Ted Singelis
Department of Psychology
California State University, Chico
Chico, California 95929-0234
Dear Colleague:
Thank you for your inquiry about my research. Included below is the latest version of the Self-Construal
Scale (SCS).
Please feel free to use the SCS in your research. I ask only that you send me a copy of your findings for my
archives. If you translate the scale please send me a copy and any equivalence or validity data you may
provide. For details of the scale development and for citation purposes, the following articles may be
useful:
Singelis, T. M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580-591.
Singelis, T. M., & Brown, W. P. (1995). Culture, self, and collectivist communication: Linking culture
to individual behavior. Human Communication Research, 21, 354-389.
Singelis, T. M., & Sharkey, W. F. (1995). Culture, self-construal, and embarrassability. Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology, 26, 622-644.
Singelis, T. M., Triandis, H. C., Bhawuk, D. S., & Gelfand, M. (1995). Horizontal and vertical
dimensions of individualism and collectivism: A theoretical and measurement refinement. Cross-
Cultural Research, 29, 240-275.
Kwan, V. S. Y., Bond, M. H., & Singelis, T. M. (1997). Pancultural explanations for life satisfaction:
Adding relationship harmony to self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1038-
1051.
Yamada, A-M., & Singelis, T. M. (1999). Biculturalism and self-construal. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 23, 697-709.
Singelis, T. M., Bond, M. H., Lai, S. Y., & Sharkey, W. F. (1999). Unpackaging culture’s influence on
self-esteem and embarrassability: The role of self-construals. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,
30, 315-341.
For a review of many SCS studies and interesting commentary see:
Oyserman, D.U., Coon, H.M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism:
Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128(1), 3-72.
For an attack, and defense, on the validity of the SCS and other self-construal measures see the following:
Levine, T. R., Bresnahan, M. J., Park, H. S., Lapinsky, M. K., Wittenbaum, G. M., & Shearman, S. M. et al.
(2003). Self-construal scales lack validity. Human Communication Research, 29(2), 210-252.
Gudykunst, W. B., & Lee, C. M. (2003). Assessing the validity of self-construal scales: A response to
levine et al. Human Communication Research, 29(2), 253-274.
Kim, M., & Raja, N. S. (2003). When validity testing lacks validity: Comment on Levine et al. Human
Communication Research, 29(2), 275-290.
Levine, T. R., Bresnahan, M. J., Park, H. S., Lapinski, M. K., Lee, T. S., & Lee, D. W. (2003). The
(in)validity of self-construal scales revisited. Human Communication Research, 29(2), 291-308.
SCORING
The attached scale contains the original 12 independent items (#s 1, 2, 9, 10, 13, 15, 18, 20, 22, 25, 27, and
29) and 12 interdependent items (#s 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 16, 17, 19, 21, 23, 26, and 28) from Singelis, 1994. Six
additional items have been added to improve internal reliabilities of the original scale: independent (#s 5, 7,
and 24) and interdependent (#s 12, 14, and 30). Cronbach Alpha reliabilities with the 15 items have been
ranging from the high .60’s to the middle .70’s. It is felt that these reliabilities are adequate considering the
broadness of the construct and the wide range of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors assessed by the scale.
Items more focused on a single aspect of self would yield higher internal consistency but would threaten the
validity of the measure. For a brief discussion of this issue, which is called the “fidelity vs. bandwidth
dilemma” by Cronbach (1990, pp.208-210) see Singelis, Triandis, Bhawuk, & Gelfand, (1995).
Please note that the original item #2 (I feel comfortable using someone's first name soon after I meet them,
even when they are much older than I am) has been replaced. It was determined that this item was not
appropriate for collective cultures, such as Japan, where first names are rarely used at initial meetings.
Therefore, a replacement item was constructed to capture the conceptual equivalence of feeling equal and
comfortable with people recently met. The current item #2 (I can talk openly with a person who I meet for
the first time, even when this person is much older than I am) has been translated and used successfully
with both US and Hong Kong Chinese participants.
To score the scale, add each subject’s scores (1 to 7) for the independent items and divide by 15 to give the
mean score of the items. Then, do the same for the interdependent items. Each subject receives two scores:
one for the strength of the independent self and one for the interdependent self. My research has shown that
these two aspects of self are separate factors, not opposite poles of a single construct. Therefore, each
aspect of self needs consideration.
If you translate the scale into another language, I would appreciate a copy of the translation. It may be
useful to contact me before the translation begins because I may be able to facilitate the process.
Should you have any questions regarding the scale, please feel free to contact me at the e-mail address
below.
Again, thank you for your interest in the SCS.
Ted Singelis, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology
California State University, Chico
[email protected] INSTRUCTIONS
This is a questionnaire that measures a variety of feelings and behaviors in various situations. Listed below are a
number of statements. Read each one as if it referred to you. Beside each statement write the number that best
matches your agreement or disagreement. Please respond to every statement. Thank you.
1=STRONGLY DISAGREE 4=DON’T AGREE OR 5=AGREE SOMEWHAT
2=DISAGREE DISAGREE 6=AGREE
3=SOMEWHAT DISAGREE 7=STRONGLY AGREE
____1. I enjoy being unique and different from others in many respects.
____2. I can talk openly with a person who I meet for the first time, even when this person is much older
than I am.
____3. Even when I strongly disagree with group members, I avoid an argument.
____4. I have respect for the authority figures with whom I interact.
____5. I do my own thing, regardless of what others think.
____6. I respect people who are modest about themselves.
____7. I feel it is important for me to act as an independent person.
____8. I will sacrifice my self interest for the benefit of the group I am in.
____9. I'd rather say "No" directly, than risk being misunderstood.
____10. Having a lively imagination is important to me.
____11. I should take into consideration my parents' advice when making education/career plans.
____12. I feel my fate is intertwined with the fate of those around me.
____13. I prefer to be direct and forthright when dealing with people I've just met.
____14. I feel good when I cooperate with others.
____15. I am comfortable with being singled out for praise or rewards.
____16. If my brother or sister fails, I feel responsible.
____17. I often have the feeling that my relationships with others are more important than my own
accomplishments.
____18. Speaking up during a class (or a meeting) is not a problem for me.
____19. I would offer my seat in a bus to my professor (or my boss).
____20. I act the same way no matter who I am with.
____21. My happiness depends on the happiness of those around me.
____22. I value being in good health above everything.
____23. I will stay in a group if they need me, even when I am not happy with the group.
____24. I try to do what is best for me, regardless of how that might affect others.
____25. Being able to take care of myself is a primary concern for me.
____26. It is important to me to respect decisions made by the group.
____27. My personal identity, independent of others, is very important to me.
____28. It is important for me to maintain harmony within my group.
____29. I act the same way at home that I do at school (or work).
____30. I usually go along with what others want to do, even when I would rather do something different.
