Six alternative structural models of individualism–collectivism are reviewed and empirically compared in a confirmatory factor analysis of questionnaire data from an Australian student sample (N = 340). Central to the debate about the structure of this broad social attitude are the issues of (1) polarity (are individualism and collectivism bipolar opposites, or orthogonal factors?) and (2) dimensionality (are individualism and collectivism themselves higher‐order constructs subsuming several more specific factors and, if so, what are they?). The data from this Australian sample support a model that represents individualism and collectivism as a higher‐order bipolar factor hierarchically subsuming several bipolar reference‐group‐specific individualisms and collectivisms. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Freeman et al. (Thu,) studied this question.