Search

SignificanceTo date, researchers and practitioners have focused on the academic challenges of underrepresented ethnic groups in the United States. In comparison, Asians have received limited attention, as they are commonly assumed to excel across all educational stages. Six large studies challenge this assumption by revealing that East Asians (but not South Asians) underperform in US law schools and business schools. This is not because East Asians are less academically motivated or less proficient in English but because their low verbal assertiveness is culturally incongruent with the assertiveness prized by US law and business schools. Online classes (via Zoom) mitigated East Asians’ underperformance in courses emphasizing assertiveness and class participation. Educators should reexamine pedagogical practices to create a culturally inclusive classroom.

Well-educated and prosperous, Asians are called the “model minority” in the United States. However, they appear disproportionately underrepresented in leadership positions, a problem known as the “bamboo ceiling.” It remains unclear why this problem exists and whether it applies to all Asians or only particular Asian subgroups. To investigate the mechanisms and scope of the problem, we compared the leadership attainment of the two largest Asian subgroups in the United States: East Asians (e.g., Chinese) and South Asians (e.g., Indians). Across nine studies ( n = 11,030) using mixed methods (archival analyses of chief executive officers, field surveys in large US companies, student leader nominations and elections, and experiments), East Asians were less likely than South Asians and whites to attain leadership positions, whereas South Asians were more likely than whites to do so. To understand why the bamboo ceiling exists for East Asians but not South Asians, we examined three categories of mechanisms—prejudice (intergroup), motivation (intrapersonal), and assertiveness (interpersonal)—while controlling for demographics (e.g., birth country, English fluency, education, socioeconomic status). Analyses revealed that East Asians faced less prejudice than South Asians and were equally motivated by work and leadership as South Asians. However, East Asians were lower in assertiveness, which consistently mediated the leadership attainment gap between East Asians and South Asians. These results suggest that East Asians hit the bamboo ceiling because their low assertiveness is incongruent with American norms concerning how leaders should communicate. The bamboo ceiling is not an Asian issue, but an issue of cultural fit.

Memorializes Lee D. Ross (1942-2021). Ross made many contributions to social psychology. He had a knack for seeing the broad and deep psychological processes underlying individual episodes of rich, everyday behavior. Ross then crafted experiments that explored those processes in a way that was engaging and unusually memorable. After completing his PhD degree in 1969, Ross joined the faculty at Stanford University, where he taught for 52 years. Ross first achieved prominence in 1977 when he coined the term "the fundamental attribution error" to describe the tendency to attribute behavior primarily to a person's traits, attitudes, and other characteristics even when it should be clear that the person's behavior was largely the result of situational influences or constraints. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Research on culture and cognition suggests that East Asians are relatively holistic and North Americans are relatively analytic. Social orientation and philosophical traditions have been linked to ...

Previous work assessing psychological tendencies across cultures suggests that East Asians are more holistic in cognition (e.g., extending attention to the context in object perception) and interdependent in social orientation (e.g., feeling happy when connected with others) than European Americans. However, little is known about the possible moderation of these findings by age and social class because of this literature’s near-exclusive focus on young and highly educated segments of the respective populations. The neglect of these demographic variables has persisted even though different theories predict divergent effects of such variables. Here, we addressed this gap by testing a comprehensive set of eleven holistic cognition measures and six interdependent social orientation measures in random samples of Japanese and Americans who varied in age, educational attainment, and gender (N = 666). The previously reported cultural variation proved highly stable across the subpopulations. Though other demographic factors played a significant role for both cognitive style and social orientation, their combined contribution was 14-18 times smaller than the effects of national culture. We discuss implications for the existing theories of culture.

