中国大学生的自我建构、利己归因偏好与自我增强

本研究验证了我国大学生的自我建构的个体间差异对利己归因偏好与自我增强的影响。我国大学生被试首先完成一个虚拟的能力测验,然后对其自我建构等进行测量,最后被试得到成绩反馈并进行归因与课题评价。结果表明被试表现出显著的利己归因偏好,独立型比依存型自我建构者表现出更显著的自我增强,同时独立性对自我增强起着极重要作用。本研究结果支持自我增强的文化普遍论的观点。     

Explanations for cultural differences in thinking: Easterners’ dialectical thinking and Westerners’ linear thinking

ABSTRACT

Since Easterners’ naïve dialectical thinking, which is contrasted with Westerners’ linear thinking, was introduced, many cross-cultural studies on human thinking have been conducted, and explanations for the cultural differences have been proposed. First, after examining the robustness of these cultural differences, two existing explanations are discussed in this paper. The first is based on the discinction between Westerners' analytic cognition and Easterners' holistic cogntion. This is related to the distinction between Westerners’ independent self and Easterners’ interdependent self. The second is based on the philosophical tradition of China’s Taoism, Confucianism, and Buddhism, which is contrasted with that of Ancient Greece. Second, we propose a new explanation based on the distinction between Westerners’ low-context culture and Easterners’ high-context culture (Beyond culture. Garden City, NJ: Anchor Books/Doubleday.). Finally, we show that this distinction can be based on socioecological approaches, and it is expected to explain the cultural differences between the Chinese and Japanese.     

Cultural variations on optimistic and pessimistic bias for self versus a sibling: is there evidence for self-enhancement in the west and for self-criticism in the east when the referent group is specified?

A culturally relevant framework was used to examine variations on optimistic and pessimistic bias in Westerners and Easterners. Study 1 showed that 136 European Americans compared with 159 Japanese were more likely to predict typical positive events to occur to self than to a sibling. The opposite pattern emerged in the prediction of typical negative events. Study 2 replicated these findings on the basis of predictions for atypical events in 175 European Americans and 130 Japanese. Across both studies, within-groups analyses indicated that European Americans held an optimistic bias in the prediction of positive and negative events, whereas Japanese held a pessimistic bias for negative events. These findings are taken to offer support for presumed cultural differences in self-enhancement and self-criticism between Westerners and Easterners, respectively.     

Loss is a loss,why categorize it? Mental accounting across cultures

Consumers regularly track their expenses and assign them to categories like food, entertainment, and clothing, which is popularly known as mental accounting. In this paper, we show that consumption biases that result from mental accounting—underconsumption or overconsumption—are not prevalent in Easterners due to their holistic thinking style, whereas Westerners exhibit such biases due to their analytic thinking style. In Study 1, we collected data with Easterners (students from the eastern part of India) and show that they do not exhibit mental accounting biases as is seen in Westerners. In Study 2, we show that such differences in mental accounting across cultures result from their thinking styles by manipulating thinking styles within a Western population (American students from the Midwest). We also show that the differences in styles of thinking across cultures motivate two different types of accounting processes—a piecemeal accounting process in the Westerners and a comprehensive accounting process in the Easterners—which in turn influence the differences in mental accounting biases across cultures. This finding adds to the growing literature in cross‐cultural differences in consumer decision making and explores how and why a well‐documented robust effect, mental accounting, varies with the cultural background of the consumers.     

Do differences in general trust explain cultural differences in dispositionism?1

Abstract: It has been suggested that Westerners are more inclined than Easterners to endorse dispositionism. To help explain what produces this cultural difference, I examined the responses of Japanese and American students to determine whether levels of general trust, which is the expectation of benign or cooperative behavior based on the goodwill of another person (Yamagishi & Yamagishi, 1994), would matter. As predicted, in accounting for either a prosocial or deviant behavior, high trusters were more likely than low trusters to show dispositionism on all three measures (dispositional attribution, trait inference, and behavioral consistency), whereas cultural differences in dispositionism almost vanished. This tendency was found regardless of the desirability of behaviors.     

Placing the face in context: cultural differences in the perception of facial emotion

Two studies tested the hypothesis that in judging people's emotions from their facial expressions, Japanese, more than Westerners, incorporate information from the social context. In Study 1, participants viewed cartoons depicting a happy, sad, angry, or neutral person surrounded by other people expressing the same emotion as the central person or a different one. The surrounding people's emotions influenced Japanese but not Westerners' perceptions of the central person. These differences reflect differences in attention, as indicated by eye-tracking data (Study 2): Japanese looked at the surrounding people more than did Westerners. Previous findings on East-West differences in contextual sensitivity generalize to social contexts, suggesting that Westerners see emotions as individual feelings, whereas Japanese see them as inseparable from the feelings of the group.     

