Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies
 !"#$%, Vol. 4, No. 2 (2003), 269–283

Marrying the Dragon (
) to the Phoenix (
): Twenty-Eight Years of Doing a Psychology of the Chinese People

MICHAEL HARRIS BOND The Chinese University of Hong Kong

 !"
 !"#$%

When drinking water from a stream, remember its source. Chinese admonition from a song by Yu Hsin

It has been a privilege to pursue my quest for intellectual harmony among the Chinese people over these last 28 years! In contrast to the British Canadian culture of my origin, Chinese culture appears big, deep, remote, strange, mysterious, and impenetrable. As a psychologist, how was I to understand persons socialized into such a different reality? Early in my adventure, I intuited that, if I could wrestle with that mighty dragon and find a satisfying psychological balance, then surely Confucius had been right when he proposed that
 !"#$%& “Within the four seas, all people are members of the same family.” In this presentation, I will describe my journey into the heart of the dragon, aided by the idealism of

This is an invited keynote address given to the Fourth Pan-Chinese Psychology Conference, Taipei, Taiwan, November 9–11, 2002. Correspondence should be sent to: Michael Harris Bond, Department of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N.T. Hong Kong. E-mail: [email protected]. 270 Michael Harris Bond the phoenix, to discover a representation of our unity as human beings arising from the ashes of cultural separateness. This has been yet another
 “Journey to the west”, and like all monkeys I have been assisted in my intellectual labors, most especially by yet another monkey. His welcoming, respectful and scientifically grounded conversation has provided the challenging counterpoint necessary for me to integrate cultural diversity into my present apprehension of our human unity.

 !"#$%
 !"#
 !"#$%&'()*&+,-.

By the blending of breath From the sun and the shade, Equilibrium comes to the world. Lao Tzu, The Way of Virtue, poem 42, lines 7–9

“Sire, now I have told you about all the cities I know.” “There is still one of which you never speak.” Marco Polo bowed his head. “Venice”, the Khan said. Marco smiled. “What else do you believe I have been talking to you about?” The Emperor did not turn a hair. “And yet I have never heard you mention that name.” And Polo said, “Every time I describe a city, I am saying something about Venice.” “When I ask you about other cities, I want to hear about them. And about Venice when I ask you about Venice.” “To distinguish the other cities’ qualities, I must speak of a first city that remains implicit. For me, it is Venice.” Italo Calvino, Invisible Cities

What a validating prospect this is — an invitation from my much respected friend and colleague, collaborator and intellectual gadfly, Kuo-Shu Yang (
 ), to address the Fourth Pan-Chinese Conference on Psychological Research about my experience of doing psychology with the Chinese people. I have practiced as an academic social psychologist these last 28 years at The Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK), and appreciate Dragon and Phoenix 271 this opportunity to explain myself — how I arrived here in the first place, my struggles to understand the psychology of the Chinese people, and how my career lived with, about and for the Chinese people has taken me beyond the Chinese face and “onto the four seas where all people are members of the same family.” At the same time, what an intimidating prospect this is. In 1997, I edited a book of auto-biographies by some luminaries in the field of cross- cultural psychology, called, “Working at the interface of cultures: 18 lives in social science.” I asked each contributor to reflect on his or her time spent in foreign cultures, and assess how those experiences had shaped the development of their thinking as a cross-culturalist. My assessment then and now is that we psychologists, so skilled at formulating the behavior of others, fumble about when portraying our own lives. We grasp at details, organizing a chronology, as if somehow a pattern, a drama, a mythical script will emerge from the litany of events. Millay’s poem captures this frustrating quest so well: Upon this gifted age, in its dark hour, Rains from the sky a meteoric shower Of facts … they lie unquestioned, uncombined. Wisdom enough to leech us of our ill Is daily spun; but there exists no loom To weave it into fabric; Edna St. Vincent Millay, Collected Poems So, I am not optimistic about my capacity to shed light on my formless darkness. But there is more behind my ambivalence about attaching words to my life. Any attempt at self-discovery and self-presentation, especially in a public forum, runs the risk of self-inflation and self-deception. And an audience of psychologists should be even more acute than most at detect- ing and flagging such artful dodges. This could be an embarrassing expe- rience were it not for the tolerance and forgiveness that I have come to expect from my Chinese colleagues. And who needs my reflections anyway? I do, for one. Discerning, formulating and writing out my understandings of my career doing Chinese psychology will bring clarity for me on these matters, by removing me from “business as usual” to consider “the nature of my business.” It will also enable me to acknowledge and repay some small part of the many debts I owe for this magical life I have been leading. “When drinking from a river, remember its source” (
 !) . 272 Michael Harris Bond

