This article examines the link between culture and divorce attitudes using country-level data of the International Social Survey Programme 1994. Outside of examining the favorability of attitudes, we distinguish different types of attitudes based on whether the consequences of marital dissolution on children were considered when evaluating the acceptability of divorce. Testing competing hypotheses derived from attitude research and cross-cultural psychology, we demonstrate that (a) individualist societies exhibit more favorable divorce attitudes than collectivist societies but that (b) there is a curvilinear relationship between culture and type of divorce attitude, such that highly individualist and highly collectivist societies are similar with regard to the structure of prevailing divorce attitudes. The discussion focuses on the broader meanings of endorsing certain types of divorce attitudes in individualist and collectivist cultures.
Alba, J.W., & Hutchinson, J.W. (1987). Dimensions of consumer expertise. Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 411-454.
2.
Barber, N. (2003). Divorce and reduced economic and emotional interdependence: A cross-national study. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage , 39, 113-124.
3.
Bellah, R.N., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W.M., Swidler, A., & Tipton, S.M. (1985). Habits of the heart: Individualism and commitment in American life. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
4.
Berger, I.E., & Mitchell, A.A. (1989). The effect of advertising on attitude accessibility, attitude confidence, and the attitude-behavior relationship. Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 269-279.
5.
Bodenmann, G., Charvoz, L., Bradbury, T.N., Bertoni, A., Lafrate, R., Giuliani, C., et al. (2006). Attractors and barriers to divorce: A retrospective study in threeEuropean countries. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 45, 1-23.
6.
Brehm, J.W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. New York: Academic Press.
7.
Cross, S.E., Gore, J.S., & Morris, M.L. (2003). The relational-interdependent self-construal, self-concept consistency, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 933-944.
8.
Diener, E., Diener, M., & Diener, C. (1995). Factors predicting the subjective well-being of nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 851-864.
9.
Dion, K.K., & Dion, K.L. (1996). Cultural perspectives on romantic love. Personal Relationships, 3, 5-17.
10.
Dion, K.L., & Dion, K.K. (2005). Culture and relationships: The downside of self-contained individualism. In R. M. Sorrentino, D. Cohen, J. M. Olson , & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), Cultural and social behavior: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 10, pp. 77-94). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11.
Eurostat. (2006). Population statistics. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
12.
Hall, E.T. (1976). Beyond culture. New York: Doubleday.
13.
Heine, S.J., & Lehman, D.R. (1997). Culture, dissonance, and self-affirmation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 389-400.
14.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .
15.
Holden, K.C., & Smock, P.J. (1991). The economic costs of marital dissolution: Why do women bear a disproportionate cost? Annual Review of Sociology , 17, 51-78.
16.
Inglehart, R. (1990). Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
17.
Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
18.
Inglehart, R., & Baker, W.E. (2000). Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of traditional values. American Sociological Review, 65, 19-51.
19.
International Social Survey Program. (1997). International social survey program: Family and changing gender roles II, 1994 [Computer file]. ICPSR version. Köln, Germany: Zentralarchiv für Empirische Sozialforschung [Producer]. Köln, Germany: Zentralarchiv für Empirische Sozialforschung & Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research [Distributors].
20.
Iwao, S. (1997). Consistency orientation and models of social behavior: Is it not time for West to meet East. Japanese Psychological Research, 39, 323-332.
21.
Kalmijn, M., & Uunk, W. (2007). Regional value differences in Europe and the social consequences of divorce: A test of the stigmatization hypothesis. Social Science Research, 36, 447-468.
22.
Katz, I., & Hass, R.G. (1988). Racial ambivalence and American value conflict: Correlational and priming studies of dual cognitive structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 893-905.
23.
LaPierre, R.T. (1934). Attitudes versus actions. Social Forces, 13, 230-237.
24.
Lester, D. (1995). Individualism and divorce. Psychological Reports, 76, 258.
25.
Levinger, G. (1999). Duty to whom? Reconsidering attractions and barriers as determinants of commitment in relationship. In J. M. Adams & W. H. Jones (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal commitment and relationship stability (pp. 37-52). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
26.
Linville, P.W. (1982). The complexity-extremity effect and age-based stereotyping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 42, 193-211.
27.
Liu, M. (1999). Enduring violence and staying in marriage: Stories of battered women in rural China. Violence Against Women, 5, 1469-1492.
28.
May, V. (2005). Divorce in Finnish women's life stories: Defining "moral" behaviour. Women's Studies International Forum, 28, 473-483.
29.
Morgan, S.P. (1986). On identifying determinants of a divorce in a divorcing population: Comments on Rankin and Maneker. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 673-675.
30.
Morgan, S.P., & Rindfuss, R.R. (1985). Marital disruption: Structural and temporal dimensions. American Journal of Sociology, 90, 1055-1077.
31.
Roland, A. (1988). In search of self in India and Japan. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
32.
Ross, C.E., & Mirowsky, J. (1999). Parental divorce, life-course disruption and adult depression. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 1034-1045.
33.
Savani, K., Markus, H.R., & Conner, A.L. (2008). Let your preference be your guide? Preferences and choices are more tightly linked for North Americans than for Indians. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 861-876.
34.
Schovanec, B., & Lee, C. (2001). Culture and divorce: The relationship of values and attitudes in a Protestant sample. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 36, 159-177.
35.
Singh, G. (1986). Violence against wives in India. Response to the Victimization of Women and Children, 9, 16-18.
36.
Singh, S.N., & Kanjirathinkal, M. (1999). Levels and styles of commitment in marriage: The case of Asian Indian immigrants. In M. J. Adams & W. H. Jones (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal commitment and relationship stability (pp. 307-323). New York: Kluwer Academic.
37.
Sullivan, P.L. (2005). Culture, divorce, and family mediation in Hong Kong. Family Court Review, 43, 109-123.
38.
Tetlock, P.E. (1986). A value pluralism model of ideological reasoning . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 819-827.
39.
Tetlock, P.E., Peterson, R.S., & Lerner, J. (1996). Revising the value pluralism model: Incorporating social content and context postulates. In C. Seligman, J. M. Olson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The psychology of values: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 8, pp. 25-51). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
40.
Triandis, H.C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview.
41.
Triandis, H.C. (1999). Cross-cultural psychology. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 2, 127-143.
42.
Vandello, J.A., & Cohen, D. (1999). Patterns of individualism and collectivism across the United States. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 77, 279-292.
43.
Whitehead, B.D. (1997). The divorce culture. New York : Alfred Knopf.
