Chapter 6: Sociocultural Approach to Understanding Behaviour

Chapter Outline

Essential Questions
How do psychologists adopt a sociocultural approach to study behaviour?
How does membership to groups influence our sense of self?
How do we acquire behaviour by observing group members?
What factors influence the formation of stereotypes and what are their effect?
What is culture?
What are cultural dimensions?
How do the processes of enculturation and acculturation influence individual attitudes, identity and behaviour?
How has globalisation influenced behaviour? (HL only)

Myths and Misconceptions

The more people are present during an emergency the higher the likelihood people will help.

This is not necessarily so. We will read about studies that investigated factors that influence a person’s willingness to help someone in an emergency. Surprisingly, the more people who are present, the less likely it is that an individual will help.

Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus.

That men and women have different ways of communicating was a popular idea of the 1990s but it is an overstatement. Lilienfeld et al. (2009) found that there is little difference in how much each gender talks and women are only slightly more willing to self-disclose (self-disclose = share private information) than men. The only significant difference was that women were better at reading non-verbal cues than men. The authors argue that the myth that men and women have totally different communication styles is an exaggeration.

The majority can impose their beliefs and attitudes on a minority.

We will examine the factors that influence conformity. Asch (1955) showed how male college students will give the wrong answer on a visual perception test so as to fit in with the group and avoid social rejection. On the other hand, researchers have shown that the minority can influence the majority in situations when the minority expresses a strong commitment to an alternative opinion.

1. A Historical Perspective on the Sociocultural Approach to Behaviour

Social psychology is the study of how groups influence behaviour. Early social psychologists included Asch (1955) who studied conformity, Milgram (1963, 1974) who investigated obedience and Haney et al. (1973) who examined the power of social settings like prisons to dramatically change behaviour. Darley and Latané (1968) wanted to know why we ignore cries for help. Why we hold stereotypes and prejudices against others is another topic of interest. Two new interests have emerged in modern social psychology, social cognition and culture. How do we construct our social world and form opinions and attitudes about others? How does culture influence behaviour?

2. Research Methods of the Sociocultural Approach

2.1 Case Studies

The section below demonstrates the range of methods used by social psychologists and the types of question they ask about human behaviour.

Sociocultural researchers take a holistic approach to studying human behaviour. They argue that all humans are social animals and their behaviour cannot be explained solely by either the actions of neurons or an individual’s cognition. Instead, human behaviour also needs to be examined in its social and cultural context. Case studies are useful because they aim to give a detailed picture of an individual or small group of people in different contexts. They have the potential of generating rich data with real relevance to a participant’s life.

2.2 Natural Experiments

In a natural experiment the independent variable is not manipulated. Instead it occurs naturally, in the normal course of life. It can be a factor like gender, ethnicity or age; it can also be an event such as unemployment in a town or even the introduction of TV to a remote area.

2.3 Field Experiments

Field experiments are conducted in the participants’ own environments. Like all experiments, the investigators manipulate an independent variable (IV) and measure the effect on the DV. Participants are often unaware that they are in an experiment. Because of their natural location which offers less control over variables other than the IV, field experiments are much less artificial than experiments carried out in a laboratory and their results are more ecologically valid.

2.4 Observations

Observations are frequently carried out by researchers taking a sociocultural approach because this method examines behaviour in its social settings. Researchers have a number of options including participant or non-participant observations carried out covertly or overtly (see Chapter 2). To triangulate methods, participants who have been observed may also be interviewed.

More recently there has been a shift away from covert observation to either participant or non-participant overt observation. New filming techniques have made observations and recording less obstructive and participants are more likely to act naturally.

2.5 Emic and Etic Approaches to Research

The words ‘emic’ and ‘etic’ refer to two different approaches to researching human beings. The terms originated in linguistics and anthropology in the 1950s and 1960s. The emic approach to research focuses on the perspectives and words of participants. The researcher using this emic approach will use accounts and descriptions given in the very words used by the members of the group or culture being studied. The researcher focuses on specific features of the group or culture. The researcher tries to put aside psychological theories and let the data from the participants ‘speak for itself’. This approach is the basis for ‘grounded theory’ in which the theory grows out of the material, rather than the theory being used to examine if the data supports it or not. The data creates the meaning. Therefore, the emic approach is often used when researching new topics. The emic approach appreciates the uniqueness of the context being studied and local viewpoints.

The etic approach to research is the opposite as it is focused on the universal. The etic approach uses as its starting point theories and concepts from outside of the setting being studied. The researcher using this etic approach will use existing theory and see if it applies to a new setting or population. The categories used are those that have meaning for the researcher. One of the strengths of the etic approach is that it allows more general cross-cultural concepts to emerge. Sometimes both approaches are used to provide a more holistic picture of behaviour within and across cultures.

2.6 Ethics and Sociocultural Research Methods

Ethics refers to a system of moral values or the way people distinguish right from wrong. The American Psychological Association (APA) and the British Psychological Society (BPS) require all their members to adhere to its code of ethics, which applies to the treatment of both humans and animals.

The desire to investigate human behaviour under natural circumstances has sometimes led to ethical problems associated with the sociocultural research methods. They are mainly related to informed consent, access to the research after the data has been collected and causing distress to participants once they learnt they had been deceived. A significant amount of research is naturalistic – that is ‘as it really is’ – and has involved covert participant observation. This approach has been criticised on ethical grounds. Many studies from the past would not be accepted by current ethics committees. However, these studies have contributed significantly to knowledge regarding human behaviour and it could be argued that the end justifies the means.

As you read about the studies in this chapter, note any ethical considerations the researchers will have taken or needed to take before, during and after the research.

3. The Individual and the Group

Social identity theory refers to the way someone thinks about themselves and evaluates themselves in relation to groups. Social identity theory posits that a person’s sense of who they are is based on their membership of social groups.

Source: IB Psychology Guide

Social identity theory was first proposed by Henri Tajfel (1971). He argued that the groups to which we belong are an important source of pride and self-esteem. We can feel good about ourselves by boosting the status of any group we belong to. Age groups, sporting teams, hobbies, gender, religions, ethnic groups and nations are all examples of groups that can give us our sense of social identity and belonging. For example, we may believe that our country, our team, our school is better than any other, and therefore other groups and their members are inferior. Unfortunately, identifying with a specific ‘ingroup’ to improve our self-esteem can lead to competition and intolerance against an ‘outgroup’. Tajfel’s theory is very influential in explaining stereotyping, discrimination and prejudice.

Tajfel identified three processes in his theory of social identity.

Categorisation is a process of organising objects and people (including ourselves) into groups. Social categories such as young, old, teacher, bus driver, Asian, student and so on are used as they describe important attributes of that person. If we belong to such a category, then we share those attributes. Group membership involves acting appropriately and following the group’s norms of behaviour. We all belong to many different groups and appropriate behaviour as a student might differ somewhat from appropriate behaviour in the family or with a group of friends.

Social identification is when we adopt the identity of ‘our’ group. If you have categorised yourself as a student, the chances are you will adopt the identity of a student and begin to conform to the norms of the ‘student’ group. Your self-esteem will be linked to this group and other groups you belong to and help define who you are.

Social comparison involves comparing your group with others. To maintain or improve your self-esteem, your group needs to compare well with other groups. This is critical to understanding prejudice because once two groups identify themselves as rivals they are likely to compete so that members can maintain and improve their self-esteem.

Focus on Research

Tajfel et al. (1971) investigated social categorisation and intergroup behaviour. The aim of the laboratory experiment was to discover the minimum requirements for participants to identify themselves as members of a group through the process of social categorisation. Their research question was: Can social categorisation lead to intergroup behaviour which discriminates against the outgroup and favours the ingroup?