But how will my talk be of use to you? You are my academic peers, and now my audience, as I have been and will continue to be yours. I value your time, especially in a forum on indigenous psychology. I sincerely want “not to do unto others as I would not want done unto myself” (

 !"#$). In the present context, not connecting vitally to your spiritual adventure in committing your academic life to Chinese psychol- ogy would be such a failure. The prospect of that failure worries and humbles me as I write this reflection on my life in Chinese psychology — how can the intellectual development of this 58-year old, Canadian-born male, educated in America, inter-culturally tempered in Japan, and most recently researching in and out of Hong Kong possibly connect to yours? I don’t know, but if you attend to my story, perhaps you will discover mirrors along the path- ways I think I have been traveling. And in their reflections, you may discover yourself more fully, more clearly, more justly revealed. A people is a mirror in which every traveler contemplates his own image. Andre Maurois

How Did I Come to be Studying the Psychology of the Chinese People?

The initial mystery that attends any journey is: How did the traveler reach his starting point in the first place? … Some step started me toward this point, as opposed to all other points on the habitable globe. I must consider; I must discover it. Louise Bogan, Journey Around My Room

I am often asked this question by both Chinese and others. I chose my answer carefully, since most questioners want a perfunctory recounting of a job search and the discovery of favorable working conditions at The Chinese University of Hong Kong. Of the others, some want to hear that I recognized the drumbeat of the Dragon’s dance early and dedicated the rest of my life to following that drumbeat in all its manifestations — childhood fairy tales, Szechuan cooking and chopsticks at the dining table, music of the erhu (
) and the pipa (
) during my teenage years, the study of Chinese language and history at university, mastering a martial art in China Dragon and Phoenix 273 while teaching English, later returning with a fellowship from some funding agency to study linguistic socialization or such topics, followed by a job approach by an academic institution in some Chinese society keen on bringing Chinese culture into the international community of scholars. No, it was none of these. My first recollection of anything Chinese was as a young boy digging in the sandbox, and my mother observing that if I kept digging I would soon reach China. China? China was apparently a country like Canada, but opposite Canada, at the very end of the world, remote from us, at the end of a long tunnel that required Herculean effort to dig and the resourcefulness of Ulysses to travel along. I knew these Greek heroes and even then my mind took a metaphorical turn, so I thought of myself as a mighty adventurer forging a passageway with my plastic shovel! However innocently extravagant was that boyhood fantasy, China had been firmly implanted in my spirit as the object of my quest, my Golden Fleece, the litmus test of my resolve. Thereafter, I carried on with my life, mastering the various academic challenges required to take me to the next level and in the process discov- ering what I enjoyed doing. What I found was a love of travel with the constant stimulation that differences provided. Being somewhere new ap- pealed to my hungry, restless mind. But I also discovered that one could travel without traveling, by exposing the mind to new sights through visual art in books and sounds through music on records and symbolic representations, especially in literature and its less structured, more invit- ing form of poetry. What I did with all this novelty was play at making it understandable, of figuring it out as best I could. I was not always or even usually fun, but it absorbed me. Organizing that understanding in verbal symbols using English grammar was hugely rewarding for me, and when I communicated that understanding successfully, I soared like an eagle on an updraft. I still do. My most intriguing encounters with novelty were with other people. Another person was like a foreign country, exotic, mysterious and demand- ing all the moment-to-moment skills at my disposal. I am a sociable person, and have had few interpersonal traumas in my life, so I readily seek out the company of others, both in person and symbolically. Perhaps then it was inevitable that I would become a social psychologist, marry a fearless and enthusiastic traveling companion, embrace the Baha’i spiritual commitment to internationalism, and live the rest of my life somewhere other than Canada. 274 Michael Harris Bond

Reaching China How does this meandering story get me to Hong Kong, exploring the psychology of the Chinese people? Simply put, I proposed and the Chinese disposed. After preparing myself as best I could to be a social psychologist, I applied for whatever work I could find somewhere else. Our first port of call was Japan, and when the Japanese and I could no longer interface with a job, CUHK accepted my application. As you may know, the logo of CUHK is the feng (
), a mythical creature symbolizing loyalty and perseverance, among other virtues. For 28 years, CUHK and I have loyally persevered with one another. But, like any marriage that survives, it works for both parties. The Chinese University has given me so much - agreeable, tolerant colleagues; disciplined, capable students; comfortable, beautiful quarters; supportive, reliable staff; organized, fair administration. What have I given in return? I have provided the obvious inputs of a good faculty member — long hours at work, positive organizational citizenship, understandable lectures, and sufficient publications of scholarly work, including both primary research and integrative essays. I have discovered that there is no free lunch in Chinese culture, for non-Chinese any more than for Chinese, and I have had to pay my dues with the rest.

