Is the Senpai--Kouhai relationship common across China, Korea, and Japan?
Although in this study we discuss only the Senpai--Kouhai relationship developed during the years of school attendance and tertiary study, the influence can extend to the years after school and can even be lifelong. The Senpai--Kouhai relationship also exists in the workplace and the military, but owing to participant demographics, to narrow our focus, we examined the Senpai--Kouhai relationship in the context of educational institutions only.
The Senpai is the person who enters school earlier and the Kouhai is the person who enters later. Hierarchy is a core characteristic of the Senpai--Kouhai relationship. The Senpai's higher status comes from his or her longer school attendance. The Kouhai is expected to speak very politely to the Senpai, using an honorific, and sometimes, because of the strict politeness expectations, struggles to speak to the Senpai. The hierarchical culture also restricts the Kouhai from expressing any negative opinions of the Senpai. Thus, if a Kouhai behaves improperly, he or she will be negatively judged and expelled by other Kouhai group members. The Senpai is expected to act as a role model for the Kouhai, who learns from the Senpai how to behave in the new environment (Enyo, 2013; Nukaga, Suzuki, Akiba, Iida, & Arai, 2018; Sano, 2014; Yoshinaga, 2017).
The features of the Japanese Senpai--Kouhai relationship are congruent with social exchange theory (Blau, 1964). In the social exchange between a Senpai and a Kouhai, the Senpai mainly provides the Kouhai with information and services, and gains status from the Kouhai (Emerson, 1962; Foa & Foa, 1980). That is why the Senpai has a higher status than the Kouhai. In comparison with an exchange of universal and concrete resources like money and goods, in this relationship, particularistic and symbolic resources like status and love are usually exchanged in a more open-ended manner and over a long term (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005). The involvement of status and love makes the Senpai--Kouhai relationship one of long-term social exchange.
Chinese, Korean, and Japanese cultures share many features as a result of the influence of Confucian values. According to Hofstede's cross-cultural theory, they all rank high on the Power Distance Index, which is scored from 1 to 100. China is scored at 80, Japan at 54, and Korea at 60. The three cultures rank low on the Individualism Index, which is also scored from 1 to 100. China is scored at 20, Japan at 46, and Korea at 48 (Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010). As the high power distance makes status inequity more acceptable, this leads to the hierarchical difference between the Senpai and the Kouhai. In a collectivistic culture, there is a tendency for people to focus on the relationship between the individual and the group, to seek group harmony, and to form a clear distinction between in-group and out-group members. It is essential for a newcomer to learn how to adapt to a group, and the Senpai can be a good guide. In Japan, mentoring is more of a relationship than a management strategy (Bright, 2005). The Senpai--Kouhai relationship itself can be regarded as a combination of a peer relationship and mentoring (Kram & Isabella, 1985). Because of the similarities in the three countries' cultural backgrounds, namely, the influence of Confucian values, and high power distance and collectivism, an assumption can be made that Senpai--Kouhai relationships, similar to those in Japan, exist in China and Korea.
Indications of similar relationships in China and Korea are that there are five basic relationships in traditional Chinese culture. One of these is the senior partner-junior partner relationship, in which the senior provides the junior with protection and consideration, and, in turn, the junior shows respect for, and obedience to, the senior (Hofstede et al., 2010). There is an expression similar to the Senpai--Koubai relationship in the Korean language, the Seonbae-Hubae relationship, which literally means "the relationship between the older generation and the younger generation," but which actually indicates a kind of peer relationship.
Thus, we concluded that if there were Senpai--Kouhai relationships in the Chinese and Korean cultures, they would share many commonalities with the Japanese version. However, as researchers have shown that there are cultural differences in East Asian cultures (Brown & Brown, 2006; Zhang, Lin, Nonaka, & Beom, 2005), a closer investigation into Senpai--Kouhai relationships in the three cultures is necessary. Therefore, we posed the following research questions:
Research Question 1: Does the same form of social exchange relationship as the Senpai--Kouhai exist in China and Korea?
Research Question 2: If the relationship exists in China and Korea, what is the factor structure of this relationship, and can there be a uniform measurement for the Senpai--Kouhai relationship in Japan, China, and Korea?