Objective We test the proposition that both social orientation and cognitive style are constructs consisting of loosely related attributes. Thus, measures of each construct should weakly correlate among themselves, forming intraindividually stable profiles across measures over time. Method Study 1 tested diverse samples of Americans (N = 233) and Japanese (N = 433) with a wide range of measures of social orientation and cognitive style to explore correlations among these measures in a cross-cultural context, using demographically heterogeneous samples. Study 2 recruited a new sample of 485 Americans and Canadians and examined their profiles on measures of social orientation and cognitive style twice, one month apart, to assess the stability of individual profiles using these variables. Results Despite finding typical cross-cultural differences, Study 1 demonstrated negligible correlations both among measures of social orientation and among measures of cognitive style. Study 2 demonstrated stable intraindividual behavioral profiles across measures capturing idiosyncratic patters of social orientation and cognitive style, despite negligible correlations among the same measures. Conclusion The results provide support for the behavioral profile approach to conceptualizing social orientation and cognitive style, highlighting the need to assess intraindividual stability of psychological constructs in cross-cultural research.

Asians appear disproportionately under-represented in leadership positions in the U.S., a problem called the “Bamboo Ceiling.” It remains unclear why this problem exists and whether it applies to a...

We examined people's beliefs about how well an individual's evaluations can predict the average evaluations of a group and how well a group's average evaluations can predict those of an individual. The individual in question was either the self or a stranger. Subjects believed that the group predicts a stranger better than the stranger predicts the group, but believed that the self predicts the group as well as or better than the group predicts the self This asymmetry in estimates of predictability mirrors asymmetries found by other researchers for similarity judgments, suggesting that beliefs about predictability may be guided by similarity judgments. This may lead to errors in predictions about self and others, including the false consensus bias.

Cultural comparison has challenged people’s assumptions of universality in psychology. It has also revealed that many questions and approaches in psychology are not culture-free, but reflect a distinctively Western analytic framework. In this framework, the world is assumed to operate by discernible and stable rules, contradiction is a problem to be resolved, and entities are viewed as relatively independent agents. Context and relationships between people and objects are relatively downplayed—or, when they are examined, are assumed to operate under parsimonious rules. Dialectical or holistic thinking, a framework more prevalent in East Asian societies, involves greater attention to context and relationships, assumptions of change rather than stasis, and acceptance of contradiction. Analytic thinking is useful for science and daily life. But sometimes dialectical thinking results in more accurate conclusions or pragmatically useful decisions than analytic thinking. Therefore, we propose that both dialectical and analytic thinking should be consciously adopted as tools in the “cognitive toolbox” of researchers and laypeople alike. In the present article, we review the cross-cultural work demonstrating the psychological differences that analytic versus dialectical thinking produce. We then consider the strengths of each type of thinking and how they may serve complementary functions for problem solving.

Considerable research has recently been conducted testing S. Schachter's hypothesis that overweight individuals are unresponsive to "internal," physiological cues signalling hunger and satiety and highly responsive to "external," food- or environment-related cues. When food is given in small units, overweight individuals are less accurate in recalling the number of units they have eaten than are normal individuals. This suggests that overweight individuals do not regulate food intake by counting. The very large intake of overweight subjects can be understood by taking seriously the implications of the "recall" data: overweight subjects do not monitor their food intake, but instead eat rather inattentively. While the research on obesity inspired by Schachter grew directly out of research on cognitive and social determinants of the labels which individuals apply to feeling states, it does not appear likely that the errors made by the obese fit into that paradigm.

The achievement gap between blacks and whites owes nothing to genetics. It is not solely due to discrimination or social-class differences between blacks and whites. It is due in good part to environmental differences between blacks and whites stemming from family, neighborhood, and school socialization factors that are present even for middle-class blacks. The gap is closing slowly, but it could be closed much more rapidly, with interventions both large and small. Preschool programs exist that can produce enormous differences in outcomes in school and in later life. Elementary schools where children spend much more time in contact with the school, and which include upper-middle-class experiences such as visits to museums and dramatic productions, have a major impact on poor black children's academic achievement. Simply convincing black children that their intellectual skills are under their control can have a marked impact.

