The subjective texture of time. An exploratory and empirical approach to time perspectives in Chile

Abstract

Time is a social and subjective construct that establishes qualitative differences in the flow of events, that is associated with an individual’s sociodemographic and cultural background, and that affects their attitudes and behavior. The relevance of the past, present, or future as well as the particular meaning of these temporal frames varies depending on each individual’s life experiences and social status. These qualitative and differentiated meanings of time have been studied in many countries through the concept of “time perspectives.” This paper presents the findings of the first application of Zimbardo’s Time Perspective Inventory in Chile and establishes correlations between its factors and sociodemographic and cultural variables. This paper aims to present comparable data for the study of time perspectives, provide theoretical and empirical evidence to progress in the study of the multidimensional nature of time in Chile, and discuss the possibilities and challenges posed by Zimbardo’s Time Perspective Inventory as an instrument for the empirical study of time.

Keywords

Time subjectivity individuals time perspectives Chile

The study of time in Latin America and Chile

Few systematic studies on social and individual temporality have been conducted in the field of social sciences in the past. However, this has markedly changed throughout the last three decades, mainly due to the challenges posed by globalization, the differentiation of social systems, and the increased speed of social processes as a result of the management of complexity, new technologies, individualization, and the recent crisis in the legitimacy of development models in the countries of the North. This context has placed the issue of the future, of the biographical consistency of individuals and the worldwide synchronization of differentiated systems at the forefront, and has restored the importance of the time variable (Dally, 1996; Esposito, 2011; Hassan and Purser, 2007; Honneth, 2004; Kwinter, 2003; Nowotny, 2005; Rosa, 2011; Valderrama, 2011; Vatter and Ruiz, 2011).

The social sciences in Latin America have given too little importance to the systematic study of social time (Aguirre et al., 2005). Empirical studies carried out so far have focused on the objective measurement of the social distribution and individual use of time. From this perspective, time has been conceived as a natural, preexisting and objective resource which individuals represent in clocks and calendars, and whose sense is reduced to its quantity. Studies conducted in Chile share the same features (Catalán, 1998; CIMMA Group, 2004; Dirección del Trabajo, 2007; INE, 2008; Jiménez, 2005; Riquelme, 1999; Rojas, 1998; UNDP, 2002, 2010; Valenzuela and Herrera, 2006). Many of these studies, especially those that refer to gender relations, also include analyses on the subjective consequences of the unequal distribution of the resource time, without redefining the notion of time as a resource (Arriagada, 2005; DOMOS et al., 2007; UNDP, 2000, 2009, 2010). There are also some studies that have attempted to demonstrate the qualitative differences in individual perceptions of time (UNDP, 2002) or the role of temporal imaginaries in the organization of cultural differences throughout various historical periods (Subercaseaux, 2011). However, these approaches are either rather weak empirically or continue to be simple theoretical assumptions.

This limited conception of the time variable has restricted the capacity of Chilean social sciences to recognize and interpret some of the challenges posed by the temporal organization of advanced capitalist society. This paper aims to take an initial step toward a more complex consideration of Chilean social time by presenting the findings of the first application of Zimbardo’s Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI) in Chile and establishing correlations between its factors and sociodemographic and cultural variables. This paper intends to provide evidence that, even though time is profoundly constrained by social structure, time production is also individual, subjective, and based on qualitative parameters that differ among social groups, and that affects behavior. By validating these hypotheses empirically, a more solid explanation of time can be provided and the current changes in Chilean society better understood.

A review on time perspectives (TPs)

As noted earlier, there are many approaches to study the origin, meaning, and social role of time, all of which have specific assumptions and limitations, and draw attention to particular aspects of this phenomenon. In order to show that time is socially constrained, but also heterogeneous and differentiated among individuals and social groups, we chose to begin our study by exploring how individuals provide meaning to the past, present, and future and their orientations toward these time frames. We have chosen to study “time perspectives” for several reasons: it is a field that helps establish links between its specific object and other dimensions of social temporality; there are internationally comparable and validated instruments provided by empirical research on the subject; and it is readily available for exploratory research.

Individuals neither experience nor relate to the flow of time as if it were a homogeneous and consistent event, but rather something that is full of meaning and is organized based on qualitative distinctions. This fact was determined early by sociology (Adam, 1990; Durkheim, 1982; Sorokin and Merton, 1937), anthropology (Evans-Pritchard, 1939; Gell, 1996), and psychology (James, 1963; McGrath and Tschan, 2004). This assertion has been conceptualized and researched in various fields of study under the notion of “time perspectives.” One common denominator of its definitions refers to the subjective operation, usually unconscious, that individuals carry out to provide order and meaning to their personal and social experiences with regard to the difference in the qualitative value given to the past, present, and future. This order provides a relatively stable subjective structure that influences attitudes and behavior in several spheres (Back and Gergen, 1963; Boniwell et al., 2010; Keough et al., 1999; Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck, 1961; Lewin, 1951; Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999).

Nevertheless, several differences and controversies become apparent within the framework of TPs, providing this field its heterogeneous and dynamic characteristics. The first significant difference is the degree of subjective autonomy or social dependency attributed to TPs. All these definitions point toward the influence of sociocultural context and socialization; however, interpretations rooted in psychology tend to emphasize the role of experience and on how individuals process TPs (Fraisse, 1963; Lewin, 1951). Sociologists, on the contrary, often place emphasis on structural determination (Nowotny, 2005; Sorokin and Merton, 1937; Zerubavel, 1981), and anthropologists on cultural rather than individual differences (Ferrandi et al., 2000; Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck, 1961).