Forty-eight 14–15-year-old schoolboys from a British school were the participants of the study. They were randomly assigned to be members of a ‘Klee’ group or a ‘Kandinsky’ group. (Klee and Kandinsky are abstract painters of the 20th century.) Though the assignment to the groups was arbitrary, they were told they had been assigned to the group based on their preferences for the art of either painter. The boys had no contact with each other and all personal details were anonymous. Each participant was given a code number. All tasks in the experiment were completed in private.

Participants were asked to distribute small sums of money between pairs of recipients using specially constructed reward matrices. The amount of money distributed was the DV of the experiment.

Participants had to make decisions about these monetary rewards by filling out forty-four different matrices. The three different types of matrices were the IV.

Figure 1.1 - An example of one of the tasks the participants were given.

An example of Maximum Joint Profit (MJP) would be the choice of 13 and 13 as that selection provides the largest reward to members of both groups. An example of the Maximum Ingroup Profit (MIP) would be a choice of 19 and 25 as that would be the largest reward for the member of their own group irrespective of the reward provided to the other group. An example of Maximum Difference (MD) would be the choice of 7 and 1 as that has the largest possible difference in reward between members of the different groups (in favour of the ingroup). By analysing the choice of the participants, the researchers could determine if the ingroup and outgroup were rewarded equally, or if there was favouritism towards the ingroup or derogation against the outgroup (derogation = the act of treating someone in a way that shows you do not respect them).

In general, participants were fair in how they awarded rewards but there was a significant tendency to give more money to ingroup members than to outgroup members. The researchers noted there was no rationale for any of these schoolboys to feel that they somehow ‘belonged’ to their groups. There was no important shared history with other group members but ingroup favouritism and outgroup derogation did occur.

Tafjel’s research led to other social psychologists investigating social groups and how membership of groups influenced individuals. One theory about how we make sense of our social world is social representation theory proposed by Moscovici and Nemeth (1974). They are similar to cognitive schemas but in this case applied to a group. This schema provides information about the group’s norms and how members communicate with each other. They establish a common understanding between group members and they contain all information about the identity of the group and how it functions in society. The study outlined below uses this theory to understand the social world of people living in a distinct area of London.

Focus on Research

Howarth (2002) aimed to understand the impact of social representations on self-esteem and identity of young people living in Brixton, South London, UK. At the time, Brixton had a high proportion of people of colour and the media often associated the area with crime, drugs and violence. Her research question focused on the social consequences of being seen as part of a community labelled ‘violent, ‘criminal’ and ‘unruly’.

The study consisted of eight focus groups based on friendship with a total of forty-four teenagers between the ages of twelve and sixteen as participants. Five interviews with the head teachers of Brixton’s secondary schools were also undertaken. Questions were concerned with what it was like living in Brixton and what people outside Brixton thought about Brixton. As is standard procedure in focus groups, the researcher used a topic guideline to ensure that questions on community, inclusion, exclusion, identity, ethnicity, the media, prejudice, racism and schools were covered.

After data collection, Howarth undertook a thematic analysis and some of the themes that emerged included the role of media, the role of the family, the perception that Brixton is black and the presence of self-hatred. Howarth noted that a very negative representation of ‘being from Brixton’ by those from outside the area was not shared by all the people living there. Some participants found that members of their community were ‘diverse, creative, and vibrant’, a very different view to most outsiders.

The conclusion of the study supported social identity theory.

Social cognitive theory suggests behaviour is modelled by other members of a group and acquired through observation or imitation based on the consequences of a behaviour.

Bandura (1977) was one of the first psychologists to investigate how behaviour is modelled and acquired through observation or imitation. He argued that behaviour is learned from the environment through the process of observation. Children observe the people around them behaving in various ways. This is illustrated by his famous Bobo doll (Bobo doll = inflatable toy clown) experiment (Bandura et al., 1961).

Focus on Research

Bandura et al. (1961) aimed to test if children will imitate aggression modelled by an adult and, if so, to examine if children were more likely to imitate same-sex models.

Four hypotheses were tested:

Children observing aggression modelled by an adult will imitate the behaviour, even if the model is no longer present.
Non-aggressive models will have an aggression-inhibiting behaviour (self-control).
Children will imitate the behaviour of the same-sex model more than that of a model of the opposite sex.
Boys will show more aggressive behaviour than girls, with the highest aggression being demonstrated by boys exposed to a male model.

This was a laboratory experiment. The IV was the aggression of the model and the DV was the observed aggressive behaviour of the participant. An opportunity sample used 36 girls and 36 boys from the nursery of an American university from an age group ranging from three years to six years, with the average age being four years and four months. The children were matched for their level of physical and verbal aggression and aggression towards objects.

The children were divided into three groups as follows.

Each child in Condition 1 was exposed for about ten minutes to a model showing physical and verbal aggression towards an inflatable Bobo doll. Children in Condition 2 were exposed for a similar period to a non-aggressive model who assembled toys. Children in the control group did not see any model.

All the children were then taken individually to play in a room full of toys. After a short while, the child was told that the toys were for other children and not for them. The child was then taken to a third room filled with toys, including a Bobo doll.

The child was allowed to play in this room for twenty minutes while the researchers observed the children from behind a one-way mirror. Measures were taken of physical and verbal aggression that imitated the earlier model. Researchers also measured the child’s non-imitative aggressive behaviour.

The researchers concluded that children exposed to aggressive behaviour imitated the same aggression physically and verbally. This indicated the role of observational learning. Participants exposed to the non-aggressive model and those in the control group did not demonstrate these aggressive behaviours.

The results for testing aggression-inhibiting behaviour were mixed. Children who observed the non-aggressive male model showed much less non-imitative aggressive behaviour than the control group. However, boys who observed the opposite sex non-aggressive model showed more imitative aggressive behaviour as compared to boys in the control group.

Violent behaviour by boys in Condition 1 was influenced significantly more by an aggressive male model than by an aggressive female model. Results for girls were less extreme. They did, however, appear more influenced by an aggressive female model than by an aggressive male model. In same-sex aggressive conditions, girls were more likely to imitate verbal aggression while boys showed more physical aggression.

In all of the conditions, boys were significantly more physically aggressive than girls.

Bandura’s study provided many insights into social learning and much subsequent research was carried out by other psychologists. There is an awareness that children are surrounded by many influential role models, such as family members, television characters, friends and teachers at school. These models provide examples of behaviour which are observed and, under certain circumstances, imitated. A child is more likely to attend to and imitate those people it perceives as similar to itself, either the same age and/or the same sex. If a child imitates behaviour and the consequences are rewarding, the child is likely to continue performing the behaviour. If a parent sees a little girl consoling her doll and says ‘what a good girl you are’, this makes it more likely that she will repeat the behaviour. Her behaviour has been reinforced. Reinforcement can be external or internal and can be positive or negative. If a child wants approval from parents or friends, this approval is an external reinforcement, but feeling happy about this approval is an internal reinforcement. Finally, the child will also take into account what happens to other people when deciding whether or not to copy someone’s actions. This is known as vicarious reinforcement. If they see someone punished for imitating behaviour, the child will learn the behaviour, but will not display it. Identification with the role model occurs and involves adopting observed behaviours, values, beliefs and attitudes of the person with whom the child is identifying.

Bandura built upon his original theory of social learning to broaden its scope and he introduced the concept of self-efficacy. The idea here is the importance of a person’s perception of their chances of success based on their previous experiences. When a person’s sense of self-efficacy is high, they believe that they can behave in ways that will lead to success. By contrast, when a person’s sense of self-efficacy is low, they believe they are incapable of success and may not even try. These beliefs are very powerful and impact relationships, health and work as well as traits of persistence. This sense of self-efficacy is shaped by past situations and experiences that a person encounters in life.