It is well documented that aging is associated with cognitive declines in many domains. Yet it is a common lay belief that some aspects of thinking improve into old age. Specifically, older people are believed to show better competencies for reasoning about social dilemmas and conflicts. Moreover, the idea of aging-related gains in wisdom is consistent with views of the aging mind in developmental psychology. However, to date research has provided little evidence corroborating this assumption. We addressed this question in two studies, using a representative community sample. We asked participants to read stories about intergroup conflicts and interpersonal conflicts and predict how these conflicts would unfold. We show that relative to young and middle-aged people, older people make more use of higher-order reasoning schemes that emphasize the need for multiple perspectives, allow for compromise, and recognize the limits of knowledge. Our coding scheme was validated by a group of professional counselors and wisdom researchers. Social reasoning improves with age despite a decline in fluid intelligence. The results suggest that it might be advisable to assign older individuals to key social roles involving legal decisions, counseling, and intergroup negotiations. Furthermore, given the abundance of research on negative effects of aging, this study may help to encourage clinicians to emphasize the inherent strengths associated with aging.

A large body of research documents cognitive differences between Westerners and East Asians. Westerners tend to be more analytic and East Asians tend to be more holistic. These findings have often been explained as being due to corresponding differences in social orientation. Westerners are more independent and Easterners are more interdependent. However, comparisons of the cognitive tendencies of Westerners and East Asians do not allow us to rule out alternative explanations for the cognitive differences, such as linguistic and genetic differences, as well as cultural differences other than social orientation. In this review we summarize recent developments that provide stronger support for the social orientation hypothesis.

Previous research has shown that when processing visual scenes, Westerners attend to salient objects and East Asians attend to the relationships between focal objects and background elements. It is possible that cross-cultural differences in attentional allocation contribute to these earlier findings. In this article, the authors investigate cultural differences in attentional allocation in two experiments, using a visual change detection paradigm. They demonstrate that East Asians are better than Americans at detecting color changes when a layout of a set of colored blocks is expanded to cover a wider region and worse when it is shrunk. East Asians are also slower than Americans are at detecting changes in the center of the screen. The data suggest that East Asians allocate their attention more broadly than Americans. The authors consider potential factors that may contribute to the development of such attention allocation differences.

Prior research indicates that East Asians are more sensitive to contextual information than Westerners. This article explored aesthetics to examine whether cultural variations were observable in art and photography. Study 1 analyzed traditional artistic styles using archival data in representative museums. Study 2 investigated how contemporary East Asians and Westerners draw landscape pictures and take portrait photographs. Study 3 further investigated aesthetic preferences for portrait photographs. The results suggest that (a) traditional East Asian art has predominantly context-inclusive styles, whereas Western art has predominantly object-focused styles, and (b) contemporary members of East Asian and Western cultures maintain these culturally shaped aesthetic orientations. The findings can be explained by the relation among attention, cultural resources, and aesthetic preference.

Central and East Europeans have a great deal in common, both historically and culturally, with West Europeans and North Americans, but tend to be more interdependent. Interdependence has been shown to be linked to holistic cognition. East Asians are more interdependent than Americans and are more holistic. If interdependence causes holism, we would expect Central and East Europeans to be more holistic than West Europeans and North Americans. In two studies we found evidence that Central and East Europeans are indeed more holistic than Westerners on three tasks, one of which examined categorization and two of which measured patterns of visual attention. These studies support the argument that cross-cultural differences in cognition are due to society level differences in independence/interdependence.

This article describes the development of a theory-based cross-cultural training intervention, named relational ideology training, and reports a field experiment testing its effectiveness in facilitating intercultural collaborations. The intervention was based on our Protestant relational ideology (PRI) theory and cross-cultural research derived from this theory. An experiment compared the effectiveness of this novel intervention with the well established cultural assimilator training. Results show that compared to cultural assimilator training, relational ideology training is more effective in improving managers' task performance and affective adjustment in cross-cultural ventures. Important practical and theoretical benefits can be gained from integrating theoretical advances in cultural psychology into cross-cultural training. We discuss the implications of RI training as an empirically validated intervention for Americans living locally yet working globally.

East Asians have been found to reason in relatively holistic fashion and Americans in relatively analytic fashion. It has been proposed that these cognitive differences are the result of social practices that encourage interdependence for Asians and independence for Americans. If so, cognitive differences might be found even across regions that are geographically close. We compared performance on a categorization task of relatively interdependent southern Italians and relatively independent northern Italians and found the former to reason in a more holistic fashion than the latter. Furthermore, as it has been argued that working class social practices encourage interdependence and middle class practices encourage independence, we anticipated that working class participants might reason in a more holistic fashion than middle class participants. This is what we found – at least for southern Italy.

Westerners' perceptions tend to focus on salient foreground objects, whereas Asians are more inclined to focus on contexts. We hypothesized that such culturally specific patterns of attention may be afforded by the perceptual environment of each culture. In order to test this hypothesis, we randomly sampled pictures of scenes from small, medium, and large cities in Japan and the United States. Using both subjective and objective measures, Study 1 demonstrated that Japanese scenes were more ambiguous and contained more elements than American scenes. Japanese scenes thus may encourage perception of the context more than American scenes. In Study 2, pictures of locations in cities were presented as primes, and participants' subsequent patterns of attention were measured. Both Japanese and American participants primed with Japanese scenes attended more to contextual information than did those primed with American scenes. These results provide evidence that culturally characteristic environments may afford distinctive patterns of perception.

Background: Cross-cultural differences in cognition suggest that Westerners use categories more than Easterners, but these differences have only been investigated in young adults. Objective: The contributions of cognitive resource and the extent of cultural exposure are explored for free recall by investigating cross-cultural differences in categorical organization in younger and older adults. Cultural differences in the use of categories should be larger for elderly than young because categorization is a well-practiced strategy for Westerners, but age-related cognitive resource limitations may make the strategy difficult for elderly Easterners to implement. Therefore, we expect that cultural differences in categorization will be magnified in elderly adults relative to younger adults, with Americans categorizing more than Chinese. Methods: Across two studies, 112 young and 112 elderly drawn from two cultures (American and Chinese) encoded words presented in their native language. One word list contained categorically-unrelated words and the other, categorically-related words; both lists were presented in the participants’ native language. In experiment 1, the words were strong category associates, and in experiment 2, the words were weak category associates. Participants recalled all the words they could remember, and the number of words recalled and degree of clustering by category were analyzed. Results: As predicted, cultural differences emerged for the elderly, with East-Asians using categories less than Americans during recall of highly-associated category exemplars (experiment 1). For recall of low-associate exemplars, East-Asians overall categorized less than Americans (experiment 2). Surprisingly, these differences in the use of categories did not lead to cultural differences in the number of words recalled. The expected effects of age were apparent with elderly recalling less than young, but in contrast to previous studies, elderly also categorized less than young. Conclusion: These studies provide support for the notion that cultural differences in categorical organization are larger for elderly adults than young, although culture did not impact the amount recalled. These data suggest that culture and age interact to influence cognition.

In the past decade, cultural differences in perceptual judgment and memory have been observed: Westerners attend more to focal objects, whereas East Asians attend more to contextual information. However, the underlying mechanisms for the apparent differences in cognitive processing styles have not been known. In the present study, we examined the possibility that the cultural differences arise from culturally different viewing patterns when confronted with a naturalistic scene. We measured the eye movements of American and Chinese participants while they viewed photographs with a focal object on a complex background. In fact, the Americans fixated more on focal objects than did the Chinese, and the Americans tended to look at the focal object more quickly. In addition, the Chinese made more saccades to the background than did the Americans. Thus, it appears that differences in judgment and memory may have their origins in differences in what is actually attended as people view a scene.

