Part 8: Autism and Geert Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions Theory - Indulgence v Restraint

->Part 7<-

The last of Hofstede's dichotomies, Indulgence v Restraint (IVR) was introduced via a study performed by Michael Minkov in 2010. It is the least studied of the dimensions and I only include it here because Hofstede does so on his site. At times dimensions are introduced and removed or changed later so this analysis is bound by the uncertainty of the dimension.

Generally Hofstede defines the two parts as:

• Indulgence: a tendency to allow relatively free gratification of basic and natural human desires related to enjoying life and having fun.
• Restraint: a conviction that such gratification needs to be curbed or regulated by strict social norms

[p232 - 232 Cultures and Organizations: Software for the Mind, Third Edition]

While Kwintessential does not have a map for this dimension (yet) I did find this map of scores corresponding to the Minkov study results. Venezuela comes out at the top of the chart with a score of 100 (this study used a 100 point scale rather than the 120 Hofstede had originally introduced). Pakistan came in at the other end of the spectrum with zero. The English speaking cluster all came in at the high 60's to low 70's indicating a fairly permissive society.

From a theoretical perspective this is the hardest for me to place in regards to the Autism subculture. Many forms of stimming for the longest time was looked down upon as unacceptable regardless of the society and certainly our general behavior has been identified as outside the norm. In the Hofstede book mentioned above there is a quote about IVR that "In loose societies norms are expressed with a wide range of alternative channels, and deviant behavior is easily is easily tolerated (p.233). I imagine a poll of most ASD in the loose English speaking cluster societies would not find them all that accepting. True Autism is not punished by death (for the most part) in these societies but when that is the measure of acceptance I think we lose any fine analysis.

On the flip side the adherence to routine and internally defined norms would indicate that as a subculture we are more on the restraint side. However each of these are defined individually and while there might be some similarities it is unlikely that ASD folk share a majority of routines/norms. Additionally the difficulties in forming relationships would pose a pseudo-caste system where everyone is broken down into degrees of how much we can communicate and relate to them.

I think it is safe to say that this debate will continue on for some time and there is no satisfying conclusion for-- or from-- me here. In the meantime I suggest we consider our parent culture's leanings in thinking about our own and then refine our thoughts on a case by case basis. In my own case I am in the United States which tolerates, and even encourages the accumulation of wealth, yet personally I have an antipathy towards people I perceive as greedy. Therefore when encountering a situation along these lines I might scale my response more along the lines of me dealing with a 'more indulgent than I' person.

And while Kwintessential does not have tips specific to the IVR dimension they provide guides on specific countries that will help. Consider Pakistan, which scored a zero, and Venezuela-- a 100-- and the tips provided there. Unlike the previous dimension (Long Term Orientation) where China could serve as a proxy for a tip sheet I think each country should be taken on a case by case basis. As an example much of Pakistan's rigidity might be attributed to the influence of fundamentalist religious views and certainly certain parts of the US could be found just as rigid. In these cases the difference is simply in which is more institutionalized at the moment.

Helpful Resources:

Target map on Indulgence v Restraint - 100 point scale rather than the 120 used elsewhere

Cultures and Organizations: Software for the Mind, Third Edition

Tips on Countries from Kwintessential

Part 6: Autism and Geert Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions Theory - Masculinity v Femininity

->Part 5<-

The dichotomy I will be addressing in this post is bit problematic because the naming of it is challenging in its sexist titles. Hofstede decided that countries that show competitiveness, assertiveness, ambition, materialism and desire for power are Masculine in nature while those who value relationships and quality of life are Feminine. Certainly stereotypes of both genders can be used to support the naming but, on the contrary, anyone at a beauty contest can attest to female competitiveness and I  believe Quality of Life (at least in their minds) is pursued by men as well as women. Additionally, gender role distinction is higher for masculine societies than feminine which flies in the face of nearly every romance novel on the market today.  Nevertheless there is a polarization detailed by his research and thus requires some form of labeling. Various people have renamed the poles to Quantity of Life v Quality of Life... still problematic in my view but less sexist. I will stick with the original names to maintain continuity with the original research but keep in mind they are labels rather than descriptors.

Before I list the country scores also keep in mind that this is not capturing Foreign Relations policy but individual attitudes at a group level. For instance the US scores almost in the middle of the dichotomy with a 62. When viewing Foreign Policy over the past fifty years the ambition, power and aggression-- much less assertiveness-- immediately jump out as extreme examples. However that is from a nationalistic stand point and it is often true that national behavior and individual behaviors are different. Another conundrum is that Russia scores a 36 on the scale meaning it is heavy to the feminine side which would also go contrary to its foreign relations since it was first formed. Norway and Sweden fall at the extreme feminine side with single digit scores.

