Dataset Information

Are virtues national, supranational, or universal?

ABSTRACT: Many studies investigated cultural differences in values, most notably by Hofstede and Schwarz. Relatively few have focused on virtues, a related and important concept in contemporary social science. The present paper examines the similarities and differences between nations, or blocks of - culturally related - nations on the perceived importance of virtues. Adults (N?=?2.809 students) from 14 countries were asked to freely mention which virtues they found important to practice in daily life, and next to rate a list of 15 virtues, which reflect the most frequently mentioned categories in The Netherlands, as found in a previous study. The 14 nations included the United States, Mexico, nine European and three Asian nations. For the free-listed virtues, we compared the top-ten lists of most frequently mentioned virtues across the nations. We used a correspondence analysis on the frequency table to assess the relationships between the virtues and nations. For the 15 virtues ratings, a MANOVA, and follow-up ANOVA's were used to examine effects of nation, age, gender and religion. We found strong evidence for relationships between nations and blocks of culturally related nations and the importance attached to various virtues. There appear to be some country specific virtues, such as generosity in France, but also some relatively universal virtues, most notably honesty, respect, and kindness.

SUBMITTER: van Oudenhoven JP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4024483 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Are virtues national, supranational, or universal?

van Oudenhoven Jan Pieter JP de Raad Boele B Timmerman Marieke E ME Askevis-Leherpeux Françoise F Boski Pawel P Carmona Carmen C Choubisa Rajneesh R Del Carmen Dominguez Alejandra A Bye Hege H HH Kurylo Anastacia A Lahmann Cornelia C Mastor Khairul K Selenko Eva E Slezáčková Alena A Smith Ripley R Tip Linda L Yik Michelle M

SpringerPlus 20140502

Many studies investigated cultural differences in values, most notably by Hofstede and Schwarz. Relatively few have focused on virtues, a related and important concept in contemporary social science. The present paper examines the similarities and differences between nations, or blocks of - culturally related - nations on the perceived importance of virtues. Adults (N = 2.809 students) from 14 countries were asked to freely mention which virtues they found important to practice in daily life, an ...[more]

PMID: 24855589

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The universal common ancestry (UCA) of all known life is a fundamental component of modern evolutionary theory, supported by a wide range of qualitative molecular evidence. Nevertheless, recently both the status and nature of UCA has been questioned. In earlier work I presented a formal, quantitative test of UCA in which model selection criteria overwhelmingly choose common ancestry over independent ancestry, based on a dataset of universally conserved proteins. These model-based tests are founded in likelihoodist and Bayesian probability theory, in opposition to classical frequentist null hypothesis tests such as Karlin-Altschul E-values for sequence similarity. In a recent comment, Koonin and Wolf (K&W) claim that the model preference for UCA is "a trivial consequence of significant sequence similarity". They support this claim with a computational simulation, derived from universally conserved proteins, which produces similar sequences lacking phylogenetic structure. The model selection tests prefer common ancestry for this artificial data set. RESULTS:For the real universal protein sequences, hierarchical phylogenetic structure (induced by genealogical history) is the overriding reason for why the tests choose UCA; sequence similarity is a relatively minor factor. First, for cases of conflicting phylogenetic structure, the tests choose independent ancestry even with highly similar sequences. Second, certain models, like star trees and K&W's profile model (corresponding to their simulation), readily explain sequence similarity yet lack phylogenetic structure. However, these are extremely poor models for the real proteins, even worse than independent ancestry models, though they explain K&W's artificial data well. Finally, K&W's simulation is an implementation of a well-known phylogenetic model, and it produces sequences that mimic homologous proteins. Therefore the model selection tests work appropriately with the artificial data. CONCLUSIONS:For K&W's artificial protein data, sequence similarity is the predominant factor influencing the preference for common ancestry. In contrast, for the real proteins, model selection tests show that phylogenetic structure is much more important than sequence similarity. Hence, the model selection tests demonstrate that real universally conserved proteins are homologous, a conclusion based primarily on the specific nested patterns of correlations induced in genetically related protein sequences. REVIEWERS:This article was reviewed by Rob Knight, Robert Beiko (nominated by Peter Gogarten), and Michael Gilchrist.

Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has mandated the use of virtual interactions in medical school. Although this falls mainly in the area of didactic instruction, of necessity, it has extended to the critical Admissions Process and the Medical School Interview itself. The California University of Science and Medicine (CUSM) with their flipped classroom approach had previously entered a virtual space of instruction even before COVID-19. Because CUSM was, in a sense, already committed to 'virtual' education, in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, CUSM focused not on what it might lose but what it might gain and what their applicants to medical school might gain with the virtual format. The COVID-19 pandemic provided a unique opportunity to initially compare the Virtual Interview with the traditional On-Campus (In-Person) Interview during the hybrid 2020 year when the COVID-19 pandemic began. The Virtual Interview was patterned after the On-Campus Interview with some modifications. The same faculty conducted both interviews. A number of inherent advantages of the Virtual Interview surfaced to these faculty interviewers based on their subjective observations and conclusions. The overall interviewee satisfaction with the Virtual Interview was very positive based on their subjective observations and conclusions. The objective data from the Virtual Interviews compared to the On-Campus Interviews in the hybrid year resulted in a greater percentage of both offers of acceptance (p = .001) and matriculations (p = .001). In order to strengthen our initial observations, we expanded our study to include 2 pre-COVID-19 years (2018, 2019) of exclusively On-Campus interviews (n = 743) and 1 additional COVID-19 year (2021) of exclusively Virtual Interviews (n = 529). In this expanded study, interviewee demographics were not confounding and the Virtual Interview gave rise to overall greater interviewee satisfaction (p = .001), a trend to greater interviewer satisfaction and a greater percentage of both offers of acceptance (p = .047) and matriculations (p = .036).

Project description:The VIA Classification on character strengths and virtues suggests 24 character strengths clustered into six core virtues (wisdom and knowledge, courage, humanity, justice, temperance, and transcendence). Three recent studies employed different methods for testing the assignment of character strengths to virtues (e.g., expert and layperson ratings), and generally supported the VIA classification. However, the co-occurrence of character strengths and virtues within individuals has not been examined yet. Another untested assumption is that an individual's composition of character strengths is related to being considered of "good character." Thus, the present study addresses three research questions: (1) How do character strengths and measured virtues co-occur within individuals? (2.1) How does the number of character strengths an individual possesses within a virtue cluster relate to their level of the respective virtue? (2.2) How does the composition of an individual's character strengths relate to being considered of "good character"? We combined data from different studies to obtain a sample of N = 1,241 participants (n = 897 self-raters, n = 344 informant-raters, 70.1% female) aged 18 to 92 years (M = 30.64). All participants completed assessments of character strengths and virtues. Regarding (1), we found a high convergence of the correlations between strengths and virtues and the VIA Classification: 22 out of 24 character strengths correlated with the assigned virtue (exceptions were hope, which correlated highest with courage, and humor, which correlated highest with humanity). Also, 15 character strengths showed the numerically highest correlation with their assigned virtue. Regarding (2.1), overall, we found a linear trend between the number of strengths within one cluster and the virtue level. Regarding (2.2), we found higher levels of reported "good character" in those who possessed either (a) at least one character strength in each virtue cluster or (b) all character strengths in at least one virtue compared to those who did not. The present results contribute to the discussion regarding the structure of character: individuals' character strengths relate to differences in virtues, across different measures and data sources. Relationships were mostly as expected, and deviations were consistent with results obtained using other approaches.

Project description:Persistent barriers to universal access to medicines are limited social protection in the event of illness, inadequate financing for essential medicines, frequent stock-outs in the public sector, and high prices in the private sector. We argue that greater coherence between human rights law, national medicines policies, and universal health coverage schemes can address these barriers. We present a cross-national content analysis of national medicines policies from 71 countries published between 1990-2016. The World Health Organization's (WHO) 2001 guidelines for developing and implementing a national medicines policy and all 71 national medicines policies were assessed on 12 principles, linking a health systems approach to essential medicines with international human rights law for medicines affordability and financing for vulnerable groups. National medicines policies most frequently contain measures for medicines selection and efficient spending/cost-effectiveness. Four principles (legal right to health; government financing; efficient spending; and financial protection of vulnerable populations) are significantly stronger in national medicines policies published after 2004 than before. Six principles have remained weak or absent: pooling user contributions, international cooperation, and four principles for good governance. Overall, South Africa (1996), Indonesia and South Sudan (2006), Philippines (2011-2016), Malaysia (2012), Somalia (2013), Afghanistan (2014), and Uganda (2015) include the most relevant texts and can be used as models for other settings. We conclude that WHO's 2001 guidelines have guided the content and language of many subsequent national medicines policies. WHO and national policy makers can use these principles and the practical examples identified in our study to further align national medicines policies with human rights law and with Target 3.8 for universal access to essential medicines in the Sustainable Development Goals.

Dataset Information

Are virtues national, supranational, or universal?

Publications

Are virtues national, supranational, or universal?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets