Differences in Psychological Features Between Sweden and Hong Kong

Please respond to my classmate's post.
* Please use this source: Heine, S. J. (2020). Cultural Psychology (4th ed.). W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.
Replies to classmates should discuss:
1.the differences in psychological features described in the article,
2. the Hofstede country comparison,
3. the benefits or challenges of the research design, or
4. possible extensions/new directions for this line of research.
Replies cannot simply restate/rephrase the original post, you must extend the discussion in some meaningful way.
The post:
In the article “Overcoming existential loneliness: a cross-cultural study” researchers aimed to describe and compare the subjective experience of existential loneliness (EL) in older adults residing in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) from Eastern (Hong Kong Chinese) and Western (Swedish) cultures. The researchers hypothesized there would be both cultural similarities and differences in how the phenomenon of EL manifests (Chung et al., 2020).
To conduct the study, Chung et al. conducted two series of in-depth semi-structured interviews with 13 Chinese and 9 Swedish LTCF residents on their personal experiences with EL. The participants were recruited from a municipal LTCF in Hong Kong and from Malmo, Sweden. They were interviewed individually by native speakers in Cantonese or Swedish. The interviews focused on questions about the participants' ideas of loneliness, experiences with a profound sense of EL, and how a typical day with EL feels. Data analysis was conducted using interpretive description and an overall analysis to identify patterns and themes describing the EL experience.
The results showed that overall the subjective experience of EL had similar characteristics between the two cultural groups (Chung et al., 2020). Both described EL in terms of disrupted identity, loss of control and meaning, isolation and not being understood. However, some cultural differences emerged - Chinese participants tended to define themselves more through family roles, while Swedes emphasized individual pursuits, personal growth, and friendships (Chung et al., 2020). For both groups, coping methods involved self-regulation by accepting limitations, inward reflection to find meaning, and redefining success. However, Chinese participants found meaning through contributing to family, while Swedes focused on new social relationships (Chung et al., 2020).
The hypothesis that EL would show both cultural commonalities and differences was largely supported. While the overall subjective experience was similar, the precise manifestations and coping methods differed based on cultural values around family versus individualism (Chung et al., 2020). This study provided initial evidence that EL may be a universal human phenomenon, but shaped by the cultural lens through which individuals define themselves and make meaning.
According to Hofstede Insights, Hong Kong's culture is characterized by several notable dimensions. Hong Kong scores high on power distance, meaning inequalities in power and status are accepted. It is a collectivist culture where group loyalty is valued over individual interests. Hong Kong is moderately masculine, success, and achievement-oriented. It shows low uncertainty avoidance, and is comfortable with ambiguity. Hong Kong also scores high on long-term orientation, taking a pragmatic and thrifty approach to prepare for the future. Finally, Hong Kong is a restrained culture, with a tendency toward cynicism and pessimism.
In contrast, Hofstede Insights showed that Sweden's cultural dimensions paint a different picture. Sweden scores low on power distance, valuing equality and independence over hierarchies. It is an individualistic culture with a loose social framework where people take care of themselves. Sweden is a feminine culture focused on caring, quality of life, and achieving consensus. It exhibits low uncertainty avoidance and a relaxed attitude about deviating from norms. Sweden shows no clear preference on long-term orientation. Finally, Sweden is an indulgent culture willing to realize impulses and desires and possessing an optimistic attitude.
These cultural profiles help contextualize the differences seen between the Chinese and Swedish participants in the existential loneliness study, particularly regarding self-identity and coping methods. The collectivist and restrained values of Hong Kong contrast with the individualist and indulgent orientation of Sweden.
This cross-cultural study on existential loneliness had several strengths in its research design. Using qualitative interviews allowed an in-depth exploration of this phenomenon across the two cultures. Back-translation of interview materials helped ensure equivalence of meaning across languages. However, a key limitation was the small convenience samples of older adults from just one nursing home per culture. Using large, representative samples from each culture can translate to increased generalizability (Heine, 2019). The analysis explored some self-construal differences, but could go further in investigating cultural versus individual levels of analysis. Heine also highlights the need for mixed methods. Using both qualitative and quantitative methods provides complementary strengths to gain a more complete understanding of the research topic (Heine, 2020). Overall, the study provides an insightful initial investigation of existential loneliness across cultures but could be expanded through larger, representative samples, unpackaging effects of culture versus individual differences, and mixed methods to gain a robust understanding of universal and culturally specific aspects.