Sylvia Huwae | Tilburg University (original) (raw)
Papers by Sylvia Huwae
International Journal of Psychology, Sep 8, 2017
Recently, researchers have begun to explore people's motives to forgive those who have offend... more Recently, researchers have begun to explore people's motives to forgive those who have offended them. Using a recall method, we examined whether such motives (relationship‐, offender‐ or self‐focused) differ between and within cultures that are more collectivistic (Moluccan Islands in Indonesia) or more individualistic (the Netherlands) and whether this depends on people's relationship with the offender. More specifically, we examined the idea that other‐focused motives should be more important in cultures that are more collectivistic and that self‐focused motives should prevail in more individualistic cultures. We found that Moluccan participants indeed endorsed relationship‐ and offender‐focused motives more than Dutch participants. Moluccan and Dutch participants did not, however, differ in the extent to which they endorsed self‐focused motives. Furthermore, Dutch participants were more likely to endorse relationship motives (especially in close relations) than self‐focused motives. For Moluccan participants, relationship‐, offender‐ and self‐focused motives were equally important and also did not depend on how close they were with the offender. Differences between the samples could not be explained by the extent to which people defined themselves as more independent or interdependent. The implications of these findings for future research on forgiveness motives are discussed.
Asian Journal of Social Psychology, Feb 6, 2018
This study examines people's motives to (not) forgive group members who violate an important grou... more This study examines people's motives to (not) forgive group members who violate an important group norm. More specifically, we attempt to determine what is the primary focus in such a situation (the group, the offender, the relationship, or the self), and whether this depends on how important the group is and on the cultural context (more individualist or more collectivist). Our sample includes Moluccans living in Indonesia (more collectivist) and Moluccans in the Netherlands (more individualist). Participants were asked to evaluate a scenario in which a group member (close or nonclose other) violated an important group norm. We find that Indonesian Moluccans are more likely not to forgive group members who violate a group norm than Dutch Moluccans. This finding suggests that the group is more important to Indonesian Moluccans. Across the two samples, however, participants were more inclined to forgive an ingroup deviant for the benefit of this person or their relationship than for the benefit of the group. Interestingly, selffocused concerns were more important among Indonesian Moluccans and differences between the samples in the relative importance of the different motives could not be explained by people's self-definition (i.e., more independent or interdependent). Implications of these findings for the literature on forgiveness and on individualism-collectivism are discussed.
International Journal of Psychology, 2016
Previous research suggests that in collectivistic cultures, people tend to suppress their emotion... more Previous research suggests that in collectivistic cultures, people tend to suppress their emotions more than in individualistic cultures. Little research, however, has explored cross-cultural differences in emotion regulation in everyday interactions. Using a daily social interaction method, we examined whether people from collectivistic backgrounds (Chinese exchange students and immigrants from the Moluccas, Indonesia) living in the Netherlands differed from those from individualistic backgrounds (Dutch natives) in emotion suppression during everyday interactions. We also examined whether this depended on their relationship with the interaction partner(s). We found that Chinese participants suppressed positive and negative emotions more than Dutch and Moluccan participants and that this was related to differences in interdependent and independent self-construal across the samples. We also found that Chinese participants suppressed positive emotions less in interactions with close others, whereas Dutch participants suppressed negative emotions more with non-close others. No such differences were found for Moluccans. Our findings support the idea that people from collectivistic cultures suppress emotions more than those from individualistic cultures, but they also suggest that this depends on who the interaction partner is. Furthermore, they suggest that emotion suppression may change when people with collectivistic backgrounds have been raised in individualistic cultures.
The present study examined how members from an individualistic culture (Dutch students) and membe... more The present study examined how members from an individualistic culture (Dutch students) and members from a collectivistic culture (Chinese exchange students) responded to injustice that targeted them personally or to injustice that targeted them as a member of a group. Our main expectations were that members from a more individualistic culture would respond more negatively to instances of personal injustice whereas members from a more collectivistic culture would respond more negatively to group-based injustice. To this end, a laboratory experiment was conducted. Participants either had to perform a set of tasks individually or with a group. They were lead to believe that they competed with another individual or a group and were told that the person or the group with the best score would receive extra money. The tasks were pre-programmed so that participants always got the best score. The injustice manipulation consisted of a change of procedure by allocating the extra reward to the...
Summary of thesis “Different cultures, different selves? Suppression of emotions and reactions to... more Summary of thesis “Different cultures, different selves? Suppression of emotions and reactions to transgressions across cultures”, Sylvia Huwae People can differ in how they respond to everyday situations. For example, when treated unfairly by someone, some people may express their anger and find it difficult to forgive the person who offended them. Others, however, may suppress this negative feeling and forgive the offender. People can also differ in their motives to forgive the offender. These variations in how people respond to the same situation can - at least in part - be explained by their cultural background. An often used framework to understand cross-cultural differences in how people feel, think and behave in social situations is that of individualism-collectivism (IC). Individualism involves cultures in which ties between individuals are relatively loose and the interests of the individual often prevail over the interests of the group. Collectivism, by contrast, refers to...