Inferring the emotions of friends versus strangers: the role of culture and self-construal

Three studies examined cross-cultural differences in empathic accuracy (the ability to correctly infer another's emotional experience) within the context of different relationships. East-West cultural differences in self-construal were hypothesized to differentiate levels of empathic accuracy across relationship types. In contrast to the independent self prevalent among members of Western cultures, members of Eastern cultures generally view the self as interdependent with those with whom they have a relationship. Easterners, relative to Westerners, are more concerned with the thoughts or feelings of close others and less concerned with the thoughts or feelings of those with whom they have no relational link (i.e., strangers). Across three studies, the authors found that East Asians, compared with European Americans, made more accurate inferences regarding the emotions of close others (i.e., friends), but less accurate inferences regarding the emotions of strangers. Furthermore, individual differences in interdependent self-construal among East Asians predicted the degree of empathic accuracy.     

The influence of culture: holistic versus analytic perception

There is recent evidence that perceptual processes are influenced by culture. Westerners tend to engage in context-independent and analytic perceptual processes by focusing on a salient object independently of its context, whereas Asians tend to engage in context-dependent and holistic perceptual processes by attending to the relationship between the object and the context in which the object is located. Recent research has explored mechanisms underlying such cultural differences, which indicate that participating in different social practices leads to both chronic as well as temporary shifts in perception. These findings establish a dynamic relationship between the cultural context and perceptual processes. We suggest that perception can no longer be regarded as consisting of processes that are universal across all people at all times.     

Pancultural self-enhancement reloaded: a meta-analytic reply to Heine (2005)

C. Sedikides, L. Gaertner, and Y. Toguchi (2003) reported findings favoring the universality of self-enhancement. S. J. Heine (2005) challenged the authors' research on evidential and logical grounds. In response, the authors carried out 2 meta-analytic investigations. The results backed the C. Sedikides et al. (2003) theory and findings. Both Westerners and Easterners self-enhanced tactically. Westerners self-enhanced on attributes relevant to the cultural ideal of individualism, whereas Easterners self-enhanced on attributes relevant to the cultural ideal of collectivism (in both cases, because of the personal importance of the ideal). Self-enhancement motivation is universal, although its manifestations are strategically sensitive to cultural context. The authors respond to other aspects of Heine's critique by discussing why researchers should empirically validate the comparison dimension (individualistic vs. collectivistic) and defending why the better-than-average effect is a valid measure of self-enhancement.     

Shame,guilt, blaming,and anger: Differences between children in Japan and the US

Recent research and theory on shame and guilt has highlighted the “dark side to shame” in motivating harmful behavior. Although researchers recognize that cultural differences in shame exist, few studies have examined such differences. In this study of 130 fourth and fifth graders from the United States and 118 from Japan, cultural differences in anger, shame, guilt, and externalization of blame were examined. Consistent with predictions, compared to American children, Japanese children were more prone to experience shame and guilt and less likely to externalize blame. However, they also were more likely to experience anger. Directly, and indirectly through blaming, shame had much greater effects on anger among American than Japanese children. Whereas the effects were positive and significant among American children, they were negative and nonsignificant among Japanese children. Among Japanese children, it was guilt, rather than shame, that was related to anger, and in a negative manner. Findings suggest that in anger, the “dark side to shame” but also the more positive side to guilt, are moderated by cultural context.     

Cultural Differences in the Self: From Philosophy to Psychology and Neuroscience

Different thinking styles in Westerners and Chinese (analytic vs. holistic) lead to disparities between the two cultures not only in perception and attention but also in high‐level social cognition such as self‐representation. Most Western philosophers discussed the self by focusing on personal self‐identity, whereas Chinese philosophers emphasized the relation between the self and others. Dissimilar philosophical thinking of the self is associated with distinct cognitive styles of self‐representation (i.e., the independent self in Westerners and the interdependent self in Chinese). Recent brain imaging studies found that Westerners employed the medial prefrontal cortex to represent only the individual self, whereas Chinese utilized the same brain area to represent both the self and close others, providing neural basis of cultural differences in self‐representation. We suggest that the cultural differences in thinking styles between Westerners and Chinese influence both psychological and neural structure of self‐representation.     

The benefits of argumentation are cross-culturally robust: The case of Japan

Thanks to the exchange of arguments, groups outperform individuals on some tasks, such as solving logical problems. However, these results stem from experiments conducted among Westerners and they could be due to cultural particularities such as tolerance of contradiction and approval of public debate. Other cultures, collectivistic cultures in particular, are said to frown on argumentation. Moreover, some influential intellectual movements, such as Confucianism, disapprove of argumentation. In two experiments, the hypothesis that Easterners might not share the benefits of argumentation was tested. In Experiment 1, Japanese participants had to solve a standard logical problem individually and then in groups. They performed significantly better in groups. In Experiment 2, Japanese participants had to estimate the weight of various animals. They did so individually, then after learning of another participant's estimates, then after discussing these estimates with the other participant, and then individually again. While the Japanese participants also benefitted from the discussion, these benefits were only visible when participants provided a final individual estimate. This delay is interpreted as reflecting the pressure to preserve social harmony that would have constrained Japanese participants to yield to their partner even when knowing that this did not improve the accuracy of their answer.     

