The Decline of Traditional Filipino Values Across Generations: A Basis for Values Revitalization Plan

This study examined the extent to which traditional Filipino values—specifically Bayanihan (community cooperation), Pakikisama (social harmony), Utang na loob (debt of gratitude), and Hiya (sense of propriety)—were practiced across four generational cohorts (Baby Boomers, Generation X, Generation Y, and Generation Z) in the Municipality of Tayug, Pangasinan, Philippines. A descriptive-comparative research design was employed with 421 respondents. CHAID classification tree analysis and MANOVA were used to identify socio-demographic predictors and assess generational differences. Results revealed that Bayanihan experienced the most pronounced generational decline, with Baby Boomers showing significantly stronger practice than younger cohorts. Utang na loob exhibited moderate generational differences, while Pakikisama and Hiya demonstrated remarkable resilience across all cohorts. Multivariate analysis (Pillai's Trace = 0.120, F(4, 414) = 4.334, p = .000) confirmed a statistically significant overall effect of generational cohort on the combined practice of traditional Filipino values. Among socio-demographic predictors, only generational cohort and religion emerged as statistically significant. These findings indicate that while some traditional Filipino values are being reinterpreted rather than abandoned—particularly among Generation Z, who express bayanihan digitally and pakikisama online—others, especially bayanihan, are experiencing genuine generational decline. A Values Revitalization Program is proposed to sustain these cultural practices within academic institutions, communities, and across generational groups.

