literature base on managing diversity with particular reference to the
development of management policies and practices that recognize and value
diversity in the workplace (Roosevelt, 1996) . In this chapter, we are concerned
with identifying diversity management policies and practices that thwart em­
ployees' tendency to feel dislike for others perceived as dissimilar and improve
the work life of those typically discriminated against-the minority-group
members in the organization. We tackle this issue by focusing on the triggers
of prejudice in diverse workgroups.
Full utilization of diversity can only be achieved when prejudices are over­
come. As a result, those who overcome prejudices will contribute their
strengths as well as accepting the dissimilar talents brought by perceived dis­
similar others. The present research aims to incorporate the concept of self
with the cultural orientation of collectivism and individualism to identify the
key outcomes of differences in cultural orientation for the individual, the
group, and the organization. In particular, we look at the group dynamics, indi­
viduals' positive and negative emotional experience of work, affectively driven
attitudes, and affectively and attitudinally driven negative and positive em­
ployee behaviors. An overview of the model developed herein is provided in
Fig. 5.1.

Bicultural & Open Self



Positive
Emotional
Experience
of Work (eg,

Individualist­
Collectivist
Orientation of
Group Member



G roup Dynamics
(eg, cohesion)



Positive
Behaviors (eg
lack of deviance,
OCB)

hope, feeling
of
competence)


Negative
Emotional

Employment Att�udes
(eg affective
commitment)

Experience
of Work (eg,
intergroup
an�iety,
stress,
depression)

Wrthdrawal
Behaviors (eg,
withdrawal,
absenteeism)

FIG. 5.1. Moderators and consequences of affective response (prejudice) toward
dissimilar others in workgroups comprised of individualists and collectivists.

90

FUJI M O T O , H A RTE L , PAN I P U C C I

THE PERCEPTION OF DISSIMILARITY
AND ITS EFFECT
Across the cultures of the world, the most important dimension of cultural dif­
ference is the relative emphasis on individualism versus collectivism (Trian­
dis, 1990). This dissimilarity reflects individual differences in racioethnicity,
values, and views of the self (Hofstede, 1980; Probst, Carnevale, & Triandis,
1999; Triandis, 1980) . An important clue to identifying effective ways in man­
aging diversity for positive outcomes should be provided by ascertaining the
key triggers of negative emotional responses to the perception of cultural dis­
similarity, such as the expression of prejudice.
For the purpose of our research, we define prejudice based on that by
Stephan and Stephan ( 1 993) as the low affection associated with perceived dis­
similar others. It comprises of emotional reaction like hatred or affection as
well as evaluative reactions such as dislike or approval (Stephan, 1999) . This
definition of prejudice highlights that diversity is an important potential trig­
ger of affective events, which, more often than not, are negative.
Perceived Dissimilarity Based on Race
Race, which individuals often use to infer one's values and self-orientation, is
among the most significant stereotype-evoking characteristics (Greenhaus,
Parasuraman, & Wormley, 1 990; Milliken & Martins, 1996) . The term race is
defined as a definite combination of physical characteristics associated with
national origin or as a group of people sharing the same culture (e.g., Western
vs. Eastern nations) (Cox & Nkomo, 1993; Oxford Dictionary Thesaurus,
2001).
Although race is a powerful factor in stereotype formation and prejudice,
there is hope for relationships between collectivists and individualists as re­
search shows stereotypes based on such observable characteristics usually op­
erate only when relationships are superficial. However, even if race doesn't
provoke the negative stereotype expected, the inevitable difference in values,
which are a distinguishing feature of both collectivism and individualism,
threatens the realization of harmonious relationships.
Perceived Dissimilarity Based on Values
Values are defined as a nonobservable higher order concept thought to provide
a structure for organizing attitudes (Hogg & Vaughan, 1998) . Value differences
arise from the independent orientation of individualists, which contrasts with
the interpersonal orientation of collectivists. Individualists emphasize an "I"
consciousness through independent values such as primary concern for per­
sonal goals and immediate family (Hofstede, 200 1 ) . Collectivists, on the other

5.

