Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No.

1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies《華人心理學報》,

Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010), 29–52

Relationship Between Social Axioms

and Subjective Well-Being: The Role
of Self-Regulation

CHIN-MING HUI
Northwestern University
MICHAEL HARRIS BOND
Hong Kong Polytechnic University

This study was designed to examine the relationships among social

axioms and four different dispositional components of self-regulation,
namely optimism, mindfulness, regulatory modes, and approach versus
avoidance motivation. We focused on two dimensions of beliefs about the
world—social cynicism, that constellation of beliefs judging the social
world to be dominated by power, and reward for application, that constel-
lation of beliefs judging the world to respond positively to inputs of
human effort and investment of resources. Results indicated that two
axiom dimensions, namely, social cynicism and reward for application,
were related to this subset of self-regulatory orientations. Moreover,
mediational analyses suggested that social cynicism was related to less
adaptive self-regulatory orientations, which in turn compromised

Chin-Ming Hui, Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, Illinois,

USA; Michael Harris Bond, Department of Applied Social Sciences, Hong Kong
Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong S.A.R., China. The study was
supported by a Direct Grant for Research from the Chinese University of Hong
Kong to the authors. We thank members of the Self-Regulation Team for their
enduring effort and commitment to the project. Correspondence concerning the
manuscript should be directed to Chin-Ming Hui, Department of Psychology,
Northwestern University, 2029 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60208, USA.
Electronic mail should be sent to [email protected].
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

30 Chin-Ming Hui and Michael Harris Bond

subjective well-being, whereas reward for application was related to

more adaptive self-regulatory orientations, which thereby enhanced
subjective well-being. The implications of these findings are discussed for
interpersonal strategic orientations and psychological health.

Keywords: social beliefs, well-bing, self-regulation

Self-regulation has been an important research topic in personality and

social psychology for the past two decades (Carver, Scheier, & Fulford,
2008; Gailliot, Mead, & Baumeister, 2008). It represents an intrinsic
process of “overriding one response or behavior and replacing it with a
less common but more desired response” (Baumeister, Schmeichel, &
Vohs, 2007, p. 517). Self-regulation is commonly believed to be a
psychological system involving various components aimed at achieving a
better fit for the individual actor with the proximal social situations and
the distal sociocultural context.
While sociocultural context actively shapes the individual’s self-regu-
latory orientations, such influence may be mediated through societal-level
processes as well as expectancies about the social world learned by
cultural members (Leung & Bond, 2004). It remains unclear at present,
however, whether individuals’ worldviews or subjective understandings
of the sociocultural context may additionally contribute to their self-regu-
latory orientations. Indeed, members of the same culture do not neces-
sarily hold the same worldview because social systems and their agents
provide differential feedback to each member’s performance based on its
success or failure, and members may then develop unique expectancies
and beliefs (Bond, 2009). To decipher the self-regulatory functions of
these individual differences in subjective worldview, this current report
introduces recent work on social axioms and then provides preliminary
evidence on the role of self-regulation in explaining the effect of social
axioms on subjective well-being.

Social Axioms and Subjective Well-Being

Work on social axioms (Leung & Bond, 2004; Leung et al., 2002)
provides a comprehensive framework for researchers to assess the nature
and functions of the layperson’s worldview. In essence, social axioms
represent a representation of global social affordances across social situa-
tions and constitute a new way to assess “the elusive social situation”
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

Relationship Between Social Axioms and Subjective Well-Being 31

(Seeman, 1997) and the subjective experience of its affordances. Impor-

tantly, social axioms are not merely a projection of self-views, given that
they are largely independent of self-beliefs, such as self-rated dimensions
of personality (Chen, Bond, & Cheung, 2006; Chen, Fok, Bond, & Matsu-
moto, 2006) and depressive self-views (Chen, Wu, & Bond, 2009).
Hence, social axioms are a unique set of lay beliefs that help beholders to
navigate social situations over and above the guidance provided by self-
knowledge. These beliefs have also been shown to influence one’s subjec-
tive well-being (e.g., Chen et al., 2009).
Subjective well-being consists of three global components, namely
life satisfaction, positive affect, and negative affect (Diener, Suh, Lucas,
& Smith, 1999). Previous studies have shown that social axioms are
related to these indices of subjective well-being. For instance, social cyni-
cism is related to life satisfaction (J. Lai, Bond, & Hui, 2007) and nega-
tive affect (C. M. Hui , 2005), whereas reward for application is related to
positive affect (C. M. Hui, 2005). However, no studies have examined the
mechanisms through which social axioms influence well-being.
In this study, we propose that self-regulation may be one such poten-
tial mechanism, given that self-regulation (such as coping and emotional
regulation) has demonstrated effects on one’s subjective well-being
(Carver et al., 2008; Carver & Scheier, 1982). As social axioms are
related to (self-reported) use of behavioral strategies, including conflict
resolution strategies and vocational choice (Bond, Leung, Au, Tong, &
Chemonges Nielson, 2004), and emotion regulation (Chen, Cheung,
Bond, & Leung, 2005), we presume that social axioms may also play a
role in influencing the broader self-regulatory orientations underlying
these social behaviors. Subsequently, social axioms can influence subjec-
tive well-being partially through these self-regulatory mechanisms.

