跨文化判断与决策(英文)

本文对判断和决策研究领域所发现的跨文化差异进行了回顾。鉴于大多数判断和决策的跨文化研究都集中于对亚洲和西方文化的比较,本文也主要关注这方面的研究发现。具体来说,本文回顾了在概率判断及信心、风险知觉、冒险行为、消费者行为以及经济判断和决策中所存在的跨文化差异。综述结果表明尽管亚洲人和西方人的判断和决策行为存在很大的跨文化差异,研究也发现了显著的文化内差异。目前关于判断和决策的跨文化差异的研究还相对匮乏,未来还需要更多的研究来进一步了解判断和决策行为的跨文化差别及机制。     

随机支持模型:青少年主观概率校准的特点

随机支持模型试图以假设支持为随机变量的方式描述主观概率的校准。采用随机配对的60个中国城市户籍人口的比较任务验证了该模型对初中、高中和大学生的适用性。研究还表明青少年主观概率校准的发展特点:青少年的正确率随年龄的增长而提高;主观概率判断(信心)不同年龄有显著差异,大学生信心最强,其次是初中生、再次是高中生;大学生主观概率判断的极端性最强,其次是初中生,再次是高中生;青少年的主观概率校准是过度自信的。     

学习困难与一般初中生过度自信特点的比较

采用比较研究的实验范式,从偏离校准、优于常人、控制错觉和过分乐观三个效应上比较学习困难初中生和一般初中生的过度自信特点。结果显示:(1)在"偏离校准"效应上,学习困难初中生在困难任务中和学习一般初中生同样存在过度自信的认知偏差,但在简单任务中则存在不自信。(2)在"优于常人"效应上,学习困难初中生和学习一般初中生都存在过度自信的认知偏差。简单任务中,他们认为自己"优于常人",而困难任务中,他们认为自己"差于常人"。(3)在"控制错觉和过分乐观"效应上,学习困难初中生和学习一般初中生都存在过度自信的认知偏差。男生比女生的过度自信程度更大。     

过度自信的跨文化差异

过度自信是指个体过高地估计自身判断的精确度,其经典的研究范式是常识问题及常识问题的变式现实情境问题。使用常识问题的研究一致发现,东方人显著比西方人更过度自信;使用现实情景问题的研究则发现,西方人比东方人更过度自信或两者无显著性差异。对“东方人比西方人过度自信”的解释包括认知习惯和教育系统两种主流观点。最后对出现不同研究结果的原因进行讨论,并进一步探讨解释的有效性和“西方人比东方人过度自信”的原因。     

跨文化（中国人）个性测量表青少年版（CPAI-A）的香港标准化研究 ——兼顾文化共通性与特殊性的人格测量

以跨文化（中国人）个性测量表（CPAI-2）的成人版为基础,综合运用文化共通性（etic）和文化特殊性（emic）方法发展了相应的青少年版个性测量工具——CPAI-A,并在香港青少年人群中进行了标准化研究。结果表明CPAI-A有良好的信度和清晰的因素结构。文章从理论和实证两方面深入分析了学界日益关注的从青少年到成人人格的发展性与稳定性问题,以及人格特质评估的文化共通性与特殊性问题。最后建议CPAI-A量表发展的历程可能是融合本土化与跨文化人格评估发展过程中一条非常值得借鉴的思路     

Linda问题：“齐当别”抉择模型的解释

大量有关人类归因判断的研究表明,人类经常违反理性概率公理。Tversky和Kahneman（1983）使用Linda问题等特定场景的研究发现,人们系统性地表现出违反理性推断标准,判断合取事件发生概率大于其组成事件发生概率,称之为合取谬误,并用人们使用代表性启发式判断概率来解释该现象产生的原因。然而使用启发式观点对合取谬误现象进行解释过于模糊不清。该文首先介绍了合取谬误现象及其解释模型,然后应用Li（1994,2004）提出的不确定情形下决策理论——“齐当别”抉择模型对Linda问题中合取谬误产生的原因进行了新的解释     

跨越文化的中西美学比较

比较视野中的中西美学研究 ,暗示着一条新的途径 ,一条旨在追求美学进一步发展、创新与超越的途径。我所理解的比较视野 ,在很大程度上不局限于单纯的美学理论向度 ,而是一种跨越文化式的比较研究。如果以此为出发点 ,就有可能导引出一种跨越文化的美学(ｔｒａｎｓｃｕｌｔｕｒａｌａｅｓｔｈｅｔｉｃｓ) ,或简称为“跨文化美学” (ｔｒａｎｓ ａｅｓｔｈｅｔｉｃｓ)。跨文化美学中的“ｔｒａｎｓ ” ,本身包含着“跨越”或“超越”的内在目的性 ,需要一种在跨文化形态中进行系统而深入的比较研究意识 ,不仅涉及西方与东方 ,也涉及现代与传…     