Finding Chinese Guides But, I have also provided something essential. During the course of paying my dues, I have been a living connection to another valued cultural tradition. Like the redoubtable Marco Polo in the stories of Italo Calvino, I have entertained and challenged the Emperor and a select circle of his Empire with credible stories of otherness that invite and provoke Him to consider his own Kingdom. My stories have been social psychological reflections on Chinese interpersonal and inter-group behavior, presented as clearly and as sympathetically as I know how at the time. To counterbalance my cultural limitations to create greater integrity in this evolving story, I usually speak in a duet with a Chinese interpreter, like Kuo-Shu Yang, Yeo-Chi King (
 ), Kwang-Kuo Hwang (
 ), or Kwok Leung (
). I encourage them to represent the Chineseness of the behavioral phenomenon we are considering, as they, by responding, force me to confront my Canadianness and identify a little more clearly the perspective out of which I am innocently interpreting the behavioral drama. Dragon and Phoenix 275

This conversation is difficult. One’s cultural positioning is the most elusive of coordinates to discern, as it is so profound and silent. In addition to pushing forward that intellectual quest, we must survive the challenges of our own inter-cultural dynamics — linguistic, socio-pragmatic, and normative. How do you tell a respected friend that he hasn’t got it right? How to be sure that, indeed, he does not have it right? Who shall be first author, and does it matter anyway, and what will the other think of you if you do not raise the issue? Or do? Should you bring a gift this time, or is our friendship past that sort of concern? And how to find out for this relationship now? These are dynamite issues in an inter-cultural relationship, providing ample excuses to retreat into more familiar, more comfortable conversations. I believe that the centrifugal dynamic of retreat in our cross-cultural encounters has been and continues to be offset by two precious virtues — tolerance and intellectual curiosity. All human association requires large doses of forgiveness because we make mistakes with one another all the time, within and across cultural lines. In exchange for that forgiveness, usually granted privately, we have offered one another the excitement of intellectual questioning and the satisfaction of academic discovery. The curiosity driving our search arises in part because our respective cultural heritages provide historical templates and institutional supports. Chinese culture has Chih-Tung Chang (
 ) exhorting, “Chinese learning for the essentials, but Western learning for technology!” (
 !"#
); Canada has its Multiculturalism Act of 1971. Both events represent the culmination of centuries of various forms of openness to other cultures, their people, their science, their art, and their cooking. So, our productive association has many precedents, just as it will have innumerable antecedents. But, we conjured up this rare intellectual magic. It was and is your particular quality of informed, disciplined, imaginative thinking, my colleagues, that attracted me, and continues to do so. It has sustained me in my quest, and draws me forward still. I thank you for this precious gift. I wish that each of you listening to these reflections or reading these words will be inspired likewise “to seek, to strive, to find, and not to yield” in your search for this intellectual companionship across cultural lines. The conversation that emerges can be most illuminat- ing … 276 Michael Harris Bond

 !"
 !"#$%

When drinking water from a river, remember its source. Chinese admonition from a song by Yu Hsin

Coming to Understand the Chinese People

“Well, Mike, it’s an interesting experiment, but it doesn’t quite capture the Chinese idea of mien-tsu (
).” Kuo-Shu Yang, reacting to Bond and Lee (1981)