Social Axioms and Self-Regulation

How might social axioms relate to self-regulatory processes? Like other
lay beliefs (Dweck, 2006; Molden & Dweck, 2006), social axioms may
provide guidance for what is attainable and therefore shape self-regulatory
orientations. For instance, a social cynic is one who disbelieves in the
goodness of human nature and may infer that power and status are more
desirable as social capital than love and friendship; he or she may also
believe that mutual trust and respect are difficult to achieve and hence is
more inclined to rely on his or her own resources (i.e., seeking less
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

32 Chin-Ming Hui and Michael Harris Bond

professional help; Kuo, Kwantes, Towson, & Nanson, 2006) and to use
coercive tactics in influencing other individuals (Bond et al., 2004; Fu et
al., 2004). Again, this pattern of findings suggests that social axioms serve
as knowledge about which activities are instrumental in attaining
preferred goals (Leung et al., 2002).
The study served two major purposes in bridging between social
axioms and self-regulation. First, we wanted to empirically establish the
unexplored relationship between social axioms and self-regulatory orien-
tations. Second, we wanted to synthesize the tripartite relationships
among social axioms, well-being, and self-regulation. To do so, we
proposed to examine whether self-regulatory orientations mediated the
effect of social axioms on well-being.
In this study, we examined the relationship between two factors of
social axioms, namely reward for application and social cynicism, and
dispositional self-regulatory orientations. Social cynicism represents a
negative view about the consequences of interactions with other people,
groups, and social institutions. Reward for application represents the
strength of judged contingencies between any person’s investment of
resources and gains arising from these investments. These two axiom
dimensions were chosen because past studies have indicated that, among
other axioms, they were consistently more predictive of self-reported
behavioral preferences, such as conflict resolution strategies and coping
behaviors (Bond et al., 2004), and negotiation behaviors (Fu et al., 2004).
These associations imply a relatively stronger link between these two
axiom dimensions and self-regulatory orientations (for a comprehensive
review, see C. M. Hui & Hui, 2009).
In general, reward for application is related to adaptive psychological
adjustment, including more prosocial behaviors and persistent goal-pursuit
activities, while social cynicism is related to psychosocial impairment,
such as low life satisfaction and elevated death anxiety (C. M. Hui & Hui,
2009). We sought to expand our understanding of these psychological
outcomes by considering their underlying self-regulatory mechanisms.
We considered a number of self-regulatory constructs, each of which has
been consistently related to subjective well-being in the literature.

Hypotheses for the Study

In this study, we tested four specific dispositional self-regulatory orienta-
tions, namely optimism, mindfulness, approach and avoidance motivations,
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

Relationship Between Social Axioms and Subjective Well-Being 33

and assessment and locomotion modes. Each of these orientations has

been studied in its own framework, but these orientations all have
substantial implications for self-regulation. The dispositional self-
regulatory orientations were chosen for two reasons: First, as to be
demonstrated below, each of the dispositional self-regulatory orienta-
tions has been well studied separately and been found to closely relate
to various social behaviors and well-being. Second, based on previous
findings, we presume that these variables are also closely tied to social
axioms conceptually.
We lay out a brief review of each self-regulatory orientation and our
specific predictions below:
Optimism. From the perspective of self-regulation (Carver et al.,
2008), optimism is a generalized belief about the likelihood of receiving
positive outcomes and reducing negative outcomes in the future. Opti-
mistic beliefs motivate individuals to persist in goal striving, whereas
pessimistic beliefs motivate individuals to disengage from goal-directed
behaviors. Accordingly, dispositional optimism often links to adaptive
psychological and physical functioning (Carver et al., 1993; Peterson,
2000; Scheier & Carver, 1987)
We predicted that reward for application would be related to opti-
mism. Reward for application is a general faith that desirable outcomes
can be attained whenever investment is enough. The belief itself may
energize active goal pursuit (Liem, Hidayat, & Soemarno, 2009). Indeed,
previous research has indicated that reward for application sustains persis-
tence and active problem solving in the face of adversity (Bond et al.,
2004; Kurman, 2004). While reward for application mobilizes resources
toward goal pursuit, it may maximize the chance of successes, which in
turn reinforces generalized expectations for positive outcomes.
We also expected a negative relationship between social cynicism and
optimism (also see Plomin et al., 1992). Cynical individuals have a dark
view of the social system and are less likely to believe in the likelihood of
interpersonal support and trust (Kuo et al., 2006; Singelis, Hubbard, Her,
& An, 2003). Indeed, cynical individuals tend to be preoccupied by a
wide variety of worries, including low self-esteem (Chen, Cheung, Bond,
& Leung, 2006), death anxiety (V. K.-Y. Hui, Bond, & Ng, 2007), and
social anxiety (Lo, 2006). Probably for these reasons, cynical individuals
tend to develop their commitment to an organization or a close relation-
ship based on its instrumentality rather than a psychological contract
based on mutual trust and love (Boski, Bilas-Henne, & Wieckowska,
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

34 Chin-Ming Hui and Michael Harris Bond

2009; Kwantes & Karam, 2009). We argue that this tendency may stem
from the pessimistic expectancy about the likely yield from social
exchanges.
Mindfulness. Mindfulness refers to “an enhanced attention to and
awareness of current experience or present reality” (Brown & Ryan, 2003,
p. 822). It facilitates one’s openness and receptiveness to conscious expe-
riences with ongoing events in the given moment (Martin, 1997). Mind-
fulness is beneficial to one’s psychological functioning because it
increases one’s conscious awareness of choices and opportunities that are
congruent with one’s own needs and values. Accordingly, mindfulness
cultivates psychological well-being by promoting realization of one’s
values, basic needs, and interests (Brown & Ryan, 2003).
We hypothesized that social cynicism is related to a lower level of
mindfulness. Indeed, cynical individuals are usually preoccupied by nega-
tive thoughts, as described above. Due to such an elevated, security-ori-
ented concern, those endorsing socially cynical beliefs may be more
defensive and narrow minded (Forster & Higgins, 2005) and hence less
open to disconfirming information (Hart et al., 2009). Consistent with
these speculations, social cynicism has been related to cognitive inflexi-
bility (Singelis et al., 2003) and need for cognitive closure (Guan & Bond,
2008). Hence, social cynicism may be associated with reduced openness
to one’s here-and-now experiences.
Approach and avoidance motivations. Human behaviors are governed
by basic principles of approach and avoidance motivations (e.g., Carver,
Sutton, & Scheier, 2000; Gray, 1981). Approach motivation is presumed
to regulate one’s attainment of rewards and nonpunishment, while avoid-
ance motivation regulates focus on the prevention of nonreward and
punishment. This basic dichotomy of motivations has been identified as
having important consequences for positive and negative emotional expe-
riences (Cacioppo, Gardner, & Bernston, 1997) as well as influencing
behavioral outcomes, like decision making (Frank & Brandstatter, 2002).
We hypothesized that reward for application is related to approach
motivation. Based on its name and content, reward for application focuses
on the contingency of rewards to investments in exchanges with the social
system. Hence, reward for application should be at least moderately
related to approach motivation, which is responsible for such reward-
related incentive. Indeed, previous research has indirectly supported this
notion. For instance, reward for application is related to extraversion, high
arousal, and positive emotions, which are psychological phenomena
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

