Class Notes (834,257)
Canada (508,444)
Psychology (1,168)
PSYCO341 (16)

chapter 8 combined.docx

11 Pages
Unlock Document

Taka Masuda

8(1): Cognition & Perception­Cognition Causes of Cultural Variation in Human Behavior: Philosophy • Western philosophers in general shared the idea that everything exists, independently and all the objects  have their own characteristics inside of it. •  Eastern philosophers in general shared the idea that everything is interrelated to each other, and that all  the actions should be interpreted as a whole. Ying and yang alternates. They exist because of each other  other.  Different view, nature, economic views that differ. Where do they come from?  • Ecology  ▯leads to different economy and social structure. For example., irrigation project of ancient china:  in the low mountain. Need collaboration and live together in a harmony especially for rice and wheat  farming which requires a lot of people working together.  • Social Structure & Social Practices effect▯  Naïve Metaphysics (Where you attend to). For example,  Chinese: look at pairs, authorities, and their relation that are surrounding them (right side)  while the Greek:  focus on the target and its feature only. Linear­Thinking vs.  Dialectical Thinking • When reading two tendency, you immediately choose immediately which sides you are on. This shows  Analytic from holistic thought differentiation Chinese=more dialectic Characteristics of Linear­Thinking vs. Dialectical Thinking • Linear­Thinking: polarizing, based on formal logic – The law of identity (“ A student is a student”) – The law of non­contradiction(“A student is not a non­student”) – The law of excluded middle (“ A student must be a student or a nonstudent, cannot be both”) • Dialectical thinking in Chinese thought: “middle way” – Principle of change – Principle of contradiction  – Principle of relationship or holism Differential preferences for dialectical proverbs • Dialectical proverb: e.g. “too humble is half proud”. • Non­dialectical proverb: e.g. “one against all is certain to fall”.  – Material: 8 dialectical and 5 non­dialectical proverbs from Chinese and English books respectively.  – Procedure: Participants rate their response on a 7­point scale. – Results: Americans rated that American­made non­dialectical proverbs as more plausible. – Chinese rated that Chinese­made dialectical proverbs as more believable. Dialectical Resolution of Social Contradictions • Method: causes and resolutions for two everyday­life scenarios – Mother­Daughter Conflict – School­Fun Conflict • Expected: Dialect: address issues from both sides and resolve using compromise ( both mom and dad  should  this)Non dialect­ exclusively one side i.e. mother should do this • Results: Chinese were in general more likely than their American counterparts To solve the problem  Dialectically, whereas Americans tended to Jjudge which side was right, and which sides was wrong.  (Dialect=no one wins middle way. Non­dialect=one person wins) Differential Approaches toward Contradiction • Materials: 5 apparently contradictory research findings • Procedures: three conditions, rate beliefs about the accuracy of each statement on a 9­point scale • Results: US: One is right the other is wrong ( the law of non­contradiction, you cannot have it both ways) .  Americans who received both arguments showed a counter normative reasoning style in that they were  more convinced that the stronger argument was correct when they also heard of a contradictory argument  than if they had only heard the strong argument by itself. • Chinese: Dialectical reasoning styles of compromising ( the truth lies between the two sides) • Chinese viewed a strong argument to be less plausible if they heard a contradictory argument.  However,  they showed a counter normative response in viewing a weak argument as being more plausible if it was  paired with a contradictory argument ( finding the middle way)  Self­Ambivalence (ASK) • Are there any differences in their level of ambivalence regarding them? Chinese, Asian Americans, Euro­ Americans, Latinos, African American answered the self­esteem scale (expected to be low in dialect). The  level of ambivalence was computed. • Results: The level of self­evaluative ambivalence scores indicate that the Chinese are the highest, and  Asian Americans ranked second. Compared to Euro­Americans, Latino, and african­american Asians are  more accepting about contradiction within themselves • Support the expectation: Asians are more accepting of contradiction within self then others euro cultures. Summary: • Characteristics of western thinking include (a)  Construction of counterarguments ( one wins) (b) Preference for consistency • Characteristics of eastern thinking (a)  Litt  emphasis on counterarguments (b) Emphasis on finding the middle way Culture and Prediction of Change • Westerners are inclined to predict that the world will move in whatever direction it now moves • East Asians are likely to expect the world to Reverse field Cultural Variation in the Perception of Change • Various types of graphs, which indicates the trend of some event (e.g. economic growth) • Participants were then asked to predict the probability for the trend to go up, go down, or to remain the same  in comparison to the last point on the graph. Negatively Accelerated Decay:  Given a line US said the trend would continue to go down. Chinese thought that it might stop and start ascending  Positively Accelerated Growth • Results: US: thought the trend will go up. Chinese: thought it will platue or begin to change or go down.  