Collectivism

Collectivism refers to an ethics perspective, a cultural characteristic, philosophical position, and/or social and psychological outlook based on people being a group. It is often defined in contrast to individualism which centres individual above the collective group.^[1][2][3]

In collectivism, the core unit is the collective group.^[1] Individuals are seen as fundamentally connected through relationships and through being a part of a group.^[1] In this context, groups are defined as networks of interpersonal relationships.^[4] The collectivist orientation emphasizes collective identity and collective agency, and values tend to prioritize the collective more than the individual.^[2]

Collectivism has many different types, depending on the relationship networks considered within the base unit.

According to Cohen (2016), any cultural system contains both individualist and collectivist features; Cohen recommends against considering any single large heterogenous group as completely collectivist or individualist.^[5]

Cultural collectivism promotes participants in a culture to see themselves as fundamentally interconnected, and prioritize relationships over individual, idiosyncratic goals.^[5] Collectivist societies are ones where people are integrated into strong, cohesive in-groups.^[6] In collectivism, social practices indicate collective cooperation and intersubjective shared understandings.^[6] Collectivism is not limited to identification (versus non-identification) with specific types of groups (eg. religion, ethnicity, families), but rather the strength of relationships within groups and how much people enter and exit the group (ie permeability of group boundaries).^[6]

Hofstede emphasizes collectivism as a group-level construct: collectivism (or individualism) is a characteristic of a social system that cannot simply be reduced to the personality traits or attributes of individuals within the group.^[7] Cultural-level collectivism and individualism should therefore not be conflated with similar individual-level constructs describing individual psychology, or national-level constructs, such as vertical and horizontal collectivism.^[7]

Cultural Collectivism-Individualism was first described as dual cultural constructs by Hofstede.^[7] According to Komisarof (2025), there is generally consensus in literature in critiquing Hofstede’s model for measurement of Individualism-Collectivism on multiple points.^[7] Minkov’s revised model adds social ascendancy to Hofstede’s model to conceptualize Collectivism at the national level as defined by (1) conformism (the tendency in a society to pressure members into uniformity and submission), (2) social ascendancy (the tendency to prioritize acquisition of power and high social status), and (3) exclusionism (the tendency to promote group-based privileges and exclusion of out-groups). The addition of social ascendency has been critiqued as a distinct concept not directly related to collectivism.^[7] Operationalization and measurement approaches vary widely.^[7] Other models to operstionalize similar concepts exit in Minkov and Kaasa’s (2022) Individualism-Collectivism index, Schwartz’s (2006) autonomy-embeddedness value orientation, Beugelsdijk and Welzel’s (2018) Individualism-Collectivism model, and Welzel’s (2013) emancipative values.^[7]

Most research on collectivist culture comes from East Asia.^[1] In contrast, individualism evidence has predominantly come from Germany and the Netherlands. Scandinavian countries (which have a more egalitarian culture), southern Europe, and Eastern Europe (where political differences may change the meaning of collectivism) are not represented in this data.^[1] Africa, West Asia, and Latin American countries are not represented in research.^[1] The literature does not include or represent countries with Islamic culture or countries where there is within-group conflict.^[1]

Collectivism, as discussed in European literature, parallels concepts of membership philosophy in Southeast Asian communities.^[6] The perception of collectivism and individualism as two discrete polar opposites has developed in European literature as a reactionary definition following the Industrial Revolution, and may not represent areas of the world where such an event has not happened.^[6]

Collectivism is a kind of ethics based on people being a group. Collectivists focus on what's good for a whole group. Individualists focus on what's good for each person. Collectivism and individualism are philosophical positions and are also part of politics.

The word "individualism" was originally used by socialists to attack their enemies. They said that individualists were selfish for not supporting socialism.^[1] Instead, individualists support people being independent and chasing their own goals. They also believe in having lots of freedoms.^[8]

Collectivists believe that one person is not as important as a group of many people. They often believe people should compromise to make things better for each other instead of just themselves.^[9] They also think that letting someone do whatever they want is not good if it hurts lots of other people.

Psychologically, collectivism increases the likelihood of including, relating, and assimilating information.^[1]

• In 1930 Max Weber compared two ways of thinking in religion: one where people focus on themselves (individualism) and the other where they focus on being part of a group (collectivism). Weber thought that Protestants were more independent, while Catholics were more into having a structured community.^[4]
• Ferdinand Tönnies talked about collectivism and individualism using concepts such as Gemeinschaft (community) and Gesellschaft (society). He used these words to describe two types of relationships: one where people care a lot about their community, especially in small villages, and another where people are more focused on society as a whole. An anthropologist named Redfield also talked about this idea in 1941 when comparing village life to city life.^[10][2]

• In 1980 Geert Hofstede became influential in cultural comparision. According to him, collectivism and individualism are two ends of a spectrum, where someone leaning more towards collectivism cares more about the goals of their social group rather than their individual goals.^[11]