Relationship Between Social Axioms and Subjective Well-Being 35

closely related to approach motivation (Chen, Bond, et al., 2006; Chen,

Fok, et al., 2006; C. M. Hui, 2005). In addition, recent research (C. M.
Hui & Hui, 2009) has also suggested that believers in reward for applica-
tion tend to exhibit prosocial behaviors, anticipating social rewards even
at the risk of painful rejection and disregard. Such proactive prosocial
behaviors have been recently considered as relevant to social approach
goals (Cavallo, Fitzsimons, & Holmes, 2010; Murray, Derrick, Leder, &
Holmes, 2008).
In contrast, we hypothesized a positive relationship between social
cynicism and avoidance motivation. Past studies have shown that cynical
individuals hold a negative view about interpersonal exchanges (Nowack,
1991; Plomin et al., 1992). According to Leung and Bond (2004), such a
negative view is adaptive by elevating one’s sensitivity to deception, so
as to protect oneself from social threats and interpersonal dangers.
The above evidence suggests that social cynicism enhances reactivity to
negative events. So, it is believed that social cynicism is related to
avoidance motivation.
Locomotion and assessment modes. Recently, Kruglanski et al. (2000)
proposed that humans self-regulate by two basic self-regulatory modes,
assessment and locomotion. Assessment is a comparative aspect of self-
regulation that evaluates psychological states (e.g., goal states) in relation-
ship to referent standards. On the other hand, locomotion is an action-
oriented aspect of self-regulation that devotes psychological resources to
energizing goal-related movements with minimal delay or hesitation.
These two self-regulatory processes are inseparable, but individual differ-
ences appear in terms of resource investment in these two self-regulatory
orientations (also see Higgins, Kruglanski, & Pierro, 2003). In general,
locomotors tend to make faster decisions, while assessors make better
decisions (Mauro, Pierro, Mannetti, Higgins, & Kruglanski, 2009). More-
over, due to their skeptical orientation toward interpersonal exchanges,
assessors tend to experience more emotional instability and fewer enjoy-
able interpersonal relationships than do locomotors (Kruglanski et al.,
2000; Kumashiro, Rusbult, Finkenauer, & Stocker, 2007).
We hypothesized that reward for application would be linked to
the locomotion mode. Given that believers in reward for application
tend to believe that investments are the key to successes, they may not
spend many resources on assessing the feasibility of a goal. Instead,
they may rather act by moving directly toward their goals. Consis-
tently, research has suggested that reward for application is a strong
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

36 Chin-Ming Hui and Michael Harris Bond

predictor of one’s behavioral intention (Liem et al., 2009) and actual

goal pursuit behaviors (Kurman, 2004; Zhou, Leung, & Bond, 2009).
Hence, reward for application should be associated with the “moving”
component of self-regulation.
On the other hand, we expected a positive relation between social
cynicism and the assessment mode. As mentioned previously, social cyni-
cism potentiates sensitivity to negative social consequences and motivates
believers to actively monitor their exchanges with the social system and
with other individuals (Leung & Bond, 2004). The assessment mode is a
mode social cynics adapt, given that it facilitates critical evaluation and
comparison in goal-relevant situations (Kumashiro et al., 2007; Mauro et
al., 2009). In sum, the study has two major hypotheses on the relationship
between social axioms and different dimensions of self-regulation:
Hypothesis 1: Reward for application is positively related to optimism,
approach motivation, and locomotion self-regulatory mode.
Hypothesis 2: Social cynicism is positively related to avoidance motivation
and assessment self-regulatory mode but negatively related to mindfulness
and optimism.

The second intent of the study was to examine whether self-regulation

mediates or explains the effect of social axioms on subjective well-being.
As mentioned before, research (C. M. Hui & Hui, 2009) has shown that
reward for application is related to positive affect and social cynicism is
related to poor life satisfaction and negative affect. However, the medi-
ating mechanisms have never been tested. Given that each of the self-
regulatory orientations described before has been consistently linked to
subjective well-being, we propose that these self-regulatory orientations
may mediate the effects of social cynicism and reward for application on
subjective well-being, specifically the three global components of subjec-
tive well-being, namely, life satisfaction, positive affect, and negative
affect (Diener et al., 1999).
Hypothesis 3: Self-regulatory orientations mediate the effects of reward for
application and social cynicism on subjective well-being.
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

Relationship Between Social Axioms and Subjective Well-Being 37

Method
Participants
A total of 111 Chinese university students (52 male and 59 female; age
M = 20.50, SD = 1.20) participated in this study. They were recruited
at a university campus in Hong Kong by using flyers and mass
e-mailing. Participants were asked to fill out a battery of questionnaires
measuring social axioms, self-regulation, and subjective well-being, as
described below.

