Culture, Mind, and the Brain: Current Evidence and Future Directions

Abstract

Current research on culture focuses on independence and interdependence and documents numerous East-West psychological differences, with an increasing emphasis placed on cognitive mediating mechanisms. Lost in this literature is a time-honored idea of culture as a collective process composed of cross-generationally transmitted values and associated behavioral patterns (i.e., practices). A new model of neuro-culture interaction proposed here addresses this conceptual gap by hypothesizing that the brain serves as a crucial site that accumulates effects of cultural experience, insofar as neural connectivity is likely modified through sustained engagement in cultural practices. Thus, culture is “embrained,” and moreover, this process requires no cognitive mediation. The model is supported in a review of empirical evidence regarding (a) collective-level factors involved in both production and adoption of cultural values and practices and (b) neural changes that result from engagement in cultural practices. Future directions of research on culture, mind, and the brain are discussed.

Beyond the ‘east–west’ dichotomy: Global variation in cultural models of selfhood.

“…Notably, the logic of this model seems closer than that of previous measurement models to Markus and Kitayama's original theorizing (see Markus & Kitayama, 1991, Table 1) as well as subsequent revisions of their perspective (Kitayama & Uskul, 2011;Markus & Kitayama, 2010). If independence and interdependence are priorities of cultural systems, rather than properties of individuals, then there is no reason to expect that they should form monolithic dimensions of individual differences (Kitayama et al, 2009), and this is what we found.…”

“…Developmental psychologists sought to identify the prevailing theories, styles, and practices of parenting that foster development of independent or interdependent selves in different cultures (reviewed by Greenfield, Keller, Fuligni, & Maynard, 2003;Kağıtçıbaşı, 2007;Keller, 2007). Neuroscientists have begun to identify differences in brain activity that correlate with measures of independence and interdependence (reviewed by Kitayama & Uskul, 2011). However, the success of this perspective has arguably contributed to the prevalence of a rather black-and-white view of cultural diversity, which we believe was not the authors' original intention (see Markus & Kitayama, 2003.…”

“…Ways of being independent included (among many others) seeing oneself as separate from others, emphasizing one's uniqueness, prioritizing one's personal goals over those of others, and self-expression, whereas ways of being interdependent included seeing oneself as connected to others, fitting in with others, sacrificing one's personal goals for others, and exercising self-restraint. Researchers widely assumed that these tendencies should cluster into one or more coherent dimensions of individual differences, but Kitayama et al (2009;Kitayama & Uskul, 2011;Markus & Kitayama, 2010) later clarified that independence and interdependence should be understood not as properties of individuals-as implied by the term "selfconstrual"-but as properties of the cultural contexts that individuals inhabit: Cultural systems may incentivize individuals to think, feel, or behave independently or interdependently, but they emphasized that individuals within the same system may adopt very different ways of fulfilling these broad "cultural mandates." According to their revised perspective, ways of being independent and of being interdependent are not expected to cluster together into unitary dimensions at the individual level, but they are expected to cluster together into a single, bipolar dimension (i.e., independence vs. interdependence) at the cultural level.…”

“…Experimental researchers should examine which specific forms of independence and interdependence are activated by the various primes that have been used in previous studies (see Oyserman & Lee, 2008), as well as developing primes that more accurately target the forms of independence and interdependence that they are interested in understanding. Developmental researchers should identify parenting styles and practices associated with individual or cultural variation on these seven dimensions (Keller, 2007), and neuroscientists should examine whether individual differences are associated with specific patterns of brain activity (Kitayama & Uskul, 2011).…”

“…Neuroscientists have begun to identify differences in brain activity that correlate with measures of independence and interdependence (reviewed by Kitayama & Uskul, 2011).…”