Eero.no

Cultural Theory Specified
- The Coherent, Sequential
and Synthetic Individual Approaches
Eero Olli
Graduate Thesis
Departement of Comparative Politics
University of Bergen
ABSTRACT:
Within cultural theory there exists an internal debate about the relationship between the individual and culture. I take my starting point in this unclear relation between the individual and culture, and present three interpretations of cultural theory: The Coherent Individual, The
Sequential Individual and The Synthetic Individual. These three interpretations differ in the way individuals' cultural biases are affected by context, and in the way rejection of a cultural bias is
treated. In the second chapter I present my research design and the survey I use as data material,
develop an apparatus of measurement for cultural biases and examine their reliability and validity. In each of the three following chapters, I run an analysis of individuals' party
preferences based on the different specifications (i.e., Coherent, Sequential, and Synthetic) of the relation between individual and culture. Theoretical assumptions and expectations constrain the analyses in different ways; therefore, none of the analyses alone can answer all of the questions, and, further, each specification must be evaluated on its own premises. To examine each of
these specifications, it is necessary to use statistical analyses that resemble the structure of the
current specification in order to see if the preferences could have been created by the mechanisms described by this version of the theory. The final chapter is a systematic comparison of the three
analyses. The empirical results indicate that individuals often support more than just one cultural bias, and that rejection of a cultural bias has an effect on individuals' party preference. Cultural theory, interpreted as the Synthetic Individual Approach, proved to be a powerfull tool for LIST OF CONTENT:
Culture and Ind ividual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
The Problem of Measuring Cultural Bias . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
The Conten t Validity of Cultural Bias Indicators Cul tura l Bia s Ind icato rs an d Co nstru ct V alidi ty Identification of the Four Emerging Dimensions Reliability of the Cultural Bias Indicators The Coherent Individual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
3.1 Assumptions for the Coherent Individual Restated 3.2 Establishing the Coherent Individual's Cultural Bias Grendstad's Estimate of the Relative Strengths of the Cultural Biases 3.3 The Coherent Individual and Social Background 3.4 Party Preference and The Coherent Individual Party Preference and The Coherent Individual in 1993 Party Preference and Cultural Bias by Grendstad (1995) The Se quential I ndividu al . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
4.1 Recognizing Effects of Sequential Cultural Bias 4.2 Establishing the Sequential Individual's Cultural Bias 4.3 The Sequential Individual's Social Background The Sequential Individual and Social Position 4.4 Party Preference and Interaction Effects Tenden cy Toward s Confu sion for the Multi-Bia sed Resp ondents The Synthetic Individual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
5.2 The Effects of Synthetic Cultural Bias 5.3 Synthetic Individual's Social Background Cultural B iases and In dividual L evel Effe cts - a Cluster A nalysis A T est o f Cu ltura l Bia ses' A ddit ivity Individuals ' Party Preferenc e and Cu ltural Bias - a L ogit Analysis Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
6.2 Do Individuals have One or Several Cultural Biases? 6.3 Are Cultural Biases' Effects Additive? 6.4 How Important is Rejection of Cultural Biases? LIST OF FIGURES:
Figure 1.1 The Five Cultural Biases Mapped into Grid-Group Space Figure 3.1 The Relative Sizes of Coherent Cultural Bias Groups Figure 4.1 Who Are the Supporters of a Cultural Bias? Figure 4.2 Probability of having Two instead of One Bias for Three Age Groups Figure 4.3 Probability of having Three instead of Two Biases for Three Age Groups Figure 4.4 Probability of having Four instead of Three Biases for Three Age Groups Figure 4.5 Mono-Hierarhcy and Party Preference in Adj.Res.
Figure 4.6 Mono-Individualism and Party Preferances in Adj.res.
Figure 4.7 Mono-Egalitarianism and Party Preference in Adj.Res.
Figure 4.8 Mono-Fatalism and Party Preference in Adj.Res.
Figure 4.9 Hierarchy or Individualism and Party Preference Figure 4.10 Hierarchy or Egalitarianism and Party Preference Figure 4.11 Hierarchy or Fatalism and Party Preference Figure 4.12 Individualism or Egalitarianism and Party Preference Figure 4.13 Individualism or Fatalism and Party Preferance Figure 4.14 Egalitarianism or Fatalism and Party Preference Figure 4.15 Probability of Voting for Number of Cultural Biases and 6 Age Groups. Figure 5.1 Median support for Cultural Biases in 6 Age Groups. Figure 5.2 Scatterplot of Age and Sum of Synthetic Cultural Bias Figure 5.3 Typical Synthetic Cultural Bias for 6 Educational Groups Figure 5.4 A Sunflowerplot of Sum of Synthetic Cultural Bias and Years of Education Figure 5.5 SCB Clusters ordered by mean Education lenght and Age Figure 5.6 Sum of SCB for Educational Groups, a Scatterplot with Lowess smoothed Line 142Figure 5.7 A Schematic Overview of Variables in Logit Analysis Figure 5.8 Probability of Preferring SV for Rest of the Sample Figure 5.9 Probability of Preferring SV for Respondents who Attend Church Frequently Figure 5.10 Probability of Preferring DNA for Respondents with Labor Identity Figure 5.11 Probability of Preferring DNA for Respondents without Labor Identity Figure 5.12 Probability of Preferring Sp for Farmers, Fishermen etc.
