New Approach of Indigenous Social Psychology in the Age of Globalization

全球化時代本土社會心理學研究的新取向

10.6163/tjeas.2009.6(2)111

黃光國(Kwang-Kuo Hwang)

本土心理學 ； 儒家關係主義 ； 儒家倫理 ； 人情與面子 ； 研究傳統 ； indigeneous psychology ； Confucian Relationalism ； Confucian ethics ； Face and Favor ； research tradition

臺灣東亞文明研究學刊

6卷2期（2009 / 12 / 01）

111 - 130

英文

本土心理學的知識論目標是建構一系列的形式性理論，它們既能夠反映人類心智普遍的結構，又能夠說明本土文化中特有的心態。為了達成這樣的目標，本土心理學在持續發展的過程中必須作三個層次的突破：哲學的反思、理論建構和實徵研究。《儒家關係主義》一書首先說明我如何建構〈人情與面子〉的理論模型，以反映人類處理人際關係的普遍心智；再以之作為架構，分析儒家思想的內在結構，藉以瞭解儒家社會中人們特有的心態；並從現代倫理學的觀點，說明儒家倫理的屬性，再以之作為預設，建構出一系列的理論，來整合儒家社會中有關社會交換、成就動機、臉面觀念、關係與組織行為、以及衝突化解的實徵研究。藉由這樣的努力，希望不僅能達到本土心理學的知識論目標，而且能夠建立社會心理學中儒家關係主義的研究傳統。

The epistemological goal of indigenous psychology is to construct a series of formal theoretical models which should be able to represent the universal structure of human minds on the one hand, and account for people's specific mentalities in indigenous culture on the other hand. In order to attain this goal, three levels of breakthrough must be made for the sustainable progress of indigenous psychology: philosophical reflection, theoretical construction, and empirical research. In my book Confucian Relationalism, I explained how I constructed the Face and Favor model which may reflect the deep structure of universal human mind for dealing with interpersonal relationships. Then I used it as a framework to analyze the inner structure of Confucianism which might enable us to understand the specific mentality of people living in Confucian society. The attributes of Confucian ethics were analyzed from the perspective of modern ethics, and a series of mini-theories had been constructed on the presumption of relationalism to integrate findings of previous empirical researches on social exchange, achievement motivation, concept of face, quanxi and organizational behaviors, and strategies of conflict resolution in Confucian society. Through the efforts of this book, it is expected that we may not only achieve the epistemological goals of indigenous psychology, but also establish the research tradition of Confucian relationalism in social psychology.

1. Adair J. G.,Puhan B. N.,Vohra, N.(1993).Indigenous of psychology: Empirical assessment of progress in Indian research.International Journal of Psychology,28,149-169.
2. Azuma H.(1984).Psychology in a non-Western country.International Journal of Psychology,19(1),45-55.
3. Berry, J. W.(1989).Imposed etics-emics-dervied etics: The operationalization of a compelling idea.International Journal of Psychology,24,721-735.
4. Berry, J. W. (eds.),Kim, U. (eds.)(1993).Indigenous psychologies: Research and experience in cultural context.Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
5. Berry, J. W.,Poortinga, Y. H.,Segall, M. H.,Dasen, P. R.(1992).Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
6. Enriquez, V.(1977).Filipino psychology in the Third World.Philippine Journal of Psychology,10,3-18.
7. Enriquez, V.,U. Kim,J. Berry(1993).Indigenous psychologies: Research and experience in cultural context.Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
8. Fiske, A. P.(2002).Using individualism and collectivism to compare cultures-a critique of the validity and measurement of the constructs Comment on Oyserman.Psychological Bulletin,128(1),78-88.
9. Greenfield, P. M.(2000).Three approaches to the psychology of culture: Where do they come from? Where can they go?.Asian Journal of Social Psychology,3(3),223-240.
10. Hermans, J. M.,Kempen, J. G.(1998).Moving cultures: The perilous problem of cultural dichotomy in a globalized society.American Psychologiset,53(10),1111-1120.
11. Ho, D. Y. F.(1998).Indigenous psychologies: Asian perspectives.Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology,29(1),88-103.
12. Ho, D. Y. F. (eds.),A. C. Paranjpe (eds.),R. W. Rieber (eds.)(1988).Asian contributions to psychology.New York:Praeger.
13. Ho, D. Y. F.,U. Kim (eds.),J. W. Berry (eds.)(1993).Indigenous psychologies: Research and experience in cultural context.Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
14. Huntington, S.(1997).The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order.New York:Simon & Schuster.
15. Hwang, K. K.(2005).The third wave of culture psychology: The indigenous movement.The Psychologist,18(2),80-83.
16. Hwang, K. K.(2003).Critique of the methodology of empirical research on individual modernity in Taiwan.Asian Journal of Social Psychology,6,241-262.
17. Hwang, K. K.(2005).From anticolonialism to postcolonialism: The emergence of Chinese indigenous psychology in Taiwan.International Journal of Psychology,40(4),228-238.
18. Hwang, K. K.(2003).In search of a new paradigm for cultural psychology.Asian Journal of Social Psychology,6,287-291.
19. Hwang, K. K.(2001).The logics of social science.Taipei:Psychological Publishers.
20. Hwang, K. K.,B. N. Setiadi (eds.),A. Supratiknya (eds.),W. J. Loaner (eds.),Y. H. Poortinga (eds.)(2004).The epistemological goal of indigenous psychology: The perspective of constructive realism.Ongoing themes in psychology and culture. The International Association for cross-cultural Psychology.
21. Kim, U.(2000).Indigenous, cultural, and cross-cultural psychology: A theoretical, conceptual, and epistemological analysis.Asian Journal of Social Psychology,3(3),265-287.
22. Kim, U. (eds.),Berry, J. (eds.)(1993).Indigenous cultural psychologies: Research and experience in cultural context.Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
23. Kim, U.,Park, Y. S.,Park, D.(2000).The challenger of cross-cultural psychology: The role of the indigenous psychologies.Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology,31(1),63-75.
24. Lévi-Strauss, Claude,M. Layton (trans.)(1976).Structural Anthropology.New York:Basic Books.
25. Piaget, J.,W. Mays (trans.)(1972).The Principle of Genetic Epistemology.London:Routledge &. Kegan Paul. Rawls.
26. Poortinga, Y. H.(1999).Do differences in behavior imply a need for different psychologies?.Applied Psychology: An International Review,48(4),419-432.
27. Poortinga, Y. H.,J. Pandey (eds.),D. Sinha (eds.),D. P. S. Bhawuk (eds.)(1996).Asian contributions to cross-cultural psychology.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
28. Popper, K.(1963).Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge.London:Routledge & Kegan Paul.
29. Popper, K.(1972).Objective knowledge: An evolutionary approach.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
30. Sinha, D.(1988).Indigenisation of psychology in India and its relevance.The Indian Journal of Social Science,1,77-91.
31. Sinha, D.(1986).Psychology in a third world country: The Indian experience.New Delhi:Sage.
32. Triandis, H. C.(2000).Dialectics between cultural and cross-cultural psychology.Asian Journal of Social Psychology,3(3),185-195.
33. Yang, K. S.(1993).Why do we need to develop an indigenous Chinese psychology?.Indigenous Psychological Research in Chinese Societies,1,6-88.
34. Yang, K. S.(1999).Towards an indigenous Chinese psychology: A selective review of methodological, theoretical, and empirical accomplishments.Chinese Journal of Psychology,41,181-211.
35. Yang, K. S.(1997).Indigenous compatibility in psychological research and its related problems.Indigenous Psychological Research in Chinese Societies,8,75-120.