Value Instantiations: The Missing Link Between Values and Behavior?

  • Paul H. P. HanelEmail author
  • Katia C. Vione
  • Ulrike Hahn
  • Gregory R. Maio


Value instantiations—exemplifiers of an abstract or general category—are a new issue in human value research. Experiments have recently highlighted the important role of value instantiations in bridging the gap between abstract values and specific actions. In this chapter, we describe the general role of category instantiations in psychology, drawing on relevant literature in cognitive and social psychology. We discuss the relevance of value instantiations to important topics in the study of values, such as (non-)differences in values between nations, and the application of values to behavior. We then discuss instantiations as a mechanism through which values are related to behavior. We demonstrate that instantiations moderate the relationship between values and behavior: If the measured behaviors reflect typical instantiations of a value, the relationship between the two is stronger. Finally, we illustrate the potential roles of value instantiations by describing a method for measuring them and then examining findings relevant to two values: protecting the environment and family security.



The authors acknowledge financial support by the School of Psychology, Cardiff University (, the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC; to the first and last author (ES/J500197/1), and the CAPES Foundation (Brazil, to the second author. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.


  1. Armstrong, S. L., Gleitman, L. R., & Gleitman, H. (1983). What some concepts might not be. Cognition, 13(3), 263–308. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(83)90012-4
  2. Arthaud-Day, M. L., Rode, J. C., & Turnley, W. H. (2012). Direct and contextual effects of individual values on organizational citizenship behavior in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(4), 792–807. doi: 10.1037/a0027352
  3. Bardi, A., & Schwartz, S. H. (2003). Values and behavior: Strength and structure of relations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(10), 1207–1220. doi: 10.1177/0146167203254602
  4. Barsalou, L. W. (1985). Ideals, central tendency, and frequency of instantiation as determinants of graded structure in categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11(4), 629–654. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.11.1-4.629
  5. Barsalou, L. W. (1987). The instability of graded structure in concepts: Implications for the nature of concepts. In U. Neisser (Ed.), Concepts and conceptual development: Ecological and intellectual factors in categorization (pp. 101–140). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Evans, L., Maio, G. R., Corner, A., Hodgetts, C. J., Ahmed, S., & Hahn, U. (2013). Self-interest and pro-environmental behaviour. Nature Climate Change, 3(2), 122–125. doi: 10.1038/nclimate1662
  7. Feather, N. T., Woodyatt, L., & McKee, I. R. (2012). Predicting support for social action: How values, justice-related variables, discrete emotions, and outcome expectations influence support for the Stolen Generations. Motivation and Emotion, 36(4), 516–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fischer, R., & Schwartz, S. (2011). Whence differences in value priorities? Individual, cultural, or artifactual sources. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(7), 1127–1144. doi: 10.1177/0022022110381429
  9. Greenfield, P. M. (2014). Sociodemographic differences within countries produce variable cultural values. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45(1), 37–41. doi: 10.1177/0022022113513402
  10. Hampton, J. A. (1981). An investigation of the nature of abstract concepts. Memory & Cognition, 9(2), 149–156. doi: 10.3758/BF03202329
  11. Lord, C. G., Desforges, D. M., Fein, S., Pugh, M. A., & Lepper, M. R. (1994). Typicality effects in attitudes toward social policies: A concept-mapping approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(4), 658–673. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.66.4.658
  12. Lord, C. G., Desforges, D. M., Ramsey, S. L., Trezza, G. R., & Lepper, M. R. (1991). Typicality effects in attitude-behavior consistency: Effects of category discrimination and category knowledge. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27(6), 550–575. doi: 10.1016/0022-1031(91)90025-2
  13. Lord, C. G., Lepper, M. R., & Mackie, D. (1984). Attitude prototypes as determinants of attitude–behavior consistency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(6), 1254–1266. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.46.6.1254
  14. Maio, G. R. (2010). Mental representations of social values. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 42, pp. 1–43). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  15. Maio, G. R., Hahn, U., Frost, J.-M., & Cheung, W.-Y. (2009). Applying the value of equality unequally: Effects of value instantiations that vary in typicality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 598–614.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. McCloskey, M. E., & Glucksberg, S. (1978). Natural categories: Well defined or fuzzy sets? Memory & Cognition, 6(4), 462–472. doi: 10.3758/BF03197480
  17. Monteiro, L. T. (2012). The valley of fear—The morphology of crime, a case study in João Pessoa, Paraíba, Brasil. In M. Greene, J. Reyes, & A. Castro (Eds.), Proceedings of the eighth space syntax symposium. PUC: Santiago de Chile.Google Scholar
  18. Office for national statistics. (2014). Chapter 2Homicide. Retrieved from
  19. Pozzebon, J. A., & Ashton, M. C. (2009). Personality and values as predictors of self- and peer-reported behavior. Journal of Individual Differences, 30(3), 122–129. doi: 10.1027/1614-0001.30.3.122
  20. Rogers, T. T., & Patterson, K. (2007). Object categorization: Reversals and explanations of the basic-level advantage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136(3), 451–469. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.136.3.451
  21. Rosch, E. (1973). Natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 4(3), 328–350. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(73)90017-0
  22. Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive reference points. Cognitive Psychology, 7(4), 532–547. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(75)90021-3
  23. Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8(3), 382–439. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(76)90013-X
  24. Rosch, E., Simpson, C., & Scott, R. (1976). Structural bases of typicality effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2(4), 491–502. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.2.4.491
  25. Roth, E. M., & Shoben, E. J. (1983). The effect of context on the structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 15(3), 346–378. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(83)90012-9
  26. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schwartz, S. H., & Bardi, A. (2001). Value hierarchies across cultures taking a similarities perspective. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(3), 268–290. doi: 10.1177/0022022101032003002
  28. Schwartz, S. H., Melech, G., Lehmann, A., Burgess, S., Harris, M., & Owens, V. (2001). Extending the cross-cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(5), 519–542. doi: 10.1177/0022022101032005001
  29. Sharma, A., Gur, R., & Bhalla, P. (2012). Kuppuswamy’s socioeconomic scale: Updating income ranges for the year 2012. Indian Journal of Public Health, 56(1). Retrieved from
  30. Shultziner, D. (2003). Human dignity—Functions and meanings. Global Jurist Topics, 3(3). Retrieved from
  31. Statista. (2014). Ranking of the most dangerous cities in the world in 2013, by murder rate per capita. Retrieved from
  32. Tansel, A., Dalgic, B., & Guven, A. (2014). Wage inequality and wage mobility in Turkey (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. Available at SSRN 2519502). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul H. P. Hanel
    • 1
    Email author
  • Katia C. Vione
    • 1
  • Ulrike Hahn
    • 2
  • Gregory R. Maio
    • 1
  1. 1.School of PsychologyCardiff UniversityCardiffWales, UK
  2. 2.Department of Psychological SciencesBirkbeck, University of LondonLondonEngland, UK

Personalised recommendations