Berry (2003) undertook research into social cognitive theory. He explored how cross-cultural images and portrayals on television might influence the multicultural attitudes, values and beliefs of children. Based on his research, he argued for more culturally diverse role models on North American television: ‘[children] need to understand from television that to be female, disabled, or religiously and ethnically different does not make you “disadvantaged,” “deprived,” or “inferior,” and that it is important for all children to take pride in their unique customs, skin colour, language, and lifestyle’ (p. 365).

The social cognitive theory has been applied to developmental psychology to understand how adolescents look to role models to identify with because they are in the process of developing their own identities. One focus has been on the effect on young people of playing violent video games. While most research has concluded that the highly interactive nature of these games leads to identification with the role models and subsequent imitation of their behaviour, there is no consensus of opinion about the negative and positive effects of video gaming.

Focus on Research

Konijn et al. (2007) tested the hypothesis that violent video games are especially likely to increase aggression when players identify with violent game characters. One hundred and twelve Dutch adolescent boys with low education ability were randomly assigned to play a realistic or fantasy violent or non-violent video game. Next, they competed with an ostensible partner (seemingly a true partner, but in reality a confederate who was employed by Konijn to act in a certain way) on a reaction time task in which the winner could blast the loser with loud noise through headphones (the aggression measure). Participants were told that high noise levels could cause permanent hearing damage. Habitual video game exposure, trait aggressiveness and sensation seeking were controlled for. As expected, the most aggressive participants were those who played a violent game and wished they were like a violent character in that game. These participants used noise levels loud enough to cause permanent hearing damage to their partners, even though their partners had not provoked them. These results suggest that identifying with violent video game characters makes players more aggressive. Players were especially likely to identify with violent characters in realistic games and in games in which they felt immersed.

An evaluation of social cognitive theory

Social cognitive theory has remained popular. It convincingly explains why children raised in aggressive or racist households tend to grow up to be aggressive or racist adults (there is a strong link to stereotype formation here). It explains how teenagers can turn to peer role models that are conformist or non-conformist and how some television programmes and video games can have a powerful influence on children because they will imitate the violence shown. This approach to understanding behaviour takes into account cognition and social pressures to provide insights into the learning of aggression and gender role development. Social cognitive theory has also formed the basis of treatments for phobias, with modelling-based therapies.

Social cognitive theorists are committed to the controlled experimental approach so as to establish cause and effect. However, this does mean that some of the studies lack ecological validity.

Ask Yourself
Do you think violent television and video games should be banned for certain ages? Why? Why not?

3.3 Stereotypes

A stereotype is a generalized and rather fixed way of thinking about a group of people. Examples of stereotypes influencing behaviour could be prejudice and discrimination. The theory of stereotype threat indicates that internalized stereotypes could influence an individual’s self-perception and behaviour in negative ways.

Source: IB Psychology Guide

Cardwell (1996) defines a stereotype as a fixed, over-generalised belief about a particular group of people. The word ‘stereotype’ originally described a solid plate of type-metal that was used for printing instead of using the original. Over time it became a metaphor for developing a set of unchanging and often exaggerated ideas about others. ‘All women are bad drivers’ would be an example of an inaccurate stereotype with no truth behind it. In fact, often car insurance for women is less expensive as they have fewer accidents than men. ‘All men are physically stronger than women’ is an example of a stereotype with some truth behind it. Because of their ratio of muscle to fat and bone, most men are physically stronger than most women.

Stereotypes can be both positive or negative, but they fail to consider any variations from one individual to another. A stereotype can be considered a schema, as we categorise people into a group and apply general characteristics, forming a schema of how members of this group behave. If we limit our perceptions of others to the definitions of the stereotypes, and do not add specific information for each person, then we can develop biases against whole groups of people.

Our social world is very complex and provides us with a great deal of information. To avoid information overload, we use stereotypes because they can easily be applied to people. We all use categories of people, places and things to understand and make sense of the world around us. In the course of stereotyping, a useful category – say, women – becomes coloured by additional associations, sometimes negative. We process the gender, age and ethnicity of others and our minds respond with messages that say things like ‘weak, sentimental, hostile’. When these qualities do not reflect reality, a stereotype is no longer an aid to understanding but rather a source of misunderstanding.

One explanation of the formation of stereotypes is Tajfel and Turner’s (1979) social identity theory. As you recall, this theory proposes that we categorise others into ingroups and outgroups. We tend to favour the ingroup which leads to a positive stereotyping of the ingroup. We tend to see our group in a positive light. Members of the outgroup are stereotyped in a negative way. To Tajfel, stereotyping lifts the self-esteem of members of the ingroup.

Brigham (1986) conducted a study into stereotyping that supports social identity theory. He researched eyewitness identification procedures and found that Caucasians were more likely to stereotype African Americans as criminals than other whites in eyewitness identification. This is likely due to the tendency to view people that belong to our group more favourably, while we tend to view members of other groups as having undesirable qualities.

To explain stereotyping, Hamilton and Gifford (1976) developed a theory of illusory correlations. (See Chapter 5.) This theory distinguishes between stereotyping as the encoding of new information and stereotyping as the application of existing knowledge. They focused on the formation of new stereotypes which they argued are the result of illusory correlations. These illusory correlations are triggered when two fairly infrequent situations or events take place at the same time. This unusual combination captures the observer’s attention and leads to stronger encoding. To test their theory, Hamilton and Gifford performed an experiment in which participants read desirable and undesirable trait adjectives about the members of one majority group and one minority group. Proportionally, there were the same amount of desirable and undesirable traits for each group. However, they found that participants over-estimated the frequency of undesirable traits in the minority group. Though Hamilton and Gifford (1976) acknowledged that society and culture help form stereotypes, they argued that ‘cognitive factors alone can be sufficient to produce differential perceptions of social groups’ (p. 405).

In the same way that the theory of illusory correlations provides insights into how stereotypes might first form, the availability heuristic and the confirmation bias help explain why stereotypes persist. According to the availability heuristic, the more easily an event is retrieved, the more likely we are to overestimate its frequency. For example, if we see a car driven by a young man being involved in an accident, we only need to see a young man driving a little erratically a few days later to become convinced that ‘all young people are bad drivers’. Due to the confirmation bias, we may ignore examples of good driving and focus more on poor driving by young people.

Other theories of why stereotypes can arise are the grain of truth hypothesis and gatekeeper theory. Campbell (1967) states that stereotypes can be formed from two sources: from a person’s own experiences with that group of people, or they can learn about groups of people through gatekeepers like the media, parents and friends. In both cases, there is often a small amount of evidence (‘grain of truth’) that gets exaggerated and generalised. Gatekeepers use stereotypes to define groups and their members, and these stereotypes become part of the culture and are seen as ‘true’.

A key question that several psychologists have asked is whether one individual is more likely to hold stereotypes than others. As early as 1954, Gordon Allport claimed that the cognitive processes of prejudiced people, who form negative stereotypes about others, differed from the cognitive processes of tolerant people (1954, p. 170). This means that a person’s stereotyping and prejudice is probably directed at many groups and is a feature of the prejudiced person’s personality. Schaller et al. (1995) conducted two studies that confirmed the ‘prejudiced personality’ existed, but emphasised that the effects of the social context in either mitigating (mitigate = to make less severe) or increasing the tendency to develop negative stereotypes needed further research.

Ask Yourself
Do you think there is such a thing as a ‘prejudiced personality’? Why? Why not?

Effects of stereotypes

Stereotypes can have powerful effects on how we view and interact with others. Information about other groups can be subject to bias and distortion and poor judgements about others can easily follow.

