: Hofstede(1980, 1991), Schwartz(1992, 1994), Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner (1997), House et al.(2004). (heuristic)..,,.,,,, 5.. :,, 3 53 E-mail : hisim@skku.edu
. 1960-70 Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck(1961), Douglas (1970) Hofstede(1980, 1991, 2001), Schwartz(1992, 1994), Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner(1997), House et al.(2004). Hofstede 1), (Triandis, 2004). Hofstede(1980) Schwartz(1992, 1994), Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner(1997), House et al.(2004). Hofstede.. 1) Hofstede(1980, 1991, 2001), -, -,, -., (Gooderham & Nordhaug, 2001; Roberts & Boyacigiller, 1984).,,, (House et al., 2004; Schwartz, 1992). 3 (, 2000). 3, ( ), (Ibid)., 3, 2) (House et al., 2004), 3. (emic approach). 1987 40 (Chinese Values Survey, CVS), Yau(1994) Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck(1961) 12 2) Hofstede 18, 20, 46. 76 65, 58, 35.
(CVS). (, 1993;, 2003;, 2007;, 1994),,,,. (heuristic) (Kweon, 2003)., Hofstede DB,. 3),... 3) (, 2011;, 2012;, 2000),. - ( ) Triandis(1995) Singelis et al.(1995).,.. Hofstede(1980, 1991), Schwartz(1992, 2004), Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner(1997, 2001), House et al.(2004). 4),. Hofstede IBM 4) (Word Values Survey) 6 80 1980 5 DB..,,, 4 EASS(East Asia Social Survey),,.
(work related values), 5) Schwartz. Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner 6) (Hooghiemstra 2003: 61). 7) GLOBE, ( What should be...? ) ( What is...? ),. GLOBE, 8) 5) Hofstede 5 IBM.. 6) (, 2004). 7) THT Parsons,, (Parsons & Shils, 1951)... (1994),,, ( ),. (1993),,,. 2000 (2003),,,,,,,,,. (2007) 9) 19,,,,,,,,, 8) House et al.(2004) GLOBE. 4),,. 9),, (2007: 98).
,,,. 10) 1..,, -, -., -, -..,,., 10) (2007). (2003)., (, 1991)..,, 11).,. (,, 2011;, 2012;,, 2000;, 2013;, 2012)., 1. (2007) 12 (107 ) (108 ), (1993) (135 ). 11) (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 1997).
(1994) (2004) (2003) (2007) * <11-104 60 > ( ) ** ( ) 12) 22) - * <9-90 18 > ( - ) *** (- ) **** 13) 14) Hofstede (1980, 2001) Schwartz (1992, 2004) **** - * **** 5-95 **** 39> * <8-112 85> **** ( ) 15) Trompenaars & Hampden- Turner (1997) House et al. (2004) - * ( ) **** <23-118 75> - *** - *** ( ) 16) - *** <32-91 65> - *** <4-69 20> - ( ) *** - ** - *** <33-88 72> 17) 18) * Hofstede(1980, 2001). ** Schwartz(1992). *** Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner(1997). **** House et al.(2004). 19) 20) 21) 22) 23) 24)
.. 12) (, 2003). (2007). 13), (, 1994). 14) ( ) (, 2003). 15). (, 2007). 16), (, 2007). 17) (, 2003). 18),, (, 2003). (Cultural Consensus Theory)., 19) (, 2004). 20). (, 2003). Schwartz(1992) House et al.(2004). 21), (, 2003). 22),. (, 2007). 23) (, 2007). 24).,.,, (, 2007).
(D'Andrade, 1981; Weller, 2007: 339)., (Ibid)., (, informant). ( ),?(Romney, Weller, & Batchelder, 1986: 314;, 2007: 47 ), ( ) (culturally correct answers), (Weller, 2007: 339).,, (consensus) (agreement). (reliability) (competence) (Weller, 2007: 340). :,..,..,. (Weller, 2007: 340)., 1 4 (Borgatti, 1996; Horowitz, 2007: 50-57; Weller & Romney 1988). 1, (freelist) (Horowitz, 2007; Keller & Loewenstein, 2011; Weller & Romney 1988). 25) (open-ended questions), ( ), ( ) 25), (Horowitz, 2007), (Keller & Loewenstein, 2011), (Chavez et al., 1995), (Magana, Burton, & Ferriera-Pinto, 1995),,,.
(, ).,.,.. 2. 1,. Anthropac(v. 4.98), ( ),, Smith s S( ). 3 1, (MDS, Multidimensional Scaling), PROFIT(property fitting),. (pilesort) 3 (triad)., 3 ( Borgatti, 1996). 4,,, (consensus analysis).,,.
.,,. (freelist) 1 43 2012 5-2012 6.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,. 22, 21, 20 26, 30 13, 40 3, 50 1. (pilesort), 37 2012 7-2012 8. 37 18, 19, 20 12, 30 15, 40 6, 50 4.. ( ) 10. 381,. 7 3., (Anthropac). hurry, in a hurry, rush, hurry,,,, respecting olders and seniors, respectful to the elderly and superiors respecting olders. 159, Anthropac(v. 4.98) 63.. 63. 63 1
63... (, pile), 37 UCINET6. UCINET6 NetDraw., ( ). (salience)., (Borgatti, 1996; Horowitz, 2007: 51). 2 Anthropac(v. 4.98), ( ),. Smith s S. Smith s S 70 ( 2 ) (items) (%) Smith s S 1 friendly 18 42 2.889 0.327 2 hurry 16 37 3.188 0.287 3 hardworking 13 30 4.385 0.190 4 polite 12 28 4.250 0.189 5 proud of Korea 10 23 6.900 0.094 6 conservative 9 21 4.889 0.134 7 patriotic 9 21 5.444 0.115 8 hospitable 8 19 3.750 0.132 9 appearance 7 16 6.286 0.083 10 emotional 6 14 6.667 0.049 11
1 ( ) 22 43 2 23 44 3 24 45 ( ) 4 25 46 5 26 ( ) 47 6 27 48 7 28 / 49 8 29 50 9 30 51 ( ) 10 / 31 52 11 ( ) 32 53 12 33 54 13 ( ) 34 55 14 35 56 ( ) 15 ( ) 36 57 16 37 58 (peer pressure) 17 38 59 (,, ) 18 ( ) 39 60 19 40 61 20 41 62 21 42 63 ( ) 57. 26) 26) 1990 2000. 7 21, 28 (20 7, 30 14, 40 3, 50 4 ).
. 27) 3 63. 27),,. (,, ),,. (MDS). MDS ( ) 2. 3. 28) 28) MDS 2 3.
2, (Stress) 0.179. 0.380 (Sturrock & Rocha, 2000),. 2 4 1(+,+), 2(,+), 3(, ), 4(+, ) 3,,,, 1,,. 2,,,, 4,,. 63. NetDraw 3.. 3 32, 32. NetDraw 1, 3 (37 ) 1/3 12. 3.,,,,, 5.,,,,,,,,,, ( ),..,,?.?, (self-concept). Mead(1934) Fenigstein et al.(1975). Mead(1934) (I)
(me). Mead. I me, (I) (me) (, 2012).,., I me. Mead (generalized other) Fenigstein et al.(1975) (public self-consciousness). (Froming & Carver, 1981; Lennon, Burns, Rowold, 1995; Schlenker & Weigold, 1990). 3,,,,,,,,, ( ),,.,. (high context) (Hall, 1976).,,, ( ), ( ),, (peer pressure), (,, ),., 1. 2,, ( ) 1,,.. 1 (primary group) (in-group) Cooley(1909) Sumner(1906), 1
(Cooley, 1909), (Sumner, 1906; Tajfel, 1969)..,.. (, 2000).,, (2002),, (2002),,.,,. Triandis Hofstede. Triandis Hofstede (interest) (Kim & Cho, 2011; Jackson et al., 2006; Triandis, 1989, 1995), (Hofstede, 1980) (Triandis, 1989, 1995). (Jackson et al., 2006: 886).,,, ( ),,. ( ),,, ( ),,,..,. 3
. 1. Hofstede(1980, 2001) -. Hofstede, 39 76 59. Clark & Mills(1979). Clark & Mills(1979) (benefits) (communal relationship) (exchange relationship), (needs) (debt). 29) Clark & Mills(1979),. 29),, (Clark & Mills, 1979).,,. (open-hearted patience), (courtesy), (kindness), (gentleness), (compassion) (humanheartedness: Leung, 2010).,.,. 30). 31) 30),, ( )., (ice breaker). 31).
,...,,,,,,,,,.. ( ), 32),,. 32),,,, ( )., ( ).. Max Weber(1958) (traditional), (charismatic), - (rational-legal).,,,, (, 2003: 151-154).,,,, -., -,. Hofstede (power distance) Schwartz (hierarchy). Hofstede et al.(2010),. Hofstede 60 76
41-42. Schwartz (wealth).,, (humility), (Schwartz, 2004). Hofstede(1980), Hofstede et al.(2010) Schwartz(2004),.,,,. Hofstede et al.(2010: 63). 33) 33).. 34), 35) Hofstede.,,,,, ( ),,, ( ),,, ( ),, ( ),,,,., 34) (positional goods). (Hirsch, 1976). 35).,,,.
