바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology

ISSN : 1229-0653

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.26 No.2
Citation Share

Effects of Priming of Cultural Dispositions and Intention of Memory on the Scene Perception

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology / Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, (P)1229-0653;
2012, v.26 no.2, pp.15-34
https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2012.26.2.002




& (2012). Effects of Priming of Cultural Dispositions and Intention of Memory on the Scene Perception. Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, 26(2), 15-34, https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2012.26.2.002
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

Two experiments were conducted to investigate whether priming of either individualistic or collectivistic disposition in the same culture and race can affect perception of the natural scenes in the viewpoint of information processing approach. It was hypothesized that individualistically primed participants pay more attention to the foreground than the background, whereas collectivistically primed participants pay attention to the relation between the foreground and the background as well as the foreground during scene perception. In both experiments, a newly constructed ‘cultural priming story writing task’ was used to prime the participants to either individualism or collectivism. Also, a 2×2×2 mixed factorial design with cultural disposition(individualism vs. collectivism) as a between-subjects factor and figure-ground relevance(naturalness vs. unnaturalness) and change of scene(figure vs. ground change) as within-subject factors was used. In addition, focusing on the contradictory results of previous studies, we used different instructions in the two experiments. In Experiment 1,participants were instructed to rate the preference of the scenes in the learning phase as in Chua et al.(2005),whereas they were informed the recognition test beforehand as in Rayner et al.(2007) in Experiment 2. The results of Experiment 1 showed that the correct recognition rates of the collectivistically primed participants were better than those of the individualistically primed participants when the scenes were unnatural and when the background were changed in the recognition phase. These results were interpreted that the former having relatively holistic viewpoints pay more attention to the relation between the foreground and the background. In contrast, the differences disappeared in Experiment 2 where the recognition test was informed beforehand. These results suggest that the cultural priming effects can be elicited in the same culture and the race. Furthermore, it was suggested that intention to memorize the scenes can affect the attentional allocation to the foreground and the background regardless of the cultural dispositions. Implications and the limitations of this study were discussed in the final discussion section.

keywords
문화성향 점화, 점화효과, 장면 지각, 개인주의, 집단주의, 문화점화 글쓰기 과제, cultural priming, priming effect, scene perception, individualism, collectivism, cultural priming story writing task

Reference

1.

김정식, 송유진, 이성수 (2008). 문화점화가 자기평가에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 22, 177-194.

2.

Brewer, M. B., & Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this “We?” Levels of collective identity and self representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 83-93.

3.

Cha, J. H., & Nam, K. D. (1985). A test of Kelley’s cube theory of attribution: A cross-cultural replication of McArthur’s study. Korean Social Science Journal, 12, 151-180.

4.

Choi, I., & Nisbett, R. E. (1998). Situational salience and cultural differences in the correspondence bias and in the actor-observer bias. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 949-960.

5.

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.

6.

Davenport, J. L., & Potter, M. C. (2004). Scene consistency in object and background perception. Psychological Science, 15, 1211-1222.

7.

Evans, K., Rotello, C. M., Li, X., & Rayner, K. (2009). Scene perception and memory revealed by eye movements and receiver-operating characteristic analyses: Dose a cultural difference truly exist? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 276-285.

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.

Kühnen, U., & Hannover, B. (2000). Assimilation and contrast in social comparisons as a consequence of self-construal activation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 799-811.

10.

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

11.

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

12.

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, 949-971.

13.

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.

14.

Peng, K., & Knowles, E. D. (2003). Culture, Education, and the Attribution of Physical Causality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1272-1284.

15.

Rayner, K., Li, X., Williams, C. C., Cave, K. R., & Well, A. D. (2007). Eye movements during information processing tasks: Individual differences and cultural effects. Vision Research, 47, 2714-2726.

16.

Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values? Journal of Social Issues, 50, 19-45.

17.

Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W. (1987). Toward a psychological structure of human values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 550-562.

18.

Singelis, T. M., Triandis, H. C., Bhawuk, D. P. S., & Gelfand, M. J. (1995). Horizontal and vertical dimensions of individualism and collectivism: A theoretical and measurement refinement. Cross-Cultural Research, 29, 240-275.

19.

van Baaren, R. B., Maddux, W. W., & Chartrand, T. L. (2003). It takes two to mimic: Behavioral consequences of self-construals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1093-1102.

20.

Utz, S. (2004). Self-construal and cooperation: Is the interdependent self more cooperative than the independent self? Self and Identity, 3, 177-190.

21.

Wong, R. Y-M., & Hong, Y. (2005). Dynamic Influences of culture on cooperation in the prisoner’s dilemma. Psychological Science, 16, 429-434.

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy