The History and the Future of the Psychology of Filial Piety

Psychological Study of Filial Piety in Chinese Societies DownloadArticle DownloadPDF ReadCube EPUB XML(NLM) totalviews ViewArticleImpact SHAREON GlennAdams UniversityofKansas,UnitedStates ThomasA.Talhelm TheUniversityofChicago,UnitedStates XIANZHAO UniversityofToronto,Canada Theeditorandreviewer'saffiliationsarethelatestprovidedontheirLoopresearchprofilesandmaynotreflecttheirsituationatthetimeofreview. Abstract Introduction ThePhilosophyofFilialPiety PsychologicalStudyofFilialPietyinChineseSocieties ExaminingParent–ChildRelationsasaContextualizedPersonalityConstruct Conclusion AuthorContributions ConflictofInterestStatement References Checkforupdates Peoplealsolookedat CONCEPTUALANALYSISarticle Front.Psychol.,30January2019Sec.CulturalPsychology https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00100 TheHistoryandtheFutureofthePsychologyofFilialPiety:ChineseNormstoContextualizedPersonalityConstruct OlwenBedford1*andKuang-HuiYeh1,2* 1DepartmentofPsychology,NationalTaiwanUniversity,Taipei,Taiwan 2InstituteofEthnology,AcademiaSinica,Taipei,Taiwan Inthefieldofpsychology,filialpietyisusuallydefinedintermsoftraditionalChineseculture-specificfamilytraditions.Theproblemwiththisapproachisthatittendstoemphasizeidentificationofbehavioralrulesornorms,whichlimitsitspotentialforapplicationinotherculturalcontexts.Duetotheglobaltrendofpopulationaging,governmentsaresearchingforsolutionstotheaccompanyingfinancialburdensogreaterattentionisbeingfocusedontheissueofeldercareanditsrelevancetofilialpractices.WecontendthatthepsychologicalinvestigationoffilialpietyinChinesesocietieshasprogressedtothepointthatitcannowprovideasolidstructureforresearchtargetingintergenerationalrelationsinothercultures.WedescribeanindigenouspsychologyapproachthatintegratedChinesehistorical,philosophical,andsocialtrendstoconstructamodeloffilialpietyintermsofthedualreciprocalandauthoritarianfilialaspectsunderlyingparent–childrelations:thedualfilialpietymodel(DFPM).Weusethismodeltore-conceptualizefilialpietyfromitsusualdefinitionasasetofChineseculture-specificnormstoacontextualizedpersonalityconstructrepresentedbyapairofculturally-sensitivepsychologicalschemasofparent–childinteraction.WethendescribehowtheDFPMcanprovideaframeworkforresearchonfilialrelationsonindividual,structural,societal,andcross-culturallevels.WeconcludewithadiscussionofhowthemodelmaybeabletointegrateandextendWesternresearchonintergenerationalrelationsandcontributetotheissueofeldercarebeyondChinesesocieties. Introduction Filialpiety(xiao)isthecorepillarofConfucianethics(Ho,1986).Itspecifiesmoralnormsthatencompassmaterialandemotionalaspectsoftheparent–childrelationship.Thecharacterxiaoiscomprisedofanuppercomponentrepresentingageandalowercomponentrepresentingchild,indicatingthatthechildsupportsandsucceedstheparent.Filialpietynotonlyspecifiesnormswithinthefamily,italsoprovidesthesocialandethicalfoundationsformaintainingsocialorder,andthusastablesociety.IthasprovidedthemoralunderpinningforChinesepatternsofparent–childrelationsandsocializationformillennia. Researchinterestinparent–childrelationsisontheriseduetotheglobaltrendofpopulationagingandthegrowingissueofeldercare(e.g.,Glassetal.,2013;NorthandFiske,2015).Researchersaroundtheworldareinvestigatingtheinfluenceoffilialnormsonadultchildren’ssupportoftheirelderlyparentsinordertosharethepublicfinancialburdenofeldercarewiththefamilysystem(e.g.,LowensteinandDaatland,2006;Gansetal.,2009).WhereasChinesefilialnormsencompassreciprocalexpectationsforparent–childrelations,aswellassocialstructure,ethicalrequirements,andpowerdynamics(Ikels,2004),scholarsinWesternsocietiestendtodefinefilialnormsinamuchmorelimitedway.Theyportraythemintermsofageneralizedone-wayexpectationregardingadultchildren’sresponsibilitytosupporttheiragingparents(Silversteinetal.,2006),andconceptualizethemasseparatefromthereligiousandsocialcontexts,whichareseenassituationalinfluencesonindividualfilialbeliefs(Gansetal.,2009). Thequestionthatarisesis:canaseeminglyculture-boundconceptsuchasChinesefilialpietyprovideinsightapplicabletoparent–childrelationsinotherculturalcontexts?GiventhecentralityoffilialpietytoChineseculture,itisahighlydevelopedconstruct.Itisplausiblethatinsightsgainedfromstudyingparent–childrelationsinChineseculturemayshedlightonaspectsofparent–childrelationsthatarelessevidentinothercultures,justassociologistGoffman(1959)reliedontheChineseconceptualizationoffaceinconstructinghisfamousuniversaldramaturgicaltheoryofface. Inthispaper,wecontendthatthepsychologicalinvestigationofparent–childrelationsinChinesesocietieshasprogressedtothepointthatitcannowprovideasolidstructureforresearchtargetingintergenerationalrelationsinothercultures.Specifically,weproposethatfilialpietyisatypeofcontextualizedpersonalityconstruct,andassuchitcanprovideaplatformforresearchonparent–childrelationsinanyculture. Inordertodemonstratethisclaim,wefirstreviewthefoundationsoffilialpietyinChinesecultureanddescribethedevelopmentofthemodernpsychologyoffilialpietythroughresearchconductedinChinesesocieties.Wehighlightdevelopmentofthedualfilialpietymodel(DFPM)(Yeh,2003;YehandBedford,2003)basedonaChineseindigenouspsychologyapproach.Usingthismodel,were-conceptualizefilialpietyfromitsusualdefinitionasasetofChineseculture-specificnormstoacontextualizedpersonalityconstructrepresentingtheunderlyingpsychologicalmechanismsintheparent–childrelationship.Withthisperspective,theDFPMcanprovideaframeworkforresearchonintergenerationalrelationalprocessesandschemasonindividual,structural,societal,andcross-culturallevels.Inthefinalsection,weindicatehowthere-conceptualizedmodelcanintegrateandextendWesternresearchonparent–childrelations. ThePhilosophyofFilialPiety Thefoundationoffilialpietyliesinancestorworship(Hsu,1975).EmperorstracedtheirlineofdescentfromShangDi,thegreatfounderancestorgod.Iftheancestorsreceivedtheappropriatesacrificestheycouldprovideguidanceonimportantgovernmentaldecisionsandprotectthedynasty(Hsu,1975).Thedutytoprovidefortheancestorsencompassedtheemperorandcommonpeoplealike.Theheadofafamilyruledoverhisrelativesastheemperorruledoverhissubjects.Thus,ancestorworshipnotonlyprovidedtheorganizingprincipleforthekinshipsystem,butalsoforrolerelationsinChinesesocietyingeneral. Confucius(551–479BCE)refinedthefilialobligationsofancestorworship(Wei,1969).Helivedatatimeofgreatchaosandfeudalbickering,sohecondensedprevailingbeliefsintoapracticalphilosophy,theWayofHumanity,toensureharmonyinthefamilyandthussociety.Insteadofemphasizingcommunicationwithancestors,heemphasizedfamily,virtue,andorderlysocialrelations(BiandD’Agostino,2004).Confucius’codifiedworksbecamethecornerstoneofeducation,andtheguidelinesformoralconduct.TheystillprovidethetemplateforChinesesocialstructure(Hwang,1987). Confucius’WayofHumanityspecifiesthattwoethicalprinciplesshouldguidesocialinteraction:favoringtheintimate(givingpreferencetothosewithwhomoneisclosest)andrespectingthesuperior(givingdeferencetothosewhoareolder)(Hwang,1987).Eachisdescribedinthefollowing. FavoringtheIntimate:Pre-ChinEra(521to221BCE) DuringConfucius’time,filialpietyemphasizedtheethicalprincipleoffavoringtheintimate,whichensurespreferentialtreatmentofone’skin(Hwang,1987).Confuciusdescribedparent–childinteractionasmotivatedbynaturalaffectionandtheprincipleofbao(reciprocity),whichrequiresthatallhelpfulbehaviorbereturned(Hsu,1975).Affectionandbaoshouldflowbothways.However,becausechildrenhaveafundamentalobligationtotheirparentsforgivingthemlife,theirobligationcanneverbefullyrepaid.Thus,motivatedbyaffection,childrencanreturnthecaretheyreceivedfromtheirparentsbycarryingoutfilialdutiessuchasbeingrespectfulandlookingaftertheirparentsintheiroldage(Yeh,2003). RespectingtheSuperior:HantotheQingDynasty(206BCEto1911AD) ThemotivationunderlyingthepracticeoffilialpietyshiftedfromtheprincipleoffavoringtheintimatetotheprincipleofrespectingthesuperiorduringtheHandynasty(206BCE–220AD),andretainedthisemphasisthroughtheendoftheQingdynasty(1911)(Hsu,1975).Thisprinciplespecifiesthatthepersoninthesuperiorpositionshouldplaytheroleofthedecision-makertoensurefamilysolidarityandprosperity(Hwang,1987).Accordingly,itisethicallyproperforthepersoninthesuperiorpositiontomakedecisionsconcerningthoseininferiorpositions. Underthisprinciple,thepracticeoffilialpietyrequiredsubmissiontohierarchicalauthorityandsuppressionofself-autonomy.Childrendiscountedself-needstoachieveparentaldesires(Yeh,2003).Thisprinciplejustifiednotonlyabsoluteparentalauthorityoverchildrenbutalso,byextension,theauthorityofanypersonofaneldergenerationoverthosewhoarejunior(Hwang,2012).Theshiftinemphasistotheprincipleofrespectingthesuperiorwasrelatedtotheneedtostrengthenpoliticalsovereignty,withpatriarchalparentalauthorityasarepresentationoftheemperor’sabsoluteauthority(Miao,2015). ModernFilialPiety ThemajorityofelderlypeoplelivinginChinesecommunitiesduringthe19thandearly20thcenturieslivedwiththeirmarriedchild,usuallytheirson(Ikels,2004).Theirson,daughter-in-law,andgrandchildrenprovidedthemwithphysical,emotional,andfinancialsupport.Daughtersprovidedtheirownparentssuchsupportonlyuntiltheymarried.Aftermarriage,theirprimaryresponsibilityshiftedtotheirhusbands’parents(Whyte,2004).Asinimperialtimes,obedienceandsubmissionmotivatedfilialpiety(Yeh,2003). AfterWWII,Chinesesocietiesbegantogothroughpoliticalreform,marketization,andsocialchangeaspeopleadaptedtheirlifestylesandvaluesystems.Thesedevelopmentsgaverisetoquestionsabouttheimpactofthosechangesonthepatternsandstructuresofsocialrelationships(Yangetal.,1989).Chinesescholarsnoticedthetrendtowardsmallerfamilies,greatergeographicmobility,andtheexpansionofwomenintheworkplace.Theybegantowonderabouttheharmfuleffectsoffilialbeliefsinthenewmoderncontext(Yeh,1999).Forexample,filialpietyseemedtoinhibittheindividual’sindependence,suppresscreativity,andeliminatepersonaldesiresandinterests(e.g.,LiuandLin,1988).TheyalsoexpressedconcernthatexposuretotheWesternideologiesoffreedomandindependencewasgivingrisetointernalconflictbetweenbeingfilialaccordingtotraditionalstandards,andbeingself-responsive,independent,andmodern(e.g.,Ho,1996). Anumberofresearchersindicatedthatfilialbeliefsmaybewaningwithindustrializationandmodernization(Yeh,1997).SomefocusedontherapideconomicdevelopmentinTaiwanandarguedthatWesterninfluenceswerediminishingtherelevanceoftraditionalfilialobligations(e.g.,Yang,1988).OthersfocusedonthepoliticalclimateinthePRC(e.g.,Lu,1990).Forexample,theSocialistTransformationMovementandtheCulturalRevolutionledsomescholarstodoubtthesurvivaloffilialpietyunderChinesecommunism,especiallysincePRCleaderscriticizedtraditionalvaluesasfeudalremnantstobeeliminated(Whyte,2004).TofocusloyaltyonthecentralgovernmentandCommunistideologyandawayfromancestorsandparents,China’sauthoritiescreatedcivilrightsfocusedontheindividualratherthanthefamily.Theypassedlegislationspecifyingthatdaughtersandsonsshareequalresponsibilityfortheirbirthparents(Miao,2015). PsychologicalStudyofFilialPietyinChineseSocieties Filialpietyhaslongbeenanimportanttopictophilosophersandhistorians.PsychologistsinChinesesocietiesonlybegansystematicstudyoffilialpietyinthepastfewdecades.Personalityandsocialpsychologistswantedtobetterunderstandhowtheprocessofsocietalmodernizationimpactedthecontentandstructureofpeople’spsychologicalmake-up(Yangetal.,1990).Theycouldnotgroundtheirresearchinclassicalmodernizationtheory(asWesternscholarshad)becauseitequatesmodernizationwithWesternization.Consequently,manyavoidedtheongoingdebatessurroundingsociologicaltheoriesofsocietalmodernityandinsteadadoptedasocialpsychologicalapproach(Yang,2003). DispositionalApproaches Initially,psychologyresearchersadoptedapsychometricdispositionalapproachthatentailedapplyingWesternmethodologiesandinstrumentstolocalparticipants(Hwang,2012).ThisapproachusestheculturalcontextasapredictorinWesternpsychologymodels.ResearchersdefinedfilialpietyintermsoftraditionalChinesenorms,andfocusedonfindingwaystomeasurethestrengthofanindividual’sfilialbeliefsorattitudes.Theythenrelatedthesescalestootherpsychologicaltraitsorbehaviors.Theresultwastwoopposingsetsoffindingsthatgenerateddebateastowhetherfilialpietyhadanoverallharmfulorhelpfulimpactonindividualpsychologicaldevelopmentandinterpersonalrelationships,aswellasconflictingfindingsonthequestionofwhetherfilialpietywaswaningininfluence(seeYeh,2003forareviewofharmfulandbeneficialperspectives). Forexample,DavidHowasoneofthefirsttodevelopafilialpietymeasure(HoandYu,1974).Heidentifiedfilialattitudesthatcorrelatedwithtraditionalparentalattitudessuchascontrol,protection,harshness,andneglect,aswellasinhibitionofself-expression,independence,andcreativity(Ho,1987).Ho(1994)foundthatfilialattitudesweremostprevalentamongthoseofloweducationandsocio-economicstatus,andsoconcludedthatfilialbeliefsmaybediminishinginmodernsocieties.ThisapproachequatesfilialpietywithChineseculturaltraditionsandfocusesonthedeclineoftraditionalnormssupportingfilialpiety. Incontrast,researcherswithamorerelationalfocusofinvestigationfoundthatfilialpietysupportswarmth,love,harmony,andclosefamilyties,andthushasabeneficialeffectonpersonalgrowthandinterpersonalrelationships(e.g.,Yang,1988;Ishii-Kuntz,1997).Theirstudiesdemonstratedthatfilialvalueswerenotwaning,andthatthemutualinterdependenceoffamilymembersremainedstrongdespitechangesinlivingarrangementsandincomeopportunitiesforwomen(seeYeh,2003forareviewofrelatedstudies). Somescholarshavecriticizeddispositionalstudiesas“explorative,andnotveryprofoundorsystematic”(Yangetal.,1990,p.66),andas“Americanizedinthesensethatnearlyalluncriticallyborrowtheories,concepts,methods,andtoolsdeveloped…forEuro-Americansubjects”(Yang,2006,p.285).Researchersapplyingthisapproachwereunabletotapintochangesinthenatureofcontemporaryfilialpiety;theycouldonlyindicatetheextentofrespondents’recognitionoftraditionalfilialbeliefs.Inotherwords,theydidnotinvestigatethemechanismsorprocessesunderlyingfilialpiety(thedeepstructureofhumanfunctioning),butfocusedonthesurfacecontentoftraditionalbeliefs.Moreover,sincetheyinvestigateddifferentaspectsoffilialbeliefinsteadofthecompleteconcept,thefindingstheyreportedconflictedwithoneanother(Yeh,2003). MoralDevelopmentApproaches FilialpietyisthecentralpillaroftheConfucianethicalsystem(YehandBedford,2019).ChildreninChinesesocietiesaretaughtthatthewaytheytreattheireldersisameasureoftheirmoralworth.Thus,somepsychologyresearchersfocusedonunderstandingthecognitivestagesoffilialpietydevelopmentfromtheperspectiveofmoraldevelopment.MostappliedKohlberg’sstagesusingdilemmascenarios,whichwasthedominantparadigmforresearchonindividualmoraldevelopmentatthetime(e.g.,Snarey,1985;Ma,1988).Kohlberg(1981)assertedthatmoraldevelopmentprogressesthroughdifferentiatedhierarchicalstageswithaspecifiedsequence,similartoPiaget(1972/1981)theoryofcognitivedevelopment. FilialpietyresearchfollowingKohlberg’sparadigmencounteredadifferenttypeofchallenge.Kohlberg(1981)assertedthathisstagesofmoraldevelopmentwereinvariantforallpeople.However,healsodefinedthemoralmaturationrepresentingthehigherstagesintermsoftheWesternideologyofrationalism,individualism,andliberalism.ChineseresearcherswhoadoptedKohlberg’sapproachdidnotinitiallyquestionthisassertion.TheydidnotconsiderwhetheratheorydevelopedinthecontextofWesternmoralvalueswouldapplicableinaculturecenteredonConfucianethics(YehandBedford,2019). AnumberofthestudiesthatappliedKohlberg’sparadigmtocollectmoralreasoningdatainChinesesocietiesencounteredtheproblemthatmanyparticipants’responsescouldnotbescoredwithKohlberg’sstandardizedsystem(Snarey,1985).Mostunscorableresponseswererelatedtofilialpiety(e.g.,Ma,1997),indicatingthatfilialpietymayhaveimplicationsformoraldecision-making.DoubtsabouttheuniversalapplicabilityofKohlberg’sstageswerestrengthenedwhenreviewsofcross-culturalstudiesofKohlberg’sstagesconcludedthatthehigherstagesarenotuniversalbecausetheyfailtotakeintoaccountnon-Westernphilosophies(e.g.,Edwards,1981). TheIndigenousPsychologyApproach:TheDualFilialPietyModel Toovercometheconflictingresultsandculturalmismatchencounteredinpriorfilialpietystudies,someresearchersinChinesesocietiesbegantoadoptanindigenouspsychologyapproach(e.g.,Yangetal.,1990;Yeh,1997,1999).Thisapproachpurposefullyincorporatesaculturalperspectiveintobothconceptualdevelopmentandtheoreticalconstruction.Itentailscreationandapplicationoftheories,concepts,methods,andtoolsthatrepresentlocalstructuresandprocesses(Yang,2006).Inthefollowing,wedescribeinsomedetailtheindigenousmodeldevelopedtorepresentthepsychologicalmechanismssupportingChinesefilialpiety. ThereviewpresentedinthephilosophysectionsuggeststhatvariedaspectsoffilialpietywerehighlightedindifferentstagesofChina’sdevelopment.Thefilialconceptduringthepre-ChinEra(before221BCE)focusedonthereciprocalaffectionoftheparent–childdyad.ThefilialconceptduringtheperiodfromtheHantotheQingdynasties(202BCE-1911AD)emphasizedthefamilyrolehierarchy(Hamilton,1990). Yeh(2003)integratedthesefindingsfromChinesehistoryandphilosophytoconstructadual-factormodeloffilialpiety.Eachfactorhaspsychologicalmeaningattheindividuallevel,andalsoreflectstheinfluenceofhistorical,societal,andculturalcontextualfactors.TheDFPMiscomprisedoftwohigher-orderfactorsthatcorrespondtothetwofocalfilialpietyattributes:reciprocityandauthoritarianism.YehandBedford(2003)providedempiricalevidenceforthecontentsofeachtypeoffilialpietyandvalidatedadualfilialpietyscale.Eachfactorisdescribedinthefollowing. Reciprocalfilialpiety(RFP)developsoutofgenuineaffectionfromlong-termpositiveinteractionwithone’sparentsindailylife.Itisrootedinintimacyandthequalityoftheparent–childrelationship.Itencompassesemotionallyandspirituallycaringforone’sparentsoutofauthenticgratitudefortheireffortandsacrifice,aswellasphysicalandfinancialcareforone’sparentsastheyage.RFPfulfillsthepsychologicalneedforrelatednessbetweentwoindividualswithinthecontextoftheparent–childrelationship(butnotthefamilyroledyad).Itgenerallymanifestsintermsofchildren’svoluntarysupportbehaviorsasexpressionsofloveandcarefortheirparents. Reciprocalfilialpietytendstobepositivelyassociatedwithahigherlevelofeducationandahighersocio-economicstatus.WomentendtoscorehigheronRFPthanmen.Itdevelopsthroughintergenerationalcommunicationandsharingindailylife,soitispositivelycorrelatedwithinterpersonalskills(e.g.,self-disclosureandempathy),betterpsychosocialadjustment,andemotionalsupportofparents(Yehetal.,2009).RFPalsopositivelycorrelateswithlifesatisfaction(Wongetal.,2010),andmediatestheinfluenceofsupportiveparentingonyoungadults’happiness(Chenetal.,2016). Authoritarianfilialpiety(AFP)isguidedbyobediencetoroleobligationsbasedonthefamilyhierarchy.Itentailssuppressingone’sownwishestocomplywithone’sparents’wishes(becauseoftheirseniority).Continuingthefamilylineageandmaintainingthefamilyreputationareimportant.Parentsarerolemodelswhorepresentabsoluteauthorityduringtheirchildren’sdevelopmentandsocialization.AFPdevelopsthroughchildren’snormativereactionstosatisfyingparentaldemandsorexpectations.AFPfulfillstheneedforsocialbelongingandcollectiveidentity. Authoritarianfilialpietybeliefsarepositivelyassociatedwithlesseducationandlowersocio-economicstatus.MentendtoscorehigherthanwomeninAFP,anditcorrelatespositivelywithtraditionalconservativeattitudes(e.g.,malesuperiorityandsubmissiontoauthority)andmaladaptation(e.g.,neuroticpersonalitytraits,depressionandanxiety)(Yeh,2006).BecauseAFPofteninvolvesself-suppression,itismorelikelytocorrelatewithpersonalstressthanRFP(Yeh,2006),andhasaonlyalowcorrelationwithemotionalsupportofparents(Yeh,2009). ReciprocityandauthoritarianismformtwointertwinedaspectsofChinesefilialpietygroundedinhistoricaldevelopmentoftheconcept.Theyarenotmutuallyexclusive,butcoexistwithinanindividual.Theymaysimultaneouslyfunctiontovaryingdegreesthatdependuponthecircumstance(YehandBedford,2004).Theymayalsobothpromotethesameoutcome.Forinstance,bothreduceparent–adolescentconflictatthefamilylevel,althoughtheeffectofRFP(viareconciliation)isgenerallymoresignificantthanthatofAFP(viainhibition).Bothalsopromoteintergenerationalsupport:RFPviaaccumulatedaffection,andAFPbyregulatingbehaviorsothattheminimumsocialexpectationsfortheroleofthechildaremet.ThedetailedpsychologicalfeaturesofthetwofilialdimensionsaresummarizedinTable1. TABLE1 Table1.Thedualfilialpietymodel:psychologicalschemasforinteractionwithparents. PsychologicalInsightsFromtheDFPM TheDFPMhasledtoatleastthreeimportantinsights.First,ratherthandesignatingpeopleasfilialorun-filial,theDFPMallowsforamorenuancedexaminationofthepsychologicalmechanismsunderlyingtheaffectivereactionsandsocialbehaviorassociatedwithfilialpiety.Itprovidesamorecomprehensiveframeworkforunderstandingthepersonalpracticeoffilialpiety(includingitsmotivationandexpression)basedontheinteractionbetweenRFPandAFP.Forexample,theDFPMidentifiesfourpossiblemodesofpersonalinteractionwithparents(YehandBedford,2004). Peoplehighinbothreciprocalandauthoritarianfilialdimensionsoperateinabalancedmode.Theyareabletosimultaneouslyconsiderpersonalchoicesandroleobligations.Theyhaveadeepandintimatebondwiththeirparentsandeasilyfindwaystocombinetheirparents’needswiththeirown.PeoplehighinRFPandlowinAFPoperateinareciprocalmode.Theyhaveapositiverelationshipwiththeirparentsandgoodcommunication.Theyemphasizepersonalchoicesoverroleobligations,andexperiencefilialpietyasauthenticloveratherthanself-sacrifice.PeoplewithlowRFPandhighAFPoperateinanauthoritarianmodeandhavealessintimateandmoreobedientrelationshipwiththeirparents.Authoritariansfocusonroleobligationsandperceivefilialpietyasself-suppressionorself-sacrifice.Theymayfinditdifficulttosatisfytheirparents’needs.Peoplefunctioninginthenon-filialmodearelowinbothRFPandAFPandisolatethemselvesfromtheirparents.Non-filialshavelowidentificationwiththeirfamilyandchildroles.Psychologicalmechanismsotherthanthedualaspectsoffilialpiety,suchasegocentrism,mayguidetheirbehaviortowardtheirparents. Second,theDFPMcanexplainpreviousdivergentfindingsontheimpactoffilialpietyinChinesesocieties.Asnoted,earlyresearchresultedinconflictingfindingsastowhetherfilialpietyhadanoverallharmfulorhelpfulimpactinthecontextofmodernsociety.Someresearcherscautionedagainstitsnegativeimpactsuchasinhibitionofself-expressionandindependence(e.g.,Ho,1987).Othersfoundthatfilialpietysupportswarmthandharmony,withabeneficialeffectonpersonalgrowthandinterpersonalrelationships(e.g.,Ishii-Kuntz,1997).WiththeDFPM,itisclearthatthesetwosetsoffindingsdonotconflict.Instead,theyrepresentthetwocoexistingdynamicfundamentalaspectsoffilialpietythatmustbeconsideredtogetherinordertohaveacompleteunderstandingoftheroleoffilialpietyinmodernChinesesocieties. Third,scholarshavenotedanoverlapbetweenChinesefilialpietyandvaluesorattitudesfoundinothercultures.TheDFPMhighlightsthenecessityofconsideringbothaspectsoffilialpietyinordertogainacompletepictureofitsroleinChinesesocieties.Similarly,itisalsonecessarytoconsiderbothaspectsofChinesefilialpietywhencomparingittorelatedfilialconceptsinothersocieties.However,inmanysuchcomparisons,researchershaveusedincompleteconceptstorepresentChinesefilialpiety,meaningthattheydidnotmakeacomprehensiveevaluation. Forexample,Schwartzetal.(2010)observedthatalthoughHispanicfamilismandChinesefilialpietyoriginatefromdifferentpartsoftheworld,theysharecommonelementsinthattheystresssocialtiesoverindividualdesires.Inotherwords,theysharetransculturaldimensions.Schwartzetal.(2010)demonstratedthatbothfamilismandfilialpietygrouptogetherunderasinglefactoroffamily/relationshipprimacy,whichisequivalentacrossgenderandethnicity.However,theitemsSchwartzetal.(2010)usedtomeasuretheconceptoffilialpietyallfocusedsolelyonauthoritarianaspects(AFP),andnoitemsaddressedreciprocalaspects(RFP).Ungeretal.(2002)alsofoundoverlapbetweenHispanicfamilismandfilialpiety.Ungeretal.