Is self-enhancement related to modesty or to individualism-collectivism? A test with four Israeli groups Jenny Kurman University of Haifa The main assertion of this study was that degree of self-enhancement is determined by the modesty requirements prevailing in a culture rather than by its level of collectivism. Four Israeli subgroups (323 11th-grade students) were compared in a two-by-two design: type of living (kibbutz versus city) and level of religious observance (religious versus secular). The two kibbutz groups were found to be more collectivist than the urban groups, and the religious groups were found to be more modest than the secular groups. Results show that self- enhancement was related to level of religious observance and not to type of living. When modesty was statistically controlled for, the effect of level of religious observance was removed. It was also found that self-enhancement measures were predicted by modesty and not by collectivism facets. Thus, the data supported the study’s main claim. Introduction One of the psychological factors differentiating cultures can be found in the typical tasks, characteristics, and structure defining the self (Markus & Kitayama, 1991, 1994; Yamaguchi, 1994). Markus and Kitayama (1991) proposed that the interdependent self and the independent self are two separate self-systems, differ in their degree of autonomy from the group. These two self-systems carry different implications for emotions, cognitions, and motivations. A well-documented difference between interdependent and independent self-systems is the strength of the self-enhancement tendency they reveal. Self- enhancement is defined as the desire to enhance the positive nature of self-conceptions and to protect the self from negative information (Sedikides, 1993). It is considered a basic motivation of the self (e.g. Dunning, 1999; Osborne, 1996). Cross-cultural literature questions the universality of this self-enhancement motive. Many findings reveal low self- enhancement in cultures which are considered collectivist (e.g. Heine, Takata, & Lehman, 2000; Kitayama, Takagi, & Matsumoto, 1995). Markus and Kitayama (1991) suggested a theoretical explanation for these differences, and claimed that they result from differing self-motivations of the two self-systems. In contrast to the self-enhancing independent self, the interdependent self is motivated to fit in, to restrain itself, and to maintain social harmony. In their view, positive self-regard is not necessarily a basic motivation of the interdependent self (Heine, Lehman, Markus, & Kitayama, 1999), so self-enhancement processes are not motivated. This study suggests an Asian Journal of Social Psychology (2001) 4: 225–237 ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd with the Asian Association of Social Psychology and the Japanese Group Dynamics Association 2001