Globalization, Identity and World-minded Values

Aghop Der-Karabetian, PhD

Editor in Chief (Social Behavior Research and Practice), Professor Emeritus, Psychology Department, College of Arts and Sciences, University of La Verne, 1950 Third Street, La Verne, CA 91750, USA; E-mail: ader-karabetian@laverne.edu

The “Global Village” is upon us, if anybody is still in doubt!

The recent pandemic of the novel corona virus (Covid-19) drives home this realization quite powerfully. The nation-state-centric view of the world originated by the treaty of Westphalia in 1648 after the Thirty-year war no longer accurately and adequately describes the workings of an increasingly interdependent and interconnected global system.^1,2,3,4

According to Boulding⁵ globalization is a total system composed of physical, biological, social, economic, political and communication system.Lifton⁶ envisioned it as a technologically imposed and fostered unity of humankind, and Mackay⁷ saw it as the growing worldwide interconnections between societies.

The globalizing forces of the interdependence of nations, countries and states have been around for some time.^8,9 Just to name a few: (a) The global spread of scientific-intellectual culture; (b) The emergence of English as an international language of commerce and communication; (c) An increasingly sophisticated worldwide communication networks like social media; (d) Increasing means and opportunities for travel for business and leisure across national boundaries; (e) The establishment of highly integrated global system of finance and exchange; (f) Growing trend in resource interdependence such as oil and rare elements; (g) and, a growing number of international governmental and non-governmental organizations addressing global issues such as poverty, climate change and environmental degradation.^10-17

The possible positive and negative impact of globalization around the world continues to be a topic of scholarly and popular discourse.^{18,19,20,21,22} Regardless of the controversies and depth of analysis surrounding the globalization phenomenon its potential psychosocial impact is inevitable. One of the key manifest associations of globalization relates to the enhanced sense of belonging to the larger global community, and the accompanying shift in value orientation that shapes the way people view the world and treat each other as individuals and as groups.

In a seminal work titled, “The Psychology of Global Citizenship: A Review of Theory and Research” Reysen et al²³ layout how globalization is reflected in an enlarged sense of belonging to an inclusive global community, and its links to pro-social values such as diversity, empathy, altruism and environmental sustainability. In a similar vein, McFarland et al²⁴ review and expand on the research and theory of the notion of global-human identity. They identify its negative links to anti-social views and behaviors such as ethnocentrism, social dominance and self-centeredness, and positive links to pro-social values of universalism, care, and justice. Also, they addressed how child reading and educational practices can foster and nurture global-human identity and accompanying values. Additionally, the authors present and review different empirical measures and instruments to promote further research and theory development.

There is growing empirical evidence to suggest that global-human identity does not have to be polarized with national identity. They could be co-extensive in the sphere of ones social identity.^{25,26,27,28,29}

A notion that encompasses both the sense of global belonging and pro-social values is the concept of world-mindedness. It is conceptualized as a value orientation that allows someone to go beyond local, regional and national concerns to perceive the world as a total interdependent system as well as feel a sense of affiliation with the whole of humanity.^30,31,32

Early empirical studies dealing with the concept of world-mindedness have been reported by Fisher³³ and Statten³⁴. Mead³⁵ and Bogardus³⁶ have explored the sociological significance in international-mindedness and world-mindedness, respectively. Ideas consistent with the notion of world-mindedness may be seen in Whitehead’s³⁷ process philosophy and his concept of the relatedness of all entities in the universe. Similarly, Cobb et al³⁸ indicate in process theology the notion of God as the unifying experience of all things that could incorporate world-mindedness as one manifestation of the experiencing of God. de Chardin’s³⁹ notion of the “noosphere” that reflects the planetary consciousness emerging from the interpenetration of culture further reinforces the concept of world-mindedness. World-mindedness as a value orientation is also consistent with the conceptual underpinnings and fundamental values of peace, economic welfare, social justice and ecological balance espoused by the World Order Models Project.⁴⁰

Continuing study of the relationships between globalization, identity and world-minded values and behaviors, using interdisciplinary, global and cross-cultural methods and perspectives, provides fertile ground for the development and advancement of knowledge that may do some good.

The “Global Village” is upon us. Let us work to understand the workings of the “Village” more, and make it a better place to thrive.^41,42

I call upon scholars, researchers and their students in the social, behavioral and pedagogical sciences around the world to engage in collaborative scholarship examining such a vital area of inquiry. Moreover, I would like to invite my colleagues and their students around the globe to share their opinions as well as research on the open-access- cyber-pages of this journal.

1. Gross L. The peace of Westphalia, 1648-1948. The American Journal of International Law. 1948; 42: 20-41. doi: 10.2307/2193560

2. Miller LH. Global Order: Values and Power in International Politics. Boulder, CO, USA: Westview Press; 1985.

3. Lechner FJ, Boli J, eds. Globalization Reader. Oxford, UK: Blackwell; 2000.

4. Pieterse JN. Globalization and Culture: Global Melange. 4th ed. New
York, USA: Rowman& Littlefield; 2020.

5. Boulding KE. The interplay of technology and values: The emerging superstructure. In: Baier K, Rescher N, eds. Values and the Future. New York, USA: Free Press; 1969: 336-350.

6. Lifton RJ. Toward a nuclear age ethos. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist. 1985; 41: 168-171. doi: 10.1080/00963402.1985.11456023

7. Mackay H. Globalization of culture. In: Held D, ed. In a Globalized World? Culture, Economics, Politics, 2nd ed. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press; 2004.

