Abstract

Self-compassion is natural, trainable and multi-faceted human capacity. To date there has been little research into the role of culture in influencing the conceptual structure of the underlying construct, the relative importance of different facets of self-compassion, nor its relationships to cultural values. This study employed a cross-cultural design, with 4,124 participants from 11 purposively sampled datasets drawn from different countries. We aimed to assess the relevance of positive and negative items when building the self-compassion construct, the convergence among the self-compassion components, and the possible influence of cultural values. Each dataset comprised undergraduate students who completed the “Self-Compassion Scale” (SCS). We used a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) approach to the multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) model, separating the variability into self-compassion components (self-kindness, common humanity, mindfulness), method (positive and negative valence), and error (uniqueness). The normative scores of the Values Survey Module (VSM) in each country, according to the cultural dimensions of individualism, masculinity, power distance, long-term orientation, uncertainty avoidance, and indulgence, were considered. We used Spearman coefficients (rs) to assess the degree of association between the cultural values and the variance coming from the positive and negative items to explain self-compassion traits, as well as the variance shared among the self-compassion traits, after removing the method effects produced by the item valence. The CFA applied to the MTMM model provided acceptable fit in all the samples. Positive items made a greater contribution to capturing the traits comprising self-compassion when the long-term orientation cultural value was higher (rs = 0.62; p = 0.042). Negative items did not make significant contributions to building the construct when the individualism cultural value was higher, but moderate effects were found (rs = 0.40; p = 0.228). The level of common variance among the self-compassion trait factors was inversely related to the indulgence cultural value (rs = -0.65; p = 0.030). The extent to which the positive and negative items contribute to explain self-compassion, and that different self-compassion facets might be regarded as reflecting a broader construct, might differ across cultural backgrounds.

Highlights

  • Compassion has been described as an orientation of mind that recognizes pain, the universality of pain and the capacity to meet pain with empathy and kindness (Feldman and Kuyken, 2011)

  • The percentage of explained trait variance in the negative items once freed of method effects was not significantly related to cultural values, we found moderate effects with individualism and masculinity

  • Our research suggest distinct conceptualizations of the selfcompassion construct depending on the contextual values in which subjects are immersed, which is consistent with the idea that the way people think, feel and behave tends to be congruent with the values shared by members of their own community, and that might be established by means of a collective mental programming through socialization processes (Hofstede, 2001; Hofstede et al, 2010)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Compassion has been described as an orientation of mind that recognizes pain, the universality of pain and the capacity to meet pain with empathy and kindness (Feldman and Kuyken, 2011). We will explore this issue with particular reference to self-compassion as assessed by the “Self-Compassion Scale” (SCS) (Neff, 2003a) This measure is the most used approach to assess self-compassion up to now, and operationalizes it as comprised of three inter-related general traits: “self-kindness” or being kind rather than judgmental toward the self; “common humanity” which describes seeing one’s suffering as part of the human condition, rather than as isolating; and “mindfulness” which consists of the capacity to hold painful feelings mindfully, rather than being over-identified with them (Neff, 2003b)

Objectives
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call