用文字概率衡量不确定性：特征和问题

文字概率是衡量不确定性的方式之一, 即人们使用诸如“也许”、“未必”的词汇来描述特定事件发生的可能性。文字概率不同于数字概率, 主要体现在文字概率的模糊性、非概率运算性和语义特性上。这使得相对于数字概率, 用文字概率衡量不确定性既有优势也有问题, 进而对人们的不确定信息沟通和风险决策造成影响。虽然文字概率与数字概率存在特征上的差异并且人们在日常交流中偏爱文字概率, 但是大部分风险领域的研究却仅局限于数字概率, 今后有必要研究使用文字概率测量的风险决策。在已有文字概率特征研究的基础上, 还可以进一步探究其不同于数字概率的其它特征(文字/数字概率与双系统模型的联系、文字概率的跨文化差异等)及其对风险决策的影响。     

跨文化的实证法学研究：文化心理学的挑战与贡献

跨文化的实证法学研究把文化心理学的理论突破和心理学的实证方法引入到对法学基本原理的研究之中。文化心理学研究中发现的东西方文化在价值定向、道德判断和思维方式等方面的差异能够给跨文化实证法学研究带来重要的启示。在对一些重要法律问题的认识上, 例如法律中的因果关系和责任的判定、合同形成以及纠纷调解等方面, 跨文化心理学研究已经发现了显著的跨文化差异, 这些差异可能会影响到不同文化背景的人对法的认识、法的建设以及法律的应用。我们认为跨文化的实证法学研究不仅可以为法学研究提供一条新的研究路径, 更主要的是还可以为中国法学研究的国际化和国际法律纠纷提供理论指导。     

过分自信的进化模型

过分自信有狭义和广义之分, 狭义的过分自信是指人们对自身绝对水平的高估, 使得对自己的评价优于实际水平, 广义的过分自信是一种非理性的过于优化的估计, 还包括对自身相对水平的高估。基于进化心理学理论和生态理性假设提出的进化模型认为, 过分自信是一种快速启发式认知策略, 在适应和生存中具有优势, 是进化选择的结果。根据对个体知觉偏差的不同假设, 进化模型分为二项式模型和正态模型, 都得出了一致的研究结论。与过分自信的自我提升理论、权重差异理论和信息差异理论相比较, 进化模型具有许多优点, 但也存在一些不足, 需要进一步对其进行探讨和检验。     

Cross-Cultural Variations in Probability Judgment Accuracy: Beyond General Knowledge Overconfidence?

Previous studies have revealed surprising and persistent cross-cultural variations in overconfidence, whereby respondents in some Asian cultures (e.g., Chinese) exhibit markedly higher degrees of overconfidence than respondents in other cultures (e.g., in the United States and Japan). Most of those demonstrations have entailed general knowledge tasks (e.g., answering questions such as whether Europe is larger than Australia). The present studies sought to determine whether such cross-cultural variations extend to judgments about the kinds of events that bear upon more common practical decisions and to aspects of accuracy other than overconfidence. Subjects in Taiwan, Japan, and the United States made probabilistic differential diagnoses of fictional diseases in a stochastic artificial ecology. Results revealed that previously observed cross-cultural variations do indeed generalize. The data were also informative about several potential accounts for such variations, e.g., arguing against a proposal that they rest on different emphases on discrimination rather than calibration, but consistent with the influences of culture-specific cognitive customs, including responsiveness to explicitly displayed information, regardless of its presumed validity.     

Culture and Probability Judgment Accuracy: The Influence of Holistic Reasoning

A well-established phenomenon in the judgment and decision-making tradition is the overconfidence one places in the amount of knowledge that one possesses. Overconfidence or probability judgment accuracy varies not only individually but also across cultures. However, research efforts to explain cross-cultural variations in the overconfidence phenomenon have seldom been made. In Study 1, the authors compared the probability judgment accuracy of U.S. Americans (N = 108) and Mexican participants (N = 100). In Study 2, they experimentally primed culture by randomly assigning English/Spanish bilingual Mexican Americans (N = 195) to response language. Results of both studies replicated the cross-cultural variation of probability judgment accuracy previously observed in other cultural groups. U.S. Americans displayed less overconfidence when compared to Mexicans. These results were then replicated in bilingual participants, when culture was experimentally manipulated with language priming. Holistic reasoning did not account for the cross-cultural variation of overconfidence. Suggestions for future studies are discussed.     

Personality dimensions across cultures

In order to generalize the dimensional structure of personality-relatively independent groups of covarying traits-across languages and cultures, a large number of cultures must be studied. Until recently only a few worldwide personality datasets have been available. The first large-scale studies indicate that the pattern of covariation between personality traits is universal and is relatively easily generalizable across languages and cultures. In contrast to the structure of personality, the comparison of the mean trait scores across cultures is much more problematic because cross-cultural differences turned out to be very small in their magnitude, about one-third of the magnitude of individual differences within culture. More integral (e.g., the similarity between personality profiles) or subtle (e.g., the disparity between positively and negatively worded items) measures can reveal more systematic relationships with relevant socioeconomic and geographic variables than the mean scores themselves. Relatively modest sizes of cross-cultural differences in the mean values may imply that a reasonable scalar equivalence can be achieved, and all individuals, irrespective of their language and culture, can be represented in a common metric.     