A second difference concerns the degree of stability of TPs. Some have pointed out that, after the process of early socialization and the development of personality, TPs become a stable element (Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999). Others, however, underscore the situational and adaptive nature of an individual’s temporal orientations and arrangements (Kruger et al., 2008).

A third difference can be found in the relative importance given to each temporal frame (past–present–future) as a subject of research. Most empirical studies have focused on the role of the different perspectives toward the future, to the point of creating a specific object: Future TPs (McInnerney, 2004; Phan, 2009). This emphasis lies on the role future perspectives play in setting long-term goals and displacing rewards, such as academic achievement, the development of a professional career, or building a family. Meanwhile, others have placed greater importance on the meaning of past experiences for biographical construction and the creation of future expectations (Chernus, 2011; Ely and Mercurio, 2011; Roberts, 2004).

Several recent studies have taken on a completely opposite direction regarding these differences and have concurred in their integration. This is particularly evident in the progression of studies conducted by one of the most important researchers on TPs: Zimbardo. In recent articles, he has probed further into sociocultural determinants, as well as on the dynamic nature of TPs and the interdependency that exists between the past, the present, and the future (Zimbardo and Hohlman, 2009).

Zimbardo’s TPs

There are many ways to empirically operationalize the study of TPs (Boniwell et al., 2010). Because of its extensive development and empirical validation, the ZTPI created by Zimbardo has become the standard for the academic community. Based on studies by W. James and K. Lewin, Zimbardo and Boyd defined TP as: “The often nonconscious process whereby the continual flows of personal and social experiences are assigned to temporal categories, or time frames, that help to give order, coherence and meaning to those events” (1999: 1271). This concept has been operationalized and corrected on the basis of empirical studies carried out since 1985. The ZTPI factorial model currently in use was defined in 1999 based on 56 items clustered into five factors: Past-Negative (10 items), Present-Hedonistic (15 items), Future (13 items), Past-Positive (nine items), and Present-Fatalistic (nine items) (Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999). A TP is interpreted as the concentration of an individual’s attitudes and perceptions in one or another of the following factors:

Past-negative (PN): This factor reflects a negative attitude toward the personal past, possibly associated with painful events experienced either directly or indirectly. It is an indication of a traumatic fixation on the past and a pessimistic view of time and life.

Present-Hedonistic (PH): Reflects an attitude toward life and the passing of time characterized by an orientation toward pleasure and sensation-seeking, as well as risk-taking. It suggests little concern for the future consequences of present actions.

Future (F): This factor reflects a future orientation; the planning and striving for rewards according to the achievement of future goals. It estimates the consistency of behavior and evaluates the future consequences of present actions.

Past-Positive (PP): This factor embodies a positive, sentimental and nostalgic view of the past.

Present-Fatalistic (PF): This factor refers to a fatalistic, helpless attitude toward the present and the future, and life in general. It reveals the belief that the future is determined by fate and that individual actions toward it are ineffective. It does not consider the future consequences of actions.

Several studies have not only shown the consistent and differentiating existence of these five factors but have also proven their correlation with an individual’s behaviors and attitudes. By way of example, TPs may have a correlation with: subjective welfare (Boniwell et al., 2010), attitudes toward the conservation of the environment and natural resources (Corral et al., 2006), the development of psychological pathologies (Van Beek et al., 2011), the organization of a family’s time and the development of social networks (Zimbardo and Hohlman, 2009), the risk of contracting HIV (Rothspan and Read, 1996), drug use (Keough et al., 1999), risk-taking behavior in general (Kruger et al., 2008), academic achievement (Mello and Worrell, 2006), consumption-oriented behavior (Ferrandi et al., 2000; Ko and Gentry, 1991), and emotional intelligence (Stolarski et al., 2011). In sum, studies on TPs based on the ZTPI have demonstrated, contrary to perspectives of time as a natural, preexisting and objective resource represented in clocks and calendars to which individuals adapt and manage, that although time is socially constrained, it is also a subjective construct that establishes qualitative differences in the flow of events and that has an impact on behavior.

The ZTPI in the 2011 United Nations Development Program (UNDP)-Chile Survey

In order to carry out an initial exploratory study of the TPs of individuals in Chile, the original ZTPI (Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999) was used. For practical reasons, a summarized version was introduced in the 2011 survey conducted by the UNDP in Chile.¹ Two items were selected from each TP of the original model (see Table 1). The items were selected, firstly, considering those explaining the most variations in each factor in the study conducted on students in Spain by Díaz Morales (2006). Secondly, following the recommendations of experts, items were chosen based on their coherence with social and cultural features of the Chilean context and on what made most sense to those surveyed. The translation of the items to Spanish was done by the UNDP-Chile research team.

Table 1.

Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory Items in the 2011 UNDP-Chile HDR Survey.