8. Steger M. Globalization: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2009.

9. Hirst P, Thompson G, Bromley S. Globalization in Question, 3rd ed. Maiden, MA, USA: Polity Press; 2015.

10. Bell D. Toward the Year 2000: Work in Progress. Boston, MA, USA: Houghton, Mifflin; 1968.

11. Brown LR. World Without Borders. New York, USA: Random House; 1972.

12. Parson J, ed. Politics and Social Structure. New York, USA: The Free Press; 1969.

13. Welch S, Miewald R, eds. Scarce National Resources: The Challenge to Public Policymakers. Beverly Hill, CA, USA: Sage Publications; 1983.

14. Yigit MF, Tarman B. The impact of social media on globalization, democratization, and articipative citizenship. Journal of Social Science Education. 2013; 12(1): 75-80. doi: 10.4119/jsse-637

15. Bu M, Lin C-T, Zhang B. Globalization and climate change: New empirical panel data evidence. Journal of Economic Surveys. 2016; 30(3): 577-595. doi: 10.1111/joes.12162

16. Isard P. Globalization and International Financial System. Cambridge, MA, USA: Cambridge University Press; 2005.

17. Gupta SD, ed. The Political Economy of Globalization. New York, USA: Springer Science & Business Media; 2012.

18. Grunig J. Decline of the Global Village: How Specialization is Changing the Mass Media. New York, USA: General Hall; 1976.

19. Hugh BB. World Futures: A Critical Analysis of Alternatives. Baltimore, MD, USA: John Hopkins University Press; 1985.

20. Featherone M, ed. Global Culture: Nationalism, Globalization and Modernity. Newbury Park, CA, USA: Sage Publications; 1991.

21. Perrons D. Globalization and Social Change: People and Places in a Divided World. New York, USA: Routledge; 2004.

22. Teitel S. Globalization and its discontents. The Journal of Socio-Economics. 2005; 34(4): 444-470. doi: 10.1016/j.socec.2005.07.016

23. Reysen S, Katzarska-Miller I. The Psychology of Global Citizenship: A Review of Theory and Research. New York, USA: Lexington Books; 2018.

24. McFarland S, Hackett J, Hamer K, et al. Global human identification and citizenship: A review of psychological studies. Political Psychology. 2019; 40 (Supplement 1): 141-171. doi: 10.1111/pops.12572

25. Der-Karabetian A, Ruiz Y. Affective bicultural and global-human identity scales for Mexican-American adolescents. Psychological Reports. 1997; 80: 1027-1039. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1997.80.3.1027

26. Arrow H, Sundberg ND. International identity: Definition, development, and some implications for global conflict and piece. In: Setiadi BN, Supratikna A, Lonner WJ, Poortinga YH, eds. Ongoing Themes in Psychology and Culture. Yogyakarta, Indonesia: International Congress of the International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology; 2004.

27. Der-Karabetian A, CaoY, Alfaro M. Sustainable behavior, perceived globalization impact, world-mindedness, identity, and perceived risk in college samples from the United States, China, and Taiwan. Ecopsychology. 2014; 6(4): 218-233. doi: 10.1089/eco.2014.0035

28. Der-Karabetian A, Alfaro M, Cao Y. Relationship of sustainable behavior, world-mindedness, national and global identities, perceived environmental risk and globalization impact among college students in the United States. Psychol Cogn Sci Open J. 2018; 4(1): 8-13. doi: 10.17140/PCSOJ-4-138

29. Der-Karabetian A, Lopez M, Oseguera M, Alfaro M. Nested, place and relational multiple social identities among Latinx and White college students in California, USA. Soc Behav Res Pract Open
J. 2019; 4(1): 8-14. doi: 10.17140/SBRPOJ-4-115

30. Sampson D, Smith KP. A scale to measure world-minded attitudes. J Soc Psychol. 1957; 45: 99-106. doi: 10.1080/00224545.1957.9714290

31. Glick EL. Toward a comprehensive definition of world-mindedness. Dissertation Abstracts International. 1975; 38: 6436-A.

32. Silvernail DL. Validation study of a teacher’s global perspective values scale. ERIC Document Reproduction. 1979; 193: 315.

33. Fisher GM. Does the Christian movement promote world-mindedness abroad? Journal Religious Education. 1926; 21: 179-187. doi: 10.1080/0034408260210211

34. Statten TC. Experiments in creating world-mindedness in Canadian boys. Journal Religious Education. 1926; 21: 214-216. doi: 10.1080/0034408260210219

35. Mead GH. National-mindedness and international mindedness. International Journal of Ethics. 1929; 39: 385-407.

36. Bogardus ES. Concept of world-mindedness. Sociology and Social Research. 1948; 32: 960-966.

37. Whitehead AN. Modes of Thought. New York, USA: Macmillan; 1938.

38. Cobb JB, Griffin D. Process Theology: An Introductory Exposition. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA: Westminister Press; 1976.

39. Teilhard de Chardin P. “My Universe”, in Science and Christ. New York, USA: Harper and Raw; 1968.

40. Mendlovitz SH, ed. On the Creation of a Just World Order. New York, USA: The Free Press; 1975.

41. Der-Karabetian A. The global village: Is its realization closer than we think? Japan Times, 1983; 11-12.

42. Der-Karabetian A. World-mindedness and the nuclear threat: A multinational study. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality. 1992;7: 293-308.