Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-27T02:37:15.351Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Allocentric and Idiocentric Personalities: A Comment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2015

David R. Lea
David R. Lea*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology & Philosophy, University of PapuaNew Guinea
*
Department of Psychology and Philosophy, University of Papua New Guinea, PO Box 320, University, NCD, Papua New Guinea
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article I question the idiocentric/allocentric distinction on the grounds that: a) it utilizes an increasingly discredited humanist conception of the rational autonomous subject associated with the definition of idiocentrism; b) it distinguishes forms of motivation which fail to offer reliable indices of behavioural patterning; and c) it offers a characterization of different cultural norms and societal morality which is ultimately misleading.

Type
Articles
Information
South Pacific Journal of Psychology , Volume 6 , 1993 , pp. 20 - 23
Copyright
Copyright © University of Papua New Guinea & University of Central Queensland 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

de Coppet, D. (1990). The society as the ultimate value and the socio cosmic configuration. Ethnos, 55, 150–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frewer, L., & Bleus, A. (1991). Personality assessment in a collectivist culture. South Pacific Journal of Psychology, 4, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, H. (1964). The concept of love. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Lacan, J. (1987). Feminine sexuality (M., & Rose, J., Trans.). London: Macmillan Press.Google Scholar
Mantovani, E. (1987). Traditional values and ethics. In Stratigos, S. & Hughes, P. (Eds.), Ethics of development: The Pacific in the twentieth century. Port Moresby: UPNG Press.Google Scholar
McCarthy, T. (1991). Introduction. In Habermas, J. (Ed.), The philosophical discourse of modernity (Lawrence, G., Trans.). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Peters, R. (1958). The concept of motivation. New York: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
Smith, A. (1957). Selections from the Wealth of Nations (Stigler, G., Ed.). Arlington: AHA Publishing. (Originally published, 1776).Google Scholar
Triandis, C., Bontempo, R., Betencourt, H., Bond, M., Leung, K., Brenes, K., Georgas, J., Hui, H., Marin, G., Setidadi, B., Sinha, J., Verma, J., Spandenberg, J., Touzard, H., & Montmollin, G. (1986). The measurement of etic aspects of individualism and collectivism across cultures. Australian Journal of Psychology, 38, 257–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Triandis, H., Bontempo, R., Villareal, M., & Lucca, G. (1986). Individualism and collectivism: Cross cultural perspectives on self-ingroup relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 323–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar