Time-Space Transition: Contradiction of Rice Theory with Reality and its Epochal Significance

Li Yinghua, Zhong Nian

Journal of Psychological Science ›› 2026, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (2) : 496-503.

PDF(413 KB)
PDF(413 KB)
Journal of Psychological Science ›› 2026, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (2) : 496-503. DOI: 10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20260221
Theories & History of Psychology

Time-Space Transition: Contradiction of Rice Theory with Reality and its Epochal Significance

Author information +
History +

Abstract

The rice theory advocates that southern China leans towards a collectivist culture. However, when explaining the cultural differences between northern and southern China, this viewpoint does not align with the universal understanding of "relationship between cultural differences and economic development" in the field of economics. Furthermore, it does not fit China’s situation, in which the south is wealthier and develops faster than the north. Self-construal is a psychological process completed based on cultural values. The analysis of the characteristics of self-construal and social expression under collectivist culture can help to summarize the cultural value orientations of the north and south, explore the reason why there are contradictions between the rice theory and the actual situation, and provide a new perspective of explaining the extant differences in cultural values between the north and south.

The self constructed under Chinese collectivist culture mainly exists in the form of interdependent self, with the core constituent element of relationship between a person and the people around. The interdependent self has flexible and elastic boundaries between oneself and others, which expressed as facial psychology in daily social intercourse. When in a mixed relation, as people are often more sensitive to the gains and losses of the face of both parties in the interaction, they are more likely to be trapped in 'relationship fetters', thus the development of market contracts and healthy operation of social and economic order could be affected. In addition, due to its location at the forefront of reform and opening up, southerners exhibit more pronounced modern personality traits than northerners, namely a greater tendency towards individualism. Based on this, it can be inferred that the reasons why the contradiction between rice theory and reality exists are as follows: its construction and understanding of collectivist culture is different from actual situation in China, and it has not sufficiently explored the huge and rapidly changing factors of self-construal.

Time-space transition provides a new perspective to explain the differences in cultural value between the north and south. The reform and opening up has led to leapfrog changes in cultural values. Based on the original collectivist culture, the South has quickly integrated more individualistic culture than the North due to its position of the forefront of reform and opening up, manifested in that being a collectivist culture as a whole, the south and north of China respectively lean towards individualism and collectivism. People in southern China have a higher proportion of independent self in their self-construal, and are relatively less concerned with relationship and the resulting gain and losses of face. Contemporaneity and adaptability are main features of "time-space transition" theory. Contemporaneity refers to the interpretation of current Chinese social psychology, which reflects people's cultural values in the process of Chinese path to modernization. Adaptability means that the change of cultural values has historical initiative, and is the result of the Chinese people's active choice and adaptation.

From the perspective of time-space transition, the collectivist culture is a dynamic concept with richer connotations, namely "developing collectivist culture". This concept contains both the excellent factors of the original collectivist culture of the Chinese nation, and some applicable factors that are organically absorbed from other cultures through social changes (mainly referring to individualistic cultural elements). With deep roots and abundant vitality, the developing collectivist culture has become a cultural driving force to promote the rapid development of China's economy, which not only breaks the "collectivism dilemma" of "weak economic growth of collectivist cultural countries", but also promotes the adjustment of Chinese new generation's self-construal in the process of adapting to social changes. The element of respecting diversity and showcasing individuality in "independent self" to some extent neutralizes the "relationship" factor of traditional "interdependent self" which could trouble people with Renqing and face. Retaining the core of interdependent self as well as incorporating the advantages of independent self, this "optimized self-construal" is a specific expression of the "free and comprehensive development of people" value in Chinese path to modernization. The developing collectivist culture and optimized self-construal can be seen as concrete practice and expression of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of our time in the specific fields of cultural motivation and self-construal. With its distinct local characteristics, the time-space transition theory reflects the Chinese wisdom of "open-minded and inclusive" and "adhering to principles and pursuing innovation". It also provides positive inspiration for the localization of social psychology.

Key words

rice theory / time-space transition / developing collectivist culture / optimized self-construal / Chinese path to modernization

Cite this article

Download Citations
Li Yinghua , Zhong Nian. Time-Space Transition: Contradiction of Rice Theory with Reality and its Epochal Significance[J]. Journal of Psychological Science. 2026, 49(2): 496-503 https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20260221

References

[1]
白晶莹, 任孝鹏. (2021). “闯关东”和独立我的地区文化. 中国社会心理学评论, 1, 230-250.
[2]
陈欣欣, 任孝鹏, 张胸宽. (2019). 深圳精神抚育独立我的行为方式. 中国社会心理学评论, 1, 14-37.
[3]
费孝通. (2002). 江村经济:中国农民的生活. 商务印书馆.
[4]
费孝通. (2015). 乡土中国. 人民出版社.
[5]
傅根跃, 李康. (2024). 社会变迁中心理与行为的稳定性:以谦虚效应为例. 心理学报, 56(7), 994-998.
面对百年未有之大变局及生活质量生活方式的剧烈变迁, 人们的心理行为乃至文化会如何变异?作者假设尽管社会变迁会影响和改变人类的某些心理和行为, 但有些心理行为, 因其受深层文化影响, 会十分稳定, 不受社会变迁的影响。近30年的有关谦虚效应的跨文化研究为这一假设提供了佐证。谦虚是中国传统文化深层结构中的集体主义的产物, 这种跨文化差异本质上来源于东西方文化中个人主义与集体主义的差异。总结谦虚效应的30年系列研究结果表明尽管中国的经济社会发生了前所未有的发展, 这个跨文化效应基本不变, 说明源于深层文化的心理和行为存在高度的稳定性。
[6]
何友晖, 彭泗清, 赵志裕. (2007). 世道人心:对中国人心理的探索. 北京大学出版社.
[7]
侯东霞, 任孝鹏, 张凤. (2016). 基于客观指标的中国人集体主义量表. 中国社会心理学评论, 2, 86-98.
[8]
黄光国. (2006a). 中国人的心理. 江苏教育出版社.
[9]
黄光国. (2006b). 儒家关系主义:文化反思与典范重建. 北京大学出版社.
[10]
李英华. (2023). “Z世代”青年心理透视:语言亚文化的视角. 新闻与传播评论, 76(3), 83-91.
[11]
罗必良, 耿鹏鹏. (2022). “稻米理论”:集体主义及其经济解理. 华南农业大学学报(社会科学版), 21(4), 1-12.
[12]
马欣然, 任孝鹏, 徐江. (2016). 中国人集体主义的南北方差异及其文化动力. 心理科学进展, 24(10), 1551-1555.
中国存在着集体主义的地区差异, 但学者对其内在动力机制尚未达成共识。我们认为儒家文化影响力的大小不容忽视, 受儒家文化影响越深的区域集体主义倾向越强。研究运用“亲亲性(loyalty/nepotism)”的内隐文化任务对来自27个省份的745名被试进行调查, 结果发现南方人对朋友更优待, 内外群体的心理界限更明显, 集体主义倾向更强。并探讨以儒家文化为代表的中原文化中心南迁对这一差异形成的影响及其未来研究方向。
[13]
彭璐珞, 郑晓莹, 彭泗清. (2017). 文化混搭:研究现状与发展方向. 心理科学进展, 25(7), 1240-1250.
 文化混搭指“不同文化在同一时空中呈现”的现象, 是全球化背景下心理学中文化研究的新热点。文化混搭研究代表了继跨文化心理学、文化心理学和多元文化心理学之后, 心理学文化研究的第四个阶段——文化会聚主义心理学, 并从不同方面延伸与拓展了传统的多元文化研究。已有文献从文化混搭对个体心理和行为的影响、个体对文化混搭的反应及心理机制等角度展开了实证研究。未来研究应进一步明晰文化混搭的概念定义和研究范畴、提炼和比较其不同表现形式、探究既有研究结论中的不一致性、比较文化元素的混搭与非文化元素的混搭的异同、采用多学科多层次的研究方法和手段。
[14]
任孝鹏, 向媛媛, 周阳, 朱廷劭. (2017). 基于微博大数据的中国人个体主义/集体主义的心理地图. 内蒙古师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 46(6), 59-64.
[15]
汪凤炎. (2018). 对水稻理论的质疑:兼新论中国人偏好整体思维的内外因. 心理学报, 50(5), 572-582.
[16]
汪凤炎. (2019). 独立自我和互依自我:从文化历史演化看中式自我的诞生、转型与定格. 南京师大学报(社会科学版), 4, 61-77.
[17]
汪凤炎, 郑红. (2015). 中国文化心理学. 暨南大学出版社.
[18]
魏新东, 汪凤炎. (2022). 个体主义/集体主义的“东西”与“南北”差异. 心理科学, 45(4), 1017-1023.
[19]
徐江, 任孝鹏, 苏红. (2016). 个体主义/集体主义的影响因素:生态视角. 心理科学进展, 24(8), 1309-1318.
个体主义/集体主义是衡量文化的重要维度。两者的价值取向有所区别, 前者关注自我的独特性, 而后者关注自我与他人的关系。近年来研究者发现了众多影响个体主义/集体主义的新因素并构建了理论。这些理论中有4个理论非常具有代表性:现代化理论、气候−经济理论、传染病理论以及大米理论。其中后3个理论从远因的角度来对个体主义/集体主义的成因进行了探讨, 为研究者探究个体主义/集体主义成因提供了新思路。未来个体主义/集体主义影响因素的研究可以用多种测量方法综合的方式或者从基因的角度来进行探索。
[20]
杨中芳. (2009). 如何理解中国人:文化与个人论文集. 重庆大学出版社.
[21]
张岱年, 成中英. (1991). 中国思维偏向. 中国社会科学出版社.
[22]
周明洁, 张建新. (2007). 中国社会现代化进程和城市现代化水平与中国人群体人格变化模式. 心理科学进展, 96(2), 203-210.
[23]
周晓虹. (2017). 中国体验:全球化、社会转型与中国人社会心态的嬗变. 社会科学文献出版社.
[24]
朱滢. (2014). 检验“水稻理论”. 心理科学, 37(5), 1261-1262.
[25]
朱滢. (2015). 再谈检验“水稻理论”. 心理研究, 8(3), 3-4.
[26]
庄孔韶. (2016). 银翅:中国的地方社会与文化变迁. 生活书店出版有限公司.
[27]
Ashraf A. M. (2017). Cultural hybridization in the globalized China: A case study of young university students. International Communication of Chinese Culture, 4(4), 457-465.
[28]
Benedict R. (2005). Patterns of culture. Houghton Mifflin Company.
[29]
Friedman M. (2002). Capitalism and freedom. University of Chicago Press.
[30]
Greenfield P. M. (2016). Social change, cultural evolution, and human development. Current Opinion in Psychology, 8, 84-92.
Social change has accelerated globally. Greenfield's interdisciplinary and multilevel theory of social change and human development provides a unified framework for exploring implications of these changes for cultural values, learning environments/socialization processes, and human development/behavior. Data from societies where social change has occurred in place (US, China, and Mexico) and a community where it has occurred through international migration (Mexican immigrants in the US) elucidate these implications. Globally dominant sociodemographic trends are: rural to urban, agriculture to commerce, isolation to interconnectedness, less to more education, less to more technology, lesser to greater wealth, and larger to smaller families/households. These trends lead to both cultural losses (e.g., interdependence/collectivism, respect, tradition, contextualized thinking) and cultural gains (e.g., independence/individualism, equality, innovation, abstraction).Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
