TESTING a DIALECTICAL MODEL of MEANING in LIFE and WELL-BEING in FOUR CULTURES by CHARLES MATTHEW CHING a Dissertation Submitted
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
TESTING A DIALECTICAL MODEL OF MEANING IN LIFE AND WELL-BEING IN FOUR CULTURES By CHARLES MATTHEW CHING A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Educational Leadership, Sport Studies, & Educational/Counseling Psychology AUGUST 2015 © Copyright by CHARLES MATTHEW CHING, 2015 All Rights Reserved © Copyright by CHARLES MATTHEW CHING, 2015 All Rights Reserved To the Faculty of Washington State University: The members of the Committee appointed to examine the dissertation of CHARLES MATTHEW CHING find it satisfactory and recommend that it be accepted. ____________________________________ A. Timothy Church, Ph.D., Chair ____________________________________ Brian F. French, Ph.D. ____________________________________ Brian W. McNeill, Ph.D. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENT My journey in the counseling psychology doctoral program has involved a mosaic of transformative experiences and invaluable relationships that have cultivated my growth and passion for this profession. I would like to express my profound gratitude to my dissertation chair, Dr. Tim Church, whose guidance and support has propelled my academic and professional development throughout the past four years. I also am grateful for the insight and knowledge shared by Dr. Brian French and Dr. Brian McNeill, who were vital members of my committee. My family has unquestionably exemplified and provided the support, understanding, and perseverance essential to undertaking this dissertation and my professional endeavors. Dad, you have consistently demonstrated the value of hard work, dedication, resourcefulness, and amiability as a professional and father. Mom, you have ceaselessly worked to keep me humble, grateful, and driven to make the most of whatever opportunities life brings. Thank you both so much for your encouragement and assistance to help me find a vocation that suits my inherent abilities and my zeal for joining others in their respective quest for purpose and fulfillment. iii TESTING A DIALECTICAL MODEL OF MEANING IN LIFE AND WELL-BEING IN FOUR CULTURES Abstract by Charles Matthew Ching, Ph.D. Washington State University August 2015 Chair: A. Timothy Church It is well established that subjective well-being and meaning in life are important to individuals’ overall psychological functioning. One important but unanswered question is whether meaning in life and well-being are manifested, and related to each other, in similar ways across cultures. This study examined how culture might influence individuals’ experience of meaning in life and subjective well-being. Specifically, Steger, Kawabata, et al.’s (2008) dialectical model of meaning in life was tested in a cross-cultural context using two cultural dimensions used by cultural psychologists to characterize cultural differences (i.e., individualism-collectivism and dialecticism). Participants in four cultures completed a demographic questionnaire; a measure of dialecticism (Spencer-Rodgers, Srivastava et al., 2010); items from self-construal scales; the Meaning in Life Questionnaire (Steger et al., 2006); Scales of Psychological Well-being (Ryff, 1989); a need-satisfaction instrument; and the PANAS-X (Watson & Clark, 1994). Structural equations modeling and hierarchical multiple regression were used to test the study hypotheses. As hypothesized, cultural differences were found in meaning in life and well- being, and their relationship. The cultural mean differences found between the United States, Australia, and Japan were consistent with expectations and were fully or partially accounted for by cultural differences in dialecticism. The presence of meaning in life was positively related to iv positive affect and pleasure-stimulation need satisfaction, and negatively related to negative affect, in all four cultures. There was less definitive evidence of cultural differences in how search for meaning relates to presence of meaning and hedonic well-being. Other results—in particular the hypothesized three-way interaction between culture, presence of meaning, and search for meaning in the prediction of hedonic well-being—were less supportive of Steger et al.’s dialectical model, and some findings were best supported for cultural comparisons of the U.S. and Japan only. Overall, the study demonstrates that individuals in different cultures are both similar and different in their experiences of meaning in life and well-being. Theoretical and applied implications, limitations of the study, and future directions for research were discussed. The study demonstrated the importance of integrating cultural and individual differences when developing models of well-being and designing interventions targeting meaning in life. v TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................... i ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... ix GENERAL INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1 SPECIALTY PAPER: A Critical Review of the Literature 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 3 2. MEANING IN LIFE ..................................................................................................... 6 Definition ............................................................................................................ 6 Measurement ....................................................................................................... 7 Presence versus Search for Meaning ................................................................ 19 Summary ........................................................................................................... 21 3. WELL-BEING ............................................................................................................ 22 Hedonic versus Eudaimonic Well-being .......................................................... 22 Relating Meaning in Life, Well-being, and Psychological Functioning .......... 29 Summary ........................................................................................................... 40 4. CULTURAL UNIVERSALS AND DIFFERENCES ................................................ 41 Theoretical Perspectives ................................................................................... 42 Cross-cultural Studies ....................................................................................... 43 Towards an Integrated Dialectical Model of Meaning in Life and Well- being .................................................................................................................. 58 5. SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ 62 6. REFERENCES ........................................................................................................... 65 vi EMPIRICAL STUDY 1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 84 Meaning in Life ................................................................................................. 85 Cultural Dimensions, Meaning in Life, and Well-being ................................... 88 An Integrated Model of Culture, Meaning in Life, and Well-being ................. 91 Overview of the Present Study ......................................................................... 93 Hypotheses ........................................................................................................ 95 2. METHOD ................................................................................................................... 97 Participants ........................................................................................................ 97 Instruments ........................................................................................................ 98 Procedure ........................................................................................................ 102 Measurement Invariance ................................................................................. 102 3. RESULTS ................................................................................................................. 105 Descriptive Statistics ....................................................................................... 105 Cultural Differences in Dialecticism and Self-Construal ............................... 106 Cultural Differences in Meaning in Life Dimensions (Hypothesis 1) ............ 107 Cultural Differences in Hedonic Well-being (Hypothesis 2) ......................... 107 Dialecticism as a Mediator of Cultural Differences in Meaning in Life and Well-being (Hypothesis 3) .............................................................................. 108 Presence of Meaning Predicting Hedonic Well-being (Hypothesis 4) ........... 111 Relating Search for Meaning to Presence of Meaning and Hedonic Well-being (Hypothesis 5) ................................................................................................. 112 vii Three-way Interaction between Culture, Presence of Meaning, and Search