{"id":8377,"date":"2022-02-04T08:03:00","date_gmt":"2022-02-04T13:03:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/news.colgate.edu\/magazine\/?p=8377"},"modified":"2022-02-01T15:29:34","modified_gmt":"2022-02-01T20:29:34","slug":"iron-fist-or-kid-gloves","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/news.colgate.edu\/magazine\/2022\/02\/04\/iron-fist-or-kid-gloves\/","title":{"rendered":"Iron Fist or Kid Gloves?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Illustration by Michael Glenwood<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Research by psychologist Michele Gelfand \u201989 looks at whether countries are culturally \u201ctight\u201d or \u201cloose\u201d and how those distinctions factor into the ways they manage a crisis. <\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n

I<\/strong>n Saudi Arabia, drinking alcohol is punishable by imprisonment, fines, and even public flogging. Meanwhile, in the United States, alcohol is not only legal, but it\u2019s also often celebrated, and some cities allow public consumption on the streets. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cultural psychologist Michele Gelfand \u201989 studies how countries can be classified as \u201ctight\u201d or \u201cloose\u201d \u2014 measured by how strictly people abide by social norms \u2014 and how those categorizations play a role in times of crises. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and China are examples of tight countries that enforce order with strict punishments, whereas the United States, New Zealand, and Brazil are  considered loose countries that are more permissible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Gelfand wrote a book on her research, titled Rule Makers, Rule Breakers: How Tight and Loose Cultures Wire Our World <\/em>(Simon & Schuster, 2018). Recently, she\u2019s been featured in several media outlets for her analysis of the ways in which different countries have been handling COVID-19. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

When facing a longer-term threat like COVID-19, the tightening instinct<\/em><\/strong> has \u201cshort- circuited in many loose nations.\u201d <\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

As the lead author, Gelfand published a paper with other researchers in Lancet Planetary Health<\/em> in early 2021 that showed \u201cthe liability of looseness.\u201d In their paper comparing 57 countries, the researchers found that in countries with more looseness, \u201cthere were five times the number of COVID-19 cases, and they had almost nine times the deaths,\u201d explains Gelfand, who is the John H. Scully Professor of cross-cultural management at the Stanford Graduate School of Business and professor of psychology by courtesy.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Portrait<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

How countries have become tight or loose is generally based on how much chronic threat they\u2019ve historically faced, Gelfand has found through data collection that she published in Science<\/em>. Cultures that have continuously been threatened by events like invasion from other countries, natural disasters, pathogen outbreaks, and population density have needed to enforce order and strict rules. \u201cOf course, all countries have experienced threat, but some have faced it chronically \u2014 to a degree that required an evolved tightening response,\u201d she wrote in \u201cA Failure of Fear: Why Certain Nations Flunked the COVID-19 Threat Test,\u201d in Behavioral Scientist. \t<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the United States, Americans banded together after the terrorist attacks on 9\/11 and were \u201cwilling to sacrifice some freedom for constraint,\u201d Gelfand noted in a Boston Globe<\/em> op-ed. But when facing a longer-term threat like COVID-19, the tightening instinct has \u201cshort-circuited in many loose nations.\u201d Americans today, for example, are not used to coordinating their social action toward a common goal, compared with other nations, and \u201cwe\u2019re more ambivalent about sacrificing our freedom for strict rules that constrain our choices.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Gelfand is quick to point out that both tight and loose cultures have strengths and liabilities. In America, looseness promotes traits like optimism and creativity, which are culturally valuable. On the other hand, optimism is what she calls an \u201cevolutionary mismatch\u201d when there\u2019s a collective threat, because people are less fearful of a danger like COVID-19 and are therefore less likely to curtail their behavior.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Still, not all tight cultures have handled the pandemic well and not all loose cultures have done poorly. \u201cIt\u2019s just a correlation,\u201d she says. \u201cPlaces like New Zealand were more ambidextrous, where people tighten under threat and then loosen when it\u2019s safe. The goal is to be able to understand the context and shift cultural gears as needed.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One type of culture is not superior to the other, she emphasizes. There are advantages and drawbacks to both. Tight cultures have more severe punishments but less crime. Loose cultures are more lenient with the rules, but people are more tolerant of others\u2019 differences and more open to change. It\u2019s what she calls the \u201ctight-loose trade-off.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Are you a rule maker or rule breaker?
<\/strong>Take Gelfand\u2019s mindset quiz: michelegelfand.com\/tl-quiz <\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Striking a balance is the takeaway, says Gelfand, who also applies this research to organizations, households, and individuals. Through a grant, she has been contracted by the U.S. military, which is \u201cdealing with a lot of threat, [but] it also has a lot of coordination issues,\u201d she says. \u201cMaybe they can insert some looseness into some non-safety domains,\u201d she proposes. \u201cThe question would be, does everyone really need to wear the same socks or have a certain type of haircut? Is that serving a function?\u201d In the book, she calls this \u201cflexible tightness \u2014 where leaders might want to insert some latitude.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