Figure 5.13 Probability of Preferring Sp for the Rest of the Sample Figure 5.14 Probability of Preferring Krf for Respondents who Attend Church Frequently Figure 5.15 Probability of Preferring Krf for Respondents who don't Attend Church Frequently Figure 5.16 Probability of Preferring H for Respondents with Middle Class Identity Figure 5.17 Probability of Preferring H for Respondents without Middle Class Identity Figure 5.18 Probability of Preferring Frp for Women Figure 5.19 Probability of Preferring Frp for Men Figure 5.20 Women's Probability of Not to know what to vote Figure 5.21 Men's Probability of Not to Know to vote Figure 5.22 Probability of Not Voting for Low Income Respondents Figure 5.23 Probability of Not Voting for High Income Respondents Table 1.1 Three sets of assumptions for cultural theory Table 2.1 The Questions Measuring Cultural Bias, and Their Frequency Distributions. Table 2.2 Principal Components, Equamax rotated Factor matrix. Table 2.3 Reliabilities of the different scales Table 2.4 Correlations between different scales and the Hierarchy variables Table 2.5 Overview of the Questions Included in each Cultural Bias Scale Table 3.1 Support for the Rejected Cultural Biases and Coherent Individuals Table 3.2 Grendstad's Estimates of Cultures' Relative Strengths in Norway (1995) Table 3.3 A Comparison of Grendstad's and My Estimates of the Relative Sizes of the Cultures Table 3.4 Age and the Coherent Individuals' Cultural Bias Table 3.6 Three Age Groups and Coherent Individuals Table 3.7 Level of Education and the Coherent Individual's Cultural Bias Table 3.7 Coherent Individuals Social Position in Column % Table 3.8 Social Position and Coherent Individual's Cultural Bias in Adjusted Residuals Table 3.9 Social Position and Coherent Individuals for respondents older than 60 Years.
Table 3.10 The Coherent Individuals and Party Preference, Column %.
Table 3.11 Cultural bias and Party Preference, adj. res. 1993 Table 3.12 Cultural biases and Party Preference from Grendstad Table 4.1 Sequential Individuals' Cultural Bias Combinations Table 4.2 Sequential Cultural Bias Combinations, Mono, Bi, Tri and Qaudracultural Bias and the Average Age.
Table 4.3 Education in Years, Sequential Combinations of Cultural Biases Table 4.4 Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA): Number of Cultural Biases with Age, Education, and Social Position Table 4.5 Different Relations between Mono- and Bicultural Biases' Effects. Relations Weakening Sequential Individual Approach Marked with Dark.
Table 4.6 Different Relations between Mono- and Bicultural Biases' Effects. Frequensies Calculated from Figures 4.9 to 4.14 . Table 5.1 Cluster Centers from The Cultural Bias Combinations Table 5.2 Party preference and cultural biases Table 5.3 A Boolean Presentation of Party Supporters Mean Positions Table 5.4 Possible Coalitions based on Cultural Biases Table 5.5 SCB Clusters and Party Preference in Adj. Res.
Table 5.6 Test of non-additivity for Cultural Biases by using 16 Clusters to represent the non-additive element in the model.
Table 6.1 Theoretical Expectations for Each of the Approaches Table 6.2 Number of Biases Supported by Sequential Individuals Table 6.3 Synthetic Individuals in Clusters Ordered by the Number of Supported Biases Table 6.4 Comparison of the Sequential and Synthetic Individual Approaches fit to the expectations of biases effect on party preference. Table 6.5 Theoretical Expectations for each Approach and Results from the Comparison of the Empirical Analyzes.
Acknow ledgements
I want to thank, especially, my wife Deborah Miller for enduring my absence and moodynes during the writing. Without her encouraging support this thesis would never have taken form. I also want to tank her for proof-reading the manuscript. I have done several changes since and all mistakes are my own.
I want also thank thank my advisor Per Selle and Gunnar Grendstad for their time and for the c onstruc tive critiz ism they h ave giv en duri ng the p rocess. LOS-center has provided me with an office where I have had the both the privacy and NSD have provided me with the data. NSD is neither responsible nor accountable for my application or analysis of these data.
I want t o thank everybo dy who has tak e their tim e to listen to my idea s and f rustratio ns, I want spe cially to mention Kristin Strøm snes, Ole-Jo han Eike land, Ma rcus Buc k, Harald Grime n, Sime n Innv ær, and everybo dy at Eldo raro.

Source: http://eero.no/publ/Olli_1995_chapter_0_-_list_of_content_etc.pdf