4.7 Article

Understanding the pay equity from the idea of universal equality in traditional Chinese philosophy

Journal

FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY
Volume 13, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.998553

Keywords

pay equity; social psychology; attitude; behavior; Chinese philosophy; universal equality

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pay equity is not only a reflection of social behavior, but also a representation of gender attitudes. By exploring Chinese philosophy, this study reveals that traditional Chinese culture contains rich implications regarding pay equity and the pursuit of gender equality. These ideas not only shape implicit non-discriminatory gender attitudes, but also regulate male superiority and intergroup prejudice through self-regulation mechanisms. The clash between traditional ideological insights and the modern pluralistic society will undoubtedly promote the renewal of gender equity and lead to changes in social attitudes and employment behaviors.
Pay equity is not only a manifestation of social behavior but also a reflection of gender attitude. In view of the close interactions between pay equity, gender attitude and cultural value, it is necessary to examine the social-psychological connotations behind the pay equity concept and to seek its theoretical basis and support at the philosophical level. By examining the main ideas in Chinese philosophy, this paper claims that traditional Chinese culture contains rich connotations related to the pay equity concept and the pursuit of gender equality. These ideas can not only shape implicit nondiscriminatory gender attitudes but also inhibit the male superiority and intergroup prejudice through the self-regulation mechanism. The collision between traditional ideological insights and the modern pluralistic society will certainly promote the renewal of gender equity and concomitant changes in social attitude and employment behavior.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available