Measurements
Social axioms. The Social Axioms Survey (Leung et al., 2002), consisting
of 60 items with a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disbelieve and 5
= strongly believe), was administered. The social axioms survey consists
of items tapping the five factors, namely social cynicism (e.g., “Powerful
people tend to exploit others”), reward for application (e.g., “One will
succeed if he/she really tries”), social complexity (e.g., “Human behaviour
changes with the social context”), fate control (e.g., “All things in the
universe have been determined”), and religiosity (e.g., “Belief in a reli-
gion makes people good citizens”).
Optimism. The Life Orientation Test (LOT; Scheier & Carver, 1992)
was used in the study. We adopted the Chinese version of the LOT for the
current study (J. C. L. Lai & Yue, 2000). The scale consists of three posi-
tive items (e.g., “I’m always optimistic about my future”) and three nega-
tive items (e.g., “I hardly ever expect things to go my way”), each
measured with a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 =
strongly agree). Though some studies have advocated using two subfac-
tors based on the positively and negatively worded items (J. C. L. Lai,
1994), the two factors did not differentially relate to the predictors in our
study. Thus, for simplicity of presentation, we aggregated all items to
calculate a global optimism score.
Mindfulness. The Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS;
Brown & Ryan, 2003) was employed. The scale consists of 15 items (e.g.,
“I could be experiencing some emotion and not be conscious of it until
some time later”), with a 6-point Likert-type scale (1 = almost always, 6 =
almost never).
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

38 Chin-Ming Hui and Michael Harris Bond

Approach and avoidance motivation. We employed the BIS/BAS

(Behavioral Inhibition System/Behavioral Activation System) scales
(Carver & White, 1994). The questionnaire consists of 4-point Likert-type
scales (1 = very false for me, 4 = very true for me). The items measure
both approach motivation (e.g., “If I see a chance to get something I want,
I move on it right away”) and avoidance motivation (e.g., “I worry about
making mistakes”).
Regulatory modes. The Regulatory Mode Questionnaire (Kruglanski
et al., 2000) was used. Two subscales correspond to the assessment mode
(e.g., “I often compare myself with other people”) and the locomotion
mode (e.g., “I can always manage to solve difficult problems if I try hard
enough”). The questionnaire consists of 7-point Likert-type scales (1 =
strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree).
Life satisfaction. A six-item questionnaire was used. The scale
consisted of five items adopted from the Satisfaction with Life Scale
(Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985) and a single item from the
Delighted-Terrible Scale (Andrews & Withey, 1976). The six-item ques-
tionnaire has been used in previous studies (Chen, Cheung, et al., 2006;
Kwan, Bond, & Singelis, 1997). Reponses were on a 7-point scale (1 =
strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree).
Positive and negative affect. The Positive and Negative Affect
Schedule (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) was used to measure posi-
tive affect (e.g., interested and excited) and negative affect (e.g., scared
and upset). Participants were presented with 20 emotion items and asked
to indicate their general endorsement of each emotion on a 5-point Likert-
type scale (1 = very slightly, 5 = very much).
The MAAS, the BIS/BAS scales, and the Regulatory Mode Question-
naire were originally developed in English. These scales were translated
into linguistically equivalent Chinese by two bilingual undergraduate
helpers using standard back-translation procedures, with the process over-
seen by a native English speaker.

Results
Relating Social Axioms With Self-Regulatory Orientations
Descriptive statistics and correlational analyses are presented in Table 1.1
As shown in Table 1, the pattern of correlations is consistent with our
predictions. Reward for application was positively related to optimism, r
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

Relationship Between Social Axioms and Subjective Well-Being 39

= .24, p < .05, approach motivation, r = .31, p < .01, and locomotion
mode, r = .48, p < .001. On the other hand, social cynicism was nega-
tively related to optimism, r = –.33, p < .01, and mindfulness, r = –.32, p
< .01, but positively related to avoidance motivation, r = .27, p < .01, and
assessment mode, r = .29, p < .01. Hence, the first two hypotheses were
supported. In addition, consistent with our prediction, among the five
axiom dimensions, only social cynicism and reward for application were
related to variables of self-regulation.
We were also interested in the strength of relationships between the
two factors of social axioms and the self-regulatory orientations. To
achieve this goal, we did additional analyses to assess how much variance
in reward for application and social cynicism could be accounted for by
the six self-regulatory orientations employed in this study. The data
showed that the self-regulatory orientations accounted for 32% and 22%
of the total variance in reward for application and social cynicism, respec-
tively. The degree to which the two axioms are related to the self-regula-
tory orientations is at least as strong as their correlations with personality
variables (Chen, Fok, et al., 2006).

Subjective Well-Being and Its Psychological Correlates

We further examined the relationship among social axioms, self-regula-
tion, and subjective well-being. Not surprisingly, as found in past studies,
each of the self-regulatory orientations we studied was significantly asso-
ciated with at least one of the three indices of subjective well-being in the
predicted way (see Table 1). Specifically, mindfulness, optimism,
approach motivation, and locomotion mode were related to increased
subjective well-being; in contrast, avoidance motivation and assessment
mode were related to lower subjective well-being.
Additionally, and consistent with the results of previous studies (Chen,
Cheung, et al., 2006; C. M. Hui, 2005), reward for application was related
to positive affect, r = .40, p < .001, while social cynicism was related to
negative affect, r = .42, p < .001, and life satisfaction, r = –.38, p < .001.
Moreover, religiosity was mildly and positively related to negative affect,
r = .19, p < .05. Additional analyses showed that there was no interaction
between social cynicism and reward for application in predicting these
indices of well-being. The associations of well-being with social
cynicism and reward for application were subjected to subsequent media-
tional analyses.
Table 1. Descriptive statistics and correlations among variables
40

Variable M SD α 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1. Reward for application 3.85 0.37 .75 —

2. Social cynicism 3.20 0.46 .85 –.05 —

3. Fate control 3.13 0.49 .58 –.13 .25** —

4. Social complexity 4.11 0.27 .56 .32** .08 –.13 —

5. Religiosity 3.39 0.59 .75 .20* –.15 –.06 –.05 —

6. Optimism 3.12 0.73 .80 .24* –.33*** –.02 .03 .08 —

7. Mindfulness 3.76 0.56 .80 .12 –.32** –.10 .16 .05 .26** —

8. Approach motivation 2.93 0.30 .72 .31** .18 .03 .06 .13 .05 –.27** —

9. Avoidance motivation 2.91 0.42 .69 –.17 .27** .07 .14 .05 –.44*** –.26** .24* —

10. Locomotion mode 4.19 0.50 .71 .48*** –.08 –.14 .09 .10 .24* .08 .25** –.07 —

11. Assessment mode 3.83 0.57 .73 .13 .29** –.11 .04 –.03 –.26** –.19* .25** .22* .23* —

12. Life satisfaction 4.28 1.07 .85 .12 –.38*** –.03 –.07 .08 .55*** .32** –.07 –.35*** .18 –.38*** —

13. Positive affect 2.96 0.70 .89 .40*** –.06 –.04 .15 .02 .38*** .11 .23* –.16 .58*** .16 .31** —
Published by the Chinese University Press