.. ().. 36) 37).,.. 38) 36) 2012 5, 8 2 (2012 11 14 ) K-pop. 37),,,. 38) (., 2008. 8. 13. 35 ;., 2007. 3. 14;.. 2007. 6. 6. 27 ;,,. Hofstede(1980), Hofstede et al.(2010) -., Hofstede -. Trompenaars & Hampden- Turner(1997).,, (ascription).,.,,, 1995. 5. 31. 3 ),.
. (, 2006;, 2010;, 1997). Trompenaars -..,,. 39). (, 2012;, 1979;, 1998). 40) 39),..,,. (, 1979).. House et al.(2004) GLOBE..,.,., ( ),, ( ),,,. 40) Schwartz(2004),,,,,. Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner (1997) (sequential) vs. (synchronous).
,,,,,,,. ( 4)..,,, ( ),.,.,. Hofstede(1980, 2001), Schwartz(1992, 1994), Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner(1997), House et al.(2004)
, 5. 43., 63 (Kweon, 2003).,. 5,,, ( ),. 5,,,.,,,,,. 41) 41),. 5, ( ), -, -, -, -.,.,....,,,.
. (1993). :. (2001). :., (2011).,. (4), 395-413. (2012). :. (2004). : Trompenaars - Turner. 35-59. (2012).,,,,,. (4), 47-69. (1979). :.,, (2002). :. (1), 25-44. (1991). :. (2003). :. (2007). :. (1), 137-158., ( ) (2006). :., (2000). -. (1), 19-32.,,, (2013). :. (1), 69-86. (2007). :. (2003). :.,,,, (2010). :. (1998).. 205-230. (2000). :.,,, (2012).. (1), 27-51. (1997).. 123-148. (2000).., (2002).,, : ( ),. (1), 55-71. (1994). :. Borgatti, S. P. (1996). ANTHROPAC 4.0 reference
manual. Natick, MA: Analytic Technologies. Chavez, L. R., F., Hubbell, A., McMullin, J. M., Martinez, R. G., & Mishra, S. I. (1995). Structure and meaning in models of breast and cervical cancer risk factors: a comparison of perceptions among latinas, anglo women, and physicians. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 9, 40-74. Clark, M. S., & Mills, J. (1979). Interpersonal attraction in exchange and communal relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 12-24. Cooley, C. H. (1909). Social Organization: A Study of the Larger Mind, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. D'Andrade, R. G. (1981). The cultural part of cognition. Cognitive Science, 5, 179-195. Douglas, M. (1970). Natural Symbols: explorations in cosmology. New York: Pantheon Books. Fenigstein, A., Scheier, M. F., & Buss, A. H. (1975). Public and private self-consciousness: assessment and theory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43, 522-527. Froming, W. J., & Carver, C. S. (1981). Divergent influences of private and public selfconsciousness in a compliance paradigm. Journal of Research in Personality, 15, 159-171. Gooderham, P., & Nordhaug, O. (2001). Are cultural differences in europe on the decline? European Business Forum. Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond Culture, New York: Anchor Books. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences: international differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Hofstede, G., & Hofstede, G. J. (2005). Cultures and organizations: software of the mind. 2nd Ed, New York: McGraw-Hill. Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: software of the mind. Revised and expanded 3rd Ed, New York: McGraw-Hill. Hooghiemstra, R. B. H. (2003). The construction of reality: cultural differences in self-serving behaviour in accounting narratives. ERIM, Rotterdam. Horowitz, D. (2007). Applying cultural consensus analysis to marketing, Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Florida State University. House, R. J., Paul, J. H., Mansour, J., Peter, W. D., & Vipin, G. (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: the globe study of 62 societies, London: Sage Publications. Jackson, C. L., Colquitt, J. A., Wesson, M. J., & Zapata-Phelan, C. P. (2006). Psychological collectivism: a measurement validation and linkage to group member performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(4), 884-899. Keller, J., & Loewenstein, J. (2011). The cultural category of cooperation: a cultural consensus model analysis for china and the US. Organization Science, 22(2), 299-319. Kim, K., & Cho, B. (2011). Development of an individualism-collectivism scale revisited: a korean sample. Psychological Reports, 108(2),