Time Perspective	Selected Items	Original Zimbardo Instrument item number	2011 Human Development Report survey question number
Past-Negative	I often think of what I should have done differently in my life	4	P75.1
Past-Negative	I think about the bad things that have happened to me in the past	50	P114.2
Present-Hedonistic	Taking risks keeps my life from becoming boring	31	P75.2
Present-Hedonistic	It is more important for me to enjoy life’s journey than to focus only on the destination	32	P114.1
Future	I am able to resist temptations when I know that there is work to be done	45	P75.4
Future	I meet my obligations to friends and authorities on time	21	P114.3
Past-Positive	Happy memories of good times spring readily to mind	20	P75.3
Past-Positive	Familiar childhood sights, sounds, smells often bring back a flood of wonderful memories	2	P114.4
Present-Fatalistic	You can’t really plan for the future because things change so much	37	P75.5
Present-Fatalistic	It doesn’t make sense to worry about the future, since there is nothing that I can do about it anyway	39	P114.5

Constructing the model: Factor analysis and formed components

The factor analysis of the 10 selected items was applied based on the method of extraction of the main components, considering eigenvalues greater than 1 and Varimax rotation. The model presented four dimensions, where the Past-Negative and Future TPs are correctly clustered but where the Present-Hedonistic is divided and merges with the Present-Fatalistic and Past-Positive. This model explains 57.439% of the total variation and presents a level of reliability of .549 in the application of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. In order to improve the theoretical and empirical effectiveness of the typology, a second factor analysis was applied, increasing the input criteria for eigenvalues to .886. The resulting model presented five dimensions, where Past-Negative, Past-Positive, and Future are correctly clustered, but where the Present-Hedonistic is divided into the Present-Fatalistic and an autonomous variable, item 31 (Present-Hedonistic): “Taking risks keeps my life from becoming boring.” The item 31 was eliminated from the model because of theoretical incompatibilities. This decision was supported by statistical evidence that showed that eliminating the aforementioned item exclusively, the statistical value of the model rose. The resulting model of four TPs in Chile meets all test requirements for the application of the factor analysis,² is conducted with nine variables applying a Varimax rotation with an eigenvalue criteria greater than .886, explains the 62.182% total variation of the model, and presents a level of reliability of .551³ in the application of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. The factor analysis of Zimbardo’s typology is distributed among four subscales presented below (Table 2).

Table 2.

Factor analysis of the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory Chile.

	Components
	1	2	3	4
It doesn’t make sense to worry about the future, since there is nothing that I can do about it anyway	.808 PF	.069	.000	.051
It is more important for me to enjoy life’s journey than to focus only on the destination	.791 PH	–.039	–.020	.068
You can’t really plan for the future because things change so much	.532 PF	.366	.263	–.028
I often think of what I should have done differently in my life	–.008	.769 PN	.131	.017
I think about the bad things that have happened to me in the past	.134	.705 PN	–.138	.044
I am able to resist temptations when I know that there is work to be done	–.015	.153	.835 F	.018
I meet my obligations to friends and authorities on time	.095	–.148	.729 F	.219
Familiar childhood sights, sounds, smells often bring back a flood of wonderful memories	.106	–.174	.093	.813 PP
Happy memories of good times spring readily to mind	–.009	.296	.124	.727 PP

The four components (see Table 3) that configure TPs in Chile based on ZTPI are: 1. Present; 2. Past-Negative; 3. Future, and 4. Past-Positive.

Table 3.

Time perspectives in Chile factors and items.

Present	It doesn’t make sense to worry about the future, since there is nothing that I can do about it anyway (PF)
	It is more important for me to enjoy life’s journey than to focus only on the destination (PH)
	You can’t really plan for the future because things change so much (PF)
Past-Negative	I often think of what I should have done differently in my life
	I think about the bad things that have happened to me in the past
Future	I meet my obligations to friends and authorities on time
	I am able to resist temptations when I know that there is work to be done
Past-Positive	Happy memories of good times spring readily to mind
	Familiar childhood sights, sounds, smells often bring back a flood of wonderful memories

A sociodemographic interpretation of TPs in Chile

In order to explore the sociodemographic distribution of TPs in Chile, ZTPI subset groups for Chile were compared with age, gender, and socioeconomic variables defined in the 2011 Human Development Report survey.

Age is associated significantly with the Present and Future⁴ and not with Past-Negative and Past-Positive⁵ TPs. It can be observed that although the Future as a TP prevails throughout almost all age ranges, it tends to increase as the individual grows older and is markedly higher in the 45–54 and 55–64 age ranges. This same tendency can be observed in the Present TP, which is found primarily in the 45–54 and 60+ age ranges. The TPs are distributed as follows according to age (Table 4).

Table 4.

Time perspectives according to age group.

			Zimbardo
			Present	Past-Negative	Future	Past-Positive
Age group	18–24	Count	71	109	157	204	541
	18–24	%	13.2%	20.1%	29.1%	37.7%
	25–34	Count	114	114	232	226	687
	25–34	%	16.7%	16.6%	33.7%	33.0%
	35–44	Count	168	177	351	309	1005
	35–44	%	16.7%	17.6%	34.9%	30.7%
	45–54	Count	194	161	359	257	971
	45–54	%	20.0%	16.6%	37.0%	26.5%
	55–64	Count	141	123	299	239	802
	55–64	%	17.6%	15.3%	37.3%	29.8%
	65 +	Count	201	159	347	295	1002
	65 +	%	20.1%	15.9%	34.6%	29.5%
Total		Count	890	843	1.745	1.531	5008

Gender-based differences in TPs are negligible; the only significant correlation that exists is in the Present TP,⁶ where it is stronger among women than men. TPs are distributed as follows according to gender (Table 5).

Table 5.

Time perspectives according to gender.

