Tag: cognition

Relational Mobility, Part II: How Easily Does Your Culture Form New Relationships…And Abandon Existing Ones?

23. September 2023by J. WittwerLeave a comment

Do they last?

Last week, we discussed relational mobility – an aspect of the social environment that reflects how easily people of different cultures form new relationships and leave existing ones.

The authors of six comprehensive studies encompassing both correlational and experimental designs unveiled significant findings regarding relational mobility in culture.

Let’s take a look at what they’ve found.

The Research

The research hypothesis of these collective studies centered on the notion that individuals residing in cultures characterized by diminished relational mobility would exhibit a heightened propensity for holistic thinking, emphasizing a broader focus on the surrounding social and physical context.

Conversely, those in cultures marked by greater relational mobility would display more analytic thinking.

To substantiate this proposition, the authors explored the disparities in relational mobility across culturally diverse regions, including the United States, Spain, Israel, Nigeria, and Morocco.

Their findings revealed that variances in relational mobility predicted patterns of dispositional bias and the prevalence of holistic or analytic cognitive orientations.

Findings

Some of the greatest findings across these six studies are as follows:

Firstly, individuals in cultures characterized by higher relational mobility exhibited narrower attention spans towards their surrounding context and displayed increased dispositional biases. This was in stark contrast to individuals in cultures with lower relational mobility.
Secondly, the authors identified that relational mobility acted as a mediator, explaining the differences observed between these cultural groups in terms of cognitive tendencies.
Thirdly, the role of locus of control was explored as a mechanism underlying these within-culture effects. It was evident that individuals in high relational mobility environments tended to perceive greater control over their surroundings, particularly within the social realm.
Lastly, relational mobility exhibited a unique predictive power in elucidating why certain cultures leaned towards analytic or holistic cognitive orientations compared to other cultural constructs.

Relational Mobility Shapes Cognitive Behaviors

The degree of relational mobility in an environment, shaped by various factors like subsistence styles, historical threats, or sociopolitical systems, influences individuals’ proximal incentives and shapes their cognitive behaviors.

In contexts with lower relational mobility, interdependence and adherence to social norms tend to dominate, driving individuals toward holistic thinking.

Conversely, higher relational mobility settings foster independence and cultural looseness, encouraging analytic cognitive tendencies.

This research sheds light on how the degree of relational mobility in a society can profoundly impact the way people think, highlighting the interchange between socioecological factors and cognitive tendencies across diverse cultures.

The Heart of Our Thinking Style: How Does Our Cultural Thinking Style Impact Our Heart Rate?

11. September 202311. September 2023by J. WittwerLeave a comment

How intimately connected are our brains and hearts?

This study on heart rate variability and analytic/holistic thinking styles delves into brain activity and neuro-visceral coordination.

Researchers specifically examined heart rate variability (HRV) in individuals exhibiting analytical and holistic thinking patterns, both during periods of rest and engagement in cognitive tasks.

Here’s what they found.

The Study

While both groups of analytical or holistic thinking styles exhibited similar success rates in resolving the cognitive challenges presented, the analytical cohort displayed prolonged response times compared to their holistic counterparts.

The tasks presented were meticulously designed to contrast the analytic and holistic conditions, instructing participants to either focus solely on an object or consider the same object in relation to the field it was situated in.

Intriguingly, when participants were tasked with cognitive activities, heart rate complexity, as quantified by sample entropy, was notably higher among those with analytical thinking tendencies.

However, no such difference emerged when participants were at rest or engaged in a straightforward motor task.

Fascinating Find: Context Means Everything

A particularly interesting finding was observed in analytical individuals when they evaluated objects concerning their relationship with the field, as opposed to objects without such contextual consideration.

During this specific task, analytical participants displayed both longer response times and heightened heart rate complexity.

In contrast, the holistic group exhibited no significant variations in response times or heart rate complexity across different tasks.

These outcomes underscore that distinctions in individual behavior, including those tied to analytical and holistic thinking styles, are not limited solely to brain activity, as previously established through methods such as fMRI and EEG.

Instead, this research reveals that these distinctions can extend to neuro-visceral coordination, as evidenced by variations in heart rate complexity.

Existing Elements Versus New

This study suggests that holistic thinkers might rely more on recombination of existing elements in their cognitive processes, while analytical thinkers lean towards generating new elements.

This distinction in learning processes was mirrored in their heart rate complexities.

The results emphasize the variations between analytic and holistic thinkers in their physiological and behavioral responses, providing fresh perspectives on the interaction between cognitive strategies and physiological coordination during cognitive tasks.

The authors suggest that further research in this realm could deepen our comprehension of the complex interchange between thought patterns and physiological responses, shedding light on the fundamental drivers of human behavior.

Cultural Thinking Orientation & the Bullwhip Effect: Does the Way We Make Decisions Impact Supply & Demand?

19. August 2023by J. WittwerLeave a comment

Economists and researchers have long studied consumer thought and decision-making in order to understand supply and demand.

They’ve uncovered a phenomenon called the “bullwhip effect.”

