Preferences versus strategies as explanations for culture-specific behavior.
نویسندگان
چکیده
In this article, we present a new framework for interpreting cultural differences in behavior -- what we call the institutional approach. In this framework, individuals' behaviors are conceptualized as strategies adapted to various incentive structures. Cultural differences in behavior are thus viewed as differences in the default adaptive strategies that individuals come to rely on in unclear situations. Through two studies, we demonstrate that the East Asian "preference" for conformity is actually a default strategy to avoid accrual of negative reputation. When the possibility for negative evaluations in a given situation was clearly defined, cultural differences in the tendency for uniqueness disappeared. This approach carries important implications to psychologists who interpret cultural differences in behavior in terms of preferences, and can serve as a common framework branching out toward other disciplines in the social sciences.
منابع مشابه
How Preferences For Eager Versus Vigilant Judgment Strategies Affect Self-Serving Conclusions.
People are often motivated to reach self-serving conclusions during judgment. This article examines how such self-serving judgment outcomes are influenced by preferences for different judgment strategies. Two studies tested how preferences for eager (promotion-oriented) versus vigilant (prevention-oriented) judgment strategies affected self-serving explanations for success or failure. Regardles...
متن کاملInvestigating Iranian Language Learners’ Use of Circumlocution for Culture-Specific Referents
This study investigated Iranian English language learners’ use of circumlocution for culture-specific referents. A discourse completion test (DCT) was designed in English and Persian, consisting of items dealing with Iranian culture-specific notions and distributed among 3 groups. The Persian language group received the Persian version, whereas the English language learners, divided into high a...
متن کاملStigler–Becker versus Myers–Briggs: why preference-based explanations are scientifically meaningful and empirically important
Economists typically object to preference-based explanations of human behavior; differences in preferences “explain everything and therefore nothing”. But this argument is only correct assuming that no empirical evidence exists to discipline preference-based explanations. In fact, over the past decade, personality psychologists have produced a robust collection of stylized facts about human pre...
متن کاملA Trojan Horse for Sociology? Preferences versus Evolution and Morality
Herbert Gintis and Dirk Helbing have developed a highly impressive, over-arching theoretical framework, using rational choice theory, general equilibrium theory, and game theory. They extend this to cover “moral, social and other-regarding values,” plus social norms, culture, and institutions. While accepting the value of their contribution, I argue that there is a tension within their work bet...
متن کاملPreferred Explanations: Theory and Generation via Planning
In this paper we examine the general problem of generating preferred explanations for observed behavior with respect to a model of the behavior of a dynamical system. This problem arises in a diversity of applications including diagnosis of dynamical systems and activity recognition. We provide a logical characterization of the notion of an explanation. To generate explanations we identify and ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- Psychological science
دوره 19 6 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2008