WVS Webinar on March 25: How the WVS Data Have Helped to Systematise Different Cultural Models

Welcome to the World Values Survey Association's webinar series. In these monthly sessions, we invite scholars from various disciplines who utilize WVS survey data, either alone or in combination with other datasets, to share their latest findings and insights. The webinars will explore a wide range of topics measured through the time-series WVS surveys, covering analysis of both substantive issues and methodological perspectives. Learn more about the forthcoming webinars here.

In this webinar, our guest speaker, Anneli Kaasa examines the challenge posed by the abundance of cultural models that define values, attitudes, beliefs, and norms across countries and regions, noting that while many models exist, their differences can be more confusing than helpful. Through empirical analyses using WVS data, the author explores how modern cultural models—such as Inglehart’s, Minkov’s revision of Hofstede’s, and Schwartz’s—are essentially rotations of each other, capturing the same cultural elements but grouping them differently. Ultimately, the research finds that by systematically merging these models, it becomes possible to create a framework that allows researchers to better relate various cultural dimensions, enhancing the ability to compare and generalize findings across disciplines.

The research on culture as a pattern of values, attitudes, beliefs, and norms that differentiates countries or regions has reached the point where the abundance of different cultural models all offering various dimensions might be rather confusing than helping. Fortunately, the work of systematizing various cultural models has started as well, including for example the theoretical analysis by Kaasa (read full paper here) merging Hofstede’s, Schwartz’s and Inglehart’s model. However, for empirical analysis, it makes sense to turn to the modern cultural models providing up-to-date data, such as Inglehart’s model providing Inglehart-Welzel cultural map, Minkov’s revision of Hofstede’s model, and more. This presentation demonstrates, based on an analysis by Kaasa and Minkov (read full paper here), how using the WVS data creatively helped to show that modern cultural models are actually rotations of each-other. They all cover the same cultural elements just grouping those elements in different ways. While covering both Inglehart’s and revised Hofstede’s model, that analysis could not tell anything about the Schwartz’s model. Hence, the story goes on based on another empirical analysis by Kaasa and Welzel (read full paper here) showing how using additional data from the WVS enables us to position the elements of the Schwartz’s model in relation to other models. Altogether, a system is provided that helps researchers to relate various cultural models. After all, one important aim of studying cultural differences is to search for explanations for differences in various sociological, economic or political phenomena. It is much easier to generalise the results by different authors using different cultural models when a system merging different models is available.

Anneli Kaasa is Professor of Social and Cultural Studies in Economics at the University of Tartu, Estonia. She holds a PhD in economics from the same university. Her current research is about cultural differences, conceptualising and measuring cultural dimensions, and relationship of culture with other societal and economic phenomena. She is the Head of the Chair of Economic Theory and teaches courses about higher mathematics, economic theory, and cultural context in economics and business. Her interests include using various novel quantitative research methods. She has published in various journals covering a wide spectrum of social sciences. In recent years, she has published a series of articles systematizing the conceptualization and measurement of culture in the Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology and Cross Cultural Research.

‹ back