393-401. Kluckhohn, F., & Strodtbeck, F. (1961). Variations in value orientations, Evanston, IL: Row and Peterson. Kweon, S. (2003). Popular discourses on korean culture: from the late 1980s to the present. Korea Journal, 43(1), 32-57. Lennon, S., Burns, L., & Rowold, K. L. (1995). Dress and human behavior research: sampling subjects and consequences for statistics. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 13(4), 262-272. Leung, M. (2010). The effects of chinese values(confucian work dynamism and humanheartedness) on students achievement goals and learning strategies. Australian Association for Research in Education, AARE 2010 International Education Research Conference, Melbourne. Magana, J. R., Burton, M., & Ferreira-Pinto, J. (1995). Occupational cognition in three nations. Journal of Quantitative Anthropology, 5, 149-168. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. Edited by Charles W. Morris, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Parsons, P., & Shils, E. (Eds.) (1951). Toward a general theory of action. New York: Harper & Row. Roberts, K. H., & Boyacigiller, N. A. (1984). Cross national organizational research: the grasp of the blind men. Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 6. JAI Press: Greenwich, CT. Romney, A. K., Weller, S. A., & Batchelder, W. H. (1986). Culture as consensus: A theory of culture and informant accuracy. American Anthropologist, 88, 313-338. Schlenker, B. R., & Weigold, M. F. (1990). Self-consciousness and self-presentation: Being autonomous versus appearing autonomous. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 820-828. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: theory and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, 25, 1-65, New York: Academic Press. Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the content and structure of values? Journal of Social Issues, 50, 19-45. Schwartz, S. H. (2004). Mapping and interpreting cultural differences around the world. In H. Vinken, J. Soeters, & P. Ester (Ed.), Comparing Cultures: Dimensions of culture in a comparative perspective, Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill. Singelis, T. M., Triandis, H. C., Bhawuk, D., & Gelfand, M. J. (1995). Horizontal and vertical dimensions of individualism and collectivism: a theoretical and measurement refinement: crosscultural eesearch. The Journal of Comparative Social Science, 29, 240-275. Sturrock, K., & Rocha, J. (2000). A multidimensional scaling stress evaluation table. Field Methods, 12, 49-60. Sumner, W. G. (1906). Folkways. Boston: Ginn. Tajfel, H. (1969). Cognitive aspects of prejudice. Journal of Social Issues, 25, 79-97. Triandis, H. C. (1989). A strategy for crosscultural research in social psychology. In J. P.
Forgas & J. M. Innes (Eds.), Recent advances in social psychology: An international perspective (pp.491-499). North Holland, the Netherlands: Elsevier Science. Triandis H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Triandis, H. C. (2004). The many dimensions of culture. Academy of Management Executive, 18(1), 88-93. Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. (1997). Riding the waves of culture: understanding diversity in global business, 2nd ed., New York: McGraw-Hill. Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. (2001). 21 leaders for the 21st century, New York: McGraw-Hill. Yau, Oliver H. M. (1994). Consumer behaviour in china: customer satisfaction and cultural values, London: Routledge. Weber, M. (1958). The three types of legitimate rule. Berkeley Publications in Society and Institutions, 4(1), 1-11. Translated by Hans Gerth. Weller, S. C. (2007). Cultural consensus theory: applications and frequently asked questions. Field Methods, 19, 339-368. Weller, S. C., & Romney, A. K. (1988). Systematic data collection. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. : 2013. 06. 03 1 : 2013. 07. 12 : 2013. 08. 16
A Study on the Cultural Characteristics of Korean Society: Discovering Its Categories Using the Cultural Consensus Model Minbong You Hyungin Shim Sungkyunkwan University This study attempted to discover the dimensions of Korean culture, with the presumption that the cross-cultural studies(hofstede, 1980, 1997; Schwartz, 1992, 1994; Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner, 1997; House et al., 2004) have limitation to explain non-western culture including Korean culture. Even though there are some Korean cultural studies, they used heuristic approaches applying the authors' experiences and intuitions. This study applied the Cultural Consensus Theory to overcome the previous studies' shortcomings and to discover the dimensions that can be empirically proved by data. In specific this study conducted in-depth interview, used content analysis, did frequency analysis, and applied pilesort technique, multidimensional scaling and network analysis. As a result, this study obtained five categories: public self-consciousness, group-focused orientation, affective human relations, hierarchical culture, and result-orientation. It is expected that these dimensions can be used as important variables that may explain Korean social phenomena. Key words : Korean culture, cultural consensus model, freelist, pilesort