Norenzayan et al (2002)
Cultural Similarities and Differences in Social Inference: Evidence From Behavioral Predictions and Lay Theories of Behavior
Study 1
Aim: The degree to which Koreans,
compared to Americans, would rely
on individual difference information
to predict future behavior when
situational information is minimal.
Sampling Method: Opportunity
sampling, 100 Korean University
students (51 men, 49 women,
average age 20.7) 97 American
University students (34 men, 63
women, average age 19)
Procedure: Participants were
randomly assigned to ether a
concrete behavior, trait or total trait
conditions, and have to rate the
probability that the person A would
be more helpful than person B in a
similar scenario given that A was
more helpful in the first scenario. The
concrete behavior condition had the
participant receive individual
difference information tapping a trait,
but without labeling the behaviors in
terms of a trait. In the trait condition
the participant received the individual
difference information as a trait (eg.
helpful, dishonest). In the total trait
condition the participants were given
20 instances portraying a trait and
predicted another future 20
instances. Finally the participants
would then read three arguments
that reflect three views of social
behavior: dispositionism,
situationism, and interactionism, and
then express their opinion from 1-9 of
disagree to agree.
Study 2
Aim: To investigate the effects of
situational information of varying
salience on Korean and American
predictions of the cross-situational
consistency of behavior.
Sampling Method: Volunteer
sampling (participants paid $10), 58
individuals, 32 Korean university
students (17 men, 15 women,
average age 22) 26 American
university students (25 European
American, 2 African American; 11
men, 15 women, average age 21)
Procedure: Participants are assigned
to either salient (participant made
aggregate predictions then read the
dispositional and situational
information about a single target
person, and then predicted their
behavior)or non-salient condition
(participant first read dispositional
and situational information about the
target, predicted the target’s future
behavior , and then proceeded to
make aggregate predictions). For the
aggregate prediction task,
participants were instructed to
estimate what proportion of 100
randomly selected individuals would
do each behavior in the situation
being describe (identical to single
case scenario only without the
dispositional information). Half of the
participants were given a inhibiting
condition and the other half would be
given a facilitating condition.
Study 3 (extension of Study 1)
Aim: The endorsement of
dispositionist, situationist, and
interactionist theories of behavior as
well as beliefs in the malleability of
personality
Sampling Method: Opportunity
sampling, 120 Korean university
students, 121 American university
students (genders not mentioned as it
had no effect on the study)
Procedure: Participants were given a
booklet containing the same three
arguments in Study 1 and expressed
their opinion about each argument
from 1-9 of disagree to agree.
Participants then read four
statements devised by Erdley and
Dweck (1993) intended to measure
implicit theory of personality. They
were asked to express their
agreement with each statement from
1-6 of agree to disagree. Incremental
theory of personality elicits socially
desirable responding, so
endorsement of an incremental view
of personality is measured in terms of
disagreement with statements that
reflect an entity theory of personality.
-All studies had no blind technique
-Limitations: small age group for
generalization of study
-Taken place in a lab
-Gender is evenly spread so can be
generalized
-High cross cultural validity
Results of Studies:
Study 1 showed that when there is no situational information, Koreans and Americans drew the same dispositional
inferences about an actor’s behavior and predicted equally high behavioral consistency across situations. In Study 2
Koreans made predictions about aggregate behavior that were more influenced by situational information that those of
Americans. As well, when predicting the behavior of a single individual, highly accessible situational information affected
Korean bun not American predictions. In Study 3 Koreans and Americans were equally likely to endorse a dispositionist
theory of behavior, Koreans agreed with a situationist theory more.