The structure of goal contents across 15 cultures

The authors investigated the structure of goal contents in a group of 1,854 undergraduates from 15 cultures around the world. Results suggested that the 11 types of goals the authors assessed were consistently organized in a circumplex fashion across the 15 cultures. The circumplex was well described by positioning 2 primary dimensions underlying the goals: intrinsic (e.g., self-acceptance, affiliation) versus extrinsic (e.g., financial success, image) and self-transcendent (e.g., spirituality) versus physical (e.g., hedonism). The circumplex model of goal contents was also quite similar in both wealthier and poorer nations, although there were some slight cross-cultural variations. The relevance of these results for several theories of motivation and personality are discussed.     

Gender and culture differences in emotion

In this article, the authors report a secondary analysis on a cross-cultural dataset on gender differences in 6 emotions, collected in 37 countries all over the world. The aim was to test the universality of the gender-specific pattern found in studies with Western respondents, namely that men report more powerful emotions (e.g., anger), whereas women report more powerless emotions (e.g., sadness, fear). The authors expected the strength of these gender differences to depend on women's status and roles in their respective countries, as operationalized by the Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM; United Nations Development Programme Human Development Report 2002). Overall, the gender-specific pattern of women reporting to experience and express more powerless emotions and men more powerful emotions was replicated, and only some interactions with the GEM were found.     

Culture and Probability Judgment

Many, if not most, real-life decisions depend heavily on judgments, which are opinions as to what was, is, or will be the state of some relevant aspect of the world. Thus, for instance, physicians’ medical treatment decisions are often predicated on judgments as to the true cause of the patient’s symptoms, and jurors’ verdicts rest on their beliefs about whether the defendant actually committed the crime in question. Studies have shown that the kinds of judgments that inform people’s decisions can differ substantially and surprisingly according to the cultural backgrounds (e.g., Chinese versus Japanese versus American) of those rendering the judgments, particularly judgments expressed as probabilities (e.g., “There’s a 75% chance that that will happen”). This article reviews major cultural variations in key characteristics of probability judgments (e.g., their overconfidence) and why those differences exist. It also discusses the theoretical and practical implications of the findings, including for collaborations among decision makers from distinct cultures.     

Holistic reasoning on the other side of the world: validation of the analysis-holism scale in Mexicans

The universality of cognitive processes has been called into question. Research suggests that individuals from Eastern cultures (e.g., China, Korea) when compared to individuals from Western cultures (e.g., the United States) prefer to reason holistically. This line of research has not been extended to cultural groups far removed from cultures traditionally surveyed in cross-cultural research such as Hispanics. We conducted two studies to understand: 1) the generalizability of the construct of holistic reasoning in Mexicans, and 2) the preferred reasoning style of Mexicans when compared to U.S. Americans. Results support the generalization of the factor structure of holistic reasoning as originally hypothesized by Choi, Koo, and Choi (2007). The results of Study 2 suggest that Mexicans scored higher than U.S. Americans on certain aspects of holistic reasoning.     

Examining Cross-Cultural Differences in Academic Faking in 41 Nations

This study examines cross-cultural differences in students’ academic faking (indicated by claiming to have impossible knowledge about mathematical concepts) by relating data from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) to the comprehensive cultural framework of the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) project. Data of N = 233,428 students from 41 countries showed a substantial amount of variance in academic faking between cultures. Students’ academic faking was positively related to the cultural dimensions of gender egalitarianism, humane orientation, and in-group collectivism. Additionally, the similarity between female and male students’ academic faking was slightly greater in more gender-egalitarian cultures than in less gender-egalitarian cultures. Thus, educational stakeholders (e.g., teachers, principals, and policy-makers) should be made aware of cross-cultural differences in academic faking because faking gives fakers an unfair advantage.     

A Cross-Cultural and Developmental Analysis of Self-Esteem in Chinese and Western Children

In this review, we examine the construct of self-esteem from a cross-cultural perspective in Chinese and Western children and adolescents. We also explore the role of childrearing practices in the development of self-esteem in these different cultures. In doing so, we first review the concepts of emic (i.e., variations in patterns of behavior within a given culture) and etic research (i.e., variations in common patterns of behavior or activities across cultures). Then, we invoke Berry's notions of “imposed-etic” and “derived-etic” approaches (J. Berry, 1989) in understanding crucial cross-cultural differences that are evident in the literature. We pose basic questions such as: (1) What does self-esteem “look” like in Chinese children? (2) How do childrearing practices in China influence the development of self-esteem in children? And, (3) what are the limitations of cross-cultural research in understanding a phenomenon such as self-esteem? We suggest that self-esteem does not “mean” the same things across these collectivist and individualistic cultures. We conclude our discourse with specific recommendations for clinical theory, research, and practice.