This article examines the heterogeneity of positive thinking across cultures, challenging the notion of it as a universal, invariant trait. Positive thinking is conceptualized as a preponderance of positive thoughts, a disposition often linked to favorable life outcomes. Historically, psychology has focused more on pathology than on positive states, and early cross-cultural theories often presented differences in optimism as fixed, dispositional traits. For instance, Western individualism was thought to foster more positivity than Eastern collectivism, a view often rooted in frameworks like Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory. This paper critiques such static models, advancing the thesis that cross-cultural variance in positive thinking is not static but is fundamentally contingent upon a situational context, specifically the valence of an external event. The central argument is that apparent cultural divergences are relative and are governed by distinct cognitive frameworks, primarily dialectical reasoning and the Lay Theory of Change (LTC). By examining Western models of individualistic positive thinking against the backdrop of East Asian holistic and cyclical philosophies, this article posits that the utility of positive thinking is conditional, functioning either as an adaptive, learned skill or a detrimental, idealized fantasy. This complex view moves beyond cultural stereotypes to understand how culture and context interact to shape psychological responses, offering a more nuanced and dynamic understanding of human cognition.
| Published in | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences (Volume 14, Issue 6) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.pbs.20251406.13 |
| Page(s) | 204-208 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Positive Thinking, Cultural Differences, Context, Lay Theory of Change, Dialectical Reasoning, Self-Enhancement, Self-Improvement, Cognitive Mechanisms, Cross-Cultural Psychology, Holism
| [1] | Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Sage Publications. |
| [2] | Ji, L.-J., Vaughan-Johnston, T. I., Zhang, Z., Jacobson, J. A., Zhang, N., & Huang, X. (2021). Contextual and cultural differences in positive thinking. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 52(5), 449–467. |
| [3] | McSweeney, B. (2002). Hofstede's model of national cultural differences and their consequences: A triumph of faith-a failure of analysis. Human Relations, 55(1), 89–118. |
| [4] | Orr, L. M., & Hauser, W. J. (2008). A re-inquiry of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions: A call for 21st century cross-cultural research. Marketing Management Journal, 18(2), 1–19. |
| [5] | Peng, K., & Nisbett, R. E. (1999). Culture, dialectics, and reasoning about contradiction. American Psychologist, 54(9), 741–754. |
| [6] | Ehrenreich, B. (2009). Bright-sided: How the relentless promotion of positive thinking has undermined America. Metropolitan Books. |
| [7] | Weber, M. (1930). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism (T. Parsons, Trans.). Allen & Unwin. (Original work published 1904-1905). |
| [8] | McLean, S., & Dixit, J. (2018). The power of positive thinking: A hidden curriculum for precarious times. Adult Education Quarterly, 68(4), 280–296. |
| [9] | Miller, J. G. (1984). Culture and the development of everyday social explanation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(5), 961–978. |
| [10] | Morris, M. W., & Peng, K. (1994). Culture and cause: American and Chinese attributions for social and physical events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(6), 949–971. |
| [11] | Spencer-Rodgers, J., Williams, M. J., & Peng, K. (2010). Cultural differences in expectations of change and tolerance for contradiction: A decade of empirical research. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(3), 296–312. |
| [12] | Ji, L.-J., Nisbett, R. E., & Su, Y. (2001). Culture, change, and prediction. Psychological Science, 12(6), 450–456. |
| [13] | Yao, X. (1999). An introduction to Confucianism. Cambridge University Press. |
| [14] | Choi, I., Nisbett, R. E., & Norenzayan, A. (1999). Causal attribution across cultures: Variation and universality. Psychological Bulletin, 125(1), 47–63. |
| [15] | Sevincer, A. T., Wagner, G., Kalvelage, J., & Oettingen, G. (2014). Positive thinking about the future in newspaper reports and presidential addresses predicts economic downturn. Psychological Science, 25(4), 1010–1017. |
| [16] | Bekhet, A. K., & Zauszniewski, J. A. (2013). Measuring use of positive thinking skills: Psychometric testing of a new scale. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 35(8), 1074–1093. |
APA Style
Hassen, M. Z. (2025). Positive Thinking Across Cultural and Contextual Divides. Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, 14(6), 204-208. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.pbs.20251406.13
ACS Style
Hassen, M. Z. Positive Thinking Across Cultural and Contextual Divides. Psychol. Behav. Sci. 2025, 14(6), 204-208. doi: 10.11648/j.pbs.20251406.13
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.pbs.20251406.13,
author = {Mohammed Zeinu Hassen},
title = {Positive Thinking Across Cultural and Contextual Divides},
journal = {Psychology and Behavioral Sciences},
volume = {14},
number = {6},
pages = {204-208},
doi = {10.11648/j.pbs.20251406.13},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.pbs.20251406.13},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.pbs.20251406.13},
abstract = {This article examines the heterogeneity of positive thinking across cultures, challenging the notion of it as a universal, invariant trait. Positive thinking is conceptualized as a preponderance of positive thoughts, a disposition often linked to favorable life outcomes. Historically, psychology has focused more on pathology than on positive states, and early cross-cultural theories often presented differences in optimism as fixed, dispositional traits. For instance, Western individualism was thought to foster more positivity than Eastern collectivism, a view often rooted in frameworks like Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory. This paper critiques such static models, advancing the thesis that cross-cultural variance in positive thinking is not static but is fundamentally contingent upon a situational context, specifically the valence of an external event. The central argument is that apparent cultural divergences are relative and are governed by distinct cognitive frameworks, primarily dialectical reasoning and the Lay Theory of Change (LTC). By examining Western models of individualistic positive thinking against the backdrop of East Asian holistic and cyclical philosophies, this article posits that the utility of positive thinking is conditional, functioning either as an adaptive, learned skill or a detrimental, idealized fantasy. This complex view moves beyond cultural stereotypes to understand how culture and context interact to shape psychological responses, offering a more nuanced and dynamic understanding of human cognition.},
year = {2025}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Positive Thinking Across Cultural and Contextual Divides AU - Mohammed Zeinu Hassen Y1 - 2025/12/09 PY - 2025 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.pbs.20251406.13 DO - 10.11648/j.pbs.20251406.13 T2 - Psychology and Behavioral Sciences JF - Psychology and Behavioral Sciences JO - Psychology and Behavioral Sciences SP - 204 EP - 208 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2328-7845 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.pbs.20251406.13 AB - This article examines the heterogeneity of positive thinking across cultures, challenging the notion of it as a universal, invariant trait. Positive thinking is conceptualized as a preponderance of positive thoughts, a disposition often linked to favorable life outcomes. Historically, psychology has focused more on pathology than on positive states, and early cross-cultural theories often presented differences in optimism as fixed, dispositional traits. For instance, Western individualism was thought to foster more positivity than Eastern collectivism, a view often rooted in frameworks like Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory. This paper critiques such static models, advancing the thesis that cross-cultural variance in positive thinking is not static but is fundamentally contingent upon a situational context, specifically the valence of an external event. The central argument is that apparent cultural divergences are relative and are governed by distinct cognitive frameworks, primarily dialectical reasoning and the Lay Theory of Change (LTC). By examining Western models of individualistic positive thinking against the backdrop of East Asian holistic and cyclical philosophies, this article posits that the utility of positive thinking is conditional, functioning either as an adaptive, learned skill or a detrimental, idealized fantasy. This complex view moves beyond cultural stereotypes to understand how culture and context interact to shape psychological responses, offering a more nuanced and dynamic understanding of human cognition. VL - 14 IS - 6 ER -
Department of Social Sciences, Addis Ababa Science and Technology University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Information