Culture’s Consequences

Abstract

Reports an error in "Examining the impact of Culture's consequences : A three-decade, multilevel, meta-analytic review of Hofstede's cultural value dimensions" by Vas Taras, Bradley L. Kirkman and Piers Steel ( Journal of Applied Psychology , 2010[May], Vol 95[3], 405-439). Tables 1 and 2 were printed incorrectly due to errors in the production process. In Table 1 (p. 414), row 2 (vote count, data point count) the table incorrectly lists 0s for categories in which data points were not available; therefore the data cells should in fact be empty. In Table 2 (pp. 416–423), due to formatting errors some of the columns were incorrectly shifted either one or two columns to the right (i.e., in row 1, the “4” should be aligned under the “k,” not the “r”). The formatting errors in Tables 1 and 2, however, do not affect the values in the tables. Corrected versions of both Table 1 and Table 2 can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0020939 .supp. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2010-09357-001 .) Using data from 598 studies representing over 200,000 individuals, we meta-analyzed the relationship between G. Hofstede's (1980a) original 4 cultural value dimensions and a variety of organizationally relevant outcomes. First, values predict outcomes with similar strength (with an overall absolute weighted effect size of ρ = 0.18) at the individual level of analysis. Second, the predictive power of the cultural values was significantly lower than that of personality traits and demographics for certain outcomes (e.g., job performance, absenteeism, turnover) but was significantly higher for others (e.g., organizational commitment, identification, citizenship behavior, team-related attitudes, feedback seeking). Third, cultural values were most strongly related to emotions, followed by attitudes, then behaviors, and finally job performance. Fourth, cultural values were more strongly related to outcomes for managers (rather than students) and for older, male, and more educated respondents. Fifth, findings were stronger for primary, rather than secondary, data. Finally, we provide support for M. Gelfand, L. H. Nishii, and J. L. Raver's (2006) conceptualization of societal tightness–looseness, finding significantly stronger effects in culturally tighter, rather than looser, countries. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)