READING 2
Culture and the Development of Everyday Social Explanation by Joan G. Miller
Please refer to the printed reader, Readings in Social Psychology 3/e, for the text of this
article.
Overview
For many years, social psychologists who studied attribution theory assumed that people
all over the world perceive each other through the same processes and are subject to the
same biases. It was generally assumed, for example, that the tendency to attribute actions
to persons relative to situations, known as the Fundamental Attribution Error, was
pervasive—and universal. As we discuss in Chapter 4 (Perceiving Persons), it is now
clear that cultures shape the way people explain the events of human behavior—and that
while westerners tend to see individuals as autonomous and motivated by internal forces,
many nonwestern “collectivist” cultures take a holistic view that emphasizes the
relationship between individuals and their surroundings. Do these differing worldviews
influence the attributions we make? Is it possible that the fundamental attribution error is
a uniquely Western phenomenon? In the first study to ask that question, Miller (1984)
compared Americans and Asian Indians of varying ages in the way they explained the
causes of other people’s behavior. As you’ll see, Miller’s research sheds light on how the
invisible hand of cultural upbringing can influence the way we perceive the people in our
world.
Critical Thinking Questions
1. Chapter 4 describes the tendency to overestimate personal causes for the behavior of
others as the “Fundamental Attribution Error.” In light of the results presented by Miller
in this article, how apt a name do you think that is for this phenomenon? In general, how
widespread is this tendency to make personal attributions?
2. How do Miller’s findings relate to the discussion in Chapter 3 of cultural influences
on the self-concept? How would you integrate the cultural differences in attribution
reported by Miller with the individualism/collectivism dichotomy observed in research on
beliefs about the self?
3. Miller gives three potential explanations for cross-cultural differences in attribution
styles. What are these three explanations, and which one is best supported by her
studies?
4. In Study 1, Miller asks participants to describe recent behaviors they have witnessed.
The Method of Study 2 is different, however, as all participants are interviewed about the
same events. What was the purpose for this change in methodology, and how do the
results of the second study compare to those of the first?
5. Consider a child who was born in America but moved to India as a baby. What would
you predict about this child’s attributional tendencies based on Miller’s results? Would
your prediction vary depending on how old the child was when he moved to India?
6. What are the implications of this study for thinking about public policy disagreements
between governments of different countries? Can you think of a real-life or hypothetical
example of how cross-cultural differences in attribution style could lead to international
conflict or misunderstanding?
Links For Further Investigation
As Question #2 above indicates, cross-cultural differences are by no means limited to
attributional tendencies. A wide array of cultural differences in perception and cognition
are studied by psychologists (and other scholars, including sociologists, linguists, and
anthropologists), as can be seen by the homepage of the Journal of Cognition and
Culture, http://www.wmich.edu/cognition/home.html, which includes the journal’s
mission statement as well as recent tables of contents.
Given the increasingly global nature of the modern business world, awareness of cultural
differences is also of great importance to individuals in industry. Consider, for example,
the role played by an audience’s cultural tendencies and preferences in designing
television advertising campaigns, an issue discussed in the following article:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/advertising/2003-06-19-xtreme_x.htm. Some recent
companies take this interest in cultural differences even further, as they explicitly focus
on training other businesses in cross-cultural strategies and awareness. See
http://www.culturalsavvy.com/ for one such company and a site that includes a variety of
articles, book reviews, and other links.