Focus on Research

Cohen (1981) performed an experiment to determine whether stereotypes can affect people’s memories. Participants were told that the woman in a video they watched was either a waitress or librarian. When participants were asked to recall details about the video, they remembered information more consistent with the commonly accepted stereotypes of these two careers. The participants who thought the woman in the video was a librarian were more likely to remember she wore glasses, and those who thought she was a waitress were more likely to remember her drinking alcohol. Cohen concluded that stereotypes can affect the type of information we focus on and what information we remember.

Steele and Aronson (1995) were also interested in the effects of stereotypes on behaviour and they described a phenomenon called stereotype threat. They defined this as a situation where individuals suspect their behaviours are being evaluated on the basis of a negative stereotype. In other words, people fear they are being judged as a member of a group and not as an individual and their performance tends to suffer. This then results in a self-fulfilling prophecy – they perform badly and that confirms the stereotype. To test this theory, participants were asked to take a problem-solving test. Participants were African Americans and European Americans. When African Americans were told that the test would represent their verbal skills, they performed worse than European Americans. But when they were told that the test was just for studying how problems are generally solved, they performed as well as the European Americans. Steele and Aronson claim that stereotype threat, due to the knowledge of a negative stereotype, can cause emotional distress and pressure to perform well. Steele (1997) went on to focus on the poor academic performance of some African Americans compared to Caucasians. He noted that African Americans were well aware of negative stereotypes, which aroused deep-seated fears that distracted them from doing as well as they could.

Inzlicht and Ben-Zeev (2000) investigated if stereotype threat affected females’ performance on maths problem-solving if they were placed in an environment where they were outnumbered by males. Seventy-two female undergraduates at a US college were randomly assigned to the minority condition, that is, one female participant to two males or the same-sex condition, that is, three women. The participants were not told of the study’s purpose. They were instructed to complete either a maths test or a verbal test. The maths test was used to invoke the stereotype threat as this subject is widely considered more challenging for females than males. They were informed that their results would be shared with their group. Half of the participants were greeted by a female experimenter and the other half by a male experimenter. The results showed that females in the minority condition performed worse than females in the same-sex condition. This deficit was not present in the groups who completed the verbal test as males and females obtained similar scores. Inzlicht and Ben-Zeev concluded that placing high-achieving women in an environment in which they are outnumbered by men can cause a decrease in their performance.

Ask Yourself
Should schools be co-educational or single sex? How does this study contribute to this contentious issue?

3.4 Assessment Advice: The Individual and the Group

4. Cultural Origins of Behaviour and Cognition

4.1 Cultural and its Influence on Behaviour and Cognition

Matsumoto and Juang (2004, p.10) define culture as ‘a dynamic system of rules, explicit and implicit, established by groups to ensure their survival, involving attitudes, values, beliefs, norms and behaviours.’ A dynamic culture is by definition constantly shifting in response to environmental and social changes.

Cultural norms are part of a culture. They are patterns of behaviour typical to specific groups and are passed down through generations by ‘gatekeepers’ such as parents, teachers, elders and the media. Cultural norms influence almost every element of life, either visibly (as in the particular form of the marriage ceremony) or less visibly (as in assumptions about whom you may marry).

One way that culture has been conceptualised is to make a distinction between surface and deep culture. Surface culture includes things like food, dress, music, visual arts, crafts, dance, literature, language, celebrations and games. These aspects of culture can be easily observed by members of that culture and by outsiders. Deep culture includes concepts of time, ideas about personal space, types and forms of non-verbal communications, ideas about child-rearing, the nature of friendships and the concept of self. These beliefs, values and thought processes can be easily understood by members of that culture but may be less accessible to outsiders. These invisible aspects of deep culture influence the visible aspects of surface culture.

Cultures
Cultures are made up of a set of attitudes, behaviours, and symbols shared by a large group of people, and usually communicated from one generation to the next. Cultural groups are characterized by different norms and conventions.‌
Source: IB Psychology Guide

Focus on Research

Researchers investigating cultural groups and differences between these groups have adopted various approaches.

These include in-depth studies of single cultures, cross-cultural studies of more than one cultural group, or studies of bicultural groups (e.g. Chinese Canadians).

This study by Sanchez-Burks and Nisbet (2000) investigating Anglo-Americans and Mexican Americans is an example of a cross-cultural study. Their area of particular interest was intergroup dynamics in work settings. They theorised that Mexican and Mexican-American ("Latin") participants' strong interpersonal orientation would influence their preference for workgroups.

Type of study: An independent measures experiment.

Hypothesis: Latin participants would evaluate task and interpersonal workgroups more favourably than Anglo-Americans, and Anglo-Americans would evaluate task workgroups more favourably than Latins. Recommendations by Mexicans for improvements to the performance of workgroups would favour socioemotional aspects.

Participants: Two groups were recruited by volunteer sampling. 110 Mexican university students (52 men; 58 women) and 108 American students (57 men; 51 women) who identified themselves as either "white" or "Anglo-American".

Procedures: Participants viewed one of two 4-minute videotapes of language tutoring sessions that were either task-orientated or a mix of task orientation and socioemotional components (the latter included such interactions as a handshake, small talk, and discussion about a movie). One video depicted Mexicans, and the other depicted Anglo-Americans. Participants then filled out a questionnaire that measured their evaluation of the tutoring session's effectiveness and made suggestions for improvement.

Results: Both groups rated the task-orientated session more favourably, but the Mexican participants rated the task workgroup less favourably than the Anglo-Americans. The ratings of both groups were not affected by the ethnicity of the people depicted in the video. When asked to analyse what might improve the tutoring, the Mexicans emphasised socioemotional considerations more than the Anglo-Americans. Both Mexicans and Anglo-Americans made the same recommendations whether they believed the groups were composed of Anglo-Americans or Mexicans.

Conclusions: For Anglo-Americans, task success depends on minimising socioemotional concerns, whereas, for Latins, socioemotional aspects underpin efficiency and success.

Focus on Research Psychologists, especially those taking a sociocultural approach, have investigated social and cultural differences in interpersonal space.

Four categories of personal space have been identified: public, social, personal, and intimate. Hall (1966) argues that cultural norms are the most important factor influencing a person's preferred social distance in each of these social situations.

He divided cultures into "contact cultures", which use closer interpersonal distances and more touching, and "non-contact cultures", which use greater distances and less contact. Mediterranean, Latin American, and Middle Eastern societies are often cited as contact cultures, while American and Northern European societies are usually classified as non-contact cultures.

Sorokowska et al. (2017) conducted a study to compare preferred interpersonal distances from a wide range of countries. The team of researchers also aimed to determine if factors other than cultural norms influenced this behaviour.

Type of Study: Survey of 8,943 participants from 42 countries. Participants were volunteers. Ages ranged from 17-88, with a mean age of 39. There were 4,013 men and 4,887 women in the sample.

Hypotheses: This study had three hypotheses.

Hypothesis 1: That there would be significant variability in preferred interpersonal distances across countries when approaching a stranger (social distance), an acquaintance (personal distance), or a close person (intimate distance).

Hypothesis 2: That gender and age would influence the preferences participants would have for interpersonal distance, with women and younger people maintaining closer interpersonal distances.

Hypothesis 3: That some environmental and psychological factors could predict the variability of interpersonal distance across countries. Lower population growth rate and higher in-group favouritism would be associated with closer interpersonal distance preferences, and closer interpersonal distances would be seen in higher temperature areas.

Procedures: Participants completed a questionnaire consisting of demographic questions (age, sex) and three questions using graphics to depict their preferred interpersonal distance. Three separate categories of desired interpersonal distances were measured: distance to a) a stranger, b) an acquaintance, and c) a close person.

Main results: Mean comparisons showed significant variability in interpersonal distance across countries for different social interactions. The higher the annual temperature of a country, the closer the preferred distance from strangers.

Women, on average, preferred to maintain greater distance with acquaintances and strangers, and older participants also preferred greater distance.

