Cognition, Emotion, and Motivation Psychology Essay

Culture and Cognition
Student’s Name
Institution
Culture and Cognition
Introduction
Examining cultural differences can yield a deeper understanding of how people think. The world is characterized by numerous different cultures, each possessing distinct features. The focus of many cultural research studies, however, revolves around the cultural differences in the context of Westerners versus Easterners. Westerners, in this case, typically include Canadians and U.S. Americans of European descent while Easterners typically refer to East Asians (Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, etc.) [de Oliveira & Nisbett, 2017]. While Easterners tend to pay greater attention to relationships and context, Westerners tend to be more analytic. In today’s world that is increasingly becoming globalized, the interaction of different cultures is unavoidable. This paper presents an analysis of how differences in culture play a role in cognition. In this regard, an understanding of cultural differences can help improve one’s understanding of human behavior and cognition.
Culture and Analytic and Holistic Cognitions
A key feature that characterizes the difference between Easterners and Westerners is cognition. While the Westerners tend to be characterized by analytic cognition, the Easterners are characterized by holistic cognition (Grossmann & Varnum, 2011). The analytic cognition of Westerners makes them detach a focal object from a continuous field, ascribe causality to focal objects or actors, and predict linear progression of events. On the other hand, the holistic cognition in Easterners is associated with focusing on the entire continuous field, predicting non-linear progression of events, and attribution of causality to context as opposed to objects or actors (Grossmann & Varnum, 2011). It can be deduced that there exist significant differences in cognition between Westerners and Easterners, and this variation can be attributed to cultural differences.
Miyamoto (2013) reports on a study that sought to examine the difference in attention between Japanese and American participants. In the study, the participants were presented with animated clips of natural underwater scenes that had focal fish in the background and were asked to describe what they saw. The study found that compared to the American participants, the Japanese tended to be more likely to describe the relationship between the background and the focal fish. On the other hand, Americans emphasized more on the focal fish. The same case happened with Chinese and American participants when presented with still photos of natural scenes (Miyamoto, 2013). According to Miyamoto (2013), when individuals from the two cultures are exposed to natural scenes, it can be deduced that they are looking at different things. An examination of other studies by Miyamoto (2013) show that Easterners are more likely than Westerners to focus on contextual information when exposed to visual stimuli. When Easterners are exposed to the American environment, their focus on configural relationships reduces, proving that culture contributes to shaping the perception of people.
Another way to look at the analytical and holistic cognition that distinguishes the two cultures is through change. According to de Oliveira & Nisbett (2017), the individuals that are characterized by analytic cognition expect stability in the states of the world. The personality traits of a person, in this case, are not expected to vary significantly. People characterized by analytic cognition such as Americans tend to presume change as following a linear trend. On the other hand, the holistic or dialectical thinkers perceive reality as a process that is constantly changing. de Oliveira & Nisbett (2017) report that Westerners tend to sell falling stocks and purchase rising stocks. On the other hand, Easterners tend to sell rising stocks and purchase falling stocks. Even among professional investors, this pattern can be seen. Investors from the Canadian culture were found to be twice as likely as their Chinese counterparts when it comes to selling falling stocks (de Oliveira & Nisbett, 2017). Therefore, investors from Western cultures are more likely to purchase rising stocks because they expect the states of the world to be stable. Eastern investors, on the other hand, consider reality to be constantly changing and are thus more likely to sell rising stocks. It is deducible that cultural differences can be used to explain the investment behaviors of different people.
Social Orientation
The differences in social orientation have been advanced as a driving factor in cultural differences in cognition. According to Varnum, Grossmann, Kitayama, and Nisbett (2010), cultures that afford and approve independent social orientation tend to put emphasis on autonomy, self-direction, and self-expression. On the other hand, cultures that afford and approve interdependent social orientation tend to put emphasis on connection, harmony, and relatedness (Varnum, Grossmann, Kitayama, & Nisbett, 2010). While the cultures that are independently-oriented consider self as separate from the larger social group, the cultures that are interdependently-oriented perceive the self as connected to the larger social group. Another key difference is that people in independently-oriented cultures are motivated to promote the self at the expense of the larger group while the case is uncommon in cultures that are interdependently oriented (Varnum, Grossmann, Kitayama, & Nisbett, 2010).
Given these differences in social orientation, a major proposition is that when cultures differ in social orientation, as shown above, it follows that the cultures will have a difference in their cognitive habits. However, Varnum, Grossmann, Kitayama, Nisbett (2010) point out that there are other viable hypotheses may explain the cognitive differences between Easterners and Westerners. This includes aspects such as time of industrialization and linguistic and genetic differences. Furthermore, it is important to note that while Eastern culture was significantly influenced by Confucian values, European cultures were influenced by Aristotelian values. Therefore, it is deducible that there are many factors that may explain the differences in cognition between Eastern and Western cultures.
According to Miyamoto (2013), different social environments advocate different imperatives and tasks for individuals. In independently-oriented cultures, the pursuit of personal goals independent from the social context is the primary imperative. In this case, the social environment in Western countries such as the US promotes the pursuit of personal goals by individuals. On the other hand, in Eastern countries, individuals are encouraged to fit their goals into focusing on the needs of the social environment (Miyamoto, 2013). Therefore, in Western countries, one can influence the surroundings according to their wishes and goals. However, in Eastern countries, individuals have to adjust themselves to their surroundings. According to Miyamoto (2013), for individuals to be able to exercise power effectively, they have to engage in the essential imperatives as advocated by a particular cultural context. This means that for one to exert power effectively in Western cultures, they have to pursue personal goals while not paying attention to the society at large. In contrast, to exert power effectively in Eastern cultures, it is essential that attends to the need of others. Therefore, it is deducible that one’s culture determines the behavior that they are likely to practice.
Physical Environment
There exist an argument that the cultural differences in cognition are attributed to the cultural variation in the physical environment. According to this argument, Westerners tend to pay attention to focal and distinctive objects rather than to the background because objects in the Western environment stand out from the background more compared to Eastern cultures (Miyamoto, Nisbett, & Masuda, 2006). On the other hand, the Easterners pay attention to the the background because, in the Eastern environment, objects are more difficult and ambiguous to differentiate from the background. To find out whether this argument is valid, Miyamoto, Nisbett, Masuda (2006) sought to examine whether the physical environment can explain the difference in cognition between Western and Eastern cultures. For the Western culture, the researchers picked the USA environment, while for the Easter culture, they decided to use the Japanese environment. To select similar perceptual environments between the two cultures, the authors randomly selected three types of institutions that make every day scenery of the two national cultures (Miyamoto, Nisbett, & Masuda, 2006). The three institutions include public elementary schools, post-offices, and hotels. The researchers took digital pictures of large, medium, and small cities in both countries. An analysis by the authors showed that patterns of attention in the two cultures may be explained partially by the physical environment. The authors found that Japanese sceneries were more ambiguous and complex compare...