Filipino values, generational cohorts, bayanihan, hiya

1. Agbayani, A. (1992). Filipino American families and cultural values. Social Work, 37(5), 454–460. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Aguas, J. J. S. (2016). The Filipino value of pakikipagkapwa-tao vis-à-vis Gabriel Marcel's notion of creative fidelity and disponibilité. Kritika Kultura, 27, 183–208. https://doi.org/10.13185/KK2016.02710 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Alampay, L. P. (2014). Parenting in the Philippines. In H. Selin (Ed.), Parenting Across Cultures (pp. 105–121). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7503-9_8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other 'authoritarian personality.' Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 47–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60382-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Arkorful, V. E., & Awaah, F. (2022). Generational differences in the workplace: Theoretical underpinnings and implications. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 30(2), 431–445. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-11-2020-2476 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469–480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Asis, M. M. B. (2006). The Philippines' culture of migration. Migration Information Source. Migration Policy Institute. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/philippines-culture-migration [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2002). Individualization: Institutionalized individualism and its social and political consequences. Sage. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Best, J. W., & Kahn, J. V. (2006). Research in education (10th ed.). Pearson. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Breen, R., & Goldthorpe, J. H. (1997). Explaining educational differentials: Towards a formal rational action theory. Rationality and Society, 9(3), 275–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/104346397009003002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Bulatao, R. A. (2003). Family influences on fertility, mortality, and migration in the Philippines. RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1659.html [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Bulloch, H. C. M. (2021). Personifying progress: Negotiating autonomy, obligation and intergenerational aspirations in the Philippines. The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology, 22(5), 414–433. https://doi.org/10.1080/14442213.2021.1967437 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Caprara, G. V., Schwartz, S. H., Capanna, C., Vecchione, M., & Barbaranelli, C. (2006). Personality and politics: Values, traits, and political choice. Political Psychology, 27(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2006.00447.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Cenizal, M. (2019). Changes in hiya over time: A cross-sectional study on the causes and effects of the natural progression of the Filipino value of hiya across generations [Undergraduate thesis]. De La Salle University. https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/etd_bachelors/2979/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Cherlin, A. J. (2004). The deinstitutionalization of American marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66(4), 848–861. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00058.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Chodorow, N. J. (1999). The reproduction of mothering: Psychoanalysis and the sociology of gender (2nd ed.). University of California Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Church, A. T., & Katigbak, M. S. (2002). Studying personality traits across cultures: Philippine examples. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 4(4). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1039 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Church, A. T., Katigbak, M. S., & Reyes, J. A. S. (1998). Further exploration of Filipino personality structure using the lexical approach: Do the Big-Five or Big-Seven dimensions emerge? European Journal of Personality, 12(4), 249–269. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0984(199807/08)12:4<249::AID-PER312>3.0.CO;2-T [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Cleofas, J. A. (2019). Towards a practical and empirically grounded account of útang-na-loób as a Filipino virtue. Kritika Kultura, 33/34, 156–179. https://doi.org/10.13185/kk2020.03308 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Cornelio, J. S. (2016). Being Catholic in the contemporary Philippines: Young people reinterpreting religion. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315543031 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Croll, E. (2006). China's new consumers: Social development and domestic demand. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. De Guzman, A. B., & Tan, E. D. (2007). Filipino college students' differential perceptions of the batang-bata (child) metaphor in gerontological care-giving context. Educational Gerontology, 33(4), 275–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601270601161568 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Enriquez, V. G. (1992). From colonial to liberation psychology: The Philippine experience. University of the Philippines Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Enriquez, V. G. (1994). Pagbabagong-dangal: Indigenous psychology and cultural empowerment. Pugad Lawin Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Fischer, R., & Schwartz, S. H. (2011). Whence differences in value priorities? Individual, cultural, or artifactual sources. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(7), 1127–1144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022110381429 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2019). How to design and evaluate research in education (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Fukuyama, F. (1999). The great disruption: Human nature and the reconstitution of social order. Free Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Ghazal Read, J. (2004). Family, religion, and work among Arab American women. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66(4), 1042–1050. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00076.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Gordon, M. M. (1964). Assimilation in American life: The role of race, religion, and national origins. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Graziano, W. G., & Eisenberg, N. (1997). Agreeableness: A dimension of personality. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 795–824). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012134645-4/50031-7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Haller, M., & Hadler, M. (2006). How social relations and structures can produce happiness and unhappiness: An international comparative analysis. Social Indicators Research, 75(2), 169–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-004-6297-y [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Hechanova, M. R. M., & Franco, E. P. (2018). Leading Philippine organizations: A research-based guide. Ateneo de Manila University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Heyneman, S. P. (2003). The history and problems in the making of education policy at the World Bank 1960–2000. International Journal of Educational Development, 23(3), 315–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0738-0593(02)00053-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Sage. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies. Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Inglehart, R., & Baker, W. E. (2000). Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of traditional values. American Sociological Review, 65(1), 19–51. https://doi.org/10.2307/2657288 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Inglehart, R., & Norris, P. (2003). Rising tide: Gender equality and cultural change around the world. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511550362 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy: The human development sequence. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Jocano, F. L. (1997). Filipino value system: A cultural definition. PUNLAD Research House. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Jocano, F. L. (1999). Filipino social organization: Traditional kinship and family organization. PUNLAD Research House. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Jocano, F. L. (2001). Filipino worldview: Ethnography of local knowledge. PUNLAD Research House. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 102–138). Guilford Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Jones, G. W. (2012). Late marriage and low fertility in Singapore: The limits of policy. The Japanese Journal of Population, 10(1), 89–101. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Jose, J., Parker, M., Lucy, S., Clere, T., & Montecillo, A. (2024). Filipino American patient perceptions of culturally concordant healthcare interactions. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 35(2), 112–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/10436596231221398 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Koroleva, I., & Ginta, D. (2023). Intergenerational value transmission: Family, school, and society. European Journal of Educational Research, 12(1), 219–233. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.12.1.219 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Lareau, A. (2011). Unequal childhoods: Class, race, and family life (2nd ed.). University of California Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Lasquety-Reyes, J. (2016). In defense of hiya as a Filipino virtue. Asian Philosophy, 26(1), 66–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/09552367.2015.1136203 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Lesthaeghe, R. (2010). The unfolding story of the second demographic transition. Population and Development Review, 36(2), 211–251. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2010.00328.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Madrona, D., Cabahug, M. M., & Empuerto, E. F. (2023). The values of Filipino millennials and Zoomers. PsychEd Journal, 14, 328–333. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409777 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. McCrae, R. R. (1996). Social consequences of experiential openness. Psychological Bulletin, 120(3), 323–337. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.120.3.323 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2003). Personality in adulthood: A Five-Factor Theory perspective (2nd ed.). Guilford Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. Medina, B. T. G. (2001). The Filipino family (2nd ed.). University of the Philippines Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. Melegrito, M. L. F. (2019). The virtue of loób: Retrieving the Filipino moral self. Kritike: An Online Journal of Philosophy, 13(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.25138/13.1.a1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

57. Mendoza, S. L., & Cruz, J. M. (2023). Bayanihan reimagined: Community solidarity in post-pandemic Philippines. Philippine Sociological Review, 71(1), 45–70. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

58. Mendoza, S. L., & Melegrito, M. L. F. (2018). Kapwa and the Filipino ethical self. Asian Philosophy, 28(2), 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/09552367.2018.1444789 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

