바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

Article Contents

Next
e-Submission

Vol.26 No.2
Citation Share

Effects of Priming of Individualism-Collectivism on the Informational Processing in the Peripheral Vision

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2014, v.26 no.2, pp.41-66
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2014.26.2.001

(George Washington University)


& (2014). Effects of Priming of Individualism-Collectivism on the Informational Processing in the Peripheral Vision. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 26(2), 41-66, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2014.26.2.001
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

The present research aims to investigate the top-down influence of individual and collective thinking on the informational processing of peripheral vision. Using a cultural priming task we primed the thinking style of individualism and collectivism for two groups of subjects respectively and conducted two types of change detection tasks with them in Exp 1 and 2. The change detection tasks were embedded in a dual task paradigm with a primary memory task for four numbers presented in the central vision area (visual angle < angle <4°) in order to control subjects’ eye fixation with attentional focus to the central region when perceiving visual stimuli presented in the peripheral vision area. Visual stimuli for the change detection tasks consisted of eight circles with various colors and sizes and were presented in a relatively near distance (visual angle <8°) and a far distance (visual angle <14°) to the central region. When the number stimuli for the memory task were to be disappeared, the change of visual stimuli could be occurred with changes of color saturation and size respectively or both of randomly selected two circles among the presented eight stimuli. We defined the change of the color saturation as the target feature and the size as the distracting features for both change detection tasks in Exp 1 and 2. However, the decision rules for two tasks were different. For the Exp 1 which we named the inclusive change detection task, participants were asked to detect if the change of visual stimuli included the change of target feature, i.e., the change of color saturation. For the Exp 2 named the exclusive change detection task, participants had to detect if only the target feature was changed, otherwise they had to reject all the other cases including the case that the target feature and distracting feature changed simultaneously. In results from Exp 1 and 2, there was a significant priming effect of individualism and collectivism when the visual stimuli was presented in the near distance. Results of Exp 1 showed the better detection performance of the individualism priming group when the target feature was changed, while results of Exp 2 showed the more accurate rejection responses of collectivism priming group when the target and distracting features changed simultaneously. Based on the current results, we insisted that individualism and collectivism do not modulate the range of attentional allocation, but induce different informational processes. Namely, the individualism may facilitate the selective informational process for the information directly related to current task, while the collectivism may increase the distributed informational process for all the information in the situation including distracting information.

keywords
individualism, collectivism, culture priming, visual change detection, peripheral vision, 개인주의, 집단주의, 문화 점화, 시각변화탐지, 주변시

Reference

1.

김비아, 이윤경, 이재식, 신현정 (2012). 문화성향 점화와 기억의도가 장면 지각에 미치는 효과. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 26, 15-34.

2.

Blais, C., Jack, R. E., Scheepers, C., Fiset, D., Caldara, R. (2008). Culture Shapes How We Look at Faces. PLoS ONE 3(8): e3022.

3.

Boduroglu, A., Shah, P., & Nisbett, R. E. (2009). Cultural differences in allocation of attention in visual information processing. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40, 349-360.

4.

Chiu, L. H. (1972). A cross-cultural comparison of cognitive styles in Chinese and American children. International Journal of Psychology, 7, 235-242.

5.

Choi, I., Nisbett, R. E., & Norenzayan, A. (1999). Causal attribution across cultures: Variation and universality. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 47-63.

6.

Chua, H. F., Boland, J. E., & Nisbett, R. E. (2005). Cultural variation in eye movements during scene perception. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, 12629-12633.

7.

Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.

8.

Hong, Y., Morris, M. W., Chiu, C., & Benet-Martinez, V. (2000). Multicultural minds: A dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition. American Psychologist, 55, 709-720.

9.

Jack, R. E., Blais, C., Scheepers, C., Schyns, P. G., & Caldara, R. (2009). Cultural confusions show that facial expressions are not universal. Current Biology, 19(18), 1543-1548.

10.

Kelly, D. J., Miellet, S., & Caldara, R. (2010). Culture shapes eye movements for visually homogeneous objects. Frontiers in psychology, 1, 6.

11.

Kim, K., Grimm, L. R., & Markman, A. B. (2007). Self-construal and the processing of covariation information in causal reasoning. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1337-1343.

12.

Kitayama, S., Duffy, S., Kawamura, T., & Larsen, J. T. (2003). Perceiving an object and its context in different cultures A cultural look at new look. Psychological Science, 14, 201-206.

13.

Kitayama, S., Duffy, S., & Uchida, Y. (2007). Self as cultural mode of being. In S. Kitayama, & D. Cohen (Eds.), Handbook of cultural psychology (pp.136-173). New York: Guilford Press.

14.

Kitayama, S., & Uskul, A. K. (2011). Culture, mind, and the brain: Current evidence and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 419-449.

15.

Kühnen, U., & Oyserman, D. (2002). Thinking about the self influences thinking in general: Cognitive consequences of salient self-concept. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 492-499.

16.

Lee, S., Lee, A. Y., & Kern, M. C. (2010). Viewing time through the lens of the self: The fit effect of self‐construal and temporal distance on task perception. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 191-200.

17.

Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.

18.

Masuda, T., & Nisbett, R. E. (2001). Attending holistically versus analytically: Comparing the context sensitivity of Japanese and Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 922-934.

19.

Masuda, T., & Nisbett, R. E. (2006). Culture and change blindness. Cognitive Science, 30, 381- 399.

20.

Morris, M. W., & Peng, K. (1994). Culture and cause: American and chinese attributions for social and physical events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(6), 949-971.

21.

Nisbett, R. E. (2004). 생각의 지도. (최인철 역). 파주: 김영사. (원전은 2003년에 출판)

22.

Nisbett, R. E., & Miyamoto, Y. (2005). The influence of culture: Holistic versus analytic perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 467-473.

23.

Oyserman, D., & Lee, S. W. S. (2008). Does culture influence what and how we think? effects of priming individualism and collectivism. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 311- 342.

24.

Triandis, H. C. (1989). The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts. Psychological Review, 96, 506-520.

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy