memory of a controversial social event – relation to the individualism-collectivism dimension...
TRANSCRIPT
Memory of a controversial social event – relation to the
individualism-collectivism dimension
Elena Paspalanova
New Bulgarian University
International Council of Psychologists 65th Annual Conference,
San Diego, California, USA
August 10 – 14, 2007
The context of the research: Cultural differences in cognitive processes
“…Westerners and Asians literally see different worlds. … Westerners see a world of objects – discrete and unconnected things. …
Asians are inclined to see a world of substances – continuous masses of matter. …
Westerners have an analytic view focusing on salient objects and their attributes,
Easterners have a holistic view focusing on continuities in substances and relationships in the environment.”
(R. Nisbett, (2003). The geography of thought.)
Some experimental evidence:
1. A pyramid made of cork: “Look at this “dax” (“blicket”)
A pyramid made of plastic vs. pieces of cork
“Point to the “dax”
Americans – the pyramid Japanese – the pieces of cork
From two-years-old to adults
2. Memory for words
Long list of words on different pictorial background:
“social” vs. “non-social” vs. no background
Chinese recall more words when presented on social background
3. Holistic view of the events vs. tunnel vision.
Recall task
8 animated underwater pictures:
- focal fish – larger, brighter, faster moving
- slower moving animals
- inert objects – rocks, plants, bubbles, etc.
• Number of references to the focal fish - Americans = Japanese
• References to the background elements – Japanese made 60% more
• 1st sentence:
Japanese – referred to the environment, e.g. “It looked like a pond.”Americans – referred to the focal object, e.g. “A big fish moving to the left.”
Memory of a controversial event:
An event that could be understood (perceived) and remembered differently by the opposing groups, which it concerns.
The state policy of changing the names of the Turkish population in Bulgaria - extermination of the ethnic differences in Bulgaria - 1984-1989
(revival process; ethnic cleansing)
Content of the memories - the most important episodes (moments) of the event (120 Ss – ethnic BG and ethnic TU)
Soldiers in the streets, frequent passport controls, midnight checks at homes, prohibition of the usage of Turkish as maternal language,
dismissal from work, prohibition of national clothing and religious
ceremonies, bomb-attempts at the train stations, arrests, compulsory
change of the names (most frequently mentioned).
Episodic memory
• personally experienced event
• store for kinds of information one includes in his/her life story
• consists of remembering both the event per se and the experienced emotions when it happened
• crucial role of the “experiencer” / “rememberer”, or the “self” as an accumulator of episodic experience
Are there any other factors, except one’s ethnic origin, which could influence the memories of people, who have experienced to a different extent - witnessed or suffered - the event of “changing the names of ethnic Turks”?
Memory of a real social event from the newest history of Bulgaria.
Social orientations
Express some of the core values and shared believes in a given society or group, which constitute the essence of its “culture”.
Individualism - Collectivism
Inter-individual differences - as to the extent of holding individualistic or respectively collectivistic values and believes.
In both individualistic and collectivistic cultures there are individualists as well as collectivists.
(H. Triandis, 1985)
Definition of the self-concept
Attribution styles
Emotional expression
Communication styles and conflict resolution
Feeling of well-being
Social behavior
Perception and Memory
The question is:
Is it possible that individualistic vs. collectivistic orientation,
measured at individual level (that is, conceived as an individual characteristic reflecting one’s preferred believes and values) could
influence the cognition (memory)?
NB – Individualism – collectivism is a cultural dimension !
Individualistic orientation – better memory of details
Collectivistic orientation – better memory of relationships (event context)
Participants: 589
Ethnic BG - 348 (60%) Ethnic TU - 233 (40%)
Males - 256 (46%) Females – 306 (54%)
Village – 83 (14%) Town – 494 (86%)
Basic – 42 (7%) Secondary – 254 (43%) Higher – 290 (50%)
Histogram: AGE
25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57 62 66 70 74 78 87
Age
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
No
. of
par
tici
pan
ts
Method
1. Memory of the controversial event (variables):
Personal details Event details SurprisePersonal emotions’ intensityNational importancePersonal importance Emotions’ intensity of the other peopleMedia information Sharing information Sharing emotions Having different opinion Being under social pressure
• Memory of details:
- Personal details: “Do you remember what you were doing those days ?”
- Event details: “Do you remember or could you give details to describe the event ?”
• Memory of relationships with other people
- Sharing with other people (info and emotions): “Did you discuss, sharing information with the other people (relatives, friends, colleagues, etc.) about this event?”; “Did you sharing emotions with the other people (showed your feelings) about the event?”
- Perception of having different opinion from the others and being under social pressure: “Did people (relatives, friends, colleagues, etc.) have opinions different from yours about the significance of the event or its consequences?”; “Did people try to change (influence) your opinion?”