			Zimbardo
			Present	Past-Negative	Future	Past-Positive
Sex	Male	Count	400	397	852	736	2385
	Male	%	16.8%	16.6%	35.7%	30.9%
	Female	Count	490	446	893	794	2623
	Female	%	18.7%	17.0%	34.0%	30.3%
Total		Count	890	843	1745	1531	5008

Socioeconomic level⁷ is associated significantly with all TPs of ZTPI in Chile.⁸ Future and Past-Positive TPs prevail in all classes, although the higher the socioeconomic level of the individual, the higher its predominance. Likewise, although the Present and Past-Negative TPs are not prevalent among the various groups, the lower the individual’s socio-economic class, the stronger its predominance. The distribution among socioeconomic levels and TPs is as follows (Table 6).

Table 6.

Time perspectives according to socioeconomic status.

			Zimbardo
			Present	Past-Negative	Future	Past-Positive
SES	ABC1	Count	29	41	129	140	338
	ABC1	%	8.5%	12.0%	38.0%	41.5%
	C2	Count	83	66	238	216	603
	C2	%	13.8%	10.9%	39.4%	35.9%
	C3	Count	299	266	590	500	1656
	C3	%	18.1%	16.1%	35.7%	30.2%
	D	Count	262	272	446	376	1357
	D	%	19.3%	20.0%	32.9%	27.7%
	E	Count	216	198	342	298	1054
	E	%	20.5%	18.8%	32.4%	28.2%
Total		Count	890	843	1745	1531	5008

These sociodemographic analyses suggest further exploration. Firstly, the correlation that exists between age ranges and TPs should be supplemented with rigorous empirical analyses in order to distinguish the effect of the life cycle and generational change. On the one hand, certain life stages and social expectations associated with them could be functionally supported by specific TPs. This can be seen, for example, in the fact that, regardless of the other variables, the mid-life stages associated with employment and financial commitments tend to correlate with an individual’s emphasis on the future. On the other hand, a generational analysis can also be carried out. The younger respondents are a generation born after the Pinochet dictatorship (1973–1990) and their memories of the past are not marked by the violence and hardships of that period. This would explain the differences between the older and newer generations, which scored higher in the Past-Positive factor.

Secondly, the weak correlation between gender and TPs can be interpreted in light of other Chilean data. These indicate that there are less noticeable differences between men and women in relation to the subjective and cultural variables that are normally measured through surveys (Güell et al., 2005, 2012).

Thirdly, Chile is a country with widespread socioeconomic inequalities (Gini 2011 = 52, 0). This produces a strong impact on an individual’s perceptions and subjective orientations (Güell, 2012). The data presented here reveal the tendency of poorer individuals to focus on the Past-Negative and Present. This suggests that further studies on time should consider carefully the consequences of social inequality for the subjective experience of time. The impact of inequality on the images and experience of time, particularly of the future, is no longer limited to underdeveloped countries but has recently begun to have an effect on developed countries as well (Rosanvallon, 2012).

The ZTPI Chile in Comparison with Other Countries

The ZTPI has been applied and adapted to gauge the TPs of individuals in various countries (see Table 7). It has been applied not only in the United States (Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999) but also in countries such as Brazil (Milfont et al., 2008), Spain (Díaz Morales, 2006), Italy⁹ (D’Alessio et al., 2003), Great Britain (Boniwell et al., 2010), Lithuania (Liniauskaite and Kairys, 2009), Mexico (Corral et al., 2006), and Russia (Boniwell et al., 2010).

Table 7.

Zimbardo time perspective inventory comparisons.

Country	Year	N	Model Factors	Model Items	Alpha Factors Range	Explained Variance
Brazil	2008	247	5	38	0.46–0.67	–
Chile	2011	2535	4	9	0.40–0.58	62.18%
Spain	2006	756	5	56	0.64–0.80	33.82%
USA	1999	606	5	56	0.74–0.82	36%
Italy	2003	1507	3	22	0.49–0.67	30.8%
Great Britain	2010	179	5	56	0.68–0.79	–
Lithuania	2009	1529	5	56	0.63–0.79	34.7%
Mexico	2006	300	3	56	0.75–0.80	–
Russia	2010	289	5	56	0.64–0.78	–

In these studies the original five-factor model consisting of 56 items have been replicated, albeit with a few differences in the number of items per component (Boniwell et al., 2010; Díaz Morales, 2006; Liniauskaite and Kairys, 2009). However, there have also been cases where the model was constructed with fewer items (Milfont et al., 2008), fewer factors (Corral et al., 2006), or fewer factors and items (D’Alessio et al., 2003), as in Chile.

The findings in Chile tend to be quite similar to those throughout the world. There is an analogous tendency of groups composed of older respondents toward the Future (Corral et al., 2006; D’Alessio et al., 2003; Díaz Morales, 2006) as is the case in the higher socioeconomic classes (Milfont et al., 2008). However, there are also studies where youth are found to be more future oriented (Liniauskaite and Kairys, 2009) or where there are no significant differences in TPs among individuals related to age or gender (Boniwell et al., 2010). In spite of the consistency of certain tendencies worldwide, any possibility of comparing ZTPI models is restricted to the similarities between the resulting models.

