Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The so-called etic–emic ‘dilemma’ has been pervasive, tenacious and constantly debatable in cross-cultural psychology ever since the terms were borrowed from the field of psycholinguistics and introduced to culture-comparative research in the 1960s. However, neither then nor now has there been a clear and completely useful differentiation between ‘etic’ and ‘emic’ perspectives. Furthermore, the etic–emic distinction, seemingly omnipresent in theoretical discussions, often failed to inform methodology and research practices. These difficulties have persisted in current cross-cultural research and theorizing, and the central question of how generalizable psychological findings are continues to challenge scientific psychology. It is argued that similar concepts have appeared in various theoretical guises over the years, and that one must be mindful of the importance of the basic ideas behind these terms. From this historical perspective, Helfrich’s (1999) discussion of the etic– emic dilemma and her ‘principle of triarchic resonance’ are useful, but partially redundant, contributions to the literature.

Keywords

cross-cultural psychology etic vs emic approaches generalizability of psychological findings

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Barker, R.G. (1968). Ecological psychology. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Barker, R.G. , & Barker, L.S. (1961). Behavior units for the comparative study of cultures. In B. Kaplan (Ed.), Studying personality cross-culturally. New York: Harper & Row.

Berry, J.W. , & Dasen, P.R. (Eds.). (1974). Culture and cognition. London: Methuen.

Berry, J.W. , Poortinga, Y.H. , Segall, M.H. , & Dasen, P.R. (1992). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Headland, T.N. , Pike, K.L. , & Harris, M. (Eds.). (1990). Emics and etics: The insider–outsider debate. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Helfrich, H. (1999). Beyond the dilemma of cross-cultural psychology: Resolving the dilemma between etic and emic approaches. Culture & Psychology, 5(2), 131–153.

Hermans, H.J.M. , & Kempen, H.J.G. (1998). Moving cultures: The perilous problems of cultural dichotomies in a globalizing society. American Psychologist, 53, 1111–1120.

10.

Jahoda, G. (1977). In pursuit of the emic–etic distinction: Can we ever capture it? In Y.H. Poortinga (Ed.), Basic problems in cross-cultural psychology. Selected proceedings of the international conference of the International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology.Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.

11.

Kelly, G.A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton.

12.

Lewin, K. (1951). Problems of research in social psychology. In Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers. New York: Harper & Brothers.

13.

Lonner, W.J. , & Adamopoulos, J. (1994). Absolutism, relativism, and universalism in the study of human behavior. In W. J. Lonner & R.S. Malpass (Eds.), Psychology and culture. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

14.

Meehl, P.E. (1954). Clinical versus statistical prediction. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

15.

Segall, M.H. , Lonner, W.J. , & Berry, J.W. (1998). Cross-cultural psychology as a scholarly discipline: On the flowering of culture in behavioral research. American Psychologist, 53, 1101–1110.

16.

Triandis, H.C. (1974). Major theoretical and methodological issues in crosscultural psychology. In J.L.M. Dawson & W.J. Lonner (Eds.), Readings in cross-cultural psychology: Proceedings of the inaugural meeting of the International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.

17.

van de Vijver, F.J.R. , & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for crosscultural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

18.

Werner, O. , & Campbell, D.T. (1970). Translating, working through interpreters, and the problem of decentering. In R. Naroll & R. Cohen (Eds.), A handbook of method in cultural anthropology. New York: American Museum of Natural History.

Helfrich’s ‘Principle of Triarchic Resonance’: A Commentary on Yet Another Perspective on the Ongoing and Tenacious Etic–Emic Debate

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References