Rational Selective Exploitation Among Americans and Chinese: General Similarity, With One Surprise

A cross-cultural experiment tested predictions regarding reward allocation decisions among subjects in the United States and Taiwan. The experiment included five independent variables—two between-subject factors (American vs. Chinese; instrumental vs. unspecified vs. social-emotional allocator orientation) and three within-subject factors (high vs. low employee competence, social skill, and mobility). In general, Americans and Chinese distributed rewards quite similarly: In both cultures, allocators distributed greater rewards to employees who were more competent and possessed greater social skill. In both cultures, instrumental allocator orientation induced stronger tendencies to base allocations on competence; social-emotional allocator orientation induced stronger tendencies to base allocations on social skill. In both cultures, subjects engaged in competence-based "rational selective exploitation"—among highly competent employees, those with greater professional mobility received larger portions of the reward pool than did counterparts with constrained mobility. In both cultures, subjects also evidenced an unexpected social-skill-based rational selective exploitation—among employees with good social skill those with greater professional mobility received larger portions of the reward pool than did counterparts with constrained mobility. However, there were a number of interactions with culture that ran contrary to our a priori predictions: We hypothesized that Americans would exhibit greater individualism by focusing on competence in allocating outcomes, and that Chinese would exhibit greater collectivism by focusing on social skill. Although Americans did attend to employee competence more than Chinese, Americans also attended to employee social skill more than Chinese. These findings are discussed in terms of an expanded conceptualization of the nature of individualism and collectivism.