14. Negative affect 2.31 0.78 .91 .00 .42*** .14 .01 .19* –.37*** –.38*** .15 .39*** .02 .46*** –.41*** .04 —
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)

Chin-Ming Hui and Michael Harris Bond

 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

Relationship Between Social Axioms and Subjective Well-Being 41

Mediational Analyses for Subjective Well-Being

To conduct mediational analyses for subjective well-being, we utilized
hierarchical regression analyses by entering all social axiom dimensions
in Block 1 and all six self-regulatory orientations in Block 2. As indicated
in Table 2, reward for application was related to positive affect, β = .41, t
= 4.18, p < .001, and social cynicism was associated with negative affect,
β = .46, t = 5.12, p < .001, and life satisfaction, β = –.39, t = –4.11, p <
.001. The results replicated the pattern in the correlational analyses. Inter-
estingly, the strengths of these three associations were substantially
reduced after the self-regulatory orientations were entered. The results
suggested that self-regulatory orientations may have mediated the associa-
tions between social axioms and subjective well-being.

Table 2. Regression analyses on subjective well-being

Life satisfaction Positive affect Negative affect
β t β t β t
Block 1
Reward for application .13 1.39 .41 4.18*** –.02 –0.24
Social cynicism –.39 –4.11*** –.06 –0.67 .46 5.12***
Fate control .07 0.78 .03 0.29 .04 0.39
Social complexity –.07 –0.73 .02 0.24 .00 0.03
Religiosity –.01 –0.06 –.07 –0.73 .27 3.04**
2
R and F(5, 105) .16 4.11** .17 4.18** .25 6.94***
Block 2
Reward for application –.01 –0.08 .07 0.74 .04 0.38
Social cynicism –.12 –1.31 .01 0.05 .21 2.42*
Fate control .00 0.03 .06 0.70 .12 1.48
Social complexity –.08 –0.93 .07 0.84 .02 0.21
Religiosity .00 0.04 –.06 –0.74 .26 3.36**
Optimism .36 3.76*** .26 2.80** –.12 –1.34
Mindfulness .14 1.54 .02 0.27 –.21 –2.51*
Approach motivation .02 0.18 .08 0.88 –.11 –1.28
Avoidance motivation –.06 –0.62 –.05 –0.55 .16 1.74
Locomotion mode .13 1.41 .43 4.73*** .02 0.21
Assessment mode –.24 –2.69** .12 1.32 .34 4.00***
∆R2 and ∆F(6, 99) .26 7.34*** .27 7.80*** .23 7.25***
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

42 Chin-Ming Hui and Michael Harris Bond

To examine the mediating role of multiple self-regulatory orienta-

tions, we used a bootstrap method (Preacher & Hayes, 2008) that
performed 5,000 bootstrapping replications with a 95% bias-corrected
confidence interval. This new analytic method has been popular (the
article has been cited 567 times since publication two years ago ) for two
reasons. First, bootstrapping is a more powerful test than the Sobel test, a
conventional test for mediation, as it does not rely on the often-violated
assumption of normality (Shrout & Bolger, 2002). Second, the new
method allows testing of multiple mediators. That is, the method provides
a stringent test of the mediating effect of each of the potential mediators,
as it simultaneously controls for the effects of other potential mediators.
The mediational analyses by bootstrapping are presented in Table 3.
The results show that the overall indirect effects of self-regulatory orien-
tations were all statistically significant, suggesting that the effects of
reward for application and social cynicism on subjective well-being were
all mediated by the set of self-regulatory orientations. Moreover, there
were also unique mediators between social axioms and different indices
of well-being: social cynicism was found to lower life satisfaction through
the mediation of pessimism and the assessment mode and to increase
negative affect through the mediation of mindlessness and the assessment
mode. On the other hand, the association between reward for application
and positive affect was mediated by optimism and the locomotion mode.
In sum, the mediating role of self-regulation (i.e., the third hypothesis)
was well and consistently supported.

Discussion
The study aimed at enriching our understanding of the link between social
axioms and well-being by considering the perspective of self-regulation
theory (Carver et al., 2000; Higgins & Scholer, 2008). The results in
general suggested that two factors of social axioms, namely social cyni-
cism and reward for application, are related to this selected set of self-reg-
ulatory orientations. Moreover, as indicated by regression analyses, the
relationship between the axioms and self-regulatory orientations was at
least as strong as the correlations between social axioms and other trans-
situational, dispositional variables, such as values (Bond et al., 2004) and
various comprehensive measures of personality (Chen, Fok, et al., 2006).
In addition, the study also demonstrated that it is fruitful to study the rela-
tionship between social axioms and self-regulation by illustrating that
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

Relationship Between Social Axioms and Subjective Well-Being 43

Table 3. Estimating mediated effects with bootstrapping in the multiple mediator model
Social cynicism → Life Reward for application → Social cynicism →
satisfaction positive affect Negative affect
Bootstrap Bootstrap Bootstrap
estimate estimate estimate
Indirect M SE 95% bias- M SE 95% bias- M SE 95% bias-
effects corrected CI corrected CI corrected CI
Overall –.58 .16 (–.93, –.29)** .60 .14 ( .35, .90)** .37 .12 ( .16, .65)**
Optimism –.27 .11 (–.54, –.10)** .12 .06 ( .02, .29)* .06 .07 (–.08, .21)
Mindfulness –.09 .08 (–.25, .02) .01 .03 (–.03, .09) .11 .06 ( .02, .25)*
Approach .01 .03 (–.06, .09) .04 .06 (–.06, .19) –.02 .03 (–.11, .02)
motivation
Avoidance –.05 .07 (–.24, .05) .01 .03 (–.04, .10) .08 .06 ( .01, .24)
motivation
Locomotion –.02 .04 (–.16, .02) .39 .11 ( .20, .63)** .01 .02 (–.07, .02)
mode
Assessment –.16 .10 (–.42, –.03)* .04 .03 (–.01, .13) .02 .08 ( .03, .34)**
mode
CI = confidence interval.
*p < .05. **p < .01.

self-regulatory orientations mediated the effect of social axioms on

outcome variables, such as well-being. The pattern of results provided a
unique opportunity to empirically synthesize the interrelationships
between social axioms and psychosocial adjustment through the perspec-
tive of self-regulation. Finally, the study also contributed a better under-
standing of the nature and function of two specific dimensions of social
axioms, namely reward for application and social cynicism.