(2002)definitionoffilialpietyreliedsolelyontheworkofHo(1994),whodetailedonlyAFPcharacteristics.Thus,itappearsthatatleastintermsofsocialbelongingnessschema,somecharacteristicsofHispanicfamilismaresimilartoAFP,butthecomparisonisincompletesinceRFPaspectsofChinesefilialpietywerenotconsidered.ThisobservationalsoinvitesthequestionofwhetherreciprocalaspectsofHispanicfamilismexist. AnotherexamplecomesfromscholarswhohaveusedtermslikefilialdutiesandfilialobligationstodescribethenatureofNorthAmericanparent–childrelations.Blustein(1977)proposedthatbecauseWesternparent–childrelationsarebasedonaffectionandintimacy,thereareinherentlimitsonthenatureoftheobligationstheyentail.InBlustein’sview,filialdutiesarebasedongratitudeandnotindebtedness,andsocannotbeexpressedintermsofrepayment,butonlythroughanongoingrelationshipthataffirmsthespecialimportanceoftheparent.English(1979,p.147)directlyansweredthequestion“whatdogrownchildrenowetheirparents?”withasingleword:“nothing.”Shecontendedthattheparent–childrelationshipisbestcharacterizedasanongoingfriendshipwithspontaneousaffection,andthatloveisthecorrectgroundoffilialobligation.Dixon(1995)likewisearguedthatthevoluntaryandlovingnatureoftherelationshipisthemostrobustbasisofchildren’sfilialbehavior.Allthreeofthesescholarsprovidedreasonedargumentsaboutthemoralfoundationsofparent–childobligations,rights,anddutiestooneanother.AlthoughthenatureoftheseargumentsreflectsreasoningthatisnothinglikeConfucianethics,thefoundationoffilialrelationsingratitudeandspontaneousaffectionandlovethattheydescribeastheidealforparent–childrelationsintheWestisidenticaltothatsupportedbythereciprocalaspectoffilialpietyinChinesesocieties.Themanifestationorexpressionofaffectionmaydifferbyculture,butaffection-basedinteractionbetweenchildrenandparentsexistsinallcultures. ApproachestoChinesefilialpietythatfocusontraditionalnormstendtoemphasizeaspectsrelatedtoAFP(asinthedirectculturalcomparisonwithHispanicfamilism).ThatapproachdoesnotallowtheculturalsimilaritiesinRFP-relatednormstobeconsidered.Ascanbeseenfromtheseexamples,exploringparent–childrelationsintermsofthedualaspectsoftheDFPMmayhelptoilluminateculturalsimilaritiesaswellasdifferencesinapproachestoparent–childrelations. FromIndigenousTheorytoCulturalPsychology ResearchersinitiatedindigenouspsychologyinChinesesocietiestoovercomeshortcomingsintheapplicationofWesterntheorytothelocalcontextandtoprovideactionableresultstosolvelocalproblems.However,theultimateacademicmissionofindigenouspsychologyistocontributetodevelopmentofformaltheorieswithrelevancetovariouscultures(Hwang,2005).Thisperspectivecorrespondstotheviewpointofculturalpsychology. AccordingtoShwederetal.(2006)“onemind,manymentalities”argument,culturalpsychologyhasapsychologicalsideandaculturalside.Thepsychologicalsideexamineshowindividualpersonsthinkandactinlightoftheirparticulargoals,values,andunderstandingsoftheworld.Thissideprobestheuniversalpartofthehumanmind.Theculturalsideentailsexaminationofsocially-assistedprocessesoflearningandschemaactivationthatareassociatedwithbecomingamemberofaparticulargroup.Thissideinvestigatesthediversepartofhumanmentalities.Inotherwords,culturalpsychologyentailsreciprocalinvestigationofthepsychologicalfoundationsofculture,andtheculturalfoundationsofmind.Theyareinterdependent;cultureandpsychemakeeachotherup.Contextandmeaningaretheoreticallyrepresentedaspartofthepsychologicalsystem,andnotasexternalinfluencesorfactors. OurtaskhereistotaketheDFPM,developedinaChinesesocietyfromanalysisofChinesehistoricalandphilosophicaltraditions,andbringitintotherealmofculturalpsychologywhereitcanrepresentboththedeepstructureofhumanfunctioningtoinvestigateaspectsoftheuniversalmind,aswellasthesurfacecontentofculturereflectingdiversementalities.Inthefollowing,weexplainhowthenotionoffilialpietycanbere-conceptualizedsothattheDFPMcanbeappliedmorebroadlyusingtheapproachofculturalpsychology. ExaminingParent–ChildRelationsasaContextualizedPersonalityConstruct Inourreviewofthedevelopmentofthepsychologyoffilialpiety,wedescribedashiftinuseofthetermfilialpiety.Initially,thetermwasmostlyusedtorefertoasetoftraditionalConfuciannorms.CognitivepsychologiststheninvestigateditasaseriesofstagesofConfucianmoraldevelopment.Useofanindigenouspsychologyapproachallowedfilialpietytobeconstruedintermsofthedualmotivationsandprocessesunderlyingparent–childrelationsoverthecourseofaperson’sentirelifespan.Withthisfinaldefinition,weproposethatfilialpietyisbestcharacterizedasacontextualizedpersonalityconstruct. Contextualizedpersonalityrefersto“stablepatternsofthought,feelings,andbehaviorsthatoccurrepeatedlywithinagivencontext”(Helleretal.,2007,p.1229).Itcapturestheideathatpersonalitymanifestsindifferentwaysacrossvarioussocialrolesandcontexts.Personalityisnotmerelyacollectionoftraits.Personalityemergesfromtheinteractionoftheindividualwiththeenvironment,andisexpressedintermsofgoalsandmotivationsinadditiontotraits(Dunlop,2015).Thesegoalsormotivationscorrespondtoparticularinterpersonalrelationshipsorsocioculturalcontexts.Theyareperson-in-contextvariables—personalitycharacteristicsthatareinseparablefromthecontextinwhichtheyarepursued(NasbyandRead,1997).Inotherwords,acontextualizedpersonalityconstructconnectsindividual-levelmotivationsorgoalstotheirsocialcontext. Contextualizedpersonalityresearchershighlightsocialrolesasidealforcontextualizingpersonalitymotivations.Socialrolescanbeorganizedaroundthetwouniversaldimensionsofaffiliationandpower(Roberts,2006),whichallowindividualstomeetthefundamentalhumanneedsofinterpersonalrelatednessandsocialbelonging.TheDFPMusestheparent–childsocialrolestocontextualizethesetwoneeds:interpersonalrelatedness(reciprocalfilialpiety)andsocialbelonging(authoritarianfilialpiety). Acontextualizedpersonalityapproachtofilialpietyfocusesfirstonparent–childinteractionasthecorecontextforunderstandingunderlyingfilialmotivations.Theinherentstructureoftheparent–childrelationshipprovidestheappropriatecuesforintegratingthevariouscontentsoffilialnormsintotheunderlyingfilialpsychologicalmechanisms. Becausethisapproachfocusesonthepsychologicalmechanismsunderlyingparent–childrelations(auniversalcontext),andnotonculturalcontent,ithasthepotentialforapplicationinanyculture.Fromthisperspective,theDFPMcanprovideaframeworkforfourlevelsofanalysis(seeTable2).Itcanbeusedtoexaminebasicindividualmotivesinthecontextofparent–childrelations;thestructuralpropertiesoftheparent–childrelationship;socialchangesinfilialnorms;anddifferencesacrossgroupsorsocietiesintheexpressionofindividualneeds,relationalstructure,andfilialnorms. TABLE2 Table2.TheoreticalimplicationsoftheDFPMatdifferentlevelsofanalysis. IndividualLevel Asacontextualizedpersonalityconstruct,filialpietydevelopsfromchildhoodandhasenduringinfluenceontheparent–childrelationship.TheDFPMidentifiestwobasicuniversalpsychologicalmotivesattheindividuallevel:theneedforinterpersonalrelatedness(RFP)andtheneedforsocialbelongingandcollectiveidentity(AFP).Interpersonalrelatednessneedscorrespondtobeliefsabouttheparent–childinterpersonalconnectionastwoindividuals(notintermsoftheirsocialroles).Theneedforsocialbelongingandforcollectiveidentitycorrespondstobeliefsaboutadherencetosocialnormsandfittingintoensuremembershipwithinalargergroup. Weprovidedpsychologicaldetailspertainingtoeachtypeoffilialneed(asmanifestinChinesesocieties)intheprevioussection,sohereweprovideanexamplerelatedtoeldercarethatdemonstratesthedifferenceinoutcomethatmayoccurwhenindividualsinterpretthesamebehaviorasmotivatedbyaffectionasopposedtobeingmotivatedbyadesiretocomplywithsocialnorms.Arecentstudyonend-of-lifecaregivingshowedthatthereciprocalfilialdimensionnotonlycorrelatedwiththecaregivers’(adultchildren’s)reducedburdenandstress,butalsowiththeelderlyparents’enhancedself-worth(Chanetal.,2012).RFPhasalsobeenshowntocorrespondtoadultchildren’sintentiontoremainascaregiversoftheirparentsandthequalityoftheircare(HsiaoandChiou,2011).Careattributedtotheauthoritarianfilialdimensionwasnotassociatedwiththesepositivebenefitsineitherofthesestudies. StructuralAnalysis