Research Question 3: If the relationship exists in China and Korea, what are the commonalities and differences in the Japanese, Chinese, and Korean Senpai--Kouhai relationship?
We conducted interviews to help determine the items about the Senpai--Kouhai relationship for the next step of our research. We then designed the items for the survey, which Chinese, Korean, and Japanese participants completed online.
We interviewed nine people, with three from each culture, about the Senpai--Kouhai relationship. They were aged from 20 to 31 years, and each had at least finished senior high school in their own country. Each person was interviewed one on one and each interview lasted for an hour. The interviews were conducted according to an outline, and open discussion was especially welcomed. The questions in the outline included:
* How do the interviewee and people in his or her culture understand the Senpai--Kouhai relationship?
* Who is the interviewee's favorite and most disliked Senpai and favorite and most disliked Kouhai? Why? What sort of person can make a good or bad Senpai or Kouhai?
* Is the Senpai--Kouhai relationship necessary? Why?
Each interviewee had developed a Senpai--Kouhai relationship, and thought that almost everyone in their culture should be familiar with the relationship. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and then analyzed using a thematic analysis process (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The positive and negative points raised are summarized in the thematic map (see Figure 1). Factors identified were:
* Hierarchy. The Senpai was described as "a peer whom you should treat like a teacher." The Senpai--Kouhai relationship involves strict rules and courtesy. All the Korean and Japanese interviewees agreed that a Senpai--Kouhai relationship was between superior and subordinate. The Kouhai respects, and uses honorifics when speaking to, the Senpai. Failure to use honorifics to a Senpai, even years after graduation from school, would still cause negative remarks from others.
* Supporting and verbal etiquette. The Senpai and the Kouhai each has a role to play. The Senpai should lead and be professional and the Kouhai should be modest and polite. Participants from each culture took a very negative view of impolite Kouhai. In China, the Senpai shares his or her skills, knowledge, and experience with the Kouhai. In return, the Kouhai respects and appreciates the Senpai for this kindness. However, the obligations that Japanese and Korean interviewees outlined were mainly connected to the Kouhai.
* Closeness and trust. The Senpai--Kouhai relationship is treated as an in-group relationship. Although there may sometimes be strict rules and dark sides, such as bullying and violence, most Senpai and Kouhai feel closer to each other than to other acquaintances. Chinese and Korean interviewees stated that the Senpai--Kouhai relationship provides the chance to develop a social network among students at the same school. All the interviewees stated that they had firm trust in their favorite Senpai and Kouhai.
We designed a survey based on a literature review and the interview responses. In the first part of the survey we sought demographic information, namely, culture, sex, age, and education. The second part comprised multiple-choice items regarding general information about the Senpai--Kouhai relationship. The third part consisted of 49 items relating to the Senpai--Kouhai relationship, to which participants responded on a 7-point Likert scale. We examined both the short-term (at school) relationship and the long-term (after leaving school) relationship. We developed items on hierarchy, supporting, and verbal etiquette in the Senpai--Kouhai relationship. Trust, comprising affection-based and cognition-based trust (Lewicki & Bunker, 1995), was explored with 10 items developed from the measures designed by Cook and Wall (1980) and McAllister (1995). The focus of each item was on the Senpai--Kouhai relationship that was developed during student days.
The survey was first designed in Chinese, then translated into Korean and Japanese by native speakers, and finally back-translated into Chinese and compared with the original Chinese version to ensure consistency. Responses were collected online through Survey Monkey.
We analyzed valid responses from 311 Chinese, 266 Korean, and 275 Japanese participants, of whom 79.4% were students (Mage = 24.0, SD = 4.20; age range: 17 to 39 years). There were 488 male participants and 374 female participants.