Shows different in cognition about the change • Culture and Child Development: Perception of Change • Procedure: Scenarios with 5 possible states. Children were asked to predict the future state. They were then  asked to justify their answer • Results: Canadian: things could be change easily and as they got older their way of thinking change and they  start thinking that it will not change as north American culture prefer stability over change (absorb societal  culture now) • Chinese: no sure what is change, but then as they get older they absorb Chinese culture and say now that  change is the rul. Investigating Training Effect of Holistic Thinking • questions: Training in Oriental medicine would make students think in a more holistic way”. Thus Can the  way a person think be modified by formal education and training. • Trying to prove that cultural differences are not fixed, but shaped through various socialization processes. Regular Students vs. East Asian Medical Students • Participants were provided a graph showing a trend of an event over three data points. • Participants were asked to predict how the phenomenon would change by marking dots at the next two data  points. • Students of both oriental medicine(square) and other majors thought the graph would continue in the same  direction to point four. • However, at point 5, the oriental medicine group expected the trend would reverse. • The students from other majors still predicted that the graph would continue in the same direction at point  five as it did in point four • Thus, difference in socialization or institutional practices effects the answers even though from same  culture. • Discussion: What is the difference between western dialectical thinking and eastern dialectical thinking?  • Ans: In such a society, placing everything on the same logical field is often seen as rather naïve , childish,  and less intelligent. ( no strong motivation to simplify things using clear logic) 8(2) Attitude Inference • Analytic thinking involves understanding objects by focusing on their component part, whereas holistic thinking involves understanding objects by considering their relation with with context. • Explaining people’s behaviors by attending to their personal characteristics is known as a dispositional attribution. NorthAmericans: mostly dispositional attributionà this bias is called the called the fundamental attribution error • In contrast, explaining people’s behaviors by attending to contextual variables is known as a situational attribution. • Study: In Jones & Harris’s (1967) classic study, American students were asked to evaluate an essay writer’s true attitude by reading an essay that they had written, which espoused either positive or critical attitudes towards Fidel Castro. • fundamental attribution error: Personnel disposition rather then the situation in which a person is. What ever the person says are does it because of the person’s internal factors and not in the situation in which a person might be. • CASTRO STUDY: (Ask) • Condition 1: Participant read an essay, which was said to be written freely. I hate castroyes he does. • Condition 2: Participant read an essay which was said to be written under constraints and he says I LOVE CASTRO as a judge, In this case, you are not sure since you don’t know if its his true thought. But you know that mostAmericans at that time have anti-castro beliefs ( so you might think that these are not his true attitudes). Same thing if he says I HATE CASTRO you are not sure what he thing but might be tempted to say yes based on majority beliefs. • Results: Large number difference =pro castro ( freely choosenà judge that essay written by the participant truly represented the participant’s belief regardless of what the most people at the time believed) • Small number difference btw pro and anti-castro difference. This should not have been the case if they had though about the situation. • In all of these conditions, participants assumed that the person reading or writing the anti-Castro essay had more negative feelings towards Castro than the person reading or writing the pro-Castro essay. • These tendencies to neglect situational information in favor of dispositional information are so pronounced that they have been labeled the “fundamental attribution error.” Culture and the FundamentalAttribution Error (ASK) Replicating Snyder & Jones’(1974) Experiment Condition 1: Free Choice: Participant read an essay, which was said to be written freely Condition 2: Forced Choice: Participant read an essay which was said to be written under constraints (i.e. told to wrote an essay on it). Condition 3: Experience: Overal, john wrote the essay under social pressures. Condition 4: Experience + Fixed Arguments ( i.e. this is what you have to say to why it is great) Results: Y= strength of fundamental attribution error Free choices: NA+Kor=truly represent their true beliefs which expected No choice: wrote under assigned position. NA+Korà showed strong Fundemental atrribution error Experience: NAàerror seen. Korà attinuated to level of error. They took into account the situation thus decreasing error. Experience + arugment: NA= still show it. Kor=decrease error to almost 0 Mainpoin: Cultural differences start coming out in the last 2 groups. In these last groups, they are not aware of the situation in which they wrote the essay regarding punishment. Summary: • IfAsians are aware of the salient situational factors through the experimental manipulation, they are able to attenuates the fundamental attribution error ( decrease like in number 4 scenario above) • However, such experimental manipulation did not work forAmerican participants.American participants continued to show a strong fundamental attribution error. • CausalAttribution InternalAttribution:Attributing the causes of one’s behavior to the person’s personality, skill, talent, and abilities (e.g. Richard Gere is clumsy!) ExternalAttribution:Attributing the causes of one’s behavior to situational factors (e.g. Dancing is very difficult!) Study: Culture and CausalAttribution: Ball Task: Guessing the reason of why the orange ball moved forward NorthAmericans and Chinese equally explain the event using both internal and external attribution Culture and CausalAttribution: Fish NorthAmericans tended to explain the event using