Do people believe behaviours are consistent with attitudes? Towards a cultural psychology of attribution processes

Self Cite

619

496

Individualism and collectivism are often equated with independent vs. interdependent, agentic vs. communal, and separate vs. relational self-construals. Although these same concepts have been used to characterize both cultural and gender differences, a perspective of cultural evolution suggests it is unlikely. A division of labor within society may produce gender differences, but this cannot explain cultural differences. A study of self-construal involving 5 cultures (Australia, the United States, Hawaii, Japan, and Korea) shows that differences between these cultures are captured mostly by the extent to which people see themselves as acting as independent agents, whereas gender differences are best summarized by the extent to which people regard themselves as emotionally related to others.

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 60%

Culture, gender, and self: A perspective from individualism-collectivism research.

Kashima¹,

Yamaguchi²,

Kim³

et al. 1995

Self Cite

619

496

“…In contrast, Western thought (both lay and intellectual) has tended to emphasize dispositional explanations (see Miller, 1984;Morris & Peng, 1994, for further discussion of cross-cultural differences in trait vs. contextual orientations). Moreover, other researchers have shown that whereas the Western dispositional orientation emphasizes the elimination of inconsistency, the East Asian interactionist orientation inherently anticipates and tolerates instances of inconsistency (Kashima, Siegel, Tanaka, & Kashima, 1992). East-West differences in dispositionism versus interactionism as well as tolerance versus intolerance of inconsistency raise many exciting questions.…”

Section: Trait Versus Process Orientations and Cultural Differences Imentioning

confidence: 99%

Person theories and attention allocation: Preferences for stereotypic versus counterstereotypic information.

Plaks

Stroessner²,

Dweck³

et al. 2001

219

241

How do people respond to information that counters a stereotype? Do they approach it or avoid it? Four experiments showed that attention to stereotype-consistent vs. -inconsistent information depends on people's implicit theories about human traits. Those holding an entity theory (the belief that traits are fixed) consistently displayed greater attention to (Experiments 1 and 4) and recognition of (Experiments 2 and 3) consistent information, whereas those holding an incremental (dynamic) theory tended to display greater attention to (Experiment 1) and recognition of (Experiment 3) inconsistent information. This was true whether implicit theories were measured as chronic structures (Experiments 1, 2, and 4) or were experimentally manipulated (Experiment 3). Thus, different a priori assumptions about human traits and behavior lead to processing that supports versus limits stereotype maintenance.

“…Recent cross-cultural work, particularly research comparing members of East Asian and Western cultures, has revealed striking differences in cognition, emotion, and behavior (e.g., Choi, Nisbett, & Norenzayan, 1999;Kashima, Siegal, Tanaka, & Kashima, 1992), as well as fascinating similarities in underlying psychological processes and motives (e.g., attribution for group vs. individual behavior; Menon, Morris, Chiu, & Hong, 1999;and cognitive dissonance;Hoshino-Browne, Zanna, & Spencer, 2005). Stereotyping processes, however, have been the focus of relatively little cross-cultural investigation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Culture and group perception: Dispositional and stereotypic inferences about novel and national groups.

Spencer‐Rodgers¹,

Williams²,

Hamilton³

et al. 2007

In 3 studies, the authors tested the hypothesis that Chinese participants would view social groups as more entitative than would Americans and, as a result, would be more likely to infer personality traits on the basis of group membership-that is, to stereotype. In Study 1, Chinese participants made stronger stereotypic trait inferences than Americans did on the basis of a target's membership in a fictitious group. Studies 2 and 3 showed that Chinese participants perceived diverse groups as more entitative and attributed more internally consistent dispositions to groups and their members. Guided by culturally based lay theories about the entitative nature of groups, Chinese participants may stereotype more readily than do Americans when group membership is available as a source of dispositional inference.