A cultural approach to TPs in Chile

An individual’s orientation toward certain time frames is not an isolated or arbitrary fact, nor does it depend only on their objective position in the sociodemographic structure. As said by Wright Mills (1959) there is an intricate connection between individual lives and social history, even though sometimes individuals might assume this intersection without reflecting on it. From this perspective follows that an individual’s time orientation is part of a more general subjective and cultural constellation, which includes self-perception, their orientations toward others and toward society, their sense of belonging and their relevant practices. It could be argued that TPs are an interdependent variable within the constellation that defines an individual’s social identity. In order to explore the relationship that is established between the TPs of individuals in Chile and other variables that refer to perceptions, practices, and subjective attitudes, comparisons were made between the ZTPI and a series of cultural variables presented in the 2011 UNDP Human Development Report survey (Table 8). Comparisons were also made between the ZTPI Chile and the individuation index developed by UNDP-Chile. For each comparison, the level of significance of the correlations and their distribution were analyzed on the basis of contingency tables.

Table 8.

Time perspectives and cultural variables: significance levels and significant values.

2011 Human Development Report survey variables	Present	Past-Negative	Future	Past-Positive
Individuation Index	0.000	0.000	0.001	0.000
Individuation Index	Medium-high 19.5%	Low 19.3%	High 36.8%	High 35.2%
P4. All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life right now?	0.879	0.000	0.000	0.000
		Totally Dissatisfied 31.5%	Very Satisfied 37.2%	Extremely Satisfied 37.2%
P30. Which of the following best describes the activity that occupies most of your time?	0.000	0.000	0.005	0.565
	Stay-at-home worker 20.7%	Unemployed and looking for work 29.6%	Permanently employed 37.2%
P42. Regarding your salary and total family income, would you say that it is…?	0.001	0.000	0.000	0.001
	Not enough, experiencing difficulties 18.5%	Not enough, experiencing difficulties 23.5%	Enough, able to save 36.5%	Enough, able to save 33.7%
P50. How worried are you about your unpaid debts?	0.006	0.000	0.026	0.335
P50. How worried are you about your unpaid debts?	Very worried 19.0%	Very worried 19.5%	Not very worried 36.1%
P71. How defined would you say your future life plans and personal goals are?	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000
	Not at all 21.2%	Not well defined 22.9%	Very defined 37.8%	Very defined 32.7%
P74. Would you say you are worried about your future or do you feel confident about it?	0.000	0.000	0.025	0.000
	Very worried 22.5%	Quite worried 23.9%	Very confident 38.6%	Very confident 36.3%
P93. Would you say that the overall situation in the country today is better, the same, or worse than 10 years ago?	0.000	0.000	0.644	0.120
	Worse 19.6%	Worse 19.3%
P94. Overall, do you believe the situation in the country within the next 10 years…?	0.000	0.001	0.956	0.038
	Will get worse 21.4%	Will get worse 17.1%		Will get better 33.2%
P97. Regarding Chile’s current economic development, do you feel you are…?	0.191	0.002	0.078	0.000
		Loser 21.0%		Winner 33.7%
P101. Conflicts occur in all societies. What should be done about it?	0.159	0.496	0.378	0.000
				Let the conflicts reveal themselves so that problems can emerge 32.3%
P102. Which of the following statements do you most agree with? (forms of government)	0.033	0.262	0.703	0.021
	People like me don’t care if the government is democratic or authoritarian 19.6%			Democracy is preferable to any other form of government 32.0%
P103.1. I’m going to name a few organizations. In each case, can you tell me how much you trust them? Catholic Church	0.810	0.231	0.481	0.012
				Little trust 31.7%
P103.10. Social and citizens’ organizations	0.420	0.003	0.617	0.002
P103.10. Social and citizens’ organizations		Do not trust 19.1%		Fully trust 32.7%
P105.2. I would like to invite you to dream of the country you’d like to live in. Which of the following statements best describes what your dream is for Chile’s development? Second citation	0.007	0.079	0.472	0.715
	I dream of a country that provides more aid and social protection 18.4%
P115. Would you say that overall…? (trust in people)	0.825	0.036	0.777	0.293
P115. Would you say that overall…? (trust in people)		People cannot be trusted 18.8%
P119. Regarding friendship, would you say that…?	0.444	0.001	0.322	0.982
P119. Regarding friendship, would you say that…?		I don’t have friends, only acquaintances 20.3%
P132. Would you say you have free time on weekends?	0.098	0.013	0.236	0.175
P132. Would you say you have free time on weekends?		Hardly ever 21.4%
P137. Regarding your everyday life, how often do you feel overwhelmed or overburdened because you have too many commitments and demands?	0.003	0.191	0.276	0.007
	Hardly ever 19.3%			Very seldom 31.7%
P155. Are you a registered voter?	0.079	0.305	0.000	0.019
P155. Are you a registered voter?			Yes 35.6%	No 30.9%
P170. Of the following alternatives, which of the following socio-economic classes would you say you belong to?	0.717	0.002	0.713	0.001
		Lower 21.0%		Upper-middle class 43.8%

The data clearly illustrate the interdependence that TPs establish with other variables that define the subjective identity of individuals. There is a correlation with class self-positioning, the degree of individuation, subjective well-being, financial expectations, political ideologies, sociability practices, free time use and perception, associativity, interpersonal trust and trust in institutions, and the assessment of one’s own trajectory and that of the country.

This interdependence can be clearly observed in the individuation index.¹⁰ This embodies a phenomenon that, on the one hand, is an expression of a complex series of subjective variables and, on the other, has become a very important variable that could explain cultural differences among groups and individuals in modern societies. Different levels of individuation are closely associated with various TPs. Low individuation is prominently associated with the Past-Negative. This means that a negative memory of past experiences, the difficulty in overcoming them, and the lack of confidence in being able to revert them in the future is associated with a low sense of biographical agency and low normative autonomy. High individuation, meanwhile, is associated with the future and task planning and the importance given to them, as well as pleasant memories of the past. The fixation with the present is ambivalent from the perspective of individuation. It can be associated with a mid-level degree of individuation insofar as it is associated with a sense of indifference toward the future or with a high degree of individuation insofar as it rests on one’s self-confidence in being able to handle the contingencies of the present.

