Short CommunicationIndividualism as the moderator of the relationship between hedonism and happiness: A study in 19 nations
Introduction
People universally value pleasure, which consists of both pleasant physical sensations and emotional experiences (Higgins, 2011). However, seeking to maximize pleasure is not the only energizer of human behavior. Research suggests that people may prefer unpleasant emotions over pleasant ones when such emotions are useful in certain situations (Tamir & Mauss, 2011). Humans' behaviors are also driven by motives such as seeking competence, relatedness, justice, and knowledge, for the sake of which pleasure may be postponed or forsaken (Higgins, 2011). In addition, individuals often need to dampen their natural inclination to maximize pleasure and comfort to achieve long-term goals (Baumeister, 2005). The ability to commit to challenging and arduous tasks and responsibilities for the sake of long-term goals has been recognized as a crucial facilitator of overall success and well-being (Baumeister & Vohs, 2003). Thus, pleasure is naturally desirable, but it may need to be frequently postponed or forsaken to foster sustained goal-directed activity.
Hedonism is the view that a good life consists mainly of pleasurable experiences (Feldman, 2004). Cultures are not equally supportive of hedonism. In particular, hedonism seems to be more consistent with the ethos of individualism compared to collectivism (e.g., Joshanloo, 2014, Triandis et al., 1986). Individualistic cultures lay special emphasis on personal goals over collective goals, and foster expression of one's unique beliefs, attitudes, and desires. Personal enjoyment and positive emotions are crucial in affirming the worth of the private self in these cultures (Kitayama & Markus, 2000). Individualistic cultures have been found to value pleasure more strongly than collectivistic cultures (Schwartz, 2009).
Whereas in individualistic cultures, having responsibilities for and concerns about others can be considered a constraint (Schwartz, 2015) or a “drag on having fun” (Triandis, McCusker, & Hui, 1990, p. 1018), collectivistic cultures emphasize group harmony over personal interests and enjoyments (Triandis et al., 1990). These cultures tend to view well-being as consisting mainly of traditional virtues (such as selflessness and harmony), which are less consistent with the hedonistic approach (Joshanloo, 2014). Studies on parenting styles across cultures indicate that parents in collectivistic cultures give more prominence to fostering self-discipline and impulse control in their children (Baumeister and Tierney, 2011, Sabbagh et al., 2006). The heavier emphasis on self-discipline in the collectivistic parenting style reflects the greater importance of harnessing hedonistic desires and promoting other salient values in these cultures. The collectivistic cultures have also been found to be generally more religious than the individualistic cultures (Diener, Tay, & Myers, 2011). Many religions emphasize values other than pleasure, such as self-transcendence, performing religious duties, and sacrificing personal interests for the sake of the religious community (Joshanloo, 2013, Joshanloo, 2014).
In sum, it seems that individualistic cultures regard pleasure as a more central ingredient of well-being, than collectivistic cultures. People in collectivistic cultures seem to attach equal or more importance to values and ideals other than pleasure, such as group harmony. Therefore, we predicted that the relationship between hedonism and happiness would be stronger in individualistic nations compared to collectivistic nations. This prediction is supported by a large body of research showing that a congruency between individuals' values and the values emphasized in their cultural environment is beneficial for subjective well-being (Sagiv, Roccas, & Oppenheim-Weller, 2015). In other words, because hedonism is more congruent with the cultural norms prevailing in individualistic cultures, we expected it to be more strongly related to happiness in these cultures.
Section snippets
Participants
The sample consisted of 6899 community participants, across 19 countries, who completed the first wave of the International Wellbeing Study (http://www.wellbeingstudy.com). The study includes many other variables that are not related to the present study. Only the 19 countries that had more than 80 participants are included. Characteristics of the samples and national averages for all the variables of the study are presented in Table 1.
Subjective happiness
The Subjective Happiness Scale (Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1999)
Results
Using multi-level modeling, we first tested an intercept-only model (excluding all the predictors). The results indicated the proportion of variability in subjective happiness that exists at both the individual and cultural levels (Hox, 2010). For an acceptable level of power, multi-level analyses require a sample of at least 20 groups that each has at least 30 individuals (Heck & Thomas, 2000). A sample of 6899 participants nested in 19 groups used in the present study seems to ensure
Discussion
A hedonistic conceptualization of well-being is in accord with the core values and ethos of western culture, which extols liberal individualism (Joshanloo, 2014). Yet, the emphasis on pleasure as an ingredient of well-being is less pronounced in collectivistic nations. In these cultures, such values as conformity, religiosity, and selflessness are considered equally (if not more) important in formulating well-being (Joshanloo, 2014). On this basis, we predicted that levels of individualism
References (31)
- et al.
Current and future directions in culture and happiness research
Current Opinion in Psychology
(2016) The cultural animal: Human nature, meaning, and social life
(2005)- et al.
Willpower: Rediscovering the greatest human strength
(2011) - et al.
Willpower, choice, and self-control
- et al.
The religion paradox: If religion makes people happy, why are so many dropping out?
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
(2011) - et al.
Centering predictor variables in cross-sectional multilevel models: A new look at an old issue
Psychological Methods
(2007) Pleasure and the good life: Concerning the nature, varieties and plausibility of hedonism
(2004)- et al.
An introduction to multilevel modeling techniques
(2000) Beyond pleasure and pain: How motivation works
(2011)- et al.
Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind
(2005)