She\u2019s also working with some companies\u2019 social media platforms, exploring the question: \u201cHow do we make a place that has freedom, but also has some civility and norms like we would have in everyday conversations because people feel a sense of accountability and they restrict the range of their behavior?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For Gelfand, the silver lining of the pandemic is that people are paying more attention to her field. \u201cWhen COVID hit, people suddenly realized that culture matters,\u201d Gelfand says. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

She\u2019s been doing this work since becoming inspired at Colgate by Professor of Psychology Carrie Keating, whose department is now housed under the Robert H.N. Ho Mind, Brain, and Behavior Initiative. \u201cShe taught a class on cross-cultural human development, and it changed my life,\u201d Gelfand says. \u201cI couldn\u2019t believe people were studying things in psychology, like basic visual illusions, and seeing whether they replicate in Africa, for example. I was like, \u2018Maybe I can make a career out of this.\u2019\u201d Keating recommended other scholars for Gelfand to talk to, leading her to earn a PhD at University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, mentored by Harry Triandis, the \u201cfather of modern cross-cultural psychology.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Illustration by Michael Glenwood<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Colgate also set the trajectory of her life because it\u2019s where she met her husband of 27 years, Todd Betke \u201989. \u201cI veer, truth be told, moderately loose,\u201d Gelfand says. \u201cTodd veers moderately tight. He\u2019s a lawyer \u2014 he has to be.\u201d The couple, along with their two daughters, \u201care constantly negotiating tight-loose in our household,\u201d she quips.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2021, Gelfand was elected to the National Academy of Sciences. She also recently co-founded the Society for the Study of Cultural Evolution, bringing together experts from the different sciences \u2014 psychology, biology, neuroscience, anthropology, and computer science. \u201cCulture really matters, so we need to have more conversations about it,\u201d Gelfand says, \u201cand we have to have leaders who understand the dynamics of culture.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Psychologist Michele Gelfand researches whether countries are culturally \u201ctight\u201d or \u201cloose\u201d and how those distinctions factor into the ways they manage a crisis.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":49,"featured_media":8394,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_hide_featured_image":false,"_jetpack_featured_image_duplicate_dismissed":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[553,397,68,165,812,99,267],"coauthors":[388],"class_list":["post-8377","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-features","tag-covid-19","tag-culture","tag-health","tag-history","tag-pandemic-response","tag-psychology","tag-research"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/palXSH-2b7","amp_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/news.colgate.edu\/magazine\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/6\/2022\/01\/Features_IronFist.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.colgate.edu\/magazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8377","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.colgate.edu\/magazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.colgate.edu\/magazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.colgate.edu\/magazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/49"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.colgate.edu\/magazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8377"}],"version-history":[{"count":30,"href":"https:\/\/news.colgate.edu\/magazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8377\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8912,"href":"https:\/\/news.colgate.edu\/magazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8377\/revisions\/8912"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.colgate.edu\/magazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/8394"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.colgate.edu\/magazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8377"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.colgate.edu\/magazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8377"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.colgate.edu\/magazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8377"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.colgate.edu\/magazine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=8377"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}