J. P. Rushton and A. R. Jensen (2005) ignore or misinterpret most of the evidence of greatest relevance to the question of heritability of the Black–White IQ gap. A dispassionate reading of the evidence on the association of IQ with degree of European ancestry for members of Black populations, convergence of Black and White IQ in recent years, alterability of Black IQ by intervention programs, and adoption studies lend no support to a hereditarian interpretation of the Black–White IQ gap. On the contrary, the evidence most relevant to the question indicates that the genetic contribution to the Black–White IQ gap is nil. Rushton and Jensen’s (2005) article is characterized by failure to cite, in any but the most cursory way, strong evidence against their position. Their lengthy presentation of indirectly relevant evidence which, in light of the direct evidence against the hereditarian view they prefer, has little probative value, and their “scorecard” tallies of evidence on various points cannot be sustained by the evidence.

East Asians and Westerners perceive the world and think about it in very different ways. Westerners are inclined to attend to some focal object, analyzing its attributes and categorizing it in an effort to find out what rules govern its behavior. Rules used include formal logic. Causal attributions tend to focus exclusively on the object and are therefore often mistaken. East Asians are more likely to attend to a broad perceptual and conceptual field, noticing relationships and changes and grouping objects based on family resemblance rather than category membership. Causal attributions emphasize the context. Social factors are likely to be important in directing attention. East Asians live in complex social networks with prescribed role relations. Attention to context is important to effective functioning. More independent Westerners live in less constraining social worlds and have the luxury of attending to the object and their goals with respect to it. The physical ‘‘ affordances’’ of the environment may also influence perception. The built environments of the East are more complex and contain more objects than do those of the West. In addition, artistic products of the East emphasize the field and deemphasize individual objects, including people. Western art renders less of the field and emphasizes individual objects and people., Culture et point de vue. Les extrême-orientaux et les occidentaux perçoivent et pensent le monde de façons très différentes. Les occidentaux ont tendance à porter leur attention sur des objets singuliers, analysant leur attributs et les catégorisant en essayant de mettre à jour quelles règles gouvernent leur comportements. Les règles utilisées incluent la logique formelle. Les attributions causales tendent à se focaliser exclusivement sur l’objet et sont par conséquent fautives. Les extrêmeorientaux portent leur attention sur un large champ perceptif et conceptuel, notant les relations et les changements, et regroupant les objets sur la base de ressemblances plutôt que sur l’appartenance catégorielle. Les attributions causales accordent de l’importance au contexte. Les extrême-orientaux vivent dans des réseaux sociaux complexes avec des relations de rôles prescrites. L’attention au contexte est importante pour le fonctionnement effectif. Les occidentaux, plus indépendants, vivent dans des mondes sociaux moins contraignants et ont le loisir de prêter attention aux objets en soi. Les «affordances » physiques de l’environnement peuvent également influencer la perception. Les environnements construits de l’Est sont plus complexes et contiennent plus d’objets que ceux de l’Ouest. De plus, les productions artistiques de l’Est donnent plus d’importance au champ qu’aux objets individuels, humains inclus. Au contraire, l’art occidental porte moins sur le champ et appuie sur les objets individuels et les humains., Nisbett Richard E., Masuda Takahiko. Culture and Point of View. In: Intellectica. Revue de l'Association pour la Recherche Cognitive, n°46-47, 2007/2-3. Culture and Society: Some Viewpoints of Cognitive Scientists. pp. 153-172.

Four experiments provided evidence that East-West differences in attention to indirect meaning are more pronounced in work settings compared with nonwork settings as suggested by prior research on Protestant relational ideology. Study 1 compared errors in interpreting indirect messages in work and nonwork contexts across three cultures. Studies 2 and 3 examined differences in self-reported indirectness with coworkers versus nonwork acquaintances across three cultures controlling for variation in individualism--collectivism. Study 4 examined self-reported indirectness in bicultural managers and experimentally manipulated the salience of Western versus Eastern culture. The results showed that Americans, but not East Asians, were less attentive to indirect cues in work than nonwork settings and that East-West differences in indirectness were greater in work than nonwork settings.

