Tag: holistic

Contradiction, Categorization, and Change: Three Studies on Cultural Thinking Styles & How We View the World, Part II

Posted on by Leave a comment

Does the way we think determine how we categorize things in our minds?

Does it influence how we view change?

Last week, we discussed analytic and holistic/dialectical thinking and how each thinking style views contradiction.

This week, we’ll take a look at two more studies on the subject – this time regarding categorization and change.

Categorization

Analytic thinkers are more likely to follow rule-based logic than dialectical thinkers are.

This is apparent in the way both groups categorize objects.

Studies in the early 2000s looked at how European American participants and Chinese and Korean participants categorize objects (Ji, Zhang, & Nisbett, 2004; Norenzayan, Smith, Kim, & Nisbett, 2002).

For instance, how would you logically pair a chicken, a cow, and grass?

Which two go together?

Americans more often than not paired the animals together, as they are more insistent on rule-based categorization, whereas East Asians were more likely than Americans to pair the cow with grass, since cows eat grass.

Americans were also more accurate about applying complex rules of categorization when instructed to do so.

Change

As mentioned in the previous post, analytic thinkers are linear thinkers.

They think in states of stability, not in states of flux.

Any states of change follow a linear trend.

Dialectical thinkers think in perpetual change and variability.

This way of thinking is described as follows:

“At the deepest level of Chinese philosophical thinking, ‘to be or not to be’ is not the question, because life is a constant state of passing from one stage of being to another, so that to be is not to be, and not to be is to be” (Peng & Nisbett, 1999, p. 743).

These different styles of thinking lead to different predictions.

One study demonstrated that while Americans take into account previous predictors to indicate future results, Chinese participants do not (Ji, Nisbett, & Su, 2001).

When given the scenario of whether a three-year chess champion would likely lose the next game against his strongest opponent, Americans proposed a 29% chance, while Chinese respondents proposed a 53% chance.

This linear versus cyclical view of change was also illustrated in a study on stocks (Ji, Zhang, & Guo, 2008).

While Canadians were more likely to sell falling stocks and buy rising stocks, Chinese participants did the opposite, selling rising stocks and buying falling stocks.

This counter-normative instinct is seen in professional investors too, with Canadian investors twice as likely to sell falling stocks as Chinese investors.

Contradiction, Categorization & Change

These studies illustrate how opposing thinking styles can color your perspective in so many different ways.

When viewing contradiction, when categorizing objects and groups, and when dealing with change in various capacities, our decisions are based on our thinking styles.

Keep this in mind when working with or managing in other cultures: There is no “one way” to see the world.

Contradiction, Categorization, and Change: Three Studies on Cultural Thinking Styles & How We View the World, Part I

Posted on by Leave a comment

Many aspects of the field of psychology are not culture-neutral; instead, they often mirror a distinct Western analytical framework. 

This is called ethnocentricity – or cultural bias.

Within this framework, the world is envisioned as operating under discernible and unwavering rules, the existence of contradictions is perceived as a puzzle to be solved, and entities are generally regarded as relatively independent agents. 

Context and the intricate web of relationships between individuals and objects tend to be marginalized or, when examined, are often assumed to conform to simple and concise rules.

In contrast, dialectical or holistic thinking, which is more prevalent in East Asian societies, places a greater emphasis on context and the interplay of relationships. 

It embraces the notion of change rather than stability and readily accommodates contradictions. 

While analytical thinking undoubtedly has its merits, particularly in scientific inquiry and daily life, dialectical thinking at times leads to more precise conclusions or pragmatically advantageous decisions. 

Consequently, the authors of this paper advocate for the conscious adoption of both dialectical and analytical thinking as valuable tools in the cognitive toolkit, applicable to researchers and the general population alike.

They’ve also identified three ways in which each style of thinking differs: contradiction, categorization, and change.

But before we get to that, let’s take a look at each thinking style in a nutshell.

Analytic Thinking Style of the West

In general, Western cultures have an analytic thinking style, focused on individual objects and their specific attributes, independent of context.

Analytic thinkers are also linear thinkers: reasoning is rule-based.

They expect stasis, and any change is predicted.

Dialectical Thinking Style of the East

Eastern cultures have a dialectical or holistic thinking style, focused on context and relationships.

Objects are viewed in their context as part of the whole; everything is interconnected.

This type of thinking expects constant change with everything in flux. 

The interconnected parts are dynamic and nonlinear, and contradiction is seen as a fact of life and to be expected.

Let’s examine contradiction and these thinking styles perceive it.

Contradiction

In a study by Peng and Nisbett (1999), groups of American and Chinese participants were given contradictory statements.

Some participant groups were provided both statements to view, while others were given either the first or second statement, with one being more plausible than the other.

They were tasked with rating the plausibility of each statement.

When given the contradictory statements together, Americans rated the more plausible statement as much more plausible than when viewed by itself.

Chinese participants viewed the less plausible statement as more plausible when provided the contradictory statements together.

Neither rating change is logical, as a statement cannot be more or less true, simply because it is contradicted.

This study goes to show that Americans wish to eliminate contradiction altogether, while the Chinese prefer to increase the contradiction, giving credibility to both sides.

Next week, we’ll take a look at the other two aspects of these differing thinking styles in regard to categorization and change.

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

Posted on by Leave 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).

Cognition and Information Design: How Different Cultures Use the WWW

Posted on by Leave a comment

In the realm of online user experiences, culture’s impact on information design and usability has often been overlooked, even though studies have shown its relevance to user preferences and performance. 

Communication researchers seek to shed light on this crucial aspect and explore whether users navigate and prefer websites created by designers from their own cultural backgrounds.

This study proposed to enhance computer-mediated communication by acknowledging and accommodating the diverse cognitive styles that arise from different cultural influences. 

East