E M O T I O NAL EXP E R I E N C E O F I - C W O R KG R O U P S

91

hand, express a "WE" consciousness through interdependent values such as
cohesive in-groups, mutual obligations, and concern for one's groups with un­
questioning loyalty (Hofstede, 200 1 ) .
Values influence the individualist-collectivist interaction (ICI) after social
categorization based on observable differences because as members interact
with one another, stereotypes are replaced subsequently by a deeper level
knowledge of the psychological features of one another (Harrison, Price, &
Bell, 1998) . In other words, as relationships deepen, people are less affected by
stereotypes associated with observable characteristics such as race, and more
affected by unobservable characteristics such as values. Consequently, this
impacts the way in which we interact with others and, thus, our organizational
behavior.
Although values refer to implicit differences and are not easily detected,
Harrison et al. (1998) argue that actual dissimilarity in values has great poten­
tial for influencing organizational outcomes. For example, individualists may
define a good employee as one who states explicitly individual goals and stands
up for his or her rights, whereas collectivists may define a good employee as
one who follows collective norms and maintains social harmony in the group
(Chen & DiTomaso, 1 996). Therefore, in individualist cultures, dissimilarity
in values may result in unfair performance appraisals based on evaluating col­
lectivist employees as too submissive, lacking confidence, and lacking initiative
(Chen & DiTomaso, 1996) . As a consequence, these values represent a major
obstacle to effective rCI interactions.
In summary, values shape attitudes and behaviors through shaping an indi­
vidual's self-concept (Marsella, Devos, & Hsu, 1 985; Wagner & Moch, 1986) .
This self-concept refers to the processes of individuals' thoughts, perspec­
tives, feelings, and desires, which, in turn, affect their interaction, and emo­
tion, with others (Deschamps & Devos, 1 998). Thus, we argue that actual dis­
similarity in values will tend to be a negative affective event, eliciting negative
affect, negative group dynamics, and negative work-related behaviors. The
overarching proposition we discuss in this chapter is, therefore:
Differences in values associated with the independent orientation ofindividualists
and the interpersonal orientation of collectivists will be correlated positively with
negative group dynamics, and negative work-related behaviors such as prejudice.

THE CATEGORIZATION PROCESS
Categorization processes are evoked during ICIs based on the perception of
differences. Self-categorization theory states that people tend to classify them­
selves and others into various social categories (Turner & Oakes, 1989). In­
group and out-group distinctions are formed on the basis of categorizations,

92

FUJIMOTO, H A RTEL, PANIPUC C I

dictating the extent to which another person is included in an interaction
(Brewer, 1 979; Dunbar, Saiz, Stela, & Saez, 2000; Miller, 1998; Mor Barak,
2000; Moreland, 1985).
The attraction to those perceived as similar, and the subsequent in-group/
out-group distinctions, activate negative stereotypes and prejudices that cause
group members to make biased attributions (Allport, 1954; Hewstone & Ward,
1985; Jackson, Stone, & Alvarez, 1 993; Taylor & Jaggi, 1974) . Therefore, based
on social identity theory, which states that prejudice results from the need for
a positive social identity with an in-group (Tajfel, 1981 ), both individualists
and collectivists may possess prejudices against each other due to the defini­
tion of their own in-group.
The negative affective and behavioral effects of ICI can be explained by a
human's inclination to be attracted to those who hold similar attitudes and
opinions (Byrne, 1971) and, thus, form part of their in-group. Individualists
tend to define their in-group as individuals or groups who are in agreement
with them on personally important issues and values (Rokeach, 1960) . Con­
versely, collectivists tend to define the in-group based on social memberships
related to them or who are concerned for their welfare such as family, friends,
or people from similar racial backgrounds (Gudykunst, Yoon, & Nishida, 1987;
Triandis, 1972, 1990).