Reward for Application

In this study, we found that believers in reward for application tend to
hold an optimistic belief, an approach motivation, and a locomotion regu-
latory mode. These self-regulatory orientations are generally conceptual-
ized as facilitators of goal attainment and well-being (Carver et al., 2008;
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

44 Chin-Ming Hui and Michael Harris Bond

Carver & White, 1994; Gable & Poore, 2008; Higgins et al., 2003). The
pattern of results was consistent with findings showing that reward for
application is related to intention and effort exertion on striving (Liem et
al., 2009; Zhou et al., 2009), persistence and active problem solving in the
face of difficulties (Bond et al., 2004; Kurman, 2004), and better coping
and adjustment in intercultural exchanges (Safdar, Lewis, & Daneshpour,
2006). As optimism and locomotion are both beneficial to psychosocial
adjustment, the study also suggested that reward for application shapes
positive affect through its influence on these two variables.

Social Cynicism
In contrast, social cynicism is related to pessimism, mindlessness, avoid-
ance motivation, and use of an assessment regulatory mode. The correla-
tions between social cynicism and these constructs support the notion that
social cynicism reflects one’s vigilance in scanning the social world for
deception and avoiding potential interpersonal risks (Leung & Bond,
2004). The avoidance and assessment orientations have been proposed to
elevate sensitivity and evaluative responsiveness to dangers dormant in
social situations (Higgins et al., 2003; Lang, 1995). In addition, relevant
pessimistic beliefs are also useful for self-regulation, as negative thoughts
can fuel and sustain avoidance motivation (Puca & Schmalt, 2001; Tamir,
2005). Consistent with this reasoning, empirical data have shown that
social cynicism facilitates better adaptation in novel situations, such as
new cultural settings (Kurman & Ronen Eilon, 2004).
However, endorsement of social cynicism is not without its cost.
Social cynicism has frequently been associated with poor psychological
health (Chen, Cheung, et al., 2006; J. Lai et al., 2007). This may be due
to the fact that cynical individuals tend to chronically use self-regulatory
strategies that compromise their psychological health. Indeed, research
has found that poor well-being stems from pessimism (Scheier &
Carver, 1987), mindlessness (Brown & Ryan, 2003), and use of an
assessment mode (Kruglanski et al., 2000). Moreover, our results indi-
cated that social cynicism reduces life satisfaction through mediation of
the assessment mode and lack of optimism and increases negative affect
through mediation of the assessment mode and lack of mindfulness.
Hence, maladaptive self-regulation may be a reason why social cynics
have poor well-being.
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

Relationship Between Social Axioms and Subjective Well-Being 45

Implications and Direction for Future Studies

This study provided insights into the linkage between social axioms and
self-regulation. First, the current study set up an agenda for research on
social beliefs. As noted by some researchers (Sampson, 1981), belief
research primarily concerns the assessment of intrapersonal constructs;
research on social and interpersonal beliefs is relatively scant (Jost, 2006;
Koltko-Rivera, 2004; Lerner & Miller, 1978). Given the utility of social
beliefs in understanding self-regulatory processes, we advocate further
research to decipher the interplay between self- and social beliefs on self-
regulatory processes.
Second, results from this study may appear biased toward individuals
who endorse reward for application or low levels of social cynicism.
However, we do not believe that there are one-sided advantages for
believers in reward for application or low social cynicism—believers in
reward for application may develop unrealistic optimism and have diffi-
culties in disengaging from unattainable goals; noncynical individuals
may more likely be duped and deceived in competitive social interactions
with exploitative others. Given that endorsement of any level on the five
dimensions of social beliefs should be functionally adaptive for believers
in navigating in their social world (Bond, 2009; Kelly, 1955), we advise
researchers to seek to understand when and how different believers (e.g.,
cynics vs. noncynics) outperform the other.

Note
1. Though independence should be expected based on previous findings (Carver
& White, 1994; Kruglanski et al., 2000), we found mildly positive correla-
tions between approach and avoidance motivations (r = .24, p < .05) and
between locomotion and assessment modes (r = .23, p < .05). We considered
these correlations spurious.
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

46 Chin-Ming Hui and Michael Harris Bond

References
Andrews, F. M., & Withey, S. B. (1976). Social indicators of well-being: Amer-
ica’s perception of life quality. New York: Plenum.
Baumeister, R. F., Schmeichel, B. J., & Vohs, K. D. (2007). Self-regulation and
the executive function: The self as controlling agent. In A. W. Kruglanski & E.
T. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed.,
pp. 516–539). New York: Guilford.
Bond, M. H. (2009). Believing in beliefs: A scientific but personal quest. In K.
Leung & M. H. Bond (Eds.), Psychological aspects of social axioms (pp.
319–342). New York: Springer.
Bond, M. H., Leung, K., Au, A., Tong, K. K., & Chemonges Nielson, Z. (2004).
Combining social axioms with values in predicting social behaviours. Euro-
pean Journal of Personality, 18, 177–191.
Boski, P., Bilas-Henne, M., & Wieckowska, J. (2009). Cynicism in love and in
politics. In K. Leung & M. H. Bond (Eds.), Psychological aspects of social
axioms (pp. 239–267). New York: Springer.
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindful-
ness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 84, 822–848.
Cacioppo, J. T., Gardner, W. L., & Bernston, G. G. (1997). Beyond bipolar
conceptualizations and measures: The case of attitudes and evaluative space.
Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 3–25.
Carver, C. S., Pozo, C., Harris, S. D., Noriega, V., Scheier, M. F., Robinson, D. S.,
et al. (1993). How coping mediates the effect of optimism on distress: A
study of women with early stage breast cancer. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 65, 375–390.
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1982). Control theory: A useful conceptual
framework for personality-social, clinical, and health psychology. Psycholog-
ical Bulletin, 92, 111–135.
Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Fulford, D. (2008). Self-regulatory processes,
stress, and coping. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.),
Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 725–742). New
York: Guilford.
Carver, C. S., Sutton, S. K., & Scheier, M. F. (2000). Action, emotion, and
personality: Emerging conceptual integration. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 26, 741–751.
Carver, C. S., & White, T. L. (1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activa-
tion, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/
BAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 319–333.
Cavallo, J. V., Fitzsimons, G. M., & Holmes, J. G. (2010). When self-protection
overreaches: Relationship-specific threat activates domain-general avoidance
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