With regard to other more specific variables, Present-oriented individuals in Chile tend to perceive that their everyday lives are marked by financial problems associated with the lack of resources to cover household needs and the anxiety associated with the payment of debts. Furthermore, their future plans are not clearly defined and they see their future as a clear cause for concern. As for the view of the country, they consider that things are worse than 10 years ago and will continue to get worse, and yearn for a country that provides greater social assistance and protection, with greater opportunities.

The Past-Negative is associated in Chile with individuals who report low and medium-low degrees of individuation and considerable dissatisfaction with their lives, although this TP might not be productive of such dissatisfaction. They show similar traits to Present-oriented individuals in terms of financial difficulties associated with income and the payment of debts, uncertainty regarding lifestyle choices, and a pessimistic approach and little confidence in the future and in Chile’s development. At a personal level, Past-Negative-oriented individuals tend to see themselves as losers vis-à-vis Chile’s economic development, develop low levels of trust in social organizations and toward people, have few friends and tend to feel they have little free time on weekends. They generally perceive themselves as belonging to the lower socio-economic classes. The “elective affinity” between the Present and Past-Negative can be explained by the common subjective base and social experience of those who tend to ascribe to these TPs.

In contrast to the previous groups, Future-oriented individuals generally present medium-high and high levels of individuation. They enjoy a high level of subjective well-being. In financial terms, they generally perceive that their household income is enough to fulfill their needs. They tend to present high levels of definition of their future plans and a confident outlook on the future. The latter is associated with, for example, their tendency to participate in electoral processes.

Past-Positive-oriented individuals tend to present various similarities with Future-oriented individuals; for example, high levels of individuation and an overall perception of satisfaction with their lives and financial well-being. They generally feel confident about the future, which is reflected in the high levels of definition of their personal future goals and their optimistic view of Chile’s development. With regard to the public realm, they generally prefer democracy to other forms of government, tend to meet conflicts head-on, and develop high levels of trust in social and citizens’ organizations. As for their self-perception, they don’t feel anxiety regarding their commitments and demands of everyday life, they consider themselves winners vis-à-vis the country’s economic development, and belong to the higher socioeconomic classes. As opposed to the “elective affinity” that exists between the Past-Negative and the Present, a certain parallel can also be established between the Past-Positive and the Future.

Conclusion

The exploratory application in Chile of the ZTPI has proven to be useful in many ways. Firstly, it has established that an individual’s relationship with time is not necessarily and solely in line with the adaptation to an objective dimension that means the same to all individuals. There are significant qualitative differences in subjective time experiences (Zerubavel, 2003). Secondly, function and meaning are not solely psychologically constructed. Research has demonstrated that sociocultural forces play a key role in shaping them. Time is also a consequence of an experience within society and is a reflection of the social structure of that experience. The aforementioned correlations are consistent with other empirical studies on the social forms of segmentation of TPs, which demonstrates that in a country with high levels of inequality as Chile, the significance of time is also distributed according to social differences. Thirdly, the social segmentation of experiences is not only associated with objective sociodemographic variables such as age or status, but also with an individual’s subjective orientations. Cultural orientations are associated with the many ways individuals observe the social world and create their own self-image. Thus, the results indicate the importance of researching not only one’s sense of time and how to manage it, as studies on the use of time have done, but also demonstrate in what particular socially constructed time one lives in, what are the social structures produced and reproduced as a result of these time structures, and what their effects are at the level of the formation of an individual’s subjective identities. In spite of the methodological limitations of this exploratory application, adding the TP variable has proven to be a valid course for reconstructing the social function of time, understood as structures of socially constructed meaning.

In addition to its overall validity, the application of the ZTPI in Chile prompts new questions for debate that could help delve deeper into the field of time studies. Firstly, it would seem necessary to explicitly take into consideration the interdependence or bidirectionality of individual temporal perspectives and social factors. Following an examination of the numerous studies that apply the ZTPI, for example on the relationship between TPs and drug use, it is possible to observe that TPs are positioned almost exclusively as an independent variable. There are very few studies that analyze the correlation between the position in the sociodemographic structure and TPs. And there is an almost total absence of studies that take into consideration the independent function of cultural variables over TPs, such as political ideology or interpersonal trust.

Secondly, it would seem necessary to observe at the level of individuals not only their bias toward one or another TP, but the form and types of combinations among them. Empirically, even if they show a bias toward a specific TP, individuals have elements of all of them. Pure expressions of one perspective in particular are unusual. A complex theory of TPs should demonstrate the combinations between its various moments and appraisals. Several authors, among them Zimbardo, have attempted to address this by developing the Balanced Temporal Perspective (BTP) (Boniwell, 2005; Boniwell and Zimbardo, 2004; Boniwell et al., 2010; Drake et al., 2008; Zimbardo and Boyd, 1999). However, the BTP has a strong normative bias. The BTP has been associated with a normative ideal of an individual’s physical and mental health, and with an optimal condition for societal functioning. Together with this measurement, it is also necessary to conduct studies on the combinations that don’t point to its assessment in terms of ideals but in the explanation of the causes and social and mental function of each combination.