INDIVIDUALIST-COLLECTMST
IN-GROUP/OUT-GROUP PREJUDICE
The cause and type of prejudice depend on a person's values. Individualists
may possess prejudices against collectivists based on both racioethnicity and
values as they place greater emphasis on defining the in-group according to
similar values and beliefs than do collectivists (Triandis, 1990). As such, indi­
vidualists' negative affect or prejudices toward collectivists' dissimilar values
may present the greatest challenge to obtaining positive employee behaviors.
For example, research indicates that individualists feel smaller social distance
from collectivists whose values are similar to their own than from European
Americans whose values are dissimilar to their own (Rokeach & Mezei, 1966) .
Collectivists, in contrast, may hold prejudice against individualists as a re­
sult of intergroup anxiety. Intergroup anxiety refers to concerns for negative
outcomes, such as rejection and disapproval, arising from in-group members'
perceived dissimilarity toward out-group members (Stephan, Ybarra, Marti­
nez, Schwarzwald, & Tur-Kaspa, 1998). Collectivists experience intergroup
anxiety as they place greater emphasis on interdependence such that the self is
almost defined entirely in the context of significant others (Stipek, 1998) . As
such, research reveals that collectivists tend to place a stronger emphasis on

5.

E M O TIONAL EXP E R I E N C E O F I - C WORKGROU P S

93

in-group/out-group membership than do individualists (Gudykunst et al.,
1987) , thus eliciting their in-group favoritism within the ICI setting.
The numerical status of group members may also impact on in-group/out­
group distinctions and behavior toward those perceived as dissimilar. Although
cultural minority group members tend to discriminate less than majority group
members, indicating their recognition of the superiority of members of the
majority group (Moscovici & Paicheler, 1978), research indicates that minority­
group membership, and a socially disadvantaged status, activate intergroup
comparison and increase competitive behavior toward the majority-group
members of individualists (Espinoza & Garza, 1 985). In addition, studies have
shown that minority members display higher levels of intergroup differentia­
tion and in-group favoritism than do majority members (Gerard & Hoyt,
1974) .
Key Outcomes for the Individual, the Group,
and the Organization
Although the major difference between individualists and collectivists is in
value orientations, we must not forget that the members of each group also
tend to be dissimilar in racioethnicity. Research states that such observable
differences often lead to prejudices and negative short-term effects because of
the stereotypes evoked (Harrison et al., 1998; Pelled, 1996) . For example, su­
pervisors tend to categorize subordinates as either in- or out-group members
early in their relationship when little information exchange has occurred be­
tween the two (Tsui, Egan, & Porter, 1 994) . This out-group status impacts
heavily on the work experience of these employees. Minority-group members
tend to perceive less support and feel less attraction and commitment, which,
in turn, result in higher rates of absenteeism and turnover (Cummings, Zhou,
& Oldham, 1993; Greenhaus, Prasuraman, & Wormley, 1 990; Pelled, 1 996;
Tsui, Egan, & O'Reilly, 1992; Tsui & O'Reilly, 1989) . These negative findings
underscore the costs involved with ineffective diversity management.
Prejudice has a further detrimental effect on minority members' emotional
experience of work and attitudes. It tends to increase their propensity to en­
gage in negative group dynamics such as self-segregation from individualists,
and in negative employee behaviors such as turnover and absenteeism (e.g.,
Kanter, 1977) .
The Mediational Role of Self-Representation on ICls
The previous discussion on prej udice and social identity suggests that the ef­
fectiveness of ICI is influenced highly by how individuals within ICI contexts
represent themselves in relation to others (Brewer & Gardner, 1996; Brickson,
2000; Markus & Kitayama, 199 1 ) . In particular, individualists tend to define
the "self" using an independent perspective, whereas collectivists take an in-