[31]
Guntuku S. C., Talhelm T., Sherman G., Fan A., Giorgi S., Wei L., & Ungar L. H. (2024). Historical patterns of rice farming explain modern-day language use in China and Japan more than modernization and urbanization. Nature Humanities and Social Science Communications, 11, 1724.
[32]
Hamamura T. (2012). Are cultures becoming individualistic? A cross-temporal comparison of individualism-collectivism in the United States and Japan. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(1), 3-24.
Individualism-collectivism is one of the best researched dimensions of culture in psychology. One frequently asked but underexamined question regards its cross-temporal changes: Are cultures becoming individualistic? One influential theory of cultural change, modernization theory, predicts the rise of individualism as a consequence of economic growth. Findings from past research are generally consistent with this theory, but there is also a body of evidence suggesting its limitations. To examine these issues, cross-temporal analyses of individualism-collectivism in the United States and Japan were conducted. Diverging patterns of cultural changes were found across indices: In both countries, some of the obtained indices showed rising individualism over the past several decades, supporting the modernization theory. However, other indices showed patterns that are best understood within the frameworks of a shifting focus of social relationships and a persisting cultural heritage. A comprehensive theory of cultural change requires considerations of these factors in addition to the modernization effect.
[33]
Harvey D. (1989). The condition of post modernity: An inquiry into the origins of cultural change. Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
[34]
Ho D. Y. E. (1985). Cultural values and professional issues in clinical psychology: Implications from the Hong Kong experience. American Psychologist, 40, 1212-1218.
[35]
Hofstede G., Hofstede G.J., & Minkov M. (2010). Cultures and organizations-software of the mind. McGraw-Hill.
[36]
Hu S. H., & Yuan Z. G. (2015). Commentary: Large-scale psychological differences within China explained by rice vs. wheat agriculture. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 489.
[37]
Inglehart R., & Baker W. E. (2000). Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of traditional values. American Sociological Review, 65(1), 19-51.
Modernization theorists from Karl Marx to Daniel Bell have argued that economic development brings pervasive cultural changes. But others, from Max Weber to Samuel Huntington, have claimed that cultural values are an enduring and autonomous influence on society. We test the thesis that economic development is linked with systematic changes in basic values. Using data from the three waves of the World Values Surveys, which include 65 societies and 75 percent of the world's population, we find evidence of both massive cultural change and the persistence of distinctive cultural traditions. Economic development is associated with shifts away from absolute norms and values toward values that are increasingly rational, tolerant, trusting, and participatory. Cultural change, however, is path dependent. The broad cultural heritage of a society—Protestant, Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Confucian, or Communist—leaves an imprint on values that endures despite modernization. Moreover, the differences between the values held by members of different religions within given societies are much smaller than are cross-national differences. Once established, such cross-cultural differences become part of a national culture transmitted by educational institutions and mass media. We conclude with some proposed revisions of modernization theory.
[38]