Conclusion: Individual characteristics (age and gender), as well as cultural norms associated with various regions, influence interpersonal space preferences. Some variation in results can be explained by the climatic temperature of a given region.

4.2 Cultural Dimensions

Modern research on cultural dimensions comes from Hofstede’s original research in the 1960s and 1970s, which is described on Geert Hofstede’s website. He based his theory on a large survey of the attitudes and national values of 117,000 employees of IBM from 40 countries. More countries were later surveyed and more occupations were also included.

Hofstede originally distinguished four ‘cultural dimensions’ by which life in a society is organised. They are as follows.

Power Distance – the extent to which people in societies accept, or do not accept, a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification.

Individualism versus Collectivism – the extent to which people prefer a loosely knit social framework in which individuals are expected to take care of themselves and their immediate families or a tightly knit framework where individuals can expect their relatives or members of a particular in-group to look after them in exchange for loyalty. A society’s position on this dimension is reflected in whether people’s self-image is defined in terms of ‘I’ or ‘we’. Individualist cultures are seen as ‘I’ cultures and collectivist cultures as ‘we’ cultures.

Masculinity versus Femininity – the extent to which a society is competitive (masculine) or cooperative (feminine).

Uncertainty versus Avoidance – the extent to which the members of a society feel uncomfortable with uncertainty and ambiguity. The fundamental issue here is how a society deals with the unknown future. A society high in uncertainty avoidance tries to control people’s behaviour through rigid codes of belief and is intolerant of unconventional ideas.

Two dimensions were added later as follows.

Long-term versus Short-Term Orientation is the extent to which a culture values the long term over the short term. This dimension is also referred to as Confucian Dynamism. Long-term cultures value future rewards, persistence and perseverance, thrift and the ability to adapt to changing circumstance. Societies with a short-term orientation value the past and the present, national pride, respect for tradition, fulfilling social obligations and the role of religion.

Indulgence versus Restraint – this is a final dimension that was added in 2010. It expresses the attitude of a culture to the gratification of natural human drives related to enjoying life and having fun. Restraint stands for a society that suppresses gratification of needs and regulates drives by means of strict social norms.

As you might notice, there are dimensions that seem to overlap and form clusters. There is a strong chance, for example, that societies scoring high on uncertainty avoidance might also score high on restraint.

Cultural Dimensions
Cultural dimensions refer to the values of members of a society living within a particular culture.‌
Source: IB Psychology Guide

Ask Yourself
Do you think the concept of cultural dimensions is an effective way of highlighting the difference between cultures?

Individualism/collectivism: Compliance

One avenue of research to examine how cultural dimensions might influence behaviour is to compare compliance in different cultures. Compliance refers to the act of responding favourably to an explicit or implicit request by others. The request may be explicit, such as a direct request for a charity donation, or implicit, such as an advertisement promoting some product without directly asking for purchase. In all cases, we realise that we are being urged to respond in a desired way. See below for examples.

Reciprocity

We all tend to do something for someone who has already done something for us. If someone does something for you, such as giving you a free sample of a product, then you feel more obliged to do something for them, and buy the product.

Commitment

If we make a small commitment, then we are more likely to commit to something larger in the future. For example, if we just buy a single DVD from an online store then we are more likely to buy other DVDs that they send us.

Manipulating people to comply

Compliance is known to be enhanced by a number of situational manipulations. The ‘Foot-in-the-Door’ technique involves someone making a small request before they make a much larger request. If you comply with the first, you are more likely to comply with subsequent larger requests. The ‘Door-in-the-Face’ technique adopts the opposite approach. A request likely to be refused is made and this is then followed up by a smaller request that you are more likely to see as reasonable. The ‘That’s not all’ technique is often used by television marketers. A product is described and then an additional offer of free products is made. The salesperson is trying to make the offer as tempting and appealing as possible.

Ingratiation

This is a compliance technique in which the persuaders get their target person to like them first, through flattery and presenting themselves as like their target, and then attempting to gain compliance with some request. While flattery might seem the most obviously successful, doing small favours, using appropriate body language and exploiting similarities between themselves and the target, are also successful.

Researchers have investigated whether there are cultural differences in a person’s willingness to comply with a request. The study by Petrova et al. (2007) is typical of this research interest.

Focus on Research

Petrova et al. (2007) undertook a field study to determine if the cultural dimension of individualism and collectivism had an influence on compliance. They focused on the ‘Foot-in-the-Door’ technique. Participants included 1,287 Asian international students (508 from China, 273 from South Korea, 185 from Japan, 184 from Taiwan and 137 from Vietnam) and a 5% random sample of US students at a large south-western university. All participants received emails requesting their participation in an online survey on ‘School and Social Relationships’. The email provided a link to the survey website and emphasised that participation in the survey was completely voluntary. At the end of the survey participants indicated their willingness to participate in future similar surveys. The first survey took approximately 20 minutes to complete. One month after receiving the first request, all participants received a second email asking them to participate in another online survey related to the first survey. Participants were also told that the second study would take approximately 40 minutes to complete. The results indicated that compliance with the initial request had a stronger impact on subsequent compliance among the US participants than among the Asian participants. Despite their lower rate of compliance with the initial request, the US participants who chose to comply were more likely than their Asian counterparts to agree to the subsequent request. The researchers concluded that differences in levels of compliance were due to the individualistic/collectivistic orientation of the participants from the two cultures. Within both cultures, the more individualistic participants showed stronger consistency with their earlier compliance than the more collectivistic participants.

Individualism/collectivism: Subjective Well being

Globalisation has increased dramatically in its scope and reach in the last several decades. To understand the positive and negative influences on individual behaviour, psychologists have investigated how East Asian students have adapted to the educational practices of European/American cultural contexts.

Another approach focuses on multinational companies' workplace practices based in an individualist culture that set up branch offices in countries with more collectivist orientation. Ogihara and Uchida (2014) took both approaches to investigate the adverse effects of individualism on interpersonal relationship and happiness.

Study 1.

Aim: To investigate the adverse effects of individualism in an East Asian culture by examining the relationship between individualistic values, subjective well-being (SWB), and the number of close relationships in Japan and the U.S.

Type of Study: Survey

Hypotheses: Individualistic values would be associated with a significant decrease in close friends and SWB in Japan, but not to close friends and SWB in the U.S.

Participants: One hundred and fourteen undergraduate students at Kyoto University in Japan and 62 undergraduate students at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in the U.S.

Procedures: The study used various instruments to measure participants' individualist and collectivist orientation, their subject well-being and the number of close friends (see the study for a description of these instruments).

Results: The individualistic orientation score was significantly higher for the U.S. participants than for Japanese participants. The collectivistic orientation score was not significantly different across cultures.

In Japan, an individualistic orientation negatively affected SWB. However, a collectivistic orientation did not affect SWB.

In contrast, in the U.S., a collectivistic orientation negatively affected SWB, but an individualistic orientation did not affect SWB.

In Japan, an individualistic orientation was associated with fewer close friends, but this relationship was not found in the U.S.

Conclusions: An individualistic orientation in Japan is associated with fewer close friends and lower subjective well-being.

The researchers argued that:

"In a more globalised world, culture matters more than ever before. Therefore, the effect of globalisation (in particular, the effects of individualism) on individuals and nations should be examined from a cultural perspective in more detail in the future."

Critiques of Cultural Dimensions

Though the original cultural dimensions were identified in the 1970s, Hofstede (2011) argues that there are still many differences between national cultures. Though the world has undergone globalisation, he contends these differences will continue to play a role into the next century. Psychologists like Bond (1997) have not accepted that the best way to understand a culture is to focus on values. For example, Gelfand et al. (2006) proposed that psychologists should give attention to the structure of societies. They observed that societies have ‘tight’ or ‘loose’ structures. Tight societies are characterised by strong and well-developed social norms that can impose sanctions on members of the society that deviate from these norms. In contrast, loose societies do not have strong norms of behaviour and they are much more tolerant of people who deviate from the norm. They used Japan as an example of a ‘tight’ society because it has clear boundaries about what is acceptable behaviour, it is less tolerant of ambiguity and difference and it imposes a stronger socialisation of children into these norms than a loose society like the USA.