Thirdly, a hypothesis can be made that not only individuals have TPs, but that institutions also require and develop TPs. A company that sells life insurance needs to place emphasis on the future whereas the entertainment industry focuses on the present. Thus, interdependency is expected between “the times of society” and “the times of individuals” (Wright Mills, 1959). Studying their synchronicity or asynchronicity would seem fundamental to observe the dimension of time in modern life (Esposito, 2011; Flaherty, 1999; Nassehi, 2008).

Finally, the plausibility of the hypothesis regarding an “elective affinity” in Chile between the Past-Negative and the Present, as well as the unanticipated low association between the Present and pleasure, suggests that the Present, or the survey questions that resulted in the incidence of this factor, do not have the same meaning in every country. Not only are there differences in the distribution of TPs between one country and another but also in the meaning the different social and cultural groups assign to the time tenses. This not only provides interesting perspectives for research but also requires that a great deal of attention be paid to the intercultural validity of the indicators used to conduct research on time.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by Fondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico (grant number 1110402).

Notes

References

Adam

(1990) Time and Social Theory, Cambridge: Polity.

Aguirre R, García C and Carrasco C (2005) El tiempo, los tiempos. Una vara de Desigualdad. Serie Mujer y Desarrollo 65. Santiago: CEPAL.

Arriagada I (2005) Los límites del uso del tiempo: dificultades para las políticas de conciliación familia y trabajo. Reunión de Expertos de Políticas de Familia, Protección e Inclusión Sociales. Santiago: CEPAL.

Back

Gergen

(1963) Apocalyptic and serial time orientations and the structure of opinions. The Public Opinion Quarterly 27: 427–442.

Boniwell I (2005) Beyond time management: how the latest research on time perspective and perceived time use can assist clients with time-related concerns. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring 3(2): 61–74.

Boniwell I and Zimbardo P (2004) Balancing time perspective in pursuit of optimal functioning. In: Linley P A and Joseph S (eds) Positive Psychology in Practice. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, pp.165–178.

Boniwell

Osin

Linley

, et al. (2010) A question of balance: Time perspective and well-being in British and Russian samples. The Journal of Positive Psychology 5: 24–40.

Catalán C (1998) Tiempos de consumo en medios de comunicación y tecnologías de la información. Informe final Proyecto FONDECYT N°1980857. Santiago.

Chernus

(2011) Aging and the experience of “remembered” time: A biopsychological exploration. Time and Society 20: 325–345.

10.

CIMMA Group (2004) Encuesta de uso del tiempo, Santiago de Chile: CIMA Group.

11.

Corral

Fraijo

Pinheiro

(2006) Sustainable behavior and time perspective: Present, past and future orientations and their relationship with water conservation behavior. Revista Interamericana de Psicología 40: 139–147.

12.

D’Alessio

Guarino

De Pascalis

, et al. (2003) Testing Zimbardo’ s stanford time perspective inventory (STPI) – Short form. An Italian study. Time and Society 12: 333–347.

13.

Dally

(1996) Family & Times. Keeping Pace in a Hurried Culture, Thousand Oaks: Sage.

14.

Díaz Morales

(2006) Estructura factorial y fiabilidad del Inventario de Perspectiva Temporal de Zimbardo. Psicothema 18: 565–571.

15.

Dirección del Trabajo (2007) ENCLA 2006, Resultados de la quinta encuesta laboral, Santiago: Dirección del Trabajo.

16.

DOMOS, SERNAM and Universidad Bolivariana (2007) Valorización del trabajo doméstico no remunerado: Encuesta uso de tiempo, Inédito.

17.

Drake L, Duncan E, Sutherland F, et al. (2008) Time perspective and correlates of wellbeing. Time and Society 17(1): 47–61.

18.

Durkheim

(1982) Las formas elementales de la vida religiosa, Madrid: Akal/Universitaria.

19.

Ely

Mercurio

(2011) Time perspective and individual memory: Individual and gender differences in experiencing time and remembering the past. Time and Society 20: 375–400.

20.

Esposito

(2011) The Future of Futures. The Time of Money in Financing and Society, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

21.

Evans-Pritchard

(1939) The Nuer time reckoning. Africa 12: 189–216.

22.

Ferrandi

Valette-Florence

Prime

(2000) Linking Personal Values and Time Orientations: The Case of the Attitude Towards Cellular Phone in France and Germany, Venezia: Ms. Universitá Ca'Foscari.

23.

Flaherty

(1999) A Watched Pot: How We Experience Time, New York: New York University Press.

24.

Fraisse

(1963) The Psychology of Time, Westport, CT: Greenwood.

25.

Gell

(1996) The Anthropology of Time, Oxford: Berg.

26.

Güell

(2012) La producción de la desigualdad: orden, discurso, subjetividad. In: Lezcano

Guerra

Nolasco

(eds) Estudos de Linguagens: Diversidade e Ensino, Sao Paulo: Pedro e Joao Editores, pp. 223–240.

27.

Güell

Frei

Godoy

(2005) El consumo cultural y la vida cotidiana: algunas hipótesis empíricas. In: Catalán

Torche

(eds) Consumo cultural en Chile. Miradas y perspectivas, Santiago: INE, CNCA, pp. 77–88.

28.

Güell

Peters

Morales

(2012) Individuación y consumo cultural: las afinidades electivas. In: Güell

Peters

(eds) La trama social de las prácticas culturales, Santiago de Chile: Ediciones Universidad Alberto Hurtado, pp. 21–49.