As a subculture in the United States, UK, Australia and other English speaking countries I think we would have the same confusion presented by our societies. However I will go out on a limb and say that we squelch our ambition, competitiveness and assertiveness out of a desire to avoid conflict. Research does indeed show a difficulty in identifying with a single gender (Williams, P., & Allard, A. (1996). Case study: Cross-gender preoccupations in two male children with autism. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 26(6), 635-642. Retrieved from EBSCOhost, Aspergirls: Empowering Females With Asperger Syndrome). Additionally the traits of Higher Functioning Autism and Aspergers are more acceptable in women than men indicating that the groups are seen as more feminine from an outside view.

And again, as with Power Distance, you should attempt to make a determination about the nature of the people you work with and use the tips suggested by Kwintessential accordingly here in the US or other of the English speaking clusters.  With those on the 'feminine' side respect the boundary between business and life, expect men and women to have similar roles in the group and work to establish trust. For more 'masculine' individuals keep in mind that your work life boundaries may not mean much, or anything, to them and that business can occur at any time. This is especially relevant in terms of networking. For a 'masculine' person any event can be a place to discuss business and your actions in that setting will reflect on how they perceive you in the workplace. This extends to social sites one the web too. A professional LinkedIn account and an unprofessional Facebook account will hurt you with the more 'masculine' cultures.

->Part 7<-

Helpful resources:

World Map of Masculinity v Femininity

Masculinity/Femininity - Tips

Part 5: Autism and Geert Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions Theory - Uncertainty Avoidance Index

->Part 4<-

The Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI) from Hofstede measures how a culture handles ambiguity, uncertainty and change. Those groups that measure high on the UAI tend to experience high anxiety regarding uncertainty and seek to limit or minimize the uncertainty in any given situation. Cultures that measure low on the index try to have as few rules as possible, are more pragmatic and are more tolerant of change. Examples of countries that are high on the UAI are Greece, Russia, Poland and Portugal (contrary to popular views of Germany is it much closer to the middle). Countries that score low on the scale are Sweden, China and the UK; while the US is low at a score of 46 it is not the lowest by far.

From a theoretical standpoint I think the Autsim subculture would score very high on this index. In fact I suspect most readers of that last statement said "well, duh". Ritualistic behavior, precision and the need for sameness are hallmarks of of autistic behavior at all levels and sometimes, depending on the situation, this has been included as part of the Autistic Advantage (source).

For those of us in low scoring countries like the UK, Australia, Canada, China and the US (map) I cannot think of a stronger point of conflict between the subculture and culture as a whole. In those countries that are high on the Index many of these behaviors may be seen as well within cultural bounds offering a rare break for ASD folk in their attempts at integrating with society.

I would go into detail regarding Kwintessential's tips for dealing with cultures that score lower than us on UAI but I imagine they are well known in practice, if not theory. All of us in low index countries have had to learn to deal with the changes common to the neurotypical society around us and being told to be more flexible. I would be interested to hear how someone from a high UAI country experiences this dimension.

As suggestions to those of us on the Spectrum I would say focus on the anxiety created by the changes with typical anxiety measures such as meditation, calming talk, a type of tea that works for you and possibly medication.  Xanax has been used for anxiety attacks but the potential for addiction and misuse make it impractical for any sustained usage. Some anti-depressants have been for effective for reducing anxiety in general and may be a good line of defense against total meltdowns.  Here are a couple of articles that offer anxiety remedies to try: 5 Quick Ways & 25 ways to relieve anxiety

->Part 6<-

Helpful resources:

World Map of Uncertainty Avoidance

Uncertainty Avoidance - Tips

5 Quick ways to overcoming anxiety

25 ways to relieve anxiety

Part 2: Autism and Geert Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions Theory

>Part 1<-

Before I jump into Hofstede's dimensions it is worth taking a look at the concept of people with autism as a culture unto themselves.  There certainly has been enough discussion on the concept of those with disabilities or different mental states  forming a subculture or even a culture unto themselves (Example One, Example Two, Example Three, Example Four) and autism certainly fits into one of those two categories. Even the concept that Autism is a disability is being challenged from the ASD community meaning that there is a form of group identity being formed and debated.

Yet I am not sure I believe that Autism is a culture unto itself yet. My thought is that if you took all Autistic people and magically dropped them onto an isolated world they would go through a similar acculturation process as another group with a unifying factor. Certainly those on the Spectrum  have formed strong subcultures within the framework of larger national cultures but lumping all ASD folk into one large group and calling it a culture seems as problematic as if I did that with Asians, people over 7 feet in height, those who caught malaria or are deaf. The independent subcultures are much stronger than a diluted larger population.