The researchers argued that tightness–looseness is distinct from individualism–collectivism, uncertainty avoidance and power distance. There is variation in tightness–looseness across societies and within societies (e.g. by region and/or ethnic group). The concept of tightness–looseness can also be applied to formal and informal organisations. For example, an understanding of tightness–looseness can provide psychological insights into diverse groups such as the Taliban, the military and gangs.

4.3 Assessment Advice: Cultural Origins of Behaviour and Cognition

5. Cultural Influences on Individual Behaviour

5.1 Enculturation and Acculturation

Socialisation is a process of learning the social norms of a culture.There are two ways this may take place. Enculturation is a lifelong process that helps a person acquire social values, social norms, behaviours, social roles, expectations, language and other tools of a culture. This is how we acquire our first culture and it is a conscious and unconscious conditioning process. Parents, friends, family and the media are all strong influences in teaching individuals what are acceptable behaviours and what behaviours should be avoided. An individual should conform to the accepted behaviours or risk being considered a deviant by the rest of the society.

Acculturation is a process of socialisation and psychological adjustment that takes place when two cultures come into contact. This is how we acquire our second or third culture. To sum up, enculturation is the process where you acquire your own culture, while acculturation is the merging of two cultures.

While enculturation is a one-way process, acculturation can be a two-way process with both cultures experiencing changes to their language, clothing, customs and practices. However, minorities that have relocated and are now living inside a country are more likely to assimilate to the new culture. Psychologists interested in acculturation have investigated how minorities such as refugees, immigrants and indigenous people interact with the dominant culture and how successfully they have adapted.

Focus on Research

Multiculturalism is becoming increasingly common. If you were to walk along a street of any major world city, you would likely encounter people of varying different ethnic backgrounds and hear numerous languages being spoken.

Acculturation is the process of social and psychological adjustment that takes place when two different cultures meet. Acculturation is experienced by immigrants, refugees or anybody taking an extended stay in a foreign country. Berry (2005) proposed that people experiencing acculturation behave in one of four ways:

Assimilation: adapting to the new culture and leaving the original culture behind.
Separation: Avoiding interactions with the new culture and holding on to the original culture.
Integration: Becoming bi-cultural. Integrating with the new culture whilst still maintaining the original culture.
Marginalisation: Leaving the original culture behind but struggling to integrate into the new culture due to discrimination.

Berry argued that the process of acculturation could often be stressful. However, it is thought that those individuals who take an integration approach are likely to experience less stress in comparison to the other groups.

Supportive Studies

Berry, Phinney, Sam and Vedder (2006) aimed to discover if there is a relationship between acculturation and adaptation to life in the new culture. They studied immigrant youth aged 13 – 18. It was found that participants who adopted an integration acculturation profile (meaning that they viewed both their original and new culture positively and had frequent contact with both cultures) adapted to life in the new culture most successfully. This was compared to participants who focused primarily on their original culture or their new culture or were confused about their cultural identity. This finding supports the claim that acculturation is more successful and less stressful when an individual seeks integration with their new culture and maintains contact with their original culture.

Lueck and Wilson (2010) studied Asian immigrants to America to discover factors that affect acculturation stress. They studied around 2000 Asian – Americans using semi-structured interviews. Results revealed that fully bilingual participants experienced less acculturation stress than those who weren't, as they could interact with both their original and new cultures. Unsurprisingly, participants who were subjected to discrimination suffered high levels of acculturation stress. This finding also supports the view that taking an integrated approach to acculturation has the most successful outcomes.

Points to consider when evaluating Berry's model:

An older theory of acculturation is the Assimilation theory which is uni-dimensional. It claims that the more individuals integrate into a new culture, the less contact they will maintain with their original culture. Berry's theory is bi-dimensional as it claims that contact can be maintained with the original culture while integrating into the new culture.
Berry fails to acknowledge that national culture is complex and not homogeneous.
Sam (2000) studied a sample of multicultural adolescents living in Norway and found that those who aimed for separation from their new culture reported higher life satisfaction than those who integrated.
Many studies into acculturation use self-report methods, such as surveys (questionnaires) and interviews, which are subject to participant bias, especially desirability bias. Many of these studies also only focus on the aspects of culture, which are quantifiable, such as food and language. They tend to ignore areas that are difficult to study, such as religion.

Sources

Berry, J. W. (2005). Acculturation: Living successfully in two cultures. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29(6), pp. 697-712

Berry, J. W., Phinney, J. S., Sam, D. L., & Vedder, P. E. (2006). Immigrant Youth in Cultural Transition: acculturation, identity, and adaptation across national contexts. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Lueck, K., & Wilson, M. (2010). Acculturative stress in Asian immigrants: the impact of social and linguistic factors. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 34(1), pp. 47-57.

Sam, D.K. (2000). Psychological adaptation of adolescents with immigrant backgrounds. The Journal of Social Psychology, 140(1), pp. 5-25

Original research reports can be found here.

Enculturation
Enculturation is the process by which people learn the necessary and appropriate skills and norms in the context of their culture.
Acculturation
People may change as a result of contact with other cultures in order to assimilate into a new culture.
Source: IB Psychology Guide

Focus on Research

Wang and Mallinckrodt (2006) used two theories to predict if Chinese and Taiwanese international students would experience psychological stress while studying in American colleges. They used Berry’s process model of acculturation to gauge an individual’s level of acculturative stress and Bowlby’s concept of the ‘secure base’ to gauge an individual’s capacity for exploring a new social environment. The study proposed the following hypotheses:

(a) both attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance would be negatively associated with acculturation to the host culture;

(b) high attachment anxiety and avoidance (as indicators of low secure base) would significantly predict more sociocultural adjustment difficulties and more psychological distress;

(c) high acculturation to the US culture and high cultural identification with home culture would predict less sociocultural adjustment difficulty and less psychological distress.

A sample of fifty-four (52%) women and fifty (48%) men were recruited to complete an internet survey. All were students at an American college. Participants answered three sets of survey questions to determine how they formed adult attachments, their attitudes towards their home culture (Chinese) and attitudes towards the host culture (American) and the degree of difficulty that respondents encountered in everyday social situations because of cultural differences. Results suggested that attachment anxiety was negatively associated with students’ acculturation to US culture, and that attachment avoidance, attachment anxiety and acculturation to US culture were significant predictors for students’ psychosocial adjustment. The researchers concluded that those who avoided social relationships and experienced anxiety about social relationships would not assimilate well and would experience more stress. Those who assimilated to the host culture while maintaining their identification with their home country would not experience stress.

Ask Yourself
Do you think living or studying in a different culture is a stressful experience? Why? Why not?

5.2 Assessment Advice: Cultural Influences on Individual Behaviour

6. The Influence of Globalisation on Individual Behaviour (HL only)

The HL extension topic for the Sociocultural approach focuses on the influence of globalisation on individual attitudes, identities and behaviour. Topics include:

The effect of the interaction of local and global influences on behaviour.
Research methods used to study the influence of globalisation on behaviour.

Your understanding of these topics will be tested in Paper 1 Section B (only ERQs will be asked).

