
doi: 10.1037/a0026316
pmid: 22082059
Westerners habitually think in analytical ways, whereas East Asians tend to favor holistic styles of thinking. We replicated this difference but showed that it disappeared after control deprivation (Experiment 1). Brief experiences of control deprivation, which stimulate increased desire for control, caused Chinese participants to shift toward Western-style analytical thinking in multiple ways (Experiments 2-5). Western Caucasian participants also increased their use of analytical thinking after control deprivation (Experiment 6). Manipulations that required Chinese participants to think in Western, analytical ways caused their sense of personal control to increase (Experiments 7-9). Prolonged experiences of control deprivation, which past work suggested foster an attitude more akin to learned helplessness than striving for control, had the opposite effect of causing Chinese participants to shift back toward a strongly holistic style of thinking (Experiments 10-12). Taken together, the results support the reality of cultural differences in cognition but also the cross-cultural similarity of using analytical thinking when seeking to enhance personal control.
Cross-Cultural Comparison, Male, China, Analytical thinking, Culture, Fixation, Ocular, Learned helplessness, White People, Thinking, Cultural difference, Young Adult, Humans, Attention, Female, Internal-External Control, Problem Solving, Control deprivation, Holistic thinking
Cross-Cultural Comparison, Male, China, Analytical thinking, Culture, Fixation, Ocular, Learned helplessness, White People, Thinking, Cultural difference, Young Adult, Humans, Attention, Female, Internal-External Control, Problem Solving, Control deprivation, Holistic thinking
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 63 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