59. Meza, I. (2020). The role of religion in shaping political and social attitudes across generations. Sociology of Religion, 81(3), 289–311. https://doi.org/10.1093/socrel/sraa013 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

60. National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA). (2020). Filipino values and cultural identity. NCCA Publications. https://ncca.gov.ph/about-culture-and-arts/culture-profile/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

61. Nisbet, E. C., Markowitz, E. M., & Kotcher, J. E. (2015). Winning the conversation: Framing and moral messaging in the climate change debate. In A. Hansen & R. Cox (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of environment and communication (pp. 284–295). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

62. Norris, P., & Inglehart, R. (2011). Sacred and secular: Religion and politics worldwide (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511894862 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

63. Pe-Pua, R., & Protacio-Marcelino, E. (2000). Sikolohiyang Pilipino (Filipino psychology): A legacy of Virgilio G. Enriquez. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 3(1), 49–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-839X.00054 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

64. Pertierra, R. (2010). The anthropology of the new media in the Philippines. Institute of Philippine Culture, Ateneo de Manila University. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

65. Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674369542 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

66. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon & Schuster. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

67. Putnam, R. D., & Campbell, D. E. (2010). American grace: How religion divides and unites us. Simon & Schuster. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

68. Reyes, J. (2002). The Filipino concept of pagkatao and pakikiramdam. Philippine Studies, 50(3), 363–386. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

69. Reyes, J. (2015). Loób and kapwa: An introduction to a Filipino virtue ethics. Asian Philosophy, 25(2), 148–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/09552367.2015.1043173 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

70. Roccas, S., Sagiv, L., Schwartz, S. H., & Knafo, A. (2002). The Big Five personality factors and personal values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(6), 789–801. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202289008 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

71. Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

72. Samaco, R. L. (2021). Intergenerational transmission of Filipino values in contemporary families. Philippine Journal of Education, 100(2), 55–72. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

73. Saroglou, V. (2002). Religion and the five factors of personality: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Individual Differences, 32(1), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00233-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

74. Schwartz, S. H., Melech, G., Lehmann, A., Burgess, S., & Harris, M. (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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022101032005001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

75. Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2017). The next Big Five Inventory (BFI-2): Developing and assessing a hierarchical model with 15 facets to enhance bandwidth, fidelity, and predictive power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(1), 117–143. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000096 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

76. Stark, R., & Finke, R. (2000). Acts of faith: Explaining the human side of religion. University of California Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

77. Strauss, W., & Howe, N. (1991). Generations: The history of America's future, 1584 to 2069. William Morrow. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

78. Tablan, F. (2021). Filipino virtue ethics and meaningful work. Humanities Bulletin, 4(1), 20–40. https://philarchive.org/archive/TABFVE [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

79. Thornton, A. (2005). Reading history sideways: The fallacy and enduring impact of the developmental paradigm on family life. University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

80. Thornton, A., & Young-DeMarco, L. (2001). Four decades of trends in attitudes toward family issues in the United States. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(4), 1009–1037. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.01009.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

81. Torres, F. L. (2014). Pakikisama and organizational behavior in Filipino workplaces. Philippine Management Review, 21, 77–93. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

82. Triandis, H. C. (2001). Individualism-collectivism and personality. Journal of Personality, 69(6), 907–924. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.696169 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

83. Tuason, M. T., Taylor, A. R., Rollings, L., Harris, T., & Martin, C. (2007). On both sides of the hyphen: Exploring the Filipino-American identity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(4), 362–372. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.54.4.362 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

84. Turkle, S. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. Basic Books. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

85. Twenge, J. M., Martin, G. N., & Spitzberg, B. H. (2019). Trends in U.S. adolescents' media use, 1976–2016: The rise of digital media, decline of TV, and the (near) demise of print. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 8(4), 329–345. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000203 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

86. Wallace, A. F. C. (1956). Revitalization movements. American Anthropologist, 58(2), 264–281. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1956.58.2.02a00040 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

87. Wilcox, W. B., & Lerman, R. I. (2021). For richer, for poorer: How family structures economic success in America. American Enterprise Institute. https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/for-richer-for-poorer-how-family-structures-economic-success-in-america/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

88. Zoleta, C. (2022). Income classification in the Philippines: What class do you belong to? Based on Philippine Institute for Development Studies data. MoneyMax / PIDS. https://pids.gov.ph/publication/discussion-papers [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study