TheDFPMcapturesthehorizontal–verticaldualityoftheparent–childrelationship.Thereciprocaldimensionencapsulatesthehorizontalaspectoftheparent–childdyad.Itcorrespondstoanequalrelationshipbetweentwoparticularindividualswhocanunderstandeachotheronlythroughinteractionandcommunication.Theauthoritariandimensioncapturestheverticalaspectandrelatestothehierarchicalrelationshipbetweentwofamilyroles(parentsandchild)forwhichthereexistsomeuniversalelements(suchasthedependenceofthechildontheparent),andsomeculturalelements(suchasthepriorityontheparent’srightsinChineseculture). Thisvertical–horizontaldualityoftheparent–childrelationshipcanreflectmeaningfulindividualdifferencesininteractionpatternswithparents.Itislikeapersonalitycharacteristicthatdevelopsnaturallyinresponsetothefirstinterpersonalcontexteveryoneencountersafterbirth.Wenotethatthesetwoaspectsofparent–childinteractionareoftenentwinedindailylife.Wedistinguishthematatheoreticallevelinordertoparsethepossiblepatternsofparent–childinteraction. Thisvertical–horizontaldualityhasimplicationsatbothindividualandsocietallevels.Chinaprovidesaninterestingcaseexample.China’simperialrulersemphasizedauthoritarianmoralismanddeference(AFP)toconsolidatetheirpower.CommunistleadersinitiallytriedtoeradicatetheseConfucianbeliefstoensurethecentralityofthestate(An,2009).Morerecently,China’sauthoritieshaveswitchedtacticstofocusonreciprocalaspectsoffilialpietyinordertoaddresstheirloomingelder-carecrisisduetopopulationaging(Xu,2001).Ratherthanemphasizingobedience,theynowfocusonsupportforagingparents.Becausetherearenostatewelfareservices,adultchildren,especiallydaughters,arebeingurgedtosupporttheirelderlyparents.The1980MarriageLawevengaveparentswhocannotprovideforthemselvestherighttodemandpaymentsfromtheirchildren(Qi,2015).Inthemid-1980s,ChinaestablishedtheFamilySupportAgreement(FSA),avoluntarycontractbetweenolderparentsandadultchildrenconcerningparentalprovisions.AlthoughtheFSA’smoralpersuasionisbasedonfilialethics,violationsaresubjecttolegalprosecution(Chou,2011).Localgovernmentshavealsoenactedprovisionssuchasrequiringalladultchildrentopaytheirelderlyparentsamonthlyallowanceandtakethemforamonthlyhaircut. Ineffect,China’sauthoritiesarerelyingonauthoritarian(vertical)meanstotrytoenhancereciprocal(horizontal)filialrelations.AccordingtotheDFPM,thisapproachisnotlikelytobeeffective,andtheevidencebearsthissuppositionout.AstudyontheFSAfoundthatiterodesspontaneity,flexibility,andaffectioninthepracticeoffilialpiety(elementsthatcorrespondtoRFP),andthusharmsrelationshipsandresultsinmorefamilylawsuits(Chou,2011). SocialChangeAnalysis TheDFPMisabletocapturechangesovertimeintheendorsementoffilialnormswithinsocieties,anddifferencesinfilialnormsacrosssocieties.Theargumentsupportingthesetwolevelsofanalysisissimilar.Boththereciprocalandauthoritariandimensionshaveapsychologicalbasis.But,forthepurposeofcomparisonovertimeoracrosscultures,theyeachcorrespondtoadifferentprototype. Reciprocalfilialpietyrepresentsthepsychologicalprototypeoffilialrelationsinthesensethatitpertainstouniversalpsychologicalprocessesrelevanttotheparent–childcontext.Thepsychologicalfunctionsoffilialpietyattheindividuallevelconnecttothechild’spersonalmotivesforfilialpractices,andrepresentthedeepstructureofthefilialmind.RFPisthuslikelytoremainstableovertimeandtosharecharacteristicsacrosscultures(whichweaddressinthefollowingsection). Authoritarianfilialpietyrepresentsthesocial/culturalprototypeofparent–childrelationsthroughtheparents’roleasapersonalizedrepresentationofthesocial/collectiveauthority.Eventhoughtheabsoluteauthorityofparentsoftengraduallyweakensaschildrengrowintoadolescenceandadulthood,AFPmaystillreflectinternalizedroleobligationscontainedinculturalfilialnorms.Thus,AFPreflectstheschemaforsocialbelongingnessandcollectiveidentityassociatedwithbecomingamemberofaparticulargroup.Accordingly,overtimeitmayevolvewithbroadersocialchanges.Itmayalsocapturemeaningfuldifferencesacrossculturesinthesurfacecontentoffilialnormsandbeliefs.Inotherwords,AFPismostrelevanttounderstandingtheimpactofthechangingsocialcontexton,orculturaldifferencesin,filialrelations. AnexampleofsocialchangeanalysisrelatestoanearlyinsightfromapplicationoftheDFPMinChinesesocieties.EarlystudiesconductedpriortodevelopmentoftheDFPMmeasuredtheextentofendorsementoftraditionalfilialnorms(suchasobedienceanddeference,whicharerelatedtoAFP),andthusreportedadeclineinrelevanceoffilialpiety(e.g.,HoandYu,1974;Ho,1996).Thesestudiesaccuratelyidentifiedthatchangingsocialconditionswereconnectedtochanginglevelsofendorsementofsometraditionalfilialvalues,buttheresearcherserredinassumingthatthesurfacecontentofthetraditionalnorms(relatedtoAFP)representedthewholeoffilialpiety.Infact,studiesconductedaroundthesametimethatfocusedsolelyonintergenerationalcaringandsupport(aspectsofRFP)didnotreportachangeinendorsementoftraditionalfilialbeliefs(e.g.,Yeh,1997;YueandNg,1999). AnotherexamplecomesfromastudyofChineseimmigrantfamiliesinNewZealand.Theauthorsacknowledgedthatauthoritarianaspectsoffilialrelationshipsmaychangeduetothenewcontext,butnotedthatrelationalaspectsoffilialbeliefremainedconsistent(Liuetal.,2000).RecentstudiesusingtheDFPMinChinesesocietieslikewisesupportthecontentionthatendorsementofauthoritarianaspectsoffilialpietyisdiminishing(Chow,2006;Chanetal.,2012).However,thesefindingsdonotmeanthatAFPbeliefsarenolongerrelevant.Forexample,a2-yearlongitudinalstudyofChineseadolescentsconcludedthatalthoughparticipantshadahigherlevelofreciprocalthanAFP,AFPstillhadrelevanceforunderstandingparent–childinteraction,particularlyobedience(Liu,2013). Cross-CulturalApplications Intheirarticleconceptualizingpsychologicaluniversals,NorenzayanandHeine(2005)statedthatapsychologicalphenomenonqualifiesasafunctionaluniversaliftheshapeoftherelationshipbetweenthevariablesisthesame,evenifthestrengthofthepatterndiffersacrosscultures.Filialpietymeetstherequirementsofafunctionaluniversalwhenitisconceptualizedintermsofacontextualizedpersonalityconstruct.TheDFPMencompassesthetwouniversalpsychologicalneedsofinterpersonalrelatednessandsocialbelongingintheuniversalcontextoftheparent–childrelationship.Themodelprovidesthestructuretolinkthesetwomotivationstothesurfacecontentoffilialnormsatthecollectivelevel,whichmayvarybyculture.Asafunctionaluniversal,theDFPMcanbecomparedwithconceptsdepictingintergenerationalrelationsinothercultures.Inparticular,anyconceptsspecifyingchildren’spsychologicalprocessesinrelatingtotheirparents(suchastheirbeliefs,attitudes,orperceptionsoftheirparents)maycorrespondtooneorbothofthedimensionsoftheDFPM. Inthissection,wereviewsomewesternconceptsofintergenerationalrelations,andsuggesthowtheDFPMmayintegrateorextendthem.Thisexercisedemonstratesthecross-culturalapplicabilityoftheDFPM,andhighlightsmultipledirectionsforfutureresearchonintergenerationalrelationsinWesternsocieties. Fewresearchershaveconsideredcomparingfilialpietyandattachmentstyle.Attachmentstyle(AinsworthandBell,1970)fitstheconceptualrequirementsofafunctionaluniversal(NorenzayanandHeine,2005).Itcanalsobeseenasatypeofcontextualizedpersonalityconceptreflectingtheschemaofchildren’sinteractionwiththeirparents,soitcanbedirectlycomparedwiththeDFPM.Inthefollowing,wecompareattachmentstyleandtheDFPMfromthreeaspects:(1)themodeofinteractionwithparents,(2)thecriticalperiodofdevelopment,and(3)children’sdevelopmentaltaskintheirrelationshipwiththeirparents. First,thetwoframeworksclassifyinteractionmodessimilarly.Secureattachmentstylecorrespondstothebalancedmodeoffilialoperation(highRFPandhighAFP).Theavoidantattachmentstylecorrespondstothenon-filialmode.Theambivalentattachmentstylecouldcorrespondtoboththereciprocalandauthoritarianmodesinthatbothtypesofchildrenlackthecapacitytobalancepersonalizedfilialpracticesbasedonaffectionfortheparent(RFP)withthesocialexpectationsfortheroleofchildren(AFP).Thus,childrenwiththereciprocalmodeofintergenerationalinteractionaremorelikelytobeanxiousaboutothers’doubtsandcriticismsoftheirpersonalizedfilialbehaviors.Thosewiththeauthoritarianmodearemorelikelytofeelstressduetoparents’extrademandsandneeds.EventhoughseparationanxietywithparentsisnotthetheoreticalfocusoftheDFPM,thecombinationofRFPandAFPstillcoversawiderrangeofanxietysituationsrelatedtointeractionwithparents. Second,accordingtoattachmenttheory,theonlytaskofachildistoformandmaintainastrongbondwiththeparentsuntiladulthood.Incontrast,theDFPMelucidatesthenatureoftheparent–childrelationshipacrossthelifespan,andencompassesbothhorizontalandverticalaspects.Thereisamajordifferenceinthecriticalperiodofdevelopment.Attachmenttheoryfocusesonthespecificinteractionstyleoriginatingininfancy;RFPfocusesonthecontinuousaccumulationofmutualunderstandingbetweenparentandchildacrossthelifespan,andtheDFPMrecognizesthattheparent–childrelationshiphelpschildrentransitionintoadulthoodandemphasizestheimportanceofacontinuedrelationshipwithone’sparentsaftergrowingup. Third,accordingtoattachmenttheory,themajortaskofchildrenistostriveforindividualautonomyfromtherelationshipwiththeirparents(AinsworthandBowlby,1991).Incontrast,fromtheperspectiveoftheDFPM,themajordevelopmentaltaskofchildrenistoformself-volitionbyintegratingnumeroussocialroles,insteadofjustself-autonomy.Theparent–childrelationshipbecomesthebasisforestablishingothertypesofsocialrelationsordevelopingamorecomplexidentitycomprisedofmultiplesocialroles. TheoverlapbetweenattachmentstylesandfilialmodesindicatesthattheDFPMhasthepotentialtoincorporatewell-knownwesternconceptualcounterparts.Thedifferencessuggestavenuestoextendwesternintergenerationalrelationsresearch.Althoughtheinfluenceofattachmentstyleonaperson’ssubsequentinterpersonalrelationshipshasbeenbroadlydiscussedintheliterature,theconceptofattachmenthasrarelybeenappliedtoinvestigateintergenerationalinteractionbetweenadultchildrenandtheirparents.Researchershavedevelopedconceptsotherthanattachmenttodescribeintergenerationalrelationsinlaterlife.SomeoftheseconceptsregardingadultrelationshipswithparentscanalsobeintegratedintotheDFPM. Forexample,theconceptofintergenerationalambivalence,whichreferstotheexperienceofbothpositiveandnegativefeelingstowardparents(LuescherandPillemer,1998)canbeexpressedasanimbalancebetweenRFPandAFP.Theconceptof(perceived)parentalauthorityisusedtopredictadolescentlifeadaptation,socialdevelopment,anddelinquency(Smetana,2000;Darlingetal.,2008).Itfocusesontheverticalstructureoftheparent–childrelationshipasacounterparttoAFP.Athirdexampleinvolvesanemergingconcept,moralcapital(Silversteinetal.,2012).Itisdefinedasthestockofinternalizedsocialnormsregardingchildren’sobligationtocarefortheirolderparents,andasasetofintergenerationallytransmittedvaluesthatmakeupfortheinsufficiencyofrelyingsolelyonchildren’sgratitudeoremotionalbondswiththeirparents.Researchersdevelopedthisconcepttoaddresswiththeissueofeldercareinlightofglobalpopulationaging.MoralcapitalcorrespondstoAFPinrepresentingroleobligationsbasedonthefamilyhierarchy.Itcanguaranteechildren’ssupportoftheirparentsevenwithaweakparent–childrelationship. Theseconceptsthatdealwithparent–childrelationsafterchildhoodaresimilartoAFPintheirmechanisms,functions,andtheoreticalimplications.However,WesternresearchershavenotdevelopedcorrespondingconceptssimilartoRFP.FindingsfromapplicationoftheDFPMinChinesesocietiesimplythatthismaybeafruitfulareaforfutureresearchwithrespecttoeldercare.Forexample,althoughpreviousstudiesinChinesesocietiesdemonstratedbeneficialeffectsofboththereciprocalandauthoritarianfilialdimensionsonintergenerationalsupportforelderlyparents,RFPrepeatedlycorrespondedwithastrongerandbroadereffect.InTaiwan,RFPshowedasignificantpositiverelationwiththefrequencyoffinancialsupport,householdlaborassistance,andemotionalsupporttowardelderlyparents.Incontrast,AFPonlyshowedapositiverelationwiththefrequencyofhouseholdlaborassistance(Yeh,2009).ResearchersreportedsimilarresultsinChinaandHongKongusingcross-nationaldatafromtheEastAsiaSurvey(Yehetal.,2013).Thisconsistentfindinghashadimplicationsforgovernmentpolicyoneldercare.OfficialsinTaiwanhavestartedtoshiftawayfrompopulationagingpoliciesthatfocusoninstitutionalcare(whichhasnotbeenwell-accepted)andtowardpoliciesmorefocusedonenhancingRFPoverAFP.Forexample,theTaiwanMinistryofEducation(2011)proposedhighlightingRFPasthecorefamilyvalueinschoolcurriculum,andthelegislatureinauguratedNationalGrandparentsDayin2010withthegoaloffacilitatingincreaseddailyintergenerationalinteractionandmutualunderstanding. Conclusion FilialpietyhasprovidedthemoralunderpinningforChinesepatternsofintergenerationalrelationsandsocializationformillennia.PsychologistsinChinesesocietiesbegantoinvestigatefilialpietysystematicallyinthepastfewdecadestobetterunderstandhowtheprocessofsocietalmodernizationimpactedthecontentandstructureofChinesepeople’spsychologicalmake-up.Now,researchersaroundtheworldarelookingatfilialbeliefsandnormsandparent–childrelationshipsinefforttoaddresstheissuessurroundingpopulationagingandeldercare. EarlyresearchersinChinesesocietiesdefinedfilialpietyintermsofChineseculturaltraditions,limitingtheimplicationsoftheirfindingstoChinesesocieties.Indigenouspsychologyresearcherstookadifferentapproach.TheyintegratedfindingsfromChinesehistoryandphilosophyintoapsychologicalmodelofparent–childrelations:theDFPM.Eachfactorinthemodelhaspsychologicalmeaningattheindividuallevel,andalsoreflectstheinfluenceofChinesehistorical,societal,andculturalfactors.Fromtheperspectiveofculturalpsychology,researchthatfocusesonauniversalcontext,suchastheparent–childrelationship,canresultininsightsthatreflecttheuniquenessoflocalcharacteristicsaswellasuniversalorsharedfeatures(Tsui,2004). Inthispaper,weproposedthatfilialpietyasconceptualizedintheDFPMisafunctionaluniversal(NorenzayanandHeine,2005)contextualizedpersonalityconstruct(Dunlop,2015).Assuch,itconnectsthetwouniversalunderlyingindividualfilialmotivationstothesocialroleinwhichtheyarerelevant.Fromthisperspective,theDFPMbalancesuniversalhumantenets,culturaldiversity,andindividualdifferences.Itcanthussupportmultiplelevelsofanalysisofintergenerationalrelationshipsacrosslifestages,bothwithinandacrosscultures. ThereisnowasolidbodyofresearchapplyingtheDFPMinChinesesocieties.Findingsfromthisresearcharebeingusedtoshapepublicpolicyandprogramsoneldercare.Inthewakeofglobaleconomicdisturbancesandtheweakeningabilityofgovernmentstosustainsocialsecurity,manyWesternstatesarealsoexploringtheroleofthefamilyandfilialbeliefsandnormsinsupportingolderadults(e.g.,LowensteinandDaatland,2006;Silversteinetal.,2012).WeprovidedsomeexamplesofhowresearcherscanusetheDFPMtointegratevariousconceptsproposedbywesternscholarsregardingintergenerationalinteractionwithparentsduringspecificdevelopmentalstagesorwithinspecificcontextstoinvestigateissuesrelevanttotheparent–childrelationshipandeldercare.WehopethatcontextualizedanalysisofissuesinChinesesocietiesandinsightsfromrelevantempiricalfindingsbasedontheDFPMmaystimulateresearch,practicalapplications,andpolicydevelopmentinotheragingsocieties. AuthorContributions OBandKYsubstantialcontributionstotheconceptionordesignoftheworkandanalysisandinterpretationofconcepts,revisingitcriticallyforimportantintellectualcontent,finalapprovaloftheversiontobepublished,agreementtobeaccountableforallaspectsoftheworkinensuringthatquestionsrelatedtotheaccuracyorintegrityofanypartoftheworkareappropriatelyinvestigatedandresolved. ConflictofInterestStatement Theauthorsdeclarethattheresearchwasconductedintheabsenceofanycommercialorfinancialrelationshipsthatcouldbeconstruedasapotentialconflictofinterest. References Ainsworth,M.,andBell,S.(1970).Attachment,exploration,andseparation:illustratedbythebehaviorofone-year-oldsinastrangesituation.ChildDev.41,49–67.doi:10.2307/1127388 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Ainsworth,M.,andBowlby,J.(1991).Anethologicalapproachtopersonalitydevelopment.Am.Psychol.46,333–341.doi:10.1037/0003-066X.46.4.333 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar An,Y.F.(2009).Promotetraditionalcultureandattendtoeldersupportproblemsinruralareas[InChinese].QiluJ.5,73–78. GoogleScholar Bi,L.,andD’Agostino,F.(2004).Thedoctrineoffilialpiety:aphilosophicalanalysisoftheconcenalmentcase.J.Chin.Philos.31,451–467.doi:10.1111/j.1540-6253.2004.00165.x CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Blustein,J.(1977).Onthedutiesofparentsandchildren.South.J.Philos.15,427–441.doi:10.1111/j.2041-6962.1977.tb00195.x CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Chan,C.,Ho,A.,Leung,P.,Chochinov,H.,Neimeyer,R.,Pang,S.,etal.(2012).Theblessingsandthecursesoffilialpietyondignityattheendoflife:livedexperienceofHongKongChineseadultchildrencaregivers.J.Ethn.Cult.Div.Soc.Work21,277–296.doi:10.1080/15313204.2012.729177 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Chen,W.-W.,Wu,C.-W.,andYeh,K.-H.(2016).Howparentingandfilialpietyinfluencehappiness,parent–childrelationshipsandqualityoffamilylifeinTaiwaneseadultchildren.J.Fam.Stud.22,80–96.doi:10.1080/13229400.2015.1027154 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Chou,J.-A.(2011).Filialpietybycontract?Theemergence,implementation,andimplicationsofthe“familysupportagreement”inChina.Gerontologist51,3–6.doi:10.1093/geront/gnq059 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Chow,N.(2006).Thepracticeoffilialpietyanditsimpactonlong-termcarepoliciesforelderlypeopleinAsianChinesecommunities.AsianJ.Gerontol.Geriatr.1,31–35. GoogleScholar Darling,N.,Cumsille,P.,andMartínez,L.(2008).Individualdifferencesinadolescents’beliefsaboutthelegitimacyofparentalauthorityandtheirownobligationtoobey:alongitudinalinvestigation.ChildDev.79,1103–1118.doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01178.x PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Dixon,N.(1995).Thefriendshipmodeloffilialobligations.J.Appl.Philos.12,77–87.doi:10.1111/j.1468-5930.1995.tb00121.x CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Dunlop,W.(2015).Contextualizedpersonality,beyondtraits.Eur.J.Pers.29,310–325.doi:10.1002/per.1995 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Edwards,C.-P.(1981).“Thecomparativestudyofthedevelopmentofmoraljudgmentandreasoning,”inHandbookofCross-CulutralHumanDevelopment,edsR.L.Munroe,R.H.Munroe,andB.Whiting(NewYork,NY:GarlandPress). GoogleScholar English,J.(1979).“Whatdogrownchildrenowetotheirparents?,”inHavingChildren:PhilosophicalandLegalReflectionsonParenthood,edsO.O’NeillandW.Ruddick(NewYork,NY:OxfordUniversityPress),351–356. PubMedAbstract|GoogleScholar Gans,D.,Silverstein,M.,andLowenstein,A.(2009).Doreligiouschildrencaremoreandprovidemorecareforolderparents?Astudyoffilialnormsandbehaviors.J.Comp.Fam.Stud.40,187–201. GoogleScholar Glass,A.P.,Gao,Y.,andLuo,J.(2013).China:facingalong-termcarechallengeonanunprecedentedscale.GlobalPublicHealth8,725–738.doi:10.1080/17441692.2013.782060 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Goffman,E.(1959).ThePresentationofSelfinEverydayLife.Oxford:Doubleday. GoogleScholar Hamilton,G.G.(1990).Patriarchy,patrimonialism,andfilialpiety:acomparisonofChinaandWesternEurope.Br.J.Sociol.41,77–104.doi:10.2307/591019 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Heller,D.,Watson,D.,Komar,J.,Min,J.-A.,andPerunovic,W.Q.E.(2007).Contextualizedpersonality:traditionalandnewassessmentprocedures.J.Pers.75,1229–1254.doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00474.x PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Ho,D.(1986).“Chinesepatternsofsocialization:acriticalreview,”inThePsychologyoftheChinesePeople,ed.M.H.Bond(HongKong:OxfordUniversityPress),1–37. GoogleScholar Ho,D.(1987).“FatherhoodinChineseculture,”inTheFather’sRole:Cross-CulturalPerspectives,ed.M.E.Lamb(Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum),227–245. PubMedAbstract|GoogleScholar Ho,D.(1994).Filialpiety,authoritarianmoralismandcognitiveconservatisminChinesesocieties.Genet.Soc.Gen.Psychol.Monogr.120:349. PubMedAbstract|GoogleScholar Ho,D.(1996).“Filialpietyanditspsychologicalconsequences,”inTheHandbookofChinesePsychology,ed.M.H.Bond(HongKong:OxfordUniversityPress),155–165. GoogleScholar Ho,D.,andYu,L.-L.(1974).AuthoriratianismandattitudetowardfilialpietyinChineseteachers.J.Soc.Psychol.92,305–306.doi:10.1080/00224545.1974.9923111 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Hsiao,C.-L.,andChiou,C.-J.(2011).Primarycaregiversofhomenursingcarerecipients:theircaregivingexperienceandrelatedfactors.J.Nurs.HealthCareRes.7,127–139. GoogleScholar Hsu,F.L.K.(1975).“Formantion,change,andproblemsinhistoryofChinesefilialthoughts,”inTheCollectedPapersofChineseIdeologicalHistory,ed.F.L.K.Hsu(Taipei:TaiwanStudentBookstore),155–200. GoogleScholar Hwang,K.-K.(1987).Faceandfavor:theChinesepowergame.Am.J.Sociol.4,944–974.doi:10.1086/228588 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Hwang,K.-K.(2005).Fromanticolonialismtopostcolonialism:theemergenceofChineseindigenouspsychologyinTaiwan.Int.J.Psychol.40,228–238.doi:10.1080/00207590444000177 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Hwang,K.-K.(2012).FoundationsofChinesePsychology:ConfucianSocialRelations.NewYork,NY:Springer.doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-1439-1 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Ikels,C.(2004).FilialPiety:PracticeandDiscourseinContemporaryEastAsia.Stanford,CA:StanfordUniversity. GoogleScholar Ishii-Kuntz,M.(1997).IntergenerationalrelationshipsamongChinese,Japanese,andKoreanAmericans.Fam.Relat.46,23–32.doi:10.2307/585603 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Kohlberg,L.(1981).EssaysonMoralDevelopment:ThePhilosophyofMoralDevelopment,Vol.1.SanFrancisco,CA:Harper&Row. GoogleScholar Liu,J.,Ng,S.H.,Weatherall,A.,andLoong,C.(2000).Filialpiety,acculturation.andintergenerationalcommunicationamongNewZealandChinese.BasicAppl.Soc.Psychol.22,213–223.doi:10.1207/S15324834BASP2203-8 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Liu,Y.-L.(2013).Autonomy,filialpiety,andparentalauthority:atwo-yearlongitudinalinvestigation.J.Genet.Psychol.174:557.doi:10.1080/00221325.2012.706660 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Liu,Z.-F.,andLin,G.(1988).ChuanTongYuZhongGuoRen[TraditionandChinesePeople].HongKong:JointPublishingCompany. GoogleScholar Lowenstein,A.,andDaatland,S.(2006).Filialnormsandfamilysupportinacomparativecross-nationalcontext:evidencefromtheOASISstudy.Age.Soc.26,203–223.doi:10.1017/S0144686X05004502 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Lu,H.(1990).FathersdoTheirDutiesasFathersandSonsdoTheirDutiesasSons.Beijing:People’sLiterature. GoogleScholar Luescher,K.,andPillemer,K.(1998).Intergenerationalambivalence:anewapproachtothestudyofparent–childrelationsinlaterlife.J.MarriageFam.60,413–425.doi:10.2307/353858 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Ma,H.-K.(1988).TheChineseperspectivesonmoraljudgmentdevelopment.Int.J.Psychol.23,201–227.doi:10.1080/00207598808247761 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Ma,H.-K.(1997).TheaffectiveandcognitiveaspectsofmoraldevelopmentinChinese.Indig.Psychol.Res.Chin.Soc.7,166–212.doi:10.1100/2012/590163 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Miao,C.(2015).Theevolutionoffilialpietyanditsinfluenceonneighboringcountries:takingtheclassicoffilialpietyasthechiefsource.AsianSoc.Sci.11,319–325.doi:10.5539/ass.v11n12p319 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Nasby,W.,andRead,N.W.(1997).Personalityprofiles.J.Pers.65,853–904.doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1997.tb00538.x CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Norenzayan,A.,andHeine,S.J.(2005).Psychologicaluniversals:whataretheyandhowcanweknow?Psychol.Bull.131,763–784.doi:10.1037/0033-2909.131.5.763 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar North,M.S.,andFiske,S.T.(2015).Modernattitudestowardolderadultsintheagingworld:across-culturalmeta-analysis.Psychol.Bull.141,993–1021.doi:10.1037/a0039469 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Piaget,J.(1972/1981).ThePrincipleofGeneticEpistemology.London:Routledge&KeganPaul. GoogleScholar Qi,X.(2015).FilialobligationincontemporaryChina:evolutionoftheculture-system.J.TheorySoc.Behav.45,141–161.doi:10.1111/jtsb.12052 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Roberts,B.(2006).Personalitydevelopmentandorganizationalbehavior.Res.Organ.Behav.27,1–40.doi:10.1016/S0191-3085(06)27001-1 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Schwartz,S.J.,Weisskirch,R.S.,Hurley,E.A.,Zamboanga,B.L.,Park,I.J.K.,Kim,S.Y.,etal.(2010).Communalism,familism,andfilialpiety:aretheybirdsofacollectivistfeather?Cult.Div.Ethn.Minor.Psychol.16,548–560.doi:10.1037/a0021370 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Shweder,R.A.,Goodnow,J.J.,Hatano,G.,LeVine,R.A.,Markus,H.R.,andMiller,P.J.(2006).“Theculturalpsychologyofdevelopment:onemind,manymentalities,”inHandbookofChildPsychology:TheoreticalModelsofHumanDevelopment,6thEdn,Vol.1,edsR.M.LernerandW.Damon(Hoboken,NJ:JohnWiley&SonsInc),716–792. PubMedAbstract|GoogleScholar Silverstein,M.,Conroy,S.,andGans,D.(2012).Beyondsolidarity,reciprocityandaltruism:moralcapitalasaunifyingconceptinintergenerationalsupportforolderpeople.Age.Soc.32,1246–1262.doi:10.1017/S0144686X1200058X PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Silverstein,M.,Gans,D.,andYang,F.M.(2006).Intergenerationalsupporttoagingparents.Theroleofnormsandneeds.J.Fam.Issues27,1068–1084.doi:10.1177/0192513X06288120 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Smetana,J.(2000).Middle-classAfricanAmericanadolescents’andparents’conceptionsofparentalauthorityandparentingpractices:alongitudinalinvestigation.ChildDev.71,1672–1686.doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00257 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Snarey,J.(1985).Cross-culturaluniversalityofsocial-moraldevelopment:acriticalreviewofKohlbergianresearch.Psychol.Bull.97,202–232.doi:10.1037/0033-2909.97.2.202 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar TaiwanMinistryofEducation(2011).AdministrativePlanandMainPolicy.Taipei:MinistryofEducation. GoogleScholar Tsao,W.-C.,andYeh,K.-H.(2019).“Indigenousimplicationsandglobalapplicationsofthedualfilialpietymodel:towardapsychologicalconceptualizationof“xiao”,”inAsianIndigenousPsychologiesintheGlobalContext,ed.K.-H.Yeh(NewYork,NY:PalgraveMacmillan). GoogleScholar Tsui,A.S.(2004).Contributingtoglobalmanagementknowledge:acaseforhighqualityindigenousresearch.AsiaPac.J.Manag.21,491–513.doi:10.1023/B:APJM.0000048715.35108.a7 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Unger,J.B.,Ritt-Olson,A.,Teran,L.,Huang,T.,Hoffman,B.R.,andPalmer,P.(2002).Culturalvaluesandsubstanceuseinamultiethnicsampleofcaliforniaadolescents.Addict.Res.Theory10,257–279.doi:10.1080/16066350290025672 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Wei,C.T.(1969).ThechangeandproblemsofChinesefilialthoughts.MonthlyRev.ArtsSci.3,1–10. GoogleScholar Whyte,M.(2004).“FilialobligationsinChinesefamilies:paradoxesofmodernization,”inFilialPiety:PracticeandDiscourseinContemporaryAsia,ed.C.Ikels(Stanford,CA:StanfordUniversityPress),106–127. GoogleScholar Wong,S.-M.,Leung,A.-N.,andMcBride-Chang,C.(2010).Adolescentfilialpietyasamoderatorbetweenperceivedmaternalcontrolandmother–adolescentrelationshipqualityinHongKong.Soc.Dev.19,187–201.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00523.x CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Xu,Y.(2001).FamilysupportforoldpeopleinruralChina.Soc.Pol.Adm.35,307–320.doi:10.1111/1467-9515.00235 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Yang,C.-F.(1988).“Familismanddevelopment:anexaminationoftheroleoffamilyincontemporaryMainlandChina,HongKongandTaiwan,”inSocialValuesandDevelopment:AsianPerspectives,edsD.SinhaandS.R.Kao(NewDelhi:Sage),93–123. GoogleScholar Yang,K.S.(2003).MethodologicalandtheoreticalissuesonpsychologicaltraditionalityandmodernityresearchinanAsiansociety:inresponsetoKwang-KuoHwangandbeyond.AsianJ.Soc.Psychol.6,263–285.doi:10.1046/j.1467-839X.2003.00126.x CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Yang,K.S.(2006).“Indigenouspersonalityresearch:thechinesecase,”inIndigenousandCulturalPsychology:UnderstandingPeopleinContext,edsU.Kim,K.S.Yang,andK.K.Hwang(NewYork,NY:Springer),285–314. GoogleScholar Yang,K.S.,Yeh,K.-H.,andLei,T.(1989).“Sociopsychologicalandstructural-developmentalstudiesoffilialpiety:concepts,methods,andfindings,”inMoralReasoning,Values,andDevelopmentinChineseSocieties,edsU.P.GielenandT.Lee(NewYork,NY:St.FrancisCollege). GoogleScholar Yang,K.S.,Yeh,K.-H.,andLei,T.(1990).“Sociopsychologicalandstructural-developmentalstudiesoffilialpiety:concepts,methods,andfindings,”inMoralReasoningandMoralValuesinChineseSocieties,edsU.Gielen,T.Lei,andE.Miao(Taipei:AcademiaSinica). GoogleScholar Yeh,K.-H.(1997).“ChangesintheTaiwanesepeople’sconceptoffilialpiety,”inTaiwaneseSocietyinthe1990s,edsL.Y.Cheng,Y.H.Lu,andF.C.Wang(Taipei:AcademiaSinica),171–214. GoogleScholar Yeh,K.-H.(1999).“Thebeneficialandharmfuleffectsoffilialpiety:anintegrativeanalysis,”inProgressinAsianSocialPsychology,edsK.S.Yang,K.K.Hwang,P.Pedersen,andI.Daibo(Westport,CN:Praeger). GoogleScholar Yeh,K.-H.(2003).“Thebeneficialandharmfuleffectsoffilialpiety:anintegrativeanalysis,”inProgressinAsianSocialPsychology:ConceptualandEmpiricalContributions,edsK.S.Yang,K.K.Hwang,P.B.Pederson,andI.Daibo(SantaBarbara,CA:Praeger),67–82. GoogleScholar Yeh,K.-H.(2006).TheimpactoffilialpietyontheproblembehavioursofculturallyChineseadolescents.J.Psychol.Chin.Soc.7,237–257. GoogleScholar Yeh,K.-H.(2009).IntergenerationalexchangebehaviorsinTaiwan:thefilialpietyperspective.Indig.Psychol.Res.Chin.Soc.31,97–142. GoogleScholar Yeh,K.-H.,andBedford,O.(2003).Atestofthedualfilialpietymodel.AsianJ.Soc.Psychol.6,215–228.doi:10.1046/j.1467-839X.2003.00122.x CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Yeh,K.-H.,andBedford,O.(2004).Filialbeliefandparent–childconflict.Int.J.Psychol.39,132–144.doi:10.1080/00207590344000312 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Yeh,K.-H.,andBedford,O.(2019).“Thepsychologyoffilialpietyandmoraldecision-makinginChinesepeople,”inTheOxfordHandbookofMoralDevelopment:AnInterdisciplinaryPerspective,ed.L.Jensen(NewYork,NY:OxfordUniversityPress). PubMedAbstract|GoogleScholar Yeh,K.-H.,Bedford,O.,andYang,Y.-J.(2009).Across-culturalcomparisonofthecoexistenceanddomainsuperiorityofindividuatingandrelatingautonomy.Int.J.Psychol.44,213–221.doi:10.1080/00207590701749146 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Yeh,K.-H.,Yi,C.-C.,Tsao,W.-C.,andWan,P.-S.(2013).FilialpietyincontemporaryChinesesocieties:acomparativestudyofTaiwan,HongKong,andChina.Int.Soc.28,277–296.doi:10.1177/0268580913484345 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Yue,X.,andNg,S.-H.(1999).FilialobligationsandexpectationsinChina:currentviewsfromyoungandoldpeopleinBeijing.AsianJ.Soc.Psychol.2,215–226.doi:10.1111/1467-839X.00035 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Keywords:filialpiety,filiality,indigenouspsychology,Chineseculture,intergenerationalrelations,morality,eldercare,familism Citation:BedfordOandYehK-H(2019)TheHistoryandtheFutureofthePsychologyofFilialPiety:ChineseNormstoContextualizedPersonalityConstruct.Front.Psychol.10:100.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00100 Received:21June2018;Accepted:14January2019;Published:30January2019. Editedby: GlennAdams,UniversityofKansas,UnitedStates Reviewedby: XianZhao,UniversityofToronto,Canada ThomasA.Talhelm,UniversityofChicago,UnitedStates Copyright©2019BedfordandYeh.Thisisanopen-accessarticledistributedunderthetermsoftheCreativeCommonsAttributionLicense(CCBY).Theuse,distributionorreproductioninotherforumsispermitted,providedtheoriginalauthor(s)andthecopyrightowner(s)arecreditedandthattheoriginalpublicationinthisjournaliscited,inaccordancewithacceptedacademicpractice.Nouse,distributionorreproductionispermittedwhichdoesnotcomplywiththeseterms. *Correspondence:OlwenBedford,[email protected],[email protected] Peoplealsolookedat Download