Although two Chinese participants, 31 Korean participants, and 11 Japanese participants had never been a Senpai, all participants were very familiar with the Senpai--Kouhai relationship. Of the Chinese participants, 53% came to know the concept of the Senpai--Kouhai relationship when they were undergraduate students, but most of the Koreans (58.1%) and Japanese (74.9%) came to know this concept during their time at high school. Of the Chinese participants, 65.3% were first regarded as a Senpai when they were undergraduate students, and 56.3% of the Korean and 88% of the Japanese participants were first regarded as a Senpai before they went to university. Of the Chinese participants, 25.6% first established a Senpai--Kouhai relationship with a person in the same department, and 27.8% when asking a Senpai for help. In contrast, 33% of the Korean participants first established a Senpai--Kouhai relationship by arrangement. Of the Japanese participants, 48.7% first established a Senpai--Kouhai relationship with a person in the same department, and 38.2% did so by arrangement. Most students from each culture knew of the existence of the Senpai--Kouhai relationship from school. Chinese and Korean participants interacted with the Senpai most frequently in clubs, whereas Japanese did so in learning groups. The results of the general descriptive items are summarized in Table 1.
To explore the relationship of the items and to construct a model to identify important aspects of the Senpai--Kouhai relationship, we performed a principal component analysis with varimax rotation. The overall measure of sampling adequacy was .93 > .50. We eliminated 18 factors, either because their loadings were greater than .50 on two factors, or because they failed to load on any factor at a .50 level (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1995). Items with loadings greater than .50 on the same factor were to form one component of the model. Finally, a four-factor model containing 31 items was extracted and explained 61% of total variance (see Table 2). Cronbach's [alpha] for trust, supporting, hierarchy, and verbal etiquette were .91, .93, .84, .84, respectively, all greater than .60 (Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2010).
Factor 1, labeled as trust, contained nine items and explained 19% of the total variance. In this factor we included the 10 items related to trust, except for the item "When cooperating with the Senpai, I believe he or she won't cause me trouble." This may be attributable to the fact that a Senpai sometimes assigns a task to the Kouhai who has to help the Senpai sort out the latter's trivial matters. The complicated situation means that this statement is related not only to trust but also to hierarchy (Factor 3) with both loadings larger than .50.
Factor 2, labeled as supporting, contained nine items and explained 18% of the total variance. This factor comprises items describing how the Senpai and Kouhai support each other. Of these items, some describe what a Senpai does for a Kouhai (e.g., provides the Kouhai with help and suggestions in study and daily life, and looks after the Kouhai years after graduation), and what the Kouhai does for the Senpai (e.g., respects, helps, and supports the Senpai years after graduation). Three items only describe what the Kouhai does for the Senpai, and every item describes situations in the years after completing tertiary study. This may be because what the Kouhai does for the Senpai during schooldays is related more closely to hierarchy (Factor 3) than to supporting.
Factor 3, labeled as hierarchy, contained nine items and explained 14% of the total variance. The items are different from the genial feeling of the expressions used in the supporting items (Factor 2). They mainly describe a relationship with a nervous atmosphere for the Kouhai, because of the hierarchical relationship. There are strict rules for the Kouhai to follow (e.g., obey the Senpai unconditionally, and take care not to offend the Senpai). The item "I will feel surprised and angry when my Kouhai directly comments negatively about me" refers to when the Kouhai responds negatively to the Senpai and it describes the Senpai's view of the attitude toward the hierarchy. The item "As Kouhai, I have the responsibility to help the Senpai with his or her daily chores" is also included in this hierarchy factor rather than in supporting (Factor 2). This may be because the Kouhai's help with daily chores is done more to show respect for the Senpai's higher position, rather than to show closeness or friendliness.
Factor 4, labeled as verbal etiquette, contained five items and explained 10% of the total variance. This factor describes the rules that the Kouhai should obey in the verbal part of the relationship. The Kouhai should address the Senpai in a respectful way rather than calling the Senpai directly by name, and should be polite when talking to the Senpai, both during school days and in the years after leaving school. Failure to do so would annoy the Senpai.
The Effect of Demographic Variables and Culture
The mean rating of items within each factor was calculated and treated as the rating of that factor. Four models were established in an analysis of variance to compare the ratings for each factor (see Table 3). Culture was added to the model as an independent variable to help answer Research Question 3. We also added the other demographic variables to the model to establish whether or not age, sex, and education affected the influence of culture. Age group was a categorical variable transformed from age. The effect of culture on all four factors was significant, with [alpha] = .05. Three effect sizes [[eta].sup.2] were above the medium threshold of .059 (Cohen, 1988). The [[eta].sup.2] for verbal etiquette was lower than .059 but much higher than .010, the small effect size. Education had a significant medium effect on trust, and a significant small effect on supporting and hierarchy. Age group had a significant medium effect on supporting and hierarchy. There was a significant interaction effect of culture*education on both hierarchy and verbal etiquette, and of gender*culture on verbal etiquette, with a relatively small [[eta].sup.2] of .100. The effect of gender on supporting was significant (p < .05), but the effect size was small ([[eta].sup.2] < .100).