Relationship Between Social Axioms and Subjective Well-Being 47

motivation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 1–8.

Chen, S. X., Bond, M. H., & Cheung, F. M. (2006). Personality correlates of
social axioms: Are beliefs nested within personality? Personality and Indi-
vidual Differences, 40, 509–519.
Chen, S. X., Cheung, F. M., Bond, M. H., & Leung, J. P. (2005). Decomposing
the construct of ambivalence over emotional expression in a Chinese cultural
context. European Journal of Personality, 19, 185–204.
Chen, S. X., Cheung, F. M., Bond, M. H., & Leung, J. P. (2006). Going beyond
self-esteem to predict life satisfaction: The Chinese case. Asian Journal of
Social Psychology, 9, 24–35.
Chen, S. X., Fok, H. K., Bond, M. H., & Matsumoto, D. (2006). Personality and
beliefs about the world revisited: Expanding the nomological network of
social axioms. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 201–211.
Chen, S. X., Wu, W. C. H., & Bond, M. H. (2009). Linking family dysfunction
to suicidal ideation: Mediating roles of self-views and world-views. Asian
Journal of Social Psychology, 12, 133–144.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction
with Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.
Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-
being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276–302.
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset. New York: Random House.
Forster, J., & Higgins, E. T. (2005). How global versus local perception fits
regulatory focus. Psychological Science, 16, 631–636.
Frank, E., & Brandstatter, V. (2002). Approach versus avoidance: Different
types of commitment in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 82, 208–221.
Fu, P. P., Kennedy, J., Tata, J., Yukl, G., Bond, M. H., Peng, T.-K., et al. (2004).
The impact of societal cultural values and individual social beliefs on the
perceived effectiveness of managerial influence strategies: A meso approach.
Journal of International Business Studies, 35, 284–305.
Gable, S. L., & Poore, J. (2008). Which thoughts count? Algorithms for evalu-
ating satisfaction in relationships. Psychological Science, 19, 1030–1036.
Gailliot, M. T., Mead, N. L., & Baumeister, R. F. (2008). Self-regulation. In O. P.
John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory
and Research (3rd ed., pp. 472–481). New York: Guilford.
Gray, J. A. (1981). A critique of Eysenck’s theory of personality. In H. J.
Eysenck (Ed.), A model of personality (pp. 246–276). New York: Springer.
Guan, Y., & Bond, M. H. (2008). [Social axioms and need for cognitive
closure]. Unpublished raw data, Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Hart, W., Albarracin, D., Eagly, A. H., Brechan, I., Lindberg, M. J., Lee, K.-H.,
et al. (2009). Feeling validated versus being correct: A meta-analysis of
selective exposure to information. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 555–588.
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

48 Chin-Ming Hui and Michael Harris Bond

Higgins, E. T., Kruglanski, A. W., & Pierro, A. (2003). Regulatory mode: Loco-
motion and assessment as distinct orientations. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.),
Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 35, pp. 293–344). San
Diego, CA: Elsevier.
Higgins, E. T., & Scholer, A. A. (2008). When is personality revealed? In O. P.
John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory
and research (3rd ed., pp. 182–207). New York: Guilford.
Hui, C. M. (2005). Can two viewpoints determine your affectivities? Self and
social views as mood regulators. Unpublished ’bachelor’s thesis, Chinese
University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Hui, C. M., & Hui, N. H.-H. (2009). The mileage from social axioms: Learning
from the past and looking forward. In K. Leung & M. H. Bond (Eds.),
Psychological aspects of social axioms (pp. 13–30). New York: Springer.
Hui, V. K.-Y., Bond, M. H., & Ng, T. S. W. (2007). General beliefs about the
world as defensive mechanisms against death anxiety. Omega: Journal of
Death and Dying, 54, 199–214.
Jost, J. T. (2006). The end of the end of ideology. American Psychologist, 61,
651–670.
Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton.
Koltko-Rivera, M. E. (2004). The psychology of worldviews. Review of General
Psychology, 8, 3–58.
Kruglanski, A. W., Thompson, E. P., Higgins, E. T., Atash, M. N., Pierro, A.,
Shah, J. Y., et al. (2000). To “do the right thing” or to “just do it”: Locomo-
tion and assessment as distinct self-regulatory imperatives. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 793–815.
Kumashiro, M., Rusbult, C. E., Finkenauer, C., & Stocker, S. L. (2007). To
think or to do: The impact of assessment and locomotion orientation on the
Michelangelo phenomenon. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships,
24, 591–611.
Kuo, B. C. H., Kwantes, C. T., Towson, S., & Nanson, K. M. (2006). Social
beliefs as determinants of attitudes toward seeking professional psychological
help among ethnically diverse university students. Canadian Journal of
Counselling, 40, 224–241.
Kurman, J. (2004, August). The dimension of reward for application. Paper
presented at the 17th Congress of International Association of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, Xi’an, China.
Kurman, J., & Ronen Eilon, C. (2004). Lack of knowledge of a culture’s social
axioms and adaptation difficulties among immigrants. Journal of Cross-Cul-
tural Psychology, 35, 192–208.
Kwan, V. S. Y., Bond, M. H., & Singelis, T. M. (1997). Pancultural explana-
tions for life satisfaction: Adding relationship harmony to self-esteem.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1038–1051.
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

