In matters of information, persons

In matters of information, persons in high-IDV countries read more books and they were more likely to own a home computer and a telephone with voice mail. High-IDV country residents more often rated TV advertising useful for information about new products. They relied more on media and less on their social network.
There is no indication that individualist cultures are healthier or unhealthier than collectivist cultures, but the fact that people in high-IDV cultures are more focused on their self is visible in a greater concern for their own health than is found in low-IDV cultures If we limit our analysis to the higher-income countries, where full medical provisions can be assumed to be available, people in countries with a more individualist culture spend a greater share of their private income on their health Governments of the same countries also spend a greater share of public budgets on health care.
Individualist and collectivist cultures deal differently with disability. A survey among Australian health-care workers showed different reactions to becoming disabled between the Anglo, Arabic-speaking, Chinese, German-speaking, Greek, and ltalian immigrant communities in the individualist communities (Anglo and German) the disabled tended to remain cheerful and optimistic, resent dependency and being helped, and plan for a future life as normal as possible. In the collectivist communities (Greek, Chinese, Arabic) there would be more expression of grief, shame, and pessimism; family members would be asked for advice and assistance, and they would make the main decisions about the disabled person's future. The Italians tended to be in the middle, northern Italy is more individualist, but a large share of Italian immigrants in Australia is from the collectivist South. Another study described the answers of the same panel of health- care workers about the way the different groups dealt with disabled children. Again in the individualist communities the dominant philosophy was to treat the disabled children as much as possible like other children, let- ting them participate in all activities where this was feasible. In the collectivist communities the disability would be seen as a shame on the family and a stigma on its members-especially if the child was a son-and the child would more often be kept out of sight.
Table 3.3 summarizes the key differences between collectivist and individualist societies from this section.

Individualism And Collectivism At School
The relationship between the individual and the group that has been established in a child`s consciousness during his or her early years in the family is further developed and reinforced at school. This is clearly visible in classroom behaviour. In the context of development assistance, if often happens that teacherd from a more individualist culture move to a more collectivist environment. A typical complaint from such teachers is that students do not speak up, not even when the teacher puts a question to the class. For the students who conceives of him or herself as part of a group, it is illogical to speak up without being sanctioned by the group to do so. If the teacher wants students to speak up, the teacher should addres a particular student personally.
Student in a collectivist culture will also hesitate to speak up in larger groups without a teacher present, especially if these are partly composed of relative strangers, or out-group members. The hesitation decreases in smaller groups. In a large, collectivist or culturally heterogeneous class,creting small subgroups is way to increase student participation. For example, students can be asked to turn around in their seats and discuss a question for five minutes in groups of three or four. Each groups is asked to appoint a spokesperson. In this way individual answers become groups answers and those who speak up do so in the name of their group. Often in subsequent exercises the students will spontaneously rotate the spokesperson role.
In the coilestivist society in-group-out-group distinctions springing from the family sphere wil continue at school, so that students from different ethnic or clan backgrounds often form subgroups in class.in an individualist society the assigment of joint tasks leads more easily to the formation of new groups than in a colectivist society. In the latter, students from the same ethnic or family background as the teacher or other school officials will except preferential treatment on this basis. In an individualist society this would be considered nepotism and intesely immoral, but in a collectivist environment it is immoral not to treat one`s in-group members better than others.
In the collectivist classroom the virtues of harmony and maintaining face reign supreme. Confrontations and conflicts should be avoided or at least formulated so as not to hurt anyone, students should not lose face if this can be avoided. Shaming (that is,invoking the groups`s honor) is an effective way of correcting offenders : they will be put in order by their in-group members. At all times, the teacher is dealing with the students as part of an in-group, never as an isolated individual.
In the individualist classroom, of course, students except to be treated as individuals and impartially, regardless of their background. Group formation among students is much more ad hoc, according to the ask or to particular friendships and skills.confrontations and open discussion of conflict are often considered salutary and face consciousness is weak or nonexistent.