This is a supply chain event where small oscillations in demand at the retail level result in increasingly larger oscillations in demand at other supplier levels, such wholesale, distributer, raw material, and manufacturer levels.

When you consider this phenomenon, visualize the cracking of a whip.

A small flick of the wrist sends a wave outwards.

Panic-Buying & The Market

One example of the bullwhip effect is panic-buying.

Consider the instinct to buy up all the toilet paper and hand sanitizer during the COVID pandemic.

As stores struggled to keep their shelves stocked, orders increased, and manufacturers worked hard to meet that demand.

But eventually, they overproduce, as consumers stop panicking and ease up on the supply.

This is one way the bullwhip effect manifests.

But does our cultural thinking orientation influence this, as well?

Researchers of this study were interested in the dynamics of a culture’s holistic versus analytic thinking orientation – and what its relationship is to the bullwhip effect.

The Hypothesis: Holistic Thinking Reduces Bullwhip Effect

The hypothesis of the study posits that a stronger holistic thinking orientation might be associated with a reduction in the bullwhip effect.

This is because holistic thinkers tend to make more extensive use of information, and higher reported information use might also be linked to a reduced bullwhip effect.

The Study’s Results: The Short Answer is ‘No’

Using the “beer game” – a simulation designed around the complexities of supply chain management – researchers found no evidence supporting the hypothesized relationship between the overall holistic versus analytic thinking orientation and the bullwhip effect.

One possible explanation for this lack of correlation could be cognitive limitations faced by individuals when dealing with an abundance of information in the beer game.

If both holistic and analytic thinkers have similar cognitive capacities, neither thinking orientation may have an advantage in handling the overwhelming information.

As a result, even if holistic thinkers focused more on contextual information, they might not integrate it into decision-making to a greater extent than analytic thinkers due to these cognitive constraints.

This is further supported by the finding that the thinking orientation did not correlate with the reported use of information, indicating that both groups utilized available contextual information similarly.

What the research found was that thinking orientation didn’t impact this relationship on the whole…although, it did impact the decision-making of different subdomains of thinkers.

The Subdomains

A negative correlation was observed between a specific subdomain of the holistic versus analytic thinking orientation and the bullwhip effect.

This indicates that certain aspects of decision-makers‘ thinking styles might indeed influence supply chain variability.

When considering the subdomains of the holistic versus analytic thinking orientation, the relationship between the subdomain concerning causal attribution and the bullwhip effect stood out.

Decision-makers who assumed less complex causal relationships performed worse in terms of the bullwhip effect.

Moreover, the study revealed that holistic thinking did not correlate with reported information use.

Instead, only the reported use of specific information demonstrated a negative association with the bullwhip effect.

This finding implies that the nature and relevance of the information being utilized might be critical in mitigating supply chain fluctuations.

This study of the dynamics within supply chains can serve as a basis for developing more effective strategies to manage demand variability.

A balanced combination of holistic and analytic thinking might yield the most beneficial outcomes, with a focus on immediate processes (analytic thinking) while considering more distant processes to some extent (holistic thinking).

The Nose Knows: Scent Emotion & Memory

1. February 20191. February 2019by J. WittwerLeave a comment

You’re strolling down a path, when you brush past a lilac bush. You take a deep breath in, and suddenly memories of your grandmother flood in.

“Nana…” you think. “Why am I suddenly recalling my gran?”

Then you recall the big lilac bushes in her backyard.

We’ve heard it all before: scent triggers memory. But just how does it work?

Scent -> Emotion

Last week, we talked about the power of our sense of smell. And perhaps this power is one of the reasons why scent triggers emotion and memory recall.

Consider ads for body fragrance, perfume, or scented products. Marketing specialists know that scent triggers certain emotions and, thus, attracts consumers to particular fragrances. And so, they bank on that.

The scent of nostalgia at Christmas -> buy a pine-scented candle.

The scent of joy in the summer -> a citric body spray will do the trick.

The scent of love/romance -> try something dusky and mysterious, like sandalwood.

Some fragrances serve as aphrodisiacs, others trigger positivity, and some even trigger productivity.

This association between fragrances and emotion is what may provoke recollections and vivid memories.

How Does It Work?

Here’s how:

The nose has olfactory receptors that are linked to the limbic system, which is the seat of emotion in the brain.
These smell sensations travel to the cortex, which is the seat of cognitive recognition.
Recognition only sparks after the depths of our brains have been ignited, so after feeling a certain emotion from a scent, it usually takes a moment for cognition and memory to catch up.

Why Don’t We Value Smell?

So, if our sense of smell is so powerful, why don’t we value it as much as, say, sight or touch or hearing.

During the 18th and 19th century, scientists and philosophers revalued the senses. The period’s elite believed sight to be the most important sense, the most civilized. The superior sense, if you will.

Sight was based on reason, while smell was considered of a lower order. According to Katie Fox’s The Smell Report, published by the Social Issues Research Center, smell was considered:

“a primitive, brutish ability associated with savagery and even madness.”

The culture of the time drew the link between smell and emotion and believed that this connection threatened the rational detachment that was in vogue.

This strange view of smell has impacted culture’s relation to it, especially when it comes to language. We’ll talk more about that next week.