Relationship Between Social Axioms and Subjective Well-Being 49

Kwantes, C. T., & Karam, C. M. (2009). Social axioms and organizational

behavior. In K. Leung & M. H. Bond (Eds.), Psychological aspects of social
axioms (pp. 31–50). New York: Springer.
Lai, J., Bond, M., & Hui, N. (2007). The role of social axioms in predicting life
satisfaction: A longitudinal study in Hong Kong. Journal of Happiness
Studies, 8, 517–535.
Lai, J. C. L. (1994). Differential predictive power of the positively versus the
negatively worded items of the Life Orientation Test. Psychological Reports,
75, 1507–1515.
Lai, J. C. L., & Yue, X. (2000). Measuring optimism in Hong Kong and main-
land Chinese with the revised Life Orientation Test. Personality and Indi-
vidual Differences, 28, 781–796.
Lang, P. J. (1995). The emotion probe: Studies of motivation and attention.
American Psychologist, 50, 372–385.
Lerner, M. J., & Miller, D. T. (1978). Just world research and the attribution
process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1030–1051.
Leung, K., & Bond, M. H. (2004). Social axioms: A model for social beliefs in
multicultural perspective. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental
social psychology (Vol. 36, pp. 119–197). San Diego, CA: Elsevier.
Leung, K., Bond, M. H., de Carrasquel, S. R., Munoz, C., Hernandez, M.,
Murakami, F., et al. (2002). Social axioms: The search for universal dimen-
sions of general beliefs about how the world functions. Journal of Cross-
Cultural Psychology, 33, 286–302.
Liem, A. D., Hidayat, S. S., & Soemarno, S. (2009). Do general beliefs predict
specific behavioral intentions in Indonesia? The role of social axioms with
the theory of planned behavior. In K. Leung & M. H. Bond (Eds.), Psycho-
logical aspects of social axioms (pp. 217–238). New York: Springer.
Lo, L. K. (2006). Comparing the predictive power of social axioms and person-
ality on social anxiety. Unpublished bachelor’s thesis. Chinese University of
Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Martin, J. R. (1997). Mindfulness: A proposed common factor. Journal of
Psychotherapy Integration, 7, 291–312.
Mauro, R., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., Higgins, E. T., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2009).
The perfect mix: Regulatory complementarity and the speed-accuracy balance
in group performance. Psychological Science, 20, 681–685.
Molden, D. C., & Dweck, C. S. (2006). Finding “meaning” in psychology: A
lay theories approach to self-regulation, social perception, and social devel-
opment. American Psychologist, 61, 192–203.
Murray, S. L., Derrick, J. L., Leder, S., & Holmes, J. G. (2008). Balancing
connectedness and self-protection goals in close relationships: A levels-of-
processing perspective on risk regulation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 94, 429–459.
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

50 Chin-Ming Hui and Michael Harris Bond

Nowack, K. M. (1991). Psychosocial predictors of health status. Work & Stress, 5,

117–131.
Peterson, C. (2000). The future of optimism. American Psychologist, 55, 44–55.
Plomin, R., Scheier, M. F., Bergeman, C. S., Pedersen, N. L., Nesselroade, J. R.,
& McClearn, G. E. (1992). Optimism, pessimism and mental health: A twin/
adoption analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 921–930.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies
for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models.
Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891.
Puca, R. M., & Schmalt, H.-D. (2001). The influence of the achievement motive
on spontaneous thoughts in pre- and postdecisional action phases. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 302–308.
Safdar, S., Lewis, J. R., & Daneshpour, M. (2006). Social axioms in Iran and
Canada: Intercultural contact, coping and adjustment. Asian Journal of Social
Psychology, 9, 123–131.
Sampson, E. E. (1981). Cognitive psychology as ideology. American Psycholo-
gist, 36, 730–743.
Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1987). Dispositional optimism and physical
well-being: The influence of generalized outcome expectancies on health.
Journal of Personality, 55, 169–210.
Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1992). Effects of optimism on psychological
and physical well-being: Theoretical overview and empirical update. Cogni-
tive Therapy and Research, 16, 201–228.
Seeman, M. (1997). The elusive situation in social psychology. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 60, 4–13.
Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperi-
mental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological
Methods, 7, 422–445.
Singelis, T. M., Hubbard, C., Her, P., & An, S. (2003). Convergent validation of
the social axioms survey. Personality and Individual Differences, 34,
269–282.
Tamir, M. (2005). Don’t worry, be happy? Neuroticism, trait-consistent affect
regulation, and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
89, 449–461.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of
brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070.
Zhou, F., Leung, K., & Bond, M. H. (2009). Social axioms and achievement
across cultures: The influence of reward for application and fate control.
Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 366–371.
 Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010)
Published by the Chinese University Press

Relationship Between Social Axioms and Subjective Well-Being 51

社會通則與主觀幸福感的關係：自我調節所扮演的角色

許展明
美國西北大學

彭邁克
香港理工大學

摘要

本研究探討社會通則與四種自我調節的不同取向的關係。該四種取向分別
為樂觀、心智專注、自我調節模式，及趨近和迴避動機。我們主要針對兩
種不同的社會通則：憤世嫉俗觀及付出有回報觀。研究結果顯示憤世嫉俗
觀及付出有回報觀與自我調節的取向有關聯。中介作用分析顯示憤世嫉俗
觀跟非適應性自我調節取向有關，並因此對主觀幸福感帶來負面影響。但
是付出有回報觀跟適應性自我調節取向有關，並因此對主觀幸福感帶來正
面影響。我們就這些結果對人際關係的策略性取向及心理健康的啟示意義
進行了討論。

關鍵字：社會信念、幸福感、自我調節
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.