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

In matters of information, persons in high-IDV countries read more books and they were more likely to own a home computer and a telephone with voice mail. High-IDV country residents more often rated TV advertising useful for information about new products. They relied more on media and less on their social network. There is no indication that individualist cultures are healthier or unhealthier than collectivist cultures, but the fact that people in high-IDV cultures are more focused on their self is visible in a greater concern for their own health than is found in low-IDV cultures If we limit our analysis to the higher-income countries, where full medical provisions can be assumed to be available, people in countries with a more individualist culture spend a greater share of their private income on their health Governments of the same countries also spend a greater share of public budgets on health care. Budaya individualis dan kolektif berurusan berbeda dengan cacat. Sebuah survei antara pekerja kesehatan Australia menunjukkan reaksi yang berbeda menjadi dinonaktifkan antara Anglo, berbahasa Arab, Cina, berbahasa Jerman, Yunani, dan ltalian komunitas imigran di masyarakat individualis (Inggris dan Jerman) Penyandang Cacat cenderung tetap ceria dan optimis, membenci ketergantungan dan membantu, dan rencana untuk masa depan kehidupan normal mungkin. Dalam masyarakat kolektif (Yunani, Cina, Arab) akan ada lebih banyak ekspresi kesedihan, rasa malu dan pesimisme; anggota keluarga akan meminta saran dan bantuan, dan mereka akan membuat keputusan utama tentang masa depan orang cacat. Italia cenderung di tengah, Italia Utara adalah individualis itu lain, tapi pangsa besar imigran Italia di Australia adalah dari kolektif Selatan. Studi lain menggambarkan jawaban dari panel yang sama Kesehatan pekerja tentang cara berbagai kelompok berurusan dengan anak-anak cacat. Sekali lagi dalam masyarakat individualis filosofi dominan adalah untuk mengobati anak-anak cacat yang sebanyak mungkin seperti anak-anak lain, biarkan-ting mereka berpartisipasi dalam semua kegiatan yang mana ini adalah layak. Dalam kolektif masyarakat kecacatan akan dilihat sebagai memalukan pada keluarga dan stigma pada para anggota-terutama jika anak adalah putra- dan anak akan lebih sering dipelihara dari pandangan. Table 3.3 summarizes the key differences between collectivist and individualist societies from this section.Individualism And Collectivism At SchoolThe relationship between the individual and the group that has been established in a child`s consciousness during his or her early years in the family is further developed and reinforced at school. This is clearly visible in classroom behaviour. In the context of development assistance, if often happens that teacherd from a more individualist culture move to a more collectivist environment. A typical complaint from such teachers is that students do not speak up, not even when the teacher puts a question to the class. For the students who conceives of him or herself as part of a group, it is illogical to speak up without being sanctioned by the group to do so. If the teacher wants students to speak up, the teacher should addres a particular student personally.Student in a collectivist culture will also hesitate to speak up in larger groups without a teacher present, especially if these are partly composed of relative strangers, or out-group members. The hesitation decreases in smaller groups. In a large, collectivist or culturally heterogeneous class,creting small subgroups is way to increase student participation. For example, students can be asked to turn around in their seats and discuss a question for five minutes in groups of three or four. Each groups is asked to appoint a spokesperson. In this way individual answers become groups answers and those who speak up do so in the name of their group. Often in subsequent exercises the students will spontaneously rotate the spokesperson role.In the coilestivist society in-group-out-group distinctions springing from the family sphere wil continue at school, so that students from different ethnic or clan backgrounds often form subgroups in class.in an individualist society the assigment of joint tasks leads more easily to the formation of new groups than in a colectivist society. In the latter, students from the same ethnic or family background as the teacher or other school officials will except preferential treatment on this basis. In an individualist society this would be considered nepotism and intesely immoral, but in a collectivist environment it is immoral not to treat one`s in-group members better than others.In the collectivist classroom the virtues of harmony and maintaining face reign supreme. Confrontations and conflicts should be avoided or at least formulated so as not to hurt anyone, students should not lose face if this can be avoided. Shaming (that is,invoking the groups`s honor) is an effective way of correcting offenders : they will be put in order by their in-group members. At all times, the teacher is dealing with the students as part of an in-group, never as an isolated individual.In the individualist classroom, of course, students except to be treated as individuals and impartially, regardless of their background. Group formation among students is much more ad hoc, according to the ask or to particular friendships and skills.confrontations and open discussion of conflict are often considered salutary and face consciousness is weak or nonexistent.