International Journal of Psychology, Sep 8, 2017
Recently, researchers have begun to explore people's motives to forgive those who have offend... more Recently, researchers have begun to explore people's motives to forgive those who have offended them. Using a recall method, we examined whether such motives (relationship‐, offender‐ or self‐focused) differ between and within cultures that are more collectivistic (Moluccan Islands in Indonesia) or more individualistic (the Netherlands) and whether this depends on people's relationship with the offender. More specifically, we examined the idea that other‐focused motives should be more important in cultures that are more collectivistic and that self‐focused motives should prevail in more individualistic cultures. We found that Moluccan participants indeed endorsed relationship‐ and offender‐focused motives more than Dutch participants. Moluccan and Dutch participants did not, however, differ in the extent to which they endorsed self‐focused motives. Furthermore, Dutch participants were more likely to endorse relationship motives (especially in close relations) than self‐focused motives. For Moluccan participants, relationship‐, offender‐ and self‐focused motives were equally important and also did not depend on how close they were with the offender. Differences between the samples could not be explained by the extent to which people defined themselves as more independent or interdependent. The implications of these findings for future research on forgiveness motives are discussed.
Asian Journal of Social Psychology, Feb 6, 2018
This study examines people's motives to (not) forgive group members who violate an important grou... more This study examines people's motives to (not) forgive group members who violate an important group norm. More specifically, we attempt to determine what is the primary focus in such a situation (the group, the offender, the relationship, or the self), and whether this depends on how important the group is and on the cultural context (more individualist or more collectivist). Our sample includes Moluccans living in Indonesia (more collectivist) and Moluccans in the Netherlands (more individualist). Participants were asked to evaluate a scenario in which a group member (close or nonclose other) violated an important group norm. We find that Indonesian Moluccans are more likely not to forgive group members who violate a group norm than Dutch Moluccans. This finding suggests that the group is more important to Indonesian Moluccans. Across the two samples, however, participants were more inclined to forgive an ingroup deviant for the benefit of this person or their relationship than for the benefit of the group. Interestingly, selffocused concerns were more important among Indonesian Moluccans and differences between the samples in the relative importance of the different motives could not be explained by people's self-definition (i.e., more independent or interdependent). Implications of these findings for the literature on forgiveness and on individualism-collectivism are discussed.
International Journal of Psychology, 2016
Previous research suggests that in collectivistic cultures, people tend to suppress their emotion... more Previous research suggests that in collectivistic cultures, people tend to suppress their emotions more than in individualistic cultures. Little research, however, has explored cross-cultural differences in emotion regulation in everyday interactions. Using a daily social interaction method, we examined whether people from collectivistic backgrounds (Chinese exchange students and immigrants from the Moluccas, Indonesia) living in the Netherlands differed from those from individualistic backgrounds (Dutch natives) in emotion suppression during everyday interactions. We also examined whether this depended on their relationship with the interaction partner(s). We found that Chinese participants suppressed positive and negative emotions more than Dutch and Moluccan participants and that this was related to differences in interdependent and independent self-construal across the samples. We also found that Chinese participants suppressed positive emotions less in interactions with close others, whereas Dutch participants suppressed negative emotions more with non-close others. No such differences were found for Moluccans. Our findings support the idea that people from collectivistic cultures suppress emotions more than those from individualistic cultures, but they also suggest that this depends on who the interaction partner is. Furthermore, they suggest that emotion suppression may change when people with collectivistic backgrounds have been raised in individualistic cultures.
The present study examined how members from an individualistic culture (Dutch students) and membe... more The present study examined how members from an individualistic culture (Dutch students) and members from a collectivistic culture (Chinese exchange students) responded to injustice that targeted them personally or to injustice that targeted them as a member of a group. Our main expectations were that members from a more individualistic culture would respond more negatively to instances of personal injustice whereas members from a more collectivistic culture would respond more negatively to group-based injustice. To this end, a laboratory experiment was conducted. Participants either had to perform a set of tasks individually or with a group. They were lead to believe that they competed with another individual or a group and were told that the person or the group with the best score would receive extra money. The tasks were pre-programmed so that participants always got the best score. The injustice manipulation consisted of a change of procedure by allocating the extra reward to the...
Summary of thesis “Different cultures, different selves? Suppression of emotions and reactions to... more Summary of thesis “Different cultures, different selves? Suppression of emotions and reactions to transgressions across cultures”, Sylvia Huwae People can differ in how they respond to everyday situations. For example, when treated unfairly by someone, some people may express their anger and find it difficult to forgive the person who offended them. Others, however, may suppress this negative feeling and forgive the offender. People can also differ in their motives to forgive the offender. These variations in how people respond to the same situation can - at least in part - be explained by their cultural background. An often used framework to understand cross-cultural differences in how people feel, think and behave in social situations is that of individualism-collectivism (IC). Individualism involves cultures in which ties between individuals are relatively loose and the interests of the individual often prevail over the interests of the group. Collectivism, by contrast, refers to...