We conducted post hoc tests with a Benjamini--Hochberg adjustment. The results of the age group test showed that participants aged 22 to 25 years (M = 4.46, SD = 1.23) rated supporting significantly lower than did participants in other age groups (M > 4.67, SD < 1.09, p < .005, d > 0.18). Participants aged 22 to 25 years (M = 3.71, SD = 0.93) rated hierarchy significantly higher than did participants aged 18 to 22 years (M = 3.35, SD = 1.00, p = .002, d = 0.37).
Results of the test on the effect of education showed that for trust and supporting, ratings increased with participants' educational level. Participants with a master's degree or doctorate (M = 4.91, SD = 0.85) rated trust significantly higher than did participants with a bachelor's degree (M = 4.65, SD = 0.96, p = .002, d = 0.29), and participants with a bachelor's degree rated trust significantly higher than did participants who had not undertaken any university study (M = 4.30, SD = 0.95, p < .001, d = 0.37). The same trend was found for supporting. Participants with a master's degree or doctorate (M = 5.21, SD = 0.86) rated supporting significantly higher than did participants with a bachelor's degree ( M = 4.84, SD = 1.06, p < .001, d = 0.38), and participants with a bachelor's degree rated it significantly higher than did participants who had not undertaken any university study (M = 4.45, SD = 1.09, p < .001, d = 0.36). For hierarchy, the effect of education was significant only for Chinese participants, of whom those who had not undertaken any university study (M = 3.74, SD = 1.10) rated hierarchy significantly higher than did participants with a master's degree or doctorate (M = 3.10, SD = 0.91, p = .037, d = 0.63). For verbal etiquette, the effect of education was significant only for Korean participants, of whom those with a master's degree or doctorate (M = 5.38, SD = 1.05) rated verbal etiquette significantly higher than did participants with a bachelor's degree (M = 4.45, SD = 1.16, p = .001, d = 0.84), and Korean participants with a bachelor's degree rated this factor significantly higher than did participants who had not undertaken any university study (M = 4.07, SD = 0.91, p = .004, d = 0.36).
Results of the test for the effect of culture are as follows: In regard to trust, Chinese Kouhai trusted their Senpai (M = 4.96, SD = 0.95) significantly more than did Korean ( M = 4.40, SD = 0.89, p < .001, d = 0.61) or Japanese participants ( M = 4.36, SD = 0.91, p < .001, d = 0.65). The difference in the level of trust between the Japanese and Korean participants was nonsignificant (p = .610). Chinese participants (M = 5.26, SD = 0.94) rated supporting significantly higher than did Korean participants (M = 4.84, SD = 0.90, p < .001, d = 0.47), and Korean participants rated supporting significantly higher than did Japanese participants (M = 4.20, SD = 1.08, p < .001, d = 0.63). Japanese participants (M = 3.92, SD = 0.92) rated hierarchy significantly higher than did Korean participants ( M = 3.42, SD = 0.89, p < .001, d = 0.55), and Korean participants rated hierarchy significantly higher than did Chinese participants (M = 3.24, SD = 1.03, p = .025, d = 0.18). Korean ( M = 4.30, SD = 1.07, p < .001, d = 0.38) and Japanese participants ( M = 4.40, SD = 1.22, p < .001, d = 0.44) rated verbal etiquette significantly higher than did Chinese participants (M = 3.84, SD = 1.32). The difference in the rating of Japanese participants and Korean participants was nonsignificant (p = .310).
Our results confirmed the existence of the Senpai--Kouhai relationship in China and Korea. Participants in all three cultures commonly accepted that the Senpai has a higher status than the Kouhai. Hierarchy is a salient feature of the Senpai--Kouhai relationship.