29.

Hassan

Purser

(2007) 24/7 Time and Temporality in the Network Society, Stanford: Stanford University Press.

30.

Honneth

(2004) Organized self-realization: Some paradoxes of individualization. European Journal of Social Theory 7: 463–478.

31.

INE (2008) Encuesta experimental sobre el uso del tiempo en el Gran Santiago, Santiago: INE.

32.

James

(1963) Principles of Psychology, Chicago: Great Books.

33.

Jiménez

(2005) El consumo cultural y el uso del tiempo. In: Catalán

Torche

(eds) Consumo cultural en Chile. Miradas y Perspectivas, Santiago: INE, CNCA, pp. 89–102.

34.

Keough

Zimbardo

Boyd

(1999) Who’s smoking, drinking, and using drugs? Time perspective as predictor of substance use. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 21: 149–164.

35.

Gentry

(1991) The development of time measures for use in cross-cultural research. Advances in Consumer Research 18: 135–141.

36.

Kluckhohn

Strodtbeck

(1961) Variation in Value Orientations, Evanston: Row and Peterson.

37.

Kruger

Reischl

Zimmerman

(2008) Time perspective as mechanism for functional developmental adaptation. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology 2: 1–22.

38.

Kwinter

(2003) Architectures of Time. Toward a Theory of the Events in Modernist Culture, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

39.

Lewin

(1951) Field Theory in Social Sciences, New York: Harper & Brothers.

40.

Liniauskaite

Kairys

(2009) The Lithuanian versión of the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI). Psichologija 40: 66–87.

41.

McGrath

Tschan

(2004) Temporal Matters in Social Psychology: Examining the Role of Time in the Lives of Groups and Individuals, Washington: American Psychological Association.

42.

McInnerney

(2004) A discussion for future time perspective. Educational Psychology Review 16: 141–151.

43.

Mello

Worrell

(2006) The relationship of time perspective to age, gender and academic achievement among academic talented adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted 29: 271–289.

44.

Milfont

Andrade

Belo

, et al. (2008) Testing Zimbardo time perspective inventory in a Brazilian sample. Revista Interamericana de Psicología 42: 49–58.

45.

Nassehi

(2008) Die Zeit der Gesellschaft. Auf dem Weg zu einer soziologischen Theorie der Zeit, Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.

46.

Nowotny

(2005) Time, Modern and Postmodern Experience, Cambridge: Polity Press.

47.

Phan

(2009) Future time perspective in sociocultural contexts: A discussion paper. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology 7: 761–778.

48.

Riquelme V (1999) El tiempo de trabajo. Temas Laborales N° 11. Santiago: Dirección del Trabajo.

49.

Roberts

(2004) Biography, time and history-making. Rethinking History 8: 89–102.

50.

Rojas I (1998) El tiempo de trabajo y los descansos. Cuaderno de Investigación 6. Santiago: Departamento de Estudios de la Dirección del Trabajo.

51.

Rosa

(2011) Aceleración social: consecuencias éticas y políticas de una sociedad de alta velocidad desincronizada. Persona y Sociedad 25: 9–50.

52.

Rosanvallon

(2012) La sociedad de iguales, Buenos Aires: Editorial Manantial.

53.

Rothspan

Read

(1996) Present versus future time perspective and HIV risk among heterosexual college students. Health Psychology 15(2): 131–134.

54.

Sorokin

Merton

(1937) Social time: A methodological and functional analysis. American Journal of Sociology 42: 615–629.

55.

Stolarski

Bitner

Zimbardo

(2011) Time perspective, emotional intelligence and discounting of delayed awards. Time and Society 20: 346–363.

56.

Subercaseaux

(2011) Historia de las ideas y de la cultura en Chile Vol I, Santiago: Editorial Universitaria.

57.

UNDP (2002) Informe de Desarrollo Humano 2002. Nosotros Los Chilenos: Un Desafío Cultural, Santiago: UNDP.

58.

UNDP (2009) Informe de Desarrollo Humano 2009. La Manera de Hacer las Cosas, Santiago: UNDP.

59.

UNDP (2010) Informe de Desarrollo Humano 2010. Género: Los Desafíos de la Igualdad, Santiago: UNDP.

60.

Valderrama

(2011) ¿Qué es lo contemporáneo? Actualidad del tiempo histórico. Utopías del presente, Santiago: Ediciones Universidad Finis Terrae.

61.

Valenzuela

Herrera

(2006) Tiempo, trabajo y familia. In: Valenzuela

Tironi

Scully

(eds) El eslabón perdido. Familia, modernización y bienestar en Chile, Santiago: Taurus.

62.

Van Beek

Berghuis

Kerkhof

, et al. (2011) Time perspective, personality and psychopathology: Zimbardo’s time perspective inventory in psychiatry. Time and Society 20: 364–374.

63.

Vatter

Ruiz

(2011) Política y Acontecimiento, Santiago: FCE.

64.

Wright Mills

(1959) The Sociological Imagination, New York: Oxford University Press.

65.

Zerubavel

(1981) Hidden Rhythms. Schedules and Calendars in Social Life, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

66.

Zerubavel

(2003) Time Maps. Collective Memory and the Social Shape of the Past, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

67.

Zimbardo

Boyd

(1999) Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77: 1271–1288.

68.

Zimbardo

Holman

(2009) The social language of time: the time perspective – social network connection. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 31: 136–147.