6.1 Globalisation and Behaviour

Globalisation is a powerful force comprised of various dimensions, including the economic, the political, the sociocultural, the technological and the environmental. It has helped expand international production and trade, facilitated advances in technology and brought people of diverse societies into contact with each other. This process has a long history, with cultures influencing each other for centuries through trade, migration and war. While some commentators refer to globalisation as an economic process involving the opening and crossing of borders, psychologists are more interested in how social and cultural exchanges influence attitudes, identities and behaviour. In the 21st century, interacting with people from other cultures is no longer limited by time and place. Furthermore, digital technology has made it possible for people worldwide to contact each other instantaneously.

Globalisation has increased dramatically in its scope and reach in the last several decades and sparked a heated debate about the pros and cons. The economic benefits have been questioned, and some people have felt threatened by foreign influences seen as eroding their local culture. Psychologists have contributed to the debate by exploring the psychological impact of globalisation. One focus has been on how people from different cultures react to and make sense of globalisation. Are attitudes open and positive or closed and negative, and what influences these reactions? Are some individuals adopting a bicultural identity? Are others experiencing cultural confusion or feeling that their local culture is being marginalised and excluded? To determine the effect of the interaction of local and global influences on behaviour, the processes of enculturation (local influences) and acculturation (global influences) will be revisited.

As you read about the following studies, be mindful that you may be asked to discuss methods used to study globalisation's influence on behaviour.

You will recall that enculturation is a lifelong process that helps a person gain social values, social norms, behaviours, social roles, expectations and language. These local influences shape our first culture. Acculturation involves socialisation and psychological change that takes place when we come into contact with other cultures. There are several ways that this might take place. For example, migrants undergo this process when they move to another country. Another consequence of globalisation has been the emergence of Third Culture Individuals (TCIs), who are raised in a culture other than their parents' culture.

The HL extension topic focuses on behaviour and how people living in their own local culture are affected by global influences that are predominately Western and individualistic. One broad approach is to determine the positive and negative consequences of the interaction of local and global effects on mental health. For example, Becker et al. (2002) investigated eating disorders among Fijian female adolescents newly exposed to TV in their homes.

Focus on Research

Becker et al. (2002) aimed to assess the impact that television had on the eating attitudes and behaviours of ethnic Fijian girls. A natural experiment was designed to compare two samples of Fijian schoolgirls before and after the arrival of television, which predominately aired Western dramas, comedies, etc. Before the arrival of television in the 1990s, eating disorders were considered rare among this traditional cultural group. Ethnic studies argued that there was an absence of pressure to be slim through dieting and other measures of restricting weight gain.

The first sample (1995) consisted of 65 secondary female students, and the second sample (1998) of 68 female students who participated in the study three years after television was introduced. Written informed consent was obtained from the participants and their parents/guardians.

Both groups completed a 26-item questionnaire on attitudes to eating, including disordered behaviours like binging and purging. Additional questions were asked of the second group concerning body image and dieting. Quantitative data from the two groups on the extent of television exposure, body mass index, instances of disordered behaviour of bingeing and purging and answers to the questionnaire, Eating Attitudes Test (EAT) were compared.

Qualitative data was gathered on those participants who had self-reported binging and purging. A semi-structured interview was undertaken to determine if these participants met the clinical definition of an eating disorder. This narrative data was audiotaped, transcribed and analysed for thematic content. Several themes emerged, including an admiration for Western actresses and a desire to emulate (emulate = imitate, copy) them, especially in weight and appearance. Participants linked weight loss and successful careers. Arguments with parents were also reported with traditional local influences conflicting with Western cultural influences, mainly about how much food should be consumed.

In summary, girls in the second group with TV in their homes were three times more likely to have an Eating Attitudes Test (EAT) score greater than 20, which is considered a risk for eating disorders. Girls began saying that they felt fat or were dieting, with 69% of girls having tried dieting and 75% of teenage girls saying they felt too big or fat.

The investigators concluded that television, with its Western imagery, profoundly influenced the increase in disordered eating behaviour despite the traditional local cultural influences that countered dieting, purging and body dissatisfaction.

A study by Ogihara and Uchida (2014) has also argued that globalisation can negatively influence behaviour, particularly on interpersonal relationships and happiness. They focused on multinational companies' workplace practices based on an individualist culture that set up branch offices in countries with a more collectivist cultural orientation.

Focus on research

Ogihara and Uchida (2014) aimed to investigate the adverse effects of individualism in an East Asian culture by examining the relationship between individualistic values, subjective well-being (SWB), and the number of close relationships in Japan and the United States of America.

Type of Study: Survey

Hypotheses: Individualistic values would be associated with a significant decrease in close friends and SWB in Japan, but not to close friends and SWB in the United States.

Participants: One hundred and fourteen undergraduate students at Kyoto University in Japan and 62 American born undergraduate students at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in the U.S.

Procedures: The study used various instruments to measure participants' individualist and collectivist orientation, their subject well-being (SWB) and the number of close friends (see the study for a description of these instruments).

Results: The individualistic orientation scores were significantly higher for the U.S. participants than for Japanese participants. The collectivistic orientation scores were not significantly different across cultures.

In Japan, an individualistic orientation negatively affected SWB. However, a collectivistic orientation did not affect SWB.

In contrast, in the U.S., a collectivistic orientation negatively affected SWB, but an individualistic orientation did not affect SWB.

In Japan, an individualistic orientation was associated with fewer close friends, but this relationship was not found in the U.S.

Conclusions: An individualistic orientation in Japan is associated with fewer close friends and lower subjective well-being.

The researchers argued that:

Buchan et al. (2009) offer a more positive view of globalisation. Their study aimed to determine how globalisation influences human cooperative behaviour, especially in efforts to find solutions to global challenges of resource depletion, climate change and other social dilemmas.

Focus on Research

Buchan et al. (2009) aimed to examine two competing hypotheses: globalisation favours one's own ethnic, racial, or language group and the alternative that globalisation strengthens cosmopolitan (cosmopolitan = showing interest in different cultures, ideas, etc.) attitudes by weakening local and national sources of identification which in turn can lead to more cooperative behaviour.

To test these hypotheses, 1145 participants were recruited using a quota sampling method from urban centres of industrial nations with varying globalisation levels. These nations included the United States, Italy, Russia, Argentina, South Africa, and Iran. Participants completed a survey to determine their score on the Individual-level Globalisation Index, which measures the extent they participated in global economic, social, and cultural networks.

Participants were asked to make a series of decisions about allocating tokens between a personal account, a local account, and a world account. Incentives were structured so that decisions could be used to measure whether the participants were self-interested (most contributions to their personal account) or willing to cooperate exclusively with people from their own locality (most contribution to the local account) or more willing to cooperate with groups from around the world (most contributions to the world account.)

An analysis of how these tokens were distributed found that as country and individual levels of globalisation increased, so too did an individual's cooperative behaviour at the global level. These results supported the cosmopolitan hypothesis that globalisation strengthens worldly attitudes by weakening the local and national sources of identification. The study concluded that globalisation is a powerful force influencing large-scale cooperative behaviour among citizens from very different countries.

6.2 Methods used to study the influence of globalisation on behaviour

This section on globalisation has introduced you to a range of research methods that psychologists use to analyse how globalisation influences behaviour. One popular method is the use of the survey, as you read in the studies by Becker et al. (2002), Buchan et al. (2009) and Ogihara and Uchida (2014). Becker et al.'s was a natural experiment that also used interviews to obtain data which was analysed using thematic content analysis. Buchan et al. used the survey data to select participants to take part in their quasi-experiment.

6.3 Assessment Advice

References

Allport, G.W. (1954). The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Arnett, J.J. (2002). The psychology of globalisation. American Psychologist, 57 (10), 774–783.

Asch, S.E. (1955). Opinions and social pressure. Scientific American, 193 (5), 31–35.

Asch, S.E. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 70 (9), 1–70.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A., Ross, D. and Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through the imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 575–582.