I have written about the process of cultural discovery and evaluation elsewhere (Bond, 1994, 1995, 1997). Here I will try to synthesize those ideas along with some subsequent insights: 1. The process begins with an immersion into the daily, psychological realities of the people constituting the different cultural group one intends to understand. This immersion stimulates awareness of one’s own cultural traditions, assumptions, scripts, concepts, values and beliefs. This immersion is into a different culture than one’s “mother culture,” so it might be called, “Adult becoming a culturally heterocentric child.” It is similar to that experienced by all immigrants, and studied as cross-cultural adaptation. 2. Ideally, this immersion can be undertaken directly by living among the people in question and interacting with their members across a wide range of life spaces. Less ideal, but a valuable supplement to the lived encounter is indirect mediation through learning about the histories, language, literary and other artistic productions of these people. 3. As social scientists and intellectuals, one reflects on these “encounters with otherness,” using surprises, irritations, and delights as grist for the mill, provocations to a process of identification and conceptualization of the differences. These provocations will only emerge along axes of apprehended difference, and will emerge where these differences exist between one’s culture of origin and one’s current host culture. 4. This process may be facilitated by conversing with knowledgeable, Dragon and Phoenix 277

open social scientists from the host culture, particularly if they have likewise experienced your host culture. The goal of this step is to ensure that local cultural considerations, concepts, and theorizing, both lay and professional, are included in the deliberations and incorporated into the eventual product. 5. Ideas are refined, then concepts are proposed, measured and tested scientifically. At some point this testing must involve other cultural groups, if one’s goal is to identify the “Chineseness,” “Canadian- ness” or any “otherness” characterizing the psychological processes or outcomes discovered. This contrast is a logical requirement of asserting any “otherness.” Through that process, one’s own culture of origin is brought into sharper relief.

Easier to Describe a Thing than to Do It! (
 !) The neat progression of the above list belies the struggles involved. At a mundane level, there is a life to be lived — health to be protected, salaries to be earned, marriages to be nourished, children to be raised, new skills to be mastered, organizations to be accommodated, journal editors to be persuaded, colleagueial networks to be sustained and enlarged. Meeting these challenges require many of the same skills and psychological resources required for successful living anywhere, but perhaps more so when one is functioning in a non-birth culture (Bond, in press). Managing an academic career that focuses on Chinese culture has required careful attention to the delicate animus of cultural chauvinism. I am a non-Chinese social scientist, working from within Chinese culture, and addressing the very heart of its inner dynamics — the personality and social psychological processes characterizing its members. I have obvious shortcomings in the task I have taken upon myself. Some might well ask how this “uncooked” (
) outsider can presume to comment on such “things Chinese.” Perhaps it is a reflection of the resilience and the syncretism of Chinese society that I have been tolerated in my scholarly activities, even welcomed for the bridging functions I serve. I have never been confronted by personal or scholarly attack for the work I do. Your openness to my presence and continuing research is a daily miracle to me, and I am grateful. Such intellectual liberalism is a noble cultural achievement in its own right, and enables me to wrestle with the supreme challenge of trying to understand 278 Michael Harris Bond your culture, of “getting it right.” Instead of inter-personal conflict motivated by cultural exclusion, mine has been a spiritual struggle. Spiritually, I am always working as close to the edge of re-learning and discovery as possible. This entails striving to be open by “bracketing” the “taken-for-granteds” from one’s culture of origin, immersing oneself as fully as one can into cultural otherness to detect its muffled voice, its spider-web logic. This is unsettling work, exposing the cultural founda- tions on which we all stand. These explorations often leave me questioning many of my “taken-for-granteds,” wrestling with what R. D. Laing (1962) termed “ontological security”: A man may have a sense of his presence in the world as a real, alive, whole and, in a temporal sense, continuous person. As a result, he can live out into the world equally real, whole, and continuous. Such a basically ontologically secure person will encounter all the hazards of life — social, ethical, spiritual, biological, from a centrally firm sense of his own and other people’s reality and identity. (p. 14) I submit that the experience of ontological insecurity is the price of spiritually open cultural exploration. For some it may provoke retreat back into one’s culture of origin. For me it has provoked an enlargement of my humanity, a reduction of my own “innocent ethnocentrism,” by leading to an appreciation of our common grounding in culture.

