Editorial Board:
Editor:
George H. Conklin,
 North Carolina
 Central University

Board:
Bob Davis
 North Carolina
 Agricultural and
 Technical State
 University

Richard Dixon,
 UNC-Wilmington

Ken Land,
 Duke University

Miles Simpson,
 North Carolina
 Central University

Ron Wimberley,
 N.C. State University

Robert Wortham,
 North Carolina
 Central University

® 
Volume 4, Number 1
Spring 2006
 
 

Value Orientation and Its Relationship to Socio-Economic Indicators of Human Development in Iran

by
Jahangir Jahangiri 
Asghar Mirfardi 

Shiraz University
 

Introduction

      The industrial revolution has affected the socio-economic and cultural structures of many societies.   Some sociologists (Weber 1958) have considered the cultural and religious contexts as rational reason for economic changes in western countries. Cultural and value conditions and consequences of development are the most critical matters in development studies. Evaluation of the relationship between development and cultural conditions, especially attitudes and values, has been a subject for social researchers in recent decades.   The World Value Survey (WVS) program, started in the 1970s, focused on this theme. 

   Iranian society encountered fundamental changes in its traditional structure in the last century. Development indicators, particularly those measuring human development, have improved. 

    This study aims at evaluating the relationship between values and attitudes and human development. Analyzing the value orientation of Iranians, this study intends to examine the effects of socio-economic factors of human development (education, life expectancy feeling and economic status) as well as job situation on the individual's value orientation. Since such factors (education, economic status and life expectancy) are critical indicators of human development, the researchers want to know whether there is significant difference between individuals in term of their situation in these indicators and their value orientations. Knowing the value orientation of a society is so important and necessary for approaching the development trend.

     Maleki (1996) studied the value orientation in the family context. He used survey method for this study. Allport's scale for values study and Inglehart's items value measurement were used for value measurement. Welzel et al. (2000) have studied the trend and identity of social changes, particularly value changes, by a multi-level and cross-cultural approach.  Inglehart and Baker (2000) in the study "Modernization, Cultural Change, and the Persistence of Social Values" analyzed the role of economic development in changing or continuing the traditional values. The study showed that cultural traditions have two situations; extended changes and continuants, and also economic development leads to change from absolute to toleration and cooperative values. Ferrari Occhionero (2000),  analyzed the value change among different generations (parents and children) in Italy. This study indicated that an average current of secularization could be considered for young generation. Zhu (2000) in a study indicated that culture is a multi-dimensional phenomena. This study examined three basic features of culture: motivation, value and temperament modalities.  Despite the fact that there are considerable studies in this respect, they attached less attention to categorization of value orientation regarding development. This weakness, particularly with respect to Iran society, is addressed in this study. 

    There are various theories about development and cultural and value structures. A brief listing of the numerous theories in the literature are listed below. 

    Hagen believed that economic development should be studied via the theory of "creative personality" (Hagen, 1962:35).  Hagen  (1962:101) stated that the primitive stages of child's education and socialization have a critical effect on the his/her future behavior. 

    Rogers believed that different cultures are differentiated from each other according their social values. Social values, in Rogers, view, are abstract and almost unconscious hypotheses about what is true and important and what is not true (Rogers 1969:49). 

    McClelland believes that achievement is originated from entrepreneurship spirit, which in its part, would lead to faster economic development (McClelland  1961:205).

    Inkeles and Smith believed that the main goal of each economic development is reaching to a desired level of living for human being, and this trend is changing from traditionalism to individual modernism (Inkeles and Smith 1974:289-290).

    Parsons and analyzed the value standards in action theory. These standards were classified upon the three methods orientation (cognitive, emotional, and evaluative). In pattern variables, he identified two different methods of value orientation according to expectation of different social systems from person (Parsons and Shils  1962:72-73, 76).

    Schwartz divided social values to open values for change and conservative values (Schwartz 1994:24). 

    Inglehart's theory of social change is based upon value change, particularly inter-generational value change (Inglehart 1977). This theory has two basic hypotheses: 

1-A Scarcity hypothesis: An individual's priorities reflect the socioeconomic environment. 2-A Socialization hypothesis: The relationship between socioeconomic environment and value priorities is not one of immediate adjustment.  A substantial time lag is involved because, to a large extent, one's basic values reflect the conditions that prevailed during one's pre-adult years (Inglehart 1997:33).

The term of post-materialist denotes a set of goals that are emphasized after people have attained material security,….the collapse of security would lead to a gradual shift back toward materialist priorities….post-materialists do not place a negative value on economic and physical security-they value it positively, like everyone else; but unlike materialists, they give even higher priority to self-expression and quality of life."

    After analyzing social progress and value systems  Grondona produced a typology of "twenty contracting cultural factors." Included factors that are favorable /resistant to development (Grondona 2000:46-53).  Harrison identified ten values, attitudes, or mind-sets that distinguish progressive cultures from static cultures. This typology is highly relevant to Harrison's typology (Harrison 2000: 299-300).  In his theory on civil society, Alexander defined civil society as: 

A sphere of solidarity in which abstract universalism and particularistic versions of community are tensely intertwined …it allows the relation between universal individual rights and particularistic restrictions on these rights to be studied empirically, as the conditions that determine the status of civil society itself. civil society depends on resources, or inputs, from these other spheres, from political life, from economic institutions, from broad cultural discussion, from territorial organization, and from democracy (Alexander 2001:193).

Theoretical Framework of the Current Study

• The fate of everyone is constant and unchanging.
• Human efforts can determine the fate of life.
• Chance is not important in human life. 

0=completely disagree
1=relatively disagree
2=moderate opinions
3=relatively agree
4=completely agree.

    Since there were 46 items, an individual's score could range from 0 to 184.  Items were recoded so a high score represents the less traditional view. A low value score for Tables 1 to 6 is from 0-93.  Medium is from 94-124, and high 125 and up. 

    Human development, which has been considered by United Nations and social scientists from 1990s, has three indicators: per-capita income, education level, and opinions about expected life expectancy. 

    Based on the theories outlined above, we predict the following relationships in the current study:

• There will be a relationship between individual's education and value orientation.
• There will be a relationship between parent's education and value orientation. There will probably be a relationship between job situation and value orientation. 
• There will probably be a relationship between the job situation and value orientation
• There may be a relationship between life expectancy feeling and value orientation.  There should be a relationship between family's economic status and value orientation. 

      This reports on a survey of 990 persons age 15 years and over and were residents of Shiraz and Yauj cities (Iran),.  The ample size was based on the Lin Formula (Lin 1976), using random-stratified sampling. The data were analyzed by SPSS. Descriptive and inferential (correlation and F and T tests) were used for analyzing the data. Reliability of dependent variable's items was measured by Cronbach – Alpha (Alpha = .77). Content validity was approved via experts' consultation. 

    The data show that individuals with upper education have a higher scores on the  value orientation scale (Tables 1, 2 and 3).  This is also the  situation when considering the father's educational level.  For example, an individual whose father's educational level ws the lowest have a low value orientation rate of 6.1%, while those whose father's had the highest educational level show only a 1% rate of low value orientation. 

   In terms of  job status, medium job status is strongly associated with medium value orientations (Table 4). 

     Table 5 shows those with medium value orientations also have the medium value of life expectancy expectations. 

      Table 6 shows that respondents over the poverty line have a higher value orientation than those under the poverty line. 

    Tables 7-10 present the results of F or T tests between  the dependent and independent variables. It indicates that education levels including individual's education, father's education, and mother's education  all have significant associations with value orientation. The job situation, job status, and economic status also have significant differences due to value orientation. Thus the hypotheses of 1, 2, and 3 are verified.

    For assessing the fifth hypothesis (family's job status and value orientation) a frequency distribution and T-test was provided by family's economic situation indicator (above/ under poverty line), but Pearson correlation r was acquired by economic income (ratio-interval scale). Average score of value orientation among the above poverty line individuals is higher than under poverty line ones. 

    Table 13 indicates that there is correlation (r =.223) between life expectancy hopes and value orientation. Increasing in life expectancy expectation leads to a higher value orientation score. This relation is also true for family's income (r=.131). As family's economic income increases, the value orientation score also increases. 

    Believing that each individual has a particular value orientation, it could be said that  the value orientation identifies the human beings' view toward society and their interaction and behavior to others. This study that has been done in light of  theories of value orientation, particularly Inglehart's materialist/ post-materialist theory (1997), Alexander's theory of civil society (2001) and  Schwartz's theory (1994).  We proposed  several hypotheses about human development and its relevance to value orientation. Data were collected via filling out questionnaire by 990 persons of 15 years and above, followed by the analysis of the hypotheses.

    Human development, according to the United Nations and social scientists from 1990s, has three  good indicators: Per-capita income, educational levels and life expectancy.  Inglehart et al. (1997) identified human development indicators in three dimensions: 1-socioeconomic development 2-cultural change and 3-democratization. The first dimension, in fact,  includes the United Nation's indicators. 

   Economic status, education level, and life expectancy feeling as socioeconomic indicators of human development and independent variables were assessed. Data analysis indicates that as socioeconomic indicators of human development go up, the value orientation increases. Each of education levels of individual, father and mother, have significant relationship with the respondents' value orientation. 

   Thus hypotheses 1  (individual's education) and 2 (parent's education) are verified. Hypothesis 3 (job situation and value orientation) is also verified, since individual's value orientation according to job (activity) situation, job kind (public/private), and social status (low, medium and high classes) are related. 

   There is a significant relationship between the life expectancy feeling and the value orientation. The forth hypothesis is also verified. 

    Economic status variable that is based on Iran's poverty line has a significant relationship with the value orientation. Individuals above poverty line have higher score on the value orientation measure. Thus the fifth hypothesis (relationship between the economic status and the value orientation) is verified. As a result, as studies of other researchers (such as Inglehart, Baker etc.) predicted, and as human development indicators are promoted, the value orientation that adjustable to development would increase and traits such as universalism, rationality, scientism etc., which themselves lead to development, would increase in society. 

Alexander, Jeffrey C. (2001). "The binary discourse of civil society." in Seidman, Steven and Jeffrey C. Alexander (eds.) The New Social Theory Reader. pp. 193-202. London: Rutledge.

Ferrari Occhionero, Marsia (2000). "Generations and value change across time." International Review of Sociology, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 223- 233.

Grondona, Mariano (2000). "A cultural typology of economic development." pp. 44-59  in Lawrence E. Harrison and Samuel P. Huntington (Eds.). Culture Matters: How Values Shape Human Progress.  New York: Basic Books.

Hagen, Everett E. (1962). On the Theory of Social Change. Homewood: The Dorsey Press Inc.

Harrison, Lawrence E. (2000). "Promoting progressive cultural change." pp. 296 – 307 in Lawrence E. Harrison, and Samuel P. Huntington (Eds.). Culture Matters: How Values Shape Human Progress. New York: Basic Books. 

Inglehart, Ronald (1977). The Silent Revolution. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Inglehart, Ronald (1997). Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic and Political Change in 43 Societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Inglehart, Ronald and Wayne E. Baker (2000). "Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of traditional values." American Sociological Review, 65(1):19-51.

Inkeles, Alex and Smith, David H. (1974). Becoming Modern. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Lin, Nan (1976).  Foundations of Social Research.  New York: McGraw-Hill. 

Maleki, Amir (1996). "The Study of Relationship between the Family's Socio-economic Status and Adolescents' Value Orientations." Tehran (Iran): Moddares University (M.A. Thesis in Sociology). 

McClelland, David  C. (1961). The Achieving Society. New York: The Free Press.

Parsons, Talcott  and Edward  A. Shils (1962). "Values, motives and systems of action." pp. 47- 109 in Parsons, Talcott and Edward A. Shils (Eds.). Toward a General Theory of Action.  Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Rogers, Everett M. (1969). Modernization Among Peasants: The Impact of Communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

Schwartz, Shalom. H. (1994). "Are there universal aspects in structure and contents of human values?" Journal of Social Issues, 50(4):19-45.

Weber, Max (1930). The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Translated by Talcott Parsons. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. (Reprinted 1958). 

Welzel, Christian, Ronald Inglehart, and Hans-Dieter Klingemann (2001). "Human development as a general theory of social change: A multi-level and cross-cultural perspective."  Berlin: wissenschaftszentrum Berlin fur sozialforschung GmbH (WZB) Paper FS III01 - 201. 

Zhu, Zhichang (2000). "Cultural change and economic performance: An interactionistic perspective." International Journal of Organizational Analysis 8(l): 109-126.

 Return to Sociation Today Spring 2006

©2006 by the North Carolina Sociological Association