94

F U J I M O T O , H A RTE L , PAN I P U C C I

terdependent view (Markus & Kitayama, 1 99 1 ) . The independent self refers to
a self-concept that is differentiated from all others, whereas the interdepend­
ent self refers to a self-concept that reflects assimilation to others or signifi­
cant social groups. The independent self of individualists and the interde­
pendent self of collectivists explain the tendency for individualists to use the
individual as the unit of analysis for social behavior, and for collectivists to use
the group (Triandis, 1998) . Thus, collectivists view more from an intergroup
perspective than do individualists, whereas individualists view more from an
interpersonal perspective than do collectivists, as demonstrated in the previ­
ous discussion of the "I" and "WE" perspective.
The implication of the different perspectives of collectivists and individual­
ists for ICls is that collectivists tend to create close groups that possess a sta­
ble relationship derived from long-term group membership, whereas individ­
ualists tend to create open groups that are flexible in changing their
memberships (Triandis, Dunnette, & Hough, 1994; Ziller, 1965). Therefore,
we propose that the different self-representations adopted by individualists
and collectivists (ICs) play a mediational role in the emotional quality of ICI.
Further, the limited understanding of the effect of self-representation on ICls
pose a serious hindrance to this area of research (Brewer & Gardner, 1996;
Brickson, 2000) . This chapter attempts to address this research gap with the
effect of self-representations on ICls explained in detail next.
Dissimilar Self-Representation Explains Negative lei
Effects
Following from the previous discussion, a number of differences exist between
individualist and collectivist group members, which may result in negative ICI
effects. For instance, when an individualist is in a group where the majority of
members are collectivists, he or she may perceive negative stereotypes deriving
from the dissimilar collectivist value of high group identity and in-group favor­
itism. Further, collectivists expect to gain group benefits from the group,
whereas individualists expect to gain personal benefits from the group. As
such, the individualists' desire to transcend the group means they are no more
likely to favor people within the group than from outside the group, as long as
there is a personal benefit in the relationship. Therefore, the individualists
may perceive that their personal benefit is thwarted by their need to be uncon­
ditionally loyal to the group, thus creating new emotion. The self-reliant orien­
tation of the individualist may also be perceived as selfishness (Bellah,
Madsen, Sulivan, Swindler, & Tipton, 1986) and thus pose another hindrance
to effective ICI.
Similarly, collectivists are expected to find working with individualists diffi­
cult because their core principle is to work cooperatively with in-group mem-

5.

EMOTI O NAL EXP E RIENCE O F I - C WORKG ROUPS

95

bers and to not seek personal benefits. As such, when a collectivist is in a group
where the majority of members are individualists, the collectivist may feel that
his or her group benefits are thwarted because of high independence within
the in-group. Further, the collectivists within such a group are expected to
perceive negative stereotypes deriving from the dissimilar individualist value
of high personal identity and to possess intergroup anxiety and fear of aban­
donment from the in-group.

EFFECT OF THE INDEPENDENT
SELF-REPRESENTATION OF INDIVIDUALISTS
Although individualists may exhibit prejudice toward those with dissimilar val­
ues to themselves, they are also expected to have an open group boundary, ex­
hibiting openness to those with similar values, regardless of group member­
ship. Individualists exhibit more prejudice toward a person when the person
has a negatively valued characteristic than do collectivists (Crandall et aI.,
200 1 ) . However, research indicates repeatedly that individualists demonstrate
openness when collectivists share their values (Rokeach & Mezei, 1966) .
Therefore, when ICs meet for the first time, individualists are expected to be
more open compared to collectivists as long as collectivists agree with individ­
ualists on issues that lead to their achievement.
The tendency for individualists to have an open group boundary appears to
lead to a cooperative orientation toward groups; however, individualists ' orien­
tation to independence means they may also have a greater concern with at­
taining high status and distinctiveness (Triandis et aI., 1994) . Consequently,
although collectivists emphasize unconditional relatedness to their in-group,
individualists emphasize conditional relatedness that calculates carefully the
costs and benefits of their relationships with others (Kim, Triandis, Kagit­
cibasi, Choi, & Yoon, 1 994; Triandis, 1998) . Research has found that Western
participants tend to define themselves as a unique individual to a group when
their group membership has a negative value for their self-image. However,
when group memberships have a positive value for their self-image, they tend
to emphasize their group membership more than individual attributes (Si­
mon, Pantaleo, & Mummendey, 1 995) . Individualists, therefore, are expected
to possess interpersonal prejudices against collectivists, negatively affecting
relationships between individualists and collectivists when there is division in
values. The emotional experience of individuals in workgroups comprised of
people with different cultural orientations is likely to be characterized by the
presence of more hassles than workgroups homogeneous in orientation unless
care is taken in the formation and management of such groups.