Becker A.E., et al.,(2002). Eating behaviours and attitudes following prolonged exposure to television among ethnic Fijian adolescent girls. The British Journal of Psychiatry, Volume 180 , Issue 6 , June 2002 , pp. 509–514.

Berry, G.L. (2003). Developing children and multicultural attitudes: the systemic psychosocial influences of television portrayals in a multimedia society. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 9 (4), 360–366.

Berry, J.W. (2005). Acculturation: Living successfully in two cultures. International Journal of Cultural Relations, 29, 697–712.

Bond, M.H. (1997). Adding value to the cross-cultural study of organizational behaviour. In P.C. Earley and M. Erez (Eds.), New perspectives in international industrial/organizational psychology (pp. 256–275). San Francisco, CA: New Lexington Press.

Bond, R. and Smith, P.B. (1996). Culture and conformity: A meta-analysis of studies using Asch's (1952b, 1956) line judgment task. Psychological Bulletin, 119 (1), 111–137.

Brigham, J.C. (1986). Social Psychology. Boston, MA: Little, Brown & Co.

Globalization and human cooperation Nancy R. Buchan, Gianluca Grimalda, Rick Wilson, Marilynn Brewer, Enrique Fatas, Margaret Foddy Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Mar 2009, 106 (11) 4138–4142.

Campbell, D.T. (1967). Stereotypes and the perception of group differences. American Psychologist, 22, 817–829.

Cardwell, M. (1996). Dictionary of Psychology. Chicago, IL: Fitzroy Dearborn.

Choi, Y., Tae, T.Y., Pekelnicky, D.D. and Kim, K. (2017). Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 23 (2), 244–257.

Cohen, C.E. (1981). Person categories and social perception: Testing some boundaries of the processing effect of prior knowledge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40 (3), 441–452.

Darley, J.M. and Latané, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 377–383.

Festinger, L., Riecken, H.W. and Schachter, S. (1956). When Prophecy Fails. New York, NY: Harper and Row.

Gelfand, M.J., Lyons, S.L. and Lun, J. (2011). Toward a Psychological Science of Globalization. Journal of Social Issues, 67, 841–853.

Gelfand, M.J., Nishii, L.H. and Raver, J.L. (2006). On the nature and importance of cultural tightness-looseness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91 (6), 1225–1244.

Goldin, I. (2016). How immigration has changed the world – for the better. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/how-immigration-has-changed-the-world-for-the-better/

Gonzales, N.A., Knight, G.P., Birman, D. and Sirolli, A.A. (2004). Acculturation and enculturation among Latino youth. In: K.I. Maton, C.J. Schellenbach, B.J. Leadbetter and A.L. Solarz (Eds.) Investing in Children, Youth, Families and Communities: Strengths-based Research and Policy (pp. 285–302). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Hamilton, D. and Gifford, R. (1976). Illusory correlation in interpersonal perception: A cognitive basis of stereotypic judgments, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 12 (4), 392–407.

Haney, C., Banks, C. and Zimbardo, P. (1973). Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology and Penology, 1, 69–97.

Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: the Hofstede model in context. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol2/iss1/8/

Hogg, M. and Vaughan, G. (2005). Social Psychology (4th ed.). London, England: Prentice-Hall.

Howarth, C. (2002). ‘So, you’re from Brixton?’: the struggle for recognition and esteem in a multicultural community. Retrieved from http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/2435/1/Struggle_for_recog_(LSERO).pdf

Inzlicht, M. and Ben-Zeev, T. (2000). A threatening intellectual environment: Why females are susceptible to experiencing problem-solving deficits in the presence of males. Psychological Science, 11, 365–371.

Konijn, E.A., Nije Bijvank, M. and Bushman, B.J. (2007). I wish I were a warrior: the role of wishful identification in effects of violent video games on aggression in adolescent boys. Developmental Psychology, 43, 1038–1044.

Lilienfeld, S.O., Lynn, S.J., Ruscio, J. and Beyerstein, B.L. (2009). 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology: Shattering Widespread Misconceptions about Human Behavior. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.

Lovell, B. and Lee, R.T. (2011). Impact of workplace bullying on emotional and physical well-being: A longitudinal collective case study. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 20 (3), 344–357.

Matsumoto, D. and Juang, L. (2004). Culture and Psychology (3rd ed.) Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.

Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67 (4), 371–378.

Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority: An experimental view. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

Moscato, G., Novara, C., Hombrados-Mendieta, I., Romano, F. and Lavanco, G. (2014). Cultural identification, perceived discrimination and sense of community as predictors of life satisfaction among foreign partners of intercultural families in Italy and Spain: A transnational study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 40, 22–33.

Moscovici, S. and Nemeth, C. (1974). Minority influence. In C. Nemeth (Ed.), Social psychology: classic and contemporary integrations (pp. 217–249). Chicago, Il: Rand McNally.

Ogihara, Y., & Uchida, Y., (2014). Does individualism bring happiness? Negative effects of individualism on interpersonal relationships and happiness Frontiers in. Psychology, 05 March 2014

Perrin, S. and Spencer, C. (1980). The Asch effect – a child of its time? Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 33, 405–406.

Petrova, P.K., Cialdini, R.B. and Sills, S.J. (2007). Consistency-based compliance across cultures. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 104–111.

Phillips, D.P., Liu, G.C., Kwok, K., Jarvinen, J.R., Zhang, W. and Abramson, I.S. (2001). The Hound of the Baskervilles effect: Natural experiment on the influence of psychological stress on timing of death. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 323 (7327), 1443–1446.

Ronay, R. and von Hippel, W. (2010). The presence of an attractive woman elevates testosterone and physical risk taking in young men. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1 (1), 57–64.

Schaller, M., Boyd, C., Yohannes, J. and O'Brien, M. (1995). The prejudiced personality revisited: personal need for structure and formation of erroneous group stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68 (3), 544–555.

Steele, C.M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613–629.

Steele, C.M. and Aronson, A. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69 (5), 797–811.

Tajfel, H., Billig, M.G., Bundy R.P. and Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 149–177.

Tajfel, H. and Turner, J.C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W.G. Austin and S. Worchel (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Wang C. and Mallinckrodt, B. (2006). Acculturation, attachment, and psychosocial adjustment of Chinese/Taiwanese international students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53 (4), 422–433.

PreviousChapter 5: Cognitive Approach to Understanding Behaviour NextChapter 7: Abnormal Psychology

Last updated 3 years ago

Chapter Outline

Essential Questions

Myths and Misconceptions

1. A Historical Perspective on the Sociocultural Approach to Behaviour

2. Research Methods of the Sociocultural Approach

2.1 Case Studies

2.2 Natural Experiments

2.3 Field Experiments

2.4 Observations

2.5 Emic and Etic Approaches to Research

2.6 Ethics and Sociocultural Research Methods

3. The Individual and the Group

3.1 Social Identity Theory

Focus on Research

Focus on Research

3.2 Social Cognitive Theory

Focus on Research

Focus on Research

Ask Yourself

3.3 Stereotypes

Ask Yourself

Focus on Research

Ask Yourself

3.4 Assessment Advice: The Individual and the Group

4. Cultural Origins of Behaviour and Cognition

4.1 Cultural and its Influence on Behaviour and Cognition

Cultures

Focus on Research

4.2 Cultural Dimensions

Cultural Dimensions

Ask Yourself

Focus on Research

4.3 Assessment Advice: Cultural Origins of Behaviour and Cognition

5. Cultural Influences on Individual Behaviour

5.1 Enculturation and Acculturation

Focus on Research

Ask Yourself

5.2 Assessment Advice: Cultural Influences on Individual Behaviour

6. The Influence of Globalisation on Individual Behaviour (HL only)

6.1 Globalisation and Behaviour

Focus on Research

Focus on Research

6.2 Methods used to study the influence of globalisation on behaviour

6.3 Assessment Advice

Further Reading

References