On the cultural guises of cognitive dissonance: the case of easterners and westerners

Cognitive dissonance and effects of self-affirmation on dissonance arousal were examined cross-culturally. In Studies 1 and 2, European Canadians justified their choices more when they made them for themselves, whereas Asian Canadians (Study 1) or Japanese (Study 2) justified their choices more when they made them for a friend. In Study 3, an interdependent self-affirmation reduced dissonance for Asian Canadians but not for European Canadians. In Study 4, when Asian Canadians made choices for a friend, an independent self-affirmation reduced dissonance for bicultural Asian Canadians but not for monocultural Asian Canadians. These studies demonstrate that both Easterners and Westerners can experience dissonance, but culture shapes the situations in which dissonance is aroused and reduced. Implications of these cultural differences for theories of cognitive dissonance and self-affirmation are discussed.     

Pancultural self-enhancement

The culture movement challenged the universality of the self-enhancement motive by proposing that the motive is pervasive in individualistic cultures (the West) but absent in collectivistic cultures (the East). The present research posited that Westerners and Easterners use different tactics to achieve the same goal: positive self-regard. Study 1 tested participants from differing cultural backgrounds (the United States vs. Japan), and Study 2 tested participants of differing self-construals (independent vs. interdependent). Americans and independents self-enhanced on individualistic attributes, whereas Japanese and interdependents self-enhanced on collectivistic attributes. Independents regarded individualistic attributes, whereas interdependents regarded collectivistic attributes, as personally important. Attribute importance mediated self-enhancement. Regardless of cultural background or self-construal, people self-enhance on personally important dimensions. Self-enhancement is a universal human motive.     

Contemporary Studies on the Concept of Creativity: the East and the West

This article reviews contemporary studies on the concept of creativity across two cultures—Eastern (Asian) cultures and Western (American and European) cultures — by examining two bodies of literature. One is on people's implicit theories of creativity across different cultures and the other is on cross‐cultural studies of creativity. Studies on implicit theories of creativity in the East suggest that many Asians have similar but not identical conceptions of creativity to many people in the West. Cross‐cultural studies of creativity reveal that Easterners and Westerners differ, on average, in their divergent‐thinking performance and creative expressions. A view of creativity as relatively culture‐specific is presented and the appropriateness of using divergent‐thinking tests to measure creativity is discussed.     

Cultural differences in perceived coherence of the self and ingroup: A Japan–Australia comparison

Past studies have found that East Asians ascribe less consistency to individual selves than Westerners, but ascribe more consistency to social groups than Westerners. Using the concepts of naive dialecticism (i.e. the tendency to tolerate contradiction) and psychological essentialism (i.e. the tendency to attribute a fixed essence to something) as different aspects of consistency perception, we examined patterns of perceived consistency of the self and national ingroup among Japanese and Australians. Compared to Australians, Japanese showed more naive dialecticism and less psychological essentialism for the self; however, this cultural difference was not found for their national ingroups. These findings suggest that lay theories are applied in a domain‐specific manner, and the domains to which they are applied depend on culture.     

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。     

有关自我增强跨文化普遍性的争论

文化自我观点质疑自我增强（self-enhancement）的跨文化普遍性,认为东亚人并非像西方人一样拥有对自我保持积极评价的需要,而是自我提升（self-improvement）。然而,另外一些学者则认为东亚人同样会表现出自我增强,其中“对自我的重要性”被看作是一个重要的中介变量。至此,笔者针对有关自我增强跨文化普遍性的争论做了回顾,并在此基础之上提出从面子角度研究东亚人自尊的建议,以期为澄清此争论提供新的思路与证据     

Language and cognitive shifting: evidence from young monolingual and bilingual children

The relationship between language and cognitive shifting in young children was examined. Specifically, second language experiences from infancy as well as individual differences in monolingual language experience may affect performances on the Dimensional Change Card Sort Task. 54 Japanese-French bilingual children and two groups of Japanese monolingual children participated (ns = 18). One monolingual group was matched to the bilingual group on verbal ability and chronological age (VC monolingual group) and the other group was matched by chronological age but had higher verbal ability (C monolingual group). The results showed that the groups of children who were bilingual and monolingual with higher verbal ability performed the task significantly better than matched monolingual children. Language experiences may affect cognitive set shifting in young children.