96

F UJ I M O T O , HARTEL, PAN I P U C C I

EFFECT OF THE INTERDEPENDENT
SELF-REPRESENTATION OF COLLECTMSTS
Like the individualist group within the leI context, the strong intergroup per­
spectives of collectivists may lead to intergroup prejudices that affect negatively
the Ie relationship (Perdue, Dovidio, Gurtman, & Tyler, 1990). There is an
ethnocentric quality to the collectivist cultures' intergroup orientation in that
they expect their perception of the in-group to be valid universally, and every­
thing is scaled and rated with reference to the in-group (Triandis, 1990) . More­
over, the salience of the numeric minority membership and socially disadvan­
taged status of collectivists also accentuate their intergroup prejudices.
Research shows that intergroup prejudices by collectivists affect negatively the
behavioral integration of individualists with collectivists. When cross-cultural
groups are formed for the first time, members from collectivist cultures behave
less cooperatively than members of individualist cultures (Gabrenya & Barba,
1987). In other words, collectivists with intergroup perspectives see individual­
ists as out-group members and act less cooperatively toward individualists.
Based on the foregoing review, it is hypothesized that:
H I . The more individualist a person, the more the person leans toward in­
terpersonal prejudice, and the more collectivist a person, the more the
person leans toward intergroup prejudice.
H2. The interpersonal prejudice of individualists and the intergroup prej­
udice of collectivists will be associated negatively with an individual's
emotional experience.
Negative outcomes arise from in-group members' attraction to those per­
ceived as similar, which, in turn, leads to the exclusion, or cultural alienation, of
others who are perceived as dissimilar (Zenger & Lawrence, 1989). In particu­
lar, collectivists may perceive threats to their self-representation, which may
lead to feelings of intergroup anxiety. The intergroup anxiety perceived by these
group members, in turn, leads to prejudice toward the individualist members
(Britt et aI., 1996). As a consequence, prejudices held by individualists toward
collectivists, and vice versa, facilitate collectivists' feelings of cultural alienation
within individualist groups or organizations. Subsequently, cultural alienation
caused by perceived discrimination may affect negatively the relationship be­
tween leI and employees' emotional experience of work. Organizational policies
and practices need, therefore, to foster emotionally constructive interactions be­
tween employees holding different cultural orientations.
H3. Higher levels of cultural alienation in collectivists will be associated
with lower levels of positive emotional experience of work and higher
levels of negative emotional experience of work.

5.