Inkeles A. (1983). Exploring individual modernity. Columbia University Press.
[39]
Liu S. S., Morris M. W., Talhelm T., & Yang Q. (2019). Ingroup vigilance in collectivistic cultures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(29), 14538-14546.
[40]
Markus H. R., & Kitayama S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review. 98(2), 224-253.
[41]
Olson M. (1980). The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups:. Harvard University Press.
[42]
Parsons T. (1971). The system of modern societies. Prentice-Hall.
[43]
Ritchie L. A., & Gill D. A. (2007). Social capital theory as an integrating theoretical framework in technological disaster research. Sociological Spectrum, 27(1), 103-129.
[44]
Roberts S. G. (2015). Commentary: Large-scale psychological differences within China explained by rice vs. Wheat agriculture. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 950.
[45]
Ruan J. Q., Xie Z., & Zhang X. B. (2015). Does rice farming shape individualism and innovation? Food Policy, 56, 51-58.
[46]
Sampson E. E. (1988). The debate on individualism: Indigenous psychologies of the individual and their role in personal and societal functioning. American Psychologists, 43(2), 15-22.
[47]
Santos H. C., Varnum M. E. W., & Grossmann I. (2017). Global increases in individualism. Psychological Science, 28(9), 1228-1239.
[48]
Smith A. (2011). The wealth of nations. Bottom of the Hill Publishing.
[49]
Talhelm T., & Dong X. (2024). People quasi-randomly assigned to farm rice are more collectivistic than people assigned to farm wheat. Nature Communications, 15(1), 1782.
[50]
Talhelm T., & English A. S. (2020). Historically rice-farming societies have tighter social norms in China and worldwide. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 117(33), 19816-19824.
[51]
Talhelm T., Zhang X., Oishi S., Shimin C., Duan D., Lan X., & Kitayama S. (2014). Large-scale psychological differences within China explained by rice versus wheat agriculture. Science, 344(5), 603-608.
\n On a diverse and large set of cognitive tests, subjects in East Asian countries are more inclined to display collectivist choices, whereas subjects in the United States are more inclined to score as individualists.\n \n Talhelm\n et al.\n \n (p.\n 603\n ; see the Perspective by\n \n Henrich\n \n ) suggest that one historical source of influence was societal patterns of farming rice versus wheat, based on three cognitive measures of individualism and collectivism in 1000 subjects from rice- and wheat-growing regions in China.\n
[52]
Van de Vliert E., Yang H. D., Wang Y. L., & Ren X. P. (2013). Climato-economic imprints on Chinese collectivism. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(4), 589-605.
A still unsolved question is why humans create collectivism. A new theory proposes that poorer populations coping with more demanding winters or summers become more collectivist. Preliminary support comes from a province-level analysis of survey data from 1,662 native residents of 15 Chinese provinces. Collectivism is weakest in provinces with temperate climates irrespective of income (e.g., Guangdong), negligibly stronger in higher income provinces with demanding climates (e.g., Hunan), and strongest in lower income provinces with demanding climates (e.g., Heilongjiang). Multilevel analysis consolidates the results by demonstrating that collectivism at the provincial level fully mediates the interactive impact of climato-economic hardships on collectivist orientations at the individual level, suggesting that culture building is a collective top-down rather than bottom-up process.
[53]
Wang X. H., Wang Y. M., & Liu N. N. (2023). Does environmental regulation narrow the north-south economic gap?-Empirical evidence based on panel data of 285 prefecture-level cities. Journal of Environmental Management, 340, 117849.
[54]
Whyte M. K. (1996). The Chinese family and economic development: Obstacle or engine? Economic Development and Cultural Change, 1, 1-30.
[55]
Yan Y. X. (2009). The individualization of Chinese society. Bloomsbury Academic.
PDF(413 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/