In this study, we found that years after graduation, both the Senpai and the Kouhai are still willing to support each other. Indeed, as the Senpai--Kouhai relationship can be lifelong, the establishment of a Senpai--Kouhai relationship is a commitment that people form to reduce uncertainty during social exchanges. They choose to interact repeatedly with each another in a safe relationship rather than to seek new but unknown alternatives. During these interactions, they establish emotional bonds, which, in turn, enhance the commitment (Lawler & Yoon, 1996).
The results also identified differences in the Senpai--Kouhai relationship among the three cultures. The Chinese Senpai--Kouhai relationship is more of a family relationship with its emphasis on supporting and trust, whereas the Senpai--Kouhai relationship of the Koreans and the Japanese, in particular, focuses more on hierarchy. We thus concluded that the differences in the Senpai--Kouhai relationship may be due to the discrepancy between reciprocal and negotiated exchange. The Senpai--Kouhai relationship in Japan and Korea is usually established earlier than it is in China and is done by arrangement, so that it is more like a negotiated exchange, whereas the emphasis in the Chinese Senpai--Kouhai relationship is more on trust and supporting. This is consistent with a reciprocal exchange, which involves more uncertainty for the parties to the relationship than does a negotiated exchange. To make up for this lack of certainty, the parties develop mutual feelings of trust and positive affection that strengthen the reciprocity of the bond (Molm, Takahashi, & Peterson, 2000).
We found that education had an effect on participants' attitudes toward the Senpai--Kouhai relationship. Trust and supporting increases as academic qualifications become higher. Glaeser, Laibson, Scheinkman, and Soutter (2000) found that the effect of education on trust occurred because education can increase social skills and social capital, which enable the individual to maintain better relationships. Antonucci, Fuhrer, and Jackson (1990) found with American and French participants that culture, age, and education predicted social support, and our results provide evidence with East Asian participants. The effect of education on hierarchy was significant only with the Chinese participants in this study. This may be attributable to the fact that in the Japanese and Korean Senpai--Kouhai relationship, hierarchy is more commonly accepted.
In other Asian countries, such as Thailand, Vietnam, Indonesia, and Malaysia, there is a culture in which both power distance and collectivism rate highly (Hofstede et al., 2010). Future researchers could examine whether or not there is a similar Senpai--Kouhai relationship in these countries.
Although the explorative nature of this study may be a limitation, our findings provide practical insights into cross-cultural management of international institutions. In the age of globalization, companies and institutions should develop a better understanding of regional cultures. There is a strong emphasis on hierarchy and relationships among people in East Asian cultures, in which the pattern of organizational culture is a strongly power-oriented family culture (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 2011). As these authors stated, personnel in enterprises in these cultures not only respect those in charge but also look to them for guidance and approval. Strong bonds are formed between in-group members. The Senpai--Kouhai relationship in this study is a typical example: a person's Senpai--Kouhai relationship network can play a role in business development, communication, and training. The Senpai and the Kouhai treat each other differently from out-group members, and they may form networks in an organization. In human resource management, managers should pay special attention to not confusing such relationships by placing the Kouhai in a higher position directly above the Senpai.
Japanese people regard mentoring as a relationship rather than a management strategy (Bright, 2005), and this may also apply to Chinese and Korean cultures because of the influence of the Senpai--Kouhai relationship. Thus, in an organization, the design of the training system and the training process should be adapted to the specific culture. In international schools and international online courses, individuals' expectations of peer relationships may differ, and misunderstanding, or even conflict, may arise among students from different cultural backgrounds.
As social exchange is an important feature in human society, our findings are valuable as, to our knowledge, it is the first time that the Senpai--Kouhai relationship has been closely investigated in Chinese and Korean cultures. A comparison of our findings with those in Japanese culture (Sano, 2014; Yoshinaga, 2017) provides a more general perspective. Future researchers could examine the deep influence of this relationship in various scenarios, such as social media, game theory, and knowledge sharing.
We explored similarities and differences between the Senpai--Kouhai relationship with Chinese, Korean, and Japanese participants, who rated trust, supporting, hierarchy, and verbal etiquette significantly differently. Our results showed that hierarchy is at the core of the Senpai--Kouhai relationship in Korea and Japan, whereas supporting is the most essential element in China. The Senpai--Kouhai relationship is a product of collectivist and high-power-distance cultures, as well as a commitment to the social exchange process. This relationship, which reflects the power-oriented family culture in East Asian organizational cultures, should receive more research attention in the age of globalization.
This work was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (71661167006) and by the National Research Foundation of Korea grant funded by the Korea Government (MSIP; NRF-2017R1C.1B5076718).
Antonucci, T. C., Fuhrer, R., & Jackson, J. S. (1990). Social support and reciprocity: A cross-ethnic and cross-national perspective. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 519-530. https://doi.org/c2vjs4
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101. https://doi.org/fswdcx
Bright, M. I. (2005). Can Japanese mentoring enhance understanding of Western mentoring? Employee Relations, 27, 325-339. https://doi.org/cjt6g8
Brown, J., & Brown, J. (2006). China, Japan, Korea: Culture and customs. North Charleston, SC: Book Surge LLC.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analyses for the social sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cook, J., & Wall, T. (1980). New work attitude measures of trust, organizational commitment and personal need non-fulfilment. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 53, 39-52. https://doi.org/dnzxp2
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31, 874-900. https://doi.org/cjtkx7
Emerson, R. M. (1962). Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review, 27, 31-41. https://doi.org/b484wx
Enyo, Y. (2013). Exploring Senpai-Koohai relationships in club meetings in a Japanese university (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Hawai'i at Manoa, Honolulu, HI. Retrieved from https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/handle/10125/102017
Foa, E. B., & Foa, U. G. (1980). Resource theory: Interpersonal behavior as exchange. In K. J. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg, & R. H. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 77-94). New York, NY: Plenum Press. https://doi.org/dn9g2q
Glaeser, E. L., Laibson, D. I., Scheinkman, J. A., & Soutter, C. L. (2000). Measuring trust. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115, 811-846. https://doi.org/cfbxxb
Hair, J. F., Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Hair, J. F., Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind: Intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Kram, K. E., & Isabella, L. A. (1985). Mentoring alternatives: The role of peer relationships in career development. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 110-132. https://doi.org/cpkt
Lawler, E. J., & Yoon, J. (1996). Commitment in exchange relations: Test of a theory of relational cohesion. American Sociological Review, 61, 89-108. https://doi.org/dq266c
Lebra, T. S. (1976). Japanese patterns of behavior. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.
Lewicki, R. J., & Bunker, B. B. (1995). Trust in relationships: A model of development and decline. In B. B. Bunker & J. Z. Rubin (Eds.), Conflict, cooperation, and justice: Essays inspired by the work of Morton0 Deutsch (pp. 133-173). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 24-59. https://doi.org/cpkv
Molm, L. D., Takahashi, N., & Peterson, G. (2000). Risk and trust in social exchange: An experimental test of a classical proposition. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 1396-1427. https://doi.org/bx4m7q
Nakane, C. (1970). Japanese society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Nukaga, S., Suzuki, F., Akiba, S., Iida, A., & Arai, H. (2018). Mentor thought of college student athletes and mentoring required in competitive and daily Life. Journal of Japan Society of Sports Industry, 28,175-184. https://doi.org/cpkn
Sano, K. (2014). The study of the Senpai-Kouhai culture in junior high schools in Japan. Sociological Insight, 6, 59-68. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/11190717/The_Study_of_the_Senpai-Kouhai_Culture_in_Junior_High_Schools_in_Japan
Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. (2011). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding diversity in global business. Boston, MA: Nicholas Brealey.
Yoshinaga, M. (2017). Contemporary Japanese attitudes towards the Senpai-K[delta]hai relationship (Unpublished undergraduate honors thesis). Portland State University, Portland, OR. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2siEWJn
Zhang, Y. B., Lin, M.-C., Nonaka, A., & Beom, K. (2005). Harmony, hierarchy and conservatism: A cross-cultural comparison of Confucian values in China, Korea, Japan, and Taiwan. Communication Research Reports, 22, 107-115. https://doi.org/frsbzh
Nan Qie (1), Pei-Luen Patrick Rau (1), Lin Wang (2), Liang Ma (1)
(1) Department of Industrial Engineering, Tsinghua University
(2) Department of Library and Information Science, Incheon National University
How to cite: Qie, N., Rau, P., Wang, L., & Ma, L. (2019). Is the Senpai--Kouhai relationship common across China, Korea, and Japan?.
Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 47(1), e7404
CORRESPONDENCE Pei-Luen Patrick Rau, Department of Industrial Engineering, Room South 525, Shunde Building, Tsinghua University, Haidian, Beijing, People's Republic of China. Email: email@example.com
Table 1. Results of the Basic Situation of the Senpai--Kouhai Relationship in the Three Cultures Question Option Chinese Korean Japanese When did you first Primary school or 4.7% 19.3% 16.7% get to know the before concept of a Junior high school 13.2% 37.4% 69.1% Senpai-Kouhai relationship? Senior high school 25.9% 20.7% 5.8% Undergraduate 53.0% 16.3% 4.0% Graduate 2.2% 0.0% 0.4% In the workplace 0.6% 4.1% 1.5% Never 0.3% 2.2% 2.5% When did you first Primary school or 3.5% 5.2% 14.2% act as a Senpai? before Junior high school 6.3% 23.0% 67.3% Senior high school 20.2% 28.1% 6.5% Undergraduate 65.3% 26.7% 4.0% Graduate 3.8% 0.4% 0.4% In the workplace 0.3% 5.2% 3.6% Never 0.6% 11.5% 4.0% How did you first Extracurricular 19.4% 20.4% 3.3% establish a activity Senpai-Kouhai Being in the same 25.7% 12.2% 48.7% relationship? laboratory or club By arrangement 19.0% 33.0% 38.2% Attending the same 4.4% 10.0% 1.5% class Asking (Senpai) for 27.9% 11.1% 3.6% help Other 3.5% 13.3% 4.7% Through which kind At school 64.2% 72.6% 81.2% of channels did you first know the By movie or 25.9% 14.4% 16.5% Senpai-Kouhai television play relationship? Through the Internet 6.7% 3.7% 1.5% Other 3.2% 9.3% 0.8% On which occasion Laboratory or club 56.2% 44.8% 14.1% do you most frequently interact with Learning group 20.8% 14.8% 76.8% the Senpai? Daily communication 13.9% 18.5% 2.1% Extracurricular 7.6% 10.0% 5.4% activity Other 1.6% 11.9% 1.7% Table 2. Factor Analysis Results of the Senpai--Kouhai Relationship Factor I Factor II Trust Supporting If I encounter difficulties, I know the .77 Senpai will help me out I will tell the Senpai my difficulties .72 and I know he/she can provide useful suggestions carefully I am confident of the Senpai's .72 professional skills I feel easy to share my points of view, .71 feelings, and ambitions with the Senpai I feel free to share with the Senpai my .71 difficulties in work and I know he/she will be willing to listen attentively The Senpai is very professional and .69 responsible If the Senpai and I leave our working .64 or study environment, we both feel a sense of loss We both have enough emotional input .68 when cooperating Usually the Senpai will do what .65 he/she says Years after graduation, I will still look .79 after my previous Kouhai if I can As Senpai, I need to listen to my Kouhai .79 about their problems in study, and carefully provide suggestions Years after graduation, if my previous .79 Kouhai has problems, I will still provide help As Senpai, I need to listen to my Kouhai .78 about their problems in daily life, and carefully provide suggestions Years after graduation, if my previous .76 Kouhai has problems to ask me about, I will still answer patiently and carefully Years after graduation, I will still try .72 my best to help and support the Senpai Years after graduation, when meeting .65 with the Senpai I will thank him/her by practical action As Senpai, I have the responsibility to .62 train and help my Kouhai with professional skills Years after graduation, I will still .56 respect the Senpai very much As Kouhai, I feel nervous in front of the Senpai The Kouhai should obey unconditionally the Senpai's order The Senpai is scary I will be very careful when cooperating with the Senpai, afraid of being criticized if I make some mistakes When communicating with the Senpai, even if there are some divergence, I will choose to follow the Senpai's opinion When cooperating with the Senpai, I tacitly think that I am in an attached position As Senpai, I will feel surprised and angry when my Kouhai directly comments negatively about me As Kouhai, I have the responsibility to help the Senpai with his/her daily chores Years after graduation, if my previous Kouhai communicates with me in a way not polite enough, I will still feel offended Years after graduation if my previous Kouhai calls me by my name directly, I will still feel annoyed If my Kouhai communicates with me in a way not polite enough, I will feel offended If my