EMOTI O NAL EXP E R I E N C E O F I - C WORKG ROUPS

97

Fostering Emotionally Constructive
Individualist-Collectivist Interactions
Although the literature is replete with cross-cultural studies of individualism
and collectivism, little information is available on the factors that foster emo­
tionally constructive ICI within organizations. In fact, although the differences
in values associated with individualists and collectivists may provide an impor­
tant source of negative affective events in diverse workgroups, there is re­
search suggesting that these differences could also be a source of positive af­
fective events. For example, research shows that members who are dissimilar
in values and beliefs can develop more creative and better alternatives in prob­
lem solving than similar members (Me Lead & Lobel, 1992). The question that
is raised, therefore, is, "What determines whether culturally-based value dif­
ferences result in negative versus positive affective events?"
We suggest two reasons, which have diversity management implications.
First, we contend that individuals' orientation to cross-cultural experience,
defined by the variables of bicultural self, open-self, and intercultural experi­
ence, determines one's affective predisposition to cultural difference. Second,
we contend that a diversity climate of openness is associated with cultural dif­
ferences triggering positive, rather than negative, affective reactions. Each is
discussed in detail next.
The Moderating Role of an Individual's Affective
Predisposition to Cultural Difference on ICls
Although cultural values are very influential in shaping the self-representation
of individuals (Marsella et al., 1985; Triandis, 1989), there are other factors
that contribute. This chapter describes the individual characteristics which
moderate the process of perceived dissimilarity and ICI. In particular, we pro­
pose that individuals may possess both individualist and collectivist cultural
orientations regardless of their cultural origins (Singe lis, 1994; Yamada &
Singelis, 1999) through their level of openness and experience, and that this
impacts on their cognitive and affective reactions to dissimilar others.
Bicultural Self. Our discussion so far has been in reference to separate in­
dependent and interdependent orientations. However, Singelis ( 1994) and
Yamada and Singelis (1999) found that the independent and interdependent
self could coexist in individuals regardless of one's culture. In agreement,
Triandis (1989) suggested that both allocentrics (interdependent self) and
idiocentrics (independent self) exist within a culture. Similarly, in an empiri­
cal study of stress-coping behavior among American and East Asian students,
Cross and Markus (1991) found that East Asian students developed an inde­
pendent self-representation similar to their American counterparts. However,

F UJI M O T O , HARTEL, PAN I P U C C I

98

their study also found that the East Asian students still had a more developed
interdependent self-representation than did American students, meaning that
one's self-concept can become bicultural. We propose that there are individu­
als who hold a balance of both individualist and collectivist values (i.e., have a
bicultural self-concept) and that these impact positively on their cognitive and
affective reactions to perceived dissimilarity.
The self-representation that demonstrates this phenomenon of both high
interdependence and independence has been termed the bicultural self
(Cross & Markus, 1 99 1 ; Yamada & Singelis, 1999) . Individuals with a
bicultural self are expected to demonstrate reduced prejudice associated with
collectivist and individualist cultures.
H4a.

H5a.

The bicultural score will be correlated negatively with interpersonal
prejudice in individualists. Similarly, the bicultural score will be
correlated negatively with intergroup prejudice in collectivists.
Consequently, bicultural self will be associated positively with em­
ployees' positive emotional experience of work and related inversely
to employees' negative emotional experience of work.

We propose two factors that lead to a bicultural self: individual's openness
(open self) and intercultural experience. These are discussed next.
Open Self
The interpersonal prejudice and intergroup prejudice sometimes observed in
ICls indicate that ICs hold negative stereotypes toward each other's group
(Ashmore & del Boca, 198 1 ) . Negative cultural stereotypes are automatically
activated in the presence of the member of a stereotyped group regardless of
one's prejudice level (Devine, 1989) . Research findings indicate that high- and
low-prejudice Whites categorized Blacks as poor and aggressive (Devine,
1989). The low-prejudice person, however, controlled their automatically acti­
vated stereotypes in considering Black-White interactions whereas high-prej­
udice persons did not (Devine, 1989) . Research findings also indicate that low­
prejudice participants are more accurate than high-prejudice participants in
estimating their partner's attitudes (Scodel & Mussen, 1953).
The individual with low prejudice is termed here as "the open self." Those
with an open self are expected to accept and try to understand self-repre­
sentations dissimilar to their own, which enables them to develop a bicultural
self. The open self may encompass a more positive meaning of self in dealing
with perceived dissimilar others. For example, those with an open self will not
only be open to those with dissimilar self-representations, but they will also be
open to others perceived as dissimilar (such as in gender or knowledge) .
Therefore, it is hypothesized that: