Search

BackgroundThe aim of the present study was to investigate the intrinsic relationship between cultural values and social network index among college students. In addition, the present study explored the mediating role of self-monitoring in the relationship between horizontal collectivism cultural values and social network index, as well as the moderating role of self-efficacy, to provide a theoretical approach based on the intrinsic mechanism for college students to establish a good social network.MethodsA simple random cluster sampling method was used to investigate 376 college students with cultural values scale, self-monitoring scale, self-efficacy scale, and social network index scale, structural equation model was constructed using M-plus and SPSS.ResultsThe result indicated that individual horizontal collectivist cultural values positively predict social network index (β = 0.477). Self-monitoring plays an intermediary role between cultural values and social network index, and self-efficacy plays a moderating role between self-monitoring and social network index.ConclusionThe level of an individual’s social network activity is affected by the cultural values of horizontal collectivism and self-monitoring. Improving individual self-monitoring ability and self-efficacy can effectively improve the interpersonal relationships of college students.

Objective The current study aims to explore the influence of social comparison on risk decision-making for self and for groups in intergroup contexts. Method Two experiments with the within-subjects design of 2 (social comparison: upward comparison, downward comparison) × 3 (decision-maker role: for “me”, for “us”, for “them”) were conducted in this study. Experiment 1 focused on the ingroup contexts, and experiment 2 focused on the outgroup contexts. Results (1) in outgroup contexts, individuals are more risk-seeking in upward comparison conditions than in downward comparison conditions. However, the difference disappears in ingroup contexts. (2) Making decisions for “them” is riskier than making decisions for “me” and for “us” with no significant differences between the latter two and consistent across intergroup contexts. (3) The difference in risk decisions made amid upward and downward comparisons is amplified for decisions made for groups. Conclusion The findings may support the selective accessibility model and provide an interpretation with responsibility alleviation for self-group differences in risk decision-making.