internalAttribution, whereas Chinese tended to explain the event using external Attribution Explanation: Social behavior is more complex and thus we began seeing a cultural different. NAà intentially moved forward since it was the leader. Chineseà Kicked out since its color was different Two Murder Case Scenarios of a Chinese and then another person was irrish person killing someone. • Results: NAà lau was mentally imbalance/he worked too much/pressure on himself (internal/dispositional). They did mention external but not as much as the chinese • Results: North Americans tended to explain the event using dispositional attribution, whereas Chinese tended to explain the event using situational attribution • ChineseàAmericans individualistic and violence tactic effect international students.Advisors were the proble. Alot of external factors/situational factors. Newspaper Reports of Soccer Games • Study: Lee, Hallahan, Herzog’s research on positive causal attribution (1996).They analyzed 11 US Newspaper articles vs. 28 Hong Kong Newspaper articles Coding the contents of article: • Measure: The amount of DispositionalAttribution • Results: NAà more likely to mention player’s personal characteristics ( mental/physical strength and personal attributes).HKà relation to the team and the circumstances surrounding the player ( external attributes) Thus, Cultural variation exist…. But where to do they comes from? Attribution & Child Development • Joan Miller (1984): 8,11,15 year-old children as well as adults from Mysore, India, and from Chicago, USA engaged in attribution task to try to ans if it is It is innate/social developed. • Results: Indiansà situation.As they got older this tendency became stronger. • Americansà dispositional attributes and as they got older this got stronger. • No difference btw the 8 years old but then changer. Our child rearing component are very important. WE explain events using external events/internal attribute and teach them/explain events using these thus they internalize these and these become stronger as they get older. Culture and Prediction of Causes Study: Looked at regular and premedical students who study ancient chinese medicine. • Procedure: Participants were given a brief summary of a hypothetical murder case, involving a graduate student being a suspect in the murder of his advisor. Participants were given a list of 97 items that could be factors in the crime. • Participants were asked to eliminate any of the items on the list that they thought were useless in the investigation of the murder. The items were randomly ordered. • Results: The second year premedical students excluded fewer items then did the students of other majors. • Importantly, second year medical students excluded even fewer items that that of second year premedical 3students. Study two-showed evidence of positive correlation between holistic thinking and oriental medicine education. Reasoning Style Family Resemblance vs. Rule-Based Categorization NAà More importance on things that they can categorize. Chineseà Motivated on similarties/family resemblance of the examples ( i.e. they are all same in color=they are all related even though they are square and circles)à they cannot help but think that allAsians a re related. They are not good at categorizing things. Less sensitive to common characteristics Similarity-Based Categorization vs. Rule-Based Categorization • Analytic and holistic thinkers show different reasoning styles. • In general, analytic reasoners are more likely to apply abstract rules in order to solve problems. • Holistic reasoners attend more to relationships among objects or events, looking for similarities or temporal relations. • Which flowers belong to which groups? i.e. shape of the steep is same to the group of flowerA=group 2 ( rules based category)=NA • Similarities of the pedalà group 1 had pedal/lead and were circle thus overall,A=group 1 • Results: North Americans were in general good at identifying common characters • EA=similrility / family based oriented vs NA=rules based categorization mostly. Differences in Similarity Judgments betweenAmericans and EastAsians • European-Americans make these decisions more based on applying rules than in looking at the overall similarity between the targets and the groups. • East Asians and Asian-Americans make these decisions more based on the overall similarities • These cultural differences only emerge when there is a conflict between an analytic and a holistic solution. Both groups can reason well in purely analytic or purely holistic tasks. 8(3) Field Dependence vs. Field Independence • When perceiving a scene, holistic thinkers are more likely to perceive it as an integrated whole.  This makes  it more difficult to separate objects from each other in a scene.  This is called field dependent. • Being able to separate objects from each other is termed field independent. Cultural Difference in Attention • Westerners’ Attention Selectively attending to the target object and its attributes (context independence,  object­oriented). • East Asians’ Attention:  Holistically attending to target objects in relation to their context and situation  (context dependence, context­oriented, relationship­sensitive). Field Dependence vs. Field Independence • Often field independence is tested with a Rod and Frame task, where a rod is inside of a frame and they  are both rotated.   • Results: In general, Westerners perform better on field independence tasks than do non­Westerners. • The individual parts of the scene are seen as distinct, and Westerners are better able to ignore the rest of the  scene. This difference can be seen in a variety of other tasks. • If you ignore the frame, you will do well. If you pay too much attention to the angle of the frame, you will  do worse ( east Asian)=context dependent= field dependent. • Results of the rod and frame task: East As
More Less

Related notes for PSYCO341

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.