Kouhai calls me by my name directly, I will feel annoyed Years after graduation, I will still pay attention to the way I speak to the Senpai to make sure it is polite enough Variance explained .19 .18 Factor III Factor IV Hierarchy Verbal etiquette If I encounter difficulties, I know the Senpai will help me out I will tell the Senpai my difficulties and I know he/she can provide useful suggestions carefully I am confident of the Senpai's professional skills I feel easy to share my points of view, feelings, and ambitions with the Senpai I feel free to share with the Senpai my difficulties in work and I know he/she will be willing to listen attentively The Senpai is very professional and responsible If the Senpai and I leave our working or study environment, we both feel a sense of loss We both have enough emotional input when cooperating Usually the Senpai will do what he/she says Years after graduation, I will still look after my previous Kouhai if I can As Senpai, I need to listen to my Kouhai about their problems in study, and carefully provide suggestions Years after graduation, if my previous Kouhai has problems, I will still provide help As Senpai, I need to listen to my Kouhai about their problems in daily life, and carefully provide suggestions Years after graduation, if my previous Kouhai has problems to ask me about, I will still answer patiently and carefully Years after graduation, I will still try my best to help and support the Senpai Years after graduation, when meeting with the Senpai I will thank him/her by practical action As Senpai, I have the responsibility to train and help my Kouhai with professional skills Years after graduation, I will still respect the Senpai very much As Kouhai, I feel nervous in front .71 of the Senpai The Kouhai should obey unconditionally .70 the Senpai's order The Senpai is scary .64 I will be very careful when cooperating .68 with the Senpai, afraid of being criticized if I make some mistakes When communicating with the Senpai, .67 even if there are some divergence, I will choose to follow the Senpai's opinion When cooperating with the Senpai, .65 I tacitly think that I am in an attached position As Senpai, I will feel surprised and .65 angry when my Kouhai directly comments negatively about me As Kouhai, I have the responsibility .57 to help the Senpai with his/her daily chores Years after graduation, if my .83 previous Kouhai communicates with me in a way not polite enough, I will still feel offended Years after graduation if my .83 previous Kouhai calls me by my name directly, I will still feel annoyed If my Kouhai communicates .73 with me in a way not polite enough, I will feel offended If my Kouhai calls me by my .71 name directly, I will feel annoyed Years after graduation, I will still .57 pay attention to the way I speak to the Senpai to make sure it is polite enough Variance explained .14 .10 Table 3. Results of Analysis of Variance of Demographic Variables and Culture on the Four Factors of the Senpai--Kouhai Relationship Factor Trust Supporting F p [[eta].sup.2] F p Age 0.99 .411 .004 8.58 <.001 Sex 2.73 .100 .003 6.30 .013 Education 26.41 <.001 .059 37.50 <.001 Culture 27.39 <.001 .061 56.19 <.001 Age x Culture 0.77 .613 .006 2.31 .024 Sex x Culture 1.77 .171 .004 1.80 .166 Education x Culture 2.06 .084 .009 1.46 .214 Factor Supporting Hierarchy [[eta].sup.2] F p [[eta].sup.2] Age .034 4.36 .002 .020 Sex .006 0.34 .561 <.001 Education .074 8.09 <.001 .018 Culture .110 32.81 <.001 .074 Age x Culture .016 1.22 .288 .010 Sex x Culture .004 2.56 .078 .006 Education x Culture .006 2.63 .034 .012 Factor Verbal etiquette F p [[eta].sup.2] Age 0.89 .471 .004 Sex 2.58 .108 .003 Education 1.29 .275 .003 Culture 19.67 <.001 .047 Age x Culture 1.43 .192 .012 Sex x Culture 4.37 .013 .010 Education x Culture 2.90 .021 .014
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Author:||Qie, Nan; Rau, Pei-Luen Patrick; Wang, Lin; Ma, Liang|
|Publication:||Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal|
|Date:||Jan 1, 2019|
|Previous Article:||Motivational bases of commitment to organizational change in the Chinese public sector.|
|Next Article:||Chinese public sector employees' age, emotional dissonance, work meaningfulness, and perceived stress.|