(1) Not at all - (5) To great extent
2. Social orientations: Individualism - Collectivism
Wealth -1.919
Success - .614
Self-confidence - .378
Cooperation .354
Tradition .416
Order .749
Justice 1.393
Gerganov, E., et al. (1996). Culture-specific approach to the study of individualism-collectivism.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 1996, vol. 26, 277-297.
Fig. 1 Histogram of individualism-collectivism dimension
0
8
16
24
32
40
48
56
64
72
80
88
96
104
112
120
<= -2.5(-2.5,-2]
(-2,-1.5](-1.5,-1]
(-1,-.5](-.5,0]
(0,.5](.5,1]
(1,1.5](1.5,2]
(2,2.5]> 2.5
Method of quartiles – 3 groups: individualists
collectivists
balanced
Fig.2. Bulgarian sub-sample IC_SCALE = 347*0,5*normal(x; 0,3703; 0,8927)
-2,5 -2,0 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5
individualism - collectivism scale
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Nu
mb
er o
f S
s
Fig. 3. Turkish sub-sampleIC_SCALE = 233*0,5*normal(x; -0,3037; 1,0024)
-3,0 -2,5 -2,0 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5
individualism - collectivism scale
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Nu
mb
er o
f S
s
MX Sx N T-test
BG 0,37 .893 347 8,48
TU - 0,30 1,002 233 p < .001
ES = .70
F-values - ethnicity and social orientations as related to the memories
Memory of: Ethnicity Social orientations
Interaction effect
1 Personal details 51.91 .15 1.91
2 Event details 57.12 .03 .67
3 Surprise 32.76 .03 .00
4 Personal emotions’ intensity 51.86 1.23 1.13
5 National importance 27.48 (BG) 20.94 (Col) 9.23
6 Personal importance 59.15 2.37 3.00 (p<.08)
7 Emotions’ intensity of the other people
14.29 .36 1.56
8 Media information 1.94 5.08 (Col) .55
9 Sharing information 4.05 (BG) 6.26 (Col) .69
10 Sharing emotions .209 5.73 (Col) .989
11 Having different opinion 20.59 .22 2.13
12 Being under social pressure 36.93 2.57 1.24
Details (personal and event) 60.45 .09 1.37
Sharing (information and emotions)
1.73 6.82 (Col) .949
Having different opinion and being under social pressure
36.41 1.40 2.13
BG sample: Individualistic vs. collectivistic orientations are not related to memory
TU sample: Collectivistic orientation is related to better memory
National importance 22,78
Personal importance 7,32
Media information 4,12
Sharing information 5,12
Sharing emotions 5,88
Sharing (information and emotions) 6,13
Total memory 12,36
F-values - social orientations as related to the memories
Memory of: BG TU
Personal details 3,83 (p<.02) 10,94 (p<.000)
Event details 11,35 (p<.000)
Sharing information 3,23 (p<.04)
Sharing emotions 2,37 (p<.09)
National importance 20,11 (p<.000)
Individualists vs. Collectivists vs. Balanced
F-values - social orientations as related to the memories
BG sampleMemory of sharing information related to social orientations
Current effect: F(2, 344)=3,2273, p=,04087Vertical bars denote 0,95 confidence intervals
Individualists Collectivists Balanced2,8
2,9
3,0
3,1
3,2
3,3
3,4
3,5
3,6
3,7
3,8
3,9
4,0
4,1
Sh
ari
ng
in
form
ati
on
Memory of sharing emotions related to social orientationsCurrent effect: F(2, 344)=2,3745, p=,09459
Vertical bars denote 0,95 confidence intervals
Individualists Collectivists Balanced2,4
2,5
2,6
2,7
2,8
2,9
3,0
3,1
3,2
3,3
3,4
3,5
3,6
3,7
Sh
ari
ng
em
oti
on
sMemory of personal details related to social orientations
Current effect: F(2, 344)=3,8296, p=,02265Vertical bars denote 0,95 confidence intervals
Individualists Collectivists Balanced2,4
2,6
2,8
3,0
3,2
3,4
3,6
3,8
4,0
Me
mo
ry o
f p
ers
on
al
de
tail
s
TU sampleMemory of personal details related to social orientation
Current effect: F(2, 230)=10,947, p=,00003Vertical bars denote 0,95 confidence intervals
Individualists Collectivists Balanced3,4
3,6
3,8
4,0
4,2
4,4
4,6
4,8
5,0
5,2
Mem
ory
of
per
son
al d
eta
ils
Memory of event details related to social orientation
Current effect: F(2, 230)=11,349, p=,00002Vertical bars denote 0,95 confidence intervals
Individualists Collectivists Balanced3,4
3,6
3,8
4,0
4,2
4,4
4,6
4,8
5,0
Mem
ory
of
even
t d
eta
ils
Conclusions:
Collectivists remember better:• Sharing (information and emotions) – BG + TU• National importance of the event – TU• Looking for the news (newspapers, TV programs, radio) – TU
Individualists (compared to balanced) remember better:• Personal details - TU• Event details - TU