首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Do individualism and collectivism on three levels (country individual and situation) influence theory-of-mind efficiency? A cross-country study
【2h】

Do individualism and collectivism on three levels (country individual and situation) influence theory-of-mind efficiency? A cross-country study

机译:个人主义和集体主义这三个层面(国家个人和情况)是否会影响心智理论的效率?越野研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

This study investigated whether individualism and collectivism (IC) at country, individual, and situational level influence how quickly and accurately people can infer mental states (i.e. theory of mind, or ToM), indexed by accuracy and reaction time in a ToM task. We hypothesized that collectivism (having an interdependent self and valuing group concerns), compared to individualism (having an independent self and valuing personal concerns), is associated with greater accuracy and speed in recognizing and understanding the thoughts and feelings of others. Students (N = 207) from individualism-representative (the Netherlands) and collectivism-representative (Vietnam) countries (Country IC) answered an individualism-collectivism questionnaire (Individual IC) and were randomly assigned to an individualism-primed, collectivism-primed, or no-prime task (Situational IC) before performing a ToM task. The data showed vast differences between the Dutch and Vietnamese groups that might not be attributable to experimental manipulation. Therefore, we analyzed the data for the groups separately and found that Individual IC did not predict ToM accuracy or reaction time performance. Regarding Situational IC, when primed with individualism, the accuracy performance of Vietnamese participants in affective ToM trials decreased compared to when primed with collectivism and when no prime was used. However, an interesting pattern emerged: Dutch participants were least accurate in affective ToM trials, while Vietnamese participants were quickest in affective ToM trials. Our research also highlights a dilemma faced by cross-cultural researchers who use hard-to-reach populations but face the challenge of disentangling experimental effects from biases that might emerge due to an interaction between cultural differences and experimental settings. We propose suggestions for overcoming such challenges.
机译:这项研究调查了国家,个人和情境层面的个人主义和集体主义(IC)是否会影响人们可以快速准确地推断出心理状态(即心理理论或ToM)的程度,这些状态由ToM任务的准确性和反应时间来确定。我们假设,与个人主义(具有独立的自我和重视个人的关注)相比,集体主义(具有相互依存的自我和重视的群体关注)在识别和理解他人的思想和感受方面具有更高的准确性和速度。来自个人主义代表国家(荷兰)和集体主义代表国家(越南)(国家IC)的学生(N = 207)回答了个人主义-集体主义问卷(个人IC),并随机分配给以个人主义为主导,以集体主义为主导,或执行无首要任务(情境IC)之前执行ToM任务。数据显示,荷兰人和越南人群体之间的巨大差异可能并非归因于实验操作。因此,我们分别分析了各组的数据,发现单个IC不能预测ToM准确性或反应时间性能。关于情境IC,当使用个人主义时,与集体主义和不使用素数相比,越南人参加情感ToM试验的准确性表现下降。但是,出现了一个有趣的模式:荷兰参与者在情感ToM试验中的准确性最低,而越南参与者在情感ToM试验中的响应速度最快。我们的研究还凸显了跨文化研究人员所面临的困境,他们使用难以达到的人口,但面临着将实验效果与由于文化差异和实验环境之间的相互作用而产生的偏见相分离的挑战。我们提出克服这些挑战的建议。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号