More conservatives would provide advantages, and social psychologists may not be as opposed to increasing the number of conservatives as Duarte et al. think. Recruitment problems concern primarily self-selection and biases in undergraduate instruction. Social psychologists should welcome having conservatives in the field to serve as a conduit for our theories and methods to conservative intellectuals and policy makers.

The authors examined cultural preferences for formal versus intuitive reasoning among East Asian (Chinese and Korean), Asian American, and European American university students. We investigated categorization (Studies 1 and 2), conceptual structure (Study 3), and deductive reasoning (Studies 3 and 4). In each study a cognitive conflict was activated between formal and intuitive strategies of reasoning. European Americans, more than Chinese and Koreans, set aside intuition in favor of formal reasoning. Conversely, Chinese and Koreans relied on intuitive strategies more than European Americans. Asian Americans’ reasoning was either identical to that of European Americans, or intermediate. Differences emerged against a background of similar reasoning tendencies across cultures in the absence of conflict between formal and intuitive strategies.

The authors investigated social inference practices of Koreans and Americans in two novel domains: behavioral predictions and folk theories of behavior. When dispositional and situational inferences were disentangled, Koreans showed dispositional thinking to the same extent as Americans. This was the case for behavioral predictions based on individual difference information (Study 1) and for endorsements of a dispositionist theory of behavior (Studies 1 and 3). Consistent with previous research in the causal attribution and attitude attribution paradigms, Koreans made greater situational inferences in behavioral prediction as long as situational information was salient (Study 2) and endorsed a situationist theory of behavior more (Studies 1 and 3). Koreans also differed from Americans in believing personality to be more malleable (Study 3).

Five studies showed that Chinese and Americans perceive change differently. Chinese anticipated more changes from an initial state than Americans did. When events were changing in a particular direction, Chinese were more likely than Americans to predict change in the direction of change. Moreover, for patterns with changing slopes, Chinese predicted greater change in the way slopes changed, in comparison to Americans. In addition, people who predicted change were perceived as wise by Chinese more than by Americans. Implications for social attribution, tolerance for contradiction, persistence on tasks, and the illusion of control are discussed.

The authors find East Asians to be holistic, attending to the entire field and assigning causality to it, making relatively little use of categories and formal logic, and relying on "dialectical" reasoning, whereas Westerners are more analytic, paying attention primarily to the object and the categories to which it belongs and using rules, including formal logic, to understand its behavior. The 2 types of cognitive processes are embedded in different naive metaphysical systems and tacit epistemologies. The authors speculate that the origin of these differences is traceable to markedly different social systems. The theory and the evidence presented call into question long-held assumptions about basic cognitive processes and even about the appropriateness of the process-content distinction.

The authors tested the hypothesis that East Asians, because of their holistic reasoning, take contradiction and inconsistency for granted and consequently are less likely than Americans to experience surprise. Studies 1 and 2 showed that Korean participants displayed less surprise and greater hindsight bias than American participants did when a target's behavior contradicted their expectations. Studies 3 and 4 further demonstrated that even when contradiction was created in highly explicit ways, Korean participants experienced little surprise, whereas American participants reported substantial surprise. We discuss the implications of these findings for various issues, including the psychology of conviction, cognitive dissonance, and the development of science.

East Asian and American causal reasoning differs significantly. East Asians understand behavior in terms of complex interactions between dispositions of the person or other object and contextual factors, whereas Americans often view social behavior primarily as the direct unfolding of dispositions. These culturally differing causal theories seem to be rooted in more pervasive, culture-specific mentalities in East Asia and the West. The Western mentality is analytic, focusing attention on the object, categorizing it by reference to its attributes, and ascribing causality based on rules about it. The East Asian mentality is holistic, focusing attention on the field in which the object is located and ascribing causality by reference to the relationship between the object and the field.