 !"#$%&'
 !"#$%&'(%)*

Within the four seas, all people are members of the same family. Confucius, The Analects, chapter 12, verse 5

Towards a Universal Model for Social Behavior

 !
 !
 ! "#$
 !"#$%&'()*&+,-. The way begets one; one begets two; two begets three; three begets the myriad creatures. Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching, poem 42, lines 1–3 (D. C. Lau, trans.) Dragon and Phoenix 279

Although my psychological playing field has been Chinese culture, my intellectual goal is the world — the world’s cultures, and how they play out in the lives of their members to yield the riches of diversity and the simplicity of similarity that characterize our lives. Although I think and act locally, my goal is to understand globally. I began this process as all cultural innocents begin — by taking an idea that emerged naturally from my Mainstream training as a social psychologist, and testing it with locally available participants, in my case Hong Kong university students (Bond, 1979). Happily, the results contra- dicted my expectations. This reversal was my professional wake-up call, alerting me to the possibility that social dynamics might be different in this Chinese locality than in the locality of my training. To assess that possibil- ity with scientific rigor, I graduated to performing two-culture com- parisons, usually contrasting Hong Kong Chinese persons with Americans. Initially, my focus was upon outcomes such as percentage of external attributions, or amount of money contributed to the other in a two-person task. Any resulting difference between persons from these two cultural groups was then “explained” by reference to some presumed and decisive difference in the socialization of persons from the two cultural systems. This sort of psychological experimentation varies in its persuasiveness, depending on the scholarship and theoretical fluency of the writer. More recently, I have focused on the processes leading to a given outcome, such as values predicting behavioral outcomes like choice of tactic for conflict resolution. In such studies, a person’s culture may be conceived as residing in the relative strength of the values he or she endorses, or in the strength of the linkage between these values and the behaviors they drive, or in both. So, for example, the greater empathetic embarrassment typically felt by Hong Kong Chinese compared to Americans is linked to the higher levels of interdependent self-construals characterizing the Hong Kongese (Singelis, Bond, Sharkey, & Lai, 1999). Or, the life satisfaction of Americans is more dependent on their level of self-esteem than it is for Hong Kong Chinese (Kwan, Bond, & Singelis, 1997). The scientific advantage of such studies is that one’s theoretical logic is tested empirically, since the internal, psychological processes are now being measured and linked statistically to the outcomes of interest. This procedure allows our field to test scientifically the often stereotypically based speculations that have driven much cross-cultural work. This unpackaging approach can be extended beyond the typical two- 280 Michael Harris Bond culture comparison, as we have recently done in examining the impact of perceived emotional harm on responses of anger. For Germans, Japanese, Hong Kong Chinese and Americans, the level of felt anger is strongly predicted by the level of norm violation characterizing the harmful episode (Lee et al., 2003). The strength of the linkage between norm violation and anger is the same across all cultural groups, so that differences across groups in the level of felt anger is a function of differences in the level of norm violation precipitating the anger in the first place. The process link- ing norm violation to anger is, however, constant. Given that there are four rather than the typical two cultures involved, the possibility must be enter- tained that a universal process has been found. Of course, the norms themselves may vary, and discovering the variable content of the norms characterizing different relationships in different cultures is one of the pressing agendas in cross-cultural psychology (Argyle, Henderson, Bond, Iizuka, & Contarello, 1986). Nonetheless, the underlying similarity of process is clear. Surprises often occur, however. The psychological mediator presumed to differentiate Chinese populations from others may not do so, for example, the value of harmony in Bond and Hewstone (1988) was found to be equal for both Hong Kongese and English respondents. This result occurred even though it is widely accepted that Chinese place a greater value on harmony (see also Bond, 1988). Or, the mediator presumed to mediate the link between culture and outcome may not do so, for example, value endorsement did not predict frequencies of self-concept categories for either Hong Kongese or Americans in Ip and Bond’s (1995) study. Some other type of mediator may be necessary to explain differences in self-concept category use. Both of these results force us to rethink some of the assumptions that underpinned our research efforts. More dramatic still is the sort of finding that can emerge when cross- cultural studies involve more than two groups — the linkages detected may vary in strength across the cultural groups. So, in a 12-culture study of influence tactics, Fu, Kennedy, Tata, Yukl, and Bond (2002) found that cynical beliefs predicted the rated effectiveness of assertive tactics, but that the strength of this linkage varied across the 12 cultural groups. This kind of finding provokes us to search for a dimension of national variation that may be correlated with the strength of the linkage between mediator and outcome (see e.g., Diener and Diener, 1995). That is, what measurable and theoretically persuasive aspect of national culture would lead a given mediator of assertive tactics of influence to be more or less powerful in one Dragon and Phoenix 281 national culture than another? These answers are elusive and difficult to find; they represent the next generation of complexity in cross-cultural research.