This is an important distinction in analyzing how the ASD culture/subculture relates to the dichotomies that the Hofstede theory puts forth. How a subculture relates to the dimensions is much different than how a top level culture has determined their relationship. The subculture, necessarily, takes its cues from the parent culture and is influenced by the parent culture's views on the dimension.

So in considering ASD and the Cultural Dimension theory I will consider it in the context of a subculture. Determining what the parent culture is will be a bit more challenging as the subculture can have parent and even grandparent cultures. For instance consider myself: ASD subculture and I live in the United States so I have that influence. However is there an in-between cultural layer of affluence level or race that affects my subculture identity? I am not sure.

->Part 3<-

Introduction to Autism and Geert Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions Theory

This is the introduction to a series of articles I will be producing on Hofstede's Cultural Dimension Theory and how it relates to ASD. Cultural theory is a complex subject and when mixing cultures (such as nationality and the Autism way of thinking) any clarity is useful; if nothing else someone can say "nope, that's not it" and eliminate an avenue of explanation.

Prior to delving into the meat of the series I felt an introduction to Hofstede and his work was needed.

Geert Hofstede founded the office of personnel research at IBM in 1965. Between the research he conducted at the company (well over 117,000 respondents) and further refinement done afterwards he was able to develop a model of cultural dimensions that identified four dichotomies that measured the orientation of cultures to various internal values. Later he would add a fifth dichotomy following the involvement of Chinese managers and students.  A sixth (and so far final) dichotomy completed the theory in 2010. These dichotomies are:

• Power distance index (PDI): “Power distance is the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power is distributed unequally.” Cultures that endorse low power distance expect and accept power relations that are more consultative or democratic. People relate to one another more as equals regardless of formal positions. Subordinates are more comfortable with and demand the right to contribute to and critique the decision making of those in power. In high power distance countries, less powerful accept power relations that are more autocratic and paternalistic. Subordinates acknowledge the power of others simply based on where they are situated in certain formal, hierarchical positions. As such, the power distance index Hofstede defines does not reflect an objective difference in power distribution, but rather the way people perceive power differences.
• Individualism (IDV) vs. collectivism: “The degree to which individuals are integrated into groups”. In individualistic societies, the stress is put on personal achievements and individual rights. People are expected to stand up for themselves and their immediate family, and to choose their own affiliations. In contrast, in collectivist societies, individuals act predominantly as members of a life-long and cohesive group or organization (note: “The word collectivism in this sense has no political meaning: it refers to the group, not to the state”). People have large extended families, which are used as a protection in exchange for unquestioning loyalty.
• Uncertainty avoidance index (UAI): “a society's tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity”. It reflects the extent to which members of a society attempt to cope with anxiety by minimizing uncertainty. People in cultures with high uncertainty avoidance tend to be more emotional. They try to minimize the occurrence of unknown and unusual circumstances and to proceed with careful changes step by step by planning and by implementing rules, laws and regulations. In contrast, low uncertainty avoidance cultures accept and feel comfortable in unstructured situations or changeable environments and try to have as few rules as possible. People in these cultures tend to be more pragmatic, they are more tolerant of change.
• Masculinity (MAS), vs. femininity: “The distribution of emotional roles between the genders”. Masculine cultures’ values are competitiveness, assertiveness, materialism, ambition and power, whereas feminine cultures place more value on relationships and quality of life. In masculine cultures, the differences between gender roles are more dramatic and less fluid than in feminine cultures where men and women have the same values emphasizing modesty and caring. As a result of the taboo on sexuality in many cultures, particularly masculine ones, and because of the obvious gender generalizations implied by Hofstede's terminology, this dimension is often renamed by users of Hofstede's work, e.g. to Quantity of Life vs. Quality of Life.
• Long term orientation (LTO), vs. short term orientation: First called “Confucian dynamism”, it describes societies’ time horizon. Long term oriented societies attach more importance to the future. They foster pragmatic values oriented towards rewards, including persistence, saving and capacity for adaptation. In short term oriented societies, values promoted are related to the past and the present, including steadiness, respect for tradition, preservation of one’s face, reciprocation and fulfilling social obligations.
• Indulgence, vs. restraint (IVR): Societies with a high rate of indulgence allow hedonistic behaviors: people can freely satisfy their basic needs and desires. On the opposite, Restraint define societies with strict social norms, where gratification of drives are suppressed and regulated.

      From Wikipedia

This framework is not without its criticisms but as with any good theory it offers a start for the conversation and a structure on which to hang the pro and con arguments. There are certainly further areas to look at including:

• Hofstede's academic site
• Kwintessentials' analysis of the theory
• Cultures and Organizations: Software for the Mind, Third Edition - Hofstede's recent work
• Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations - Original publication
• Global Ambitions and Local Identities: An Israeli-american High-tech Merger - Work by Galit Ailon; critic of Hofstede's theory

->Part 2<-