Where is Chineseness? Have we lost the Chineseness of our Chinese participants in this ambitious search for a system within which a person’s behavioral uniqueness is embedded within a complex of measurable personal, social and cultural forces? Has the cultural integrity of our Chinese participants been sacrificed in the process of struggling to extract metric equivalence for our various measures tapping psychological mediators and outcomes? Perhaps somewhat. But, we have done what must be done to effect scientifically defensible cross-cultural comparisons; we can only compare what is comparable. When we remain looking only within a given cultural system, Chinese or other, we will see more complex patterns than appear when we integrate cross-culturally. But then we cannot do the job of cross-cultural science which is precisely to compare across, not within, cultures. Surely part of one’s Chineseness resides in what is comparable, not only in what is not comparable. This is my present approach to understanding the Chineseness of my Chinese participants. It is the same approach I take to the culturedness of any of the cultural groups I study, be they Americans, Brazilians, Iranians, Georgians or Indonesians. All persons are cultured, and all cultural groups are exemplars of the acculturation process common to all humanity. To understand the role of culture, cross-cultural psychologists must work with those features of culture that are comparable, and determine how we share a common humanity. Cross-cultural psychologists will never get it cultur- ally right, only cross-culturally right.
 !"#
 !"
 !"
 !"
 !"
 !"
 !"#$%&'(&)*+, For is and not-is come together; Hard and easy are complementary; Long and short are relative; 282 Michael Harris Bond

High and low are comparative; Pitch and sound make harmony; Before and after are a sequence. Lao Tzu, The Way of Life, poem 2, l. 5–10 (R. B. Blakney, trans.)

References Argyle, M., Henderson, M., Bond, M. H., Iizuka, Y., & Contarello, A. (1986). Cross-cultural variations in relationship rules. International Journal of Psychology, 21, 287–315. Bond, M. H. (1979). Winning either way: The effect of anticipating a competitive interaction on person perception. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5, 316–319. Bond, M. H. (1988). Finding universal dimensions of individual variation in multi- cultural studies of value. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 1009–1015. Bond, M. H. (1994). Into the heart of collectivism: A personal and scientific journey. In U. Kim, H. C. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S. C. Choi, & G. Yoon (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications (pp. 66–76). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Bond, M. H. (1995). Doing social psychology cross-culturally: Into another heart of darkness. In G. Brannigan & M. Merrens (Eds.), The social psychologists: Research adventures (pp. 186–205). New York: McGraw Hill. Bond, M. H. (1997). Two decades of chasing the dragon: A Canadian psychologist assesses his career in Hong Kong. In M. H. Bond (Ed.), Working at the interface of cultures: 18 lives in social science (pp. 179–190). London: Routledge. Bond, M. H. (in press). Cross-cultural social psychology and the real world of culturally diverse teams and dyads. In D. Tjosvold & K. Leung (Eds.), Cross- cultural foundations: Traditions for managing in a global world. Bond, M. H., & Hewstone, M. (1988). Social identity theory and the perception of intergroup relations in Hong Kong. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 12, 153–170. Bond, M. H., & Lee, P. W. H. (1981). Face-saving in Chinese culture: A discussion and experimental study of Hong Kong students. In A. King & R. Lee (Eds.), Social life and development in Hong Kong (pp. 288–305). Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press. Diener, E., & Diener, M. (1995). Cross-cultural correlates of life satisfaction and self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 653–663. Fu, P. P., Kennedy, J., Tata, J., Yukl, G., & Bond, M. H. (2002). The impact of societal cultural values and individual social beliefs on the perceived effective- ness of managerial influence strategies. Manuscript submitted for publication. Dragon and Phoenix 283

Ip, G. W. M., & Bond, M. H. (1995). Culture, values, and the spontaneous self- concept. Asian Journal of Psychology, 1, 30–36. Kwan, V. S. Y., Bond, M. H., & Singelis, T. M. (1997). Pancultural explanations for life satisfaction: Adding relationship harmony to self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1038–1051. Laing, R. D. (1962). Ontological insecurity. In H. M. Ruitenbeek (Ed.), Psychoanalysis and existential psychology (pp. 41–69). New York: E. P. Dutton. Lee, M. T. Y., Bond, M. H., Quigley, B., Ohbuchi, K., Mummenedy, A., & Tedeschi, J. T. (2003). Emotional responses after being harmed by another: A search for possible universals. Manuscript submitted for publication. Singelis, T. M., Bond, M. H., Sharkey, W. F., & Lai, C. S. Y. (1999). Unpackaging culture’s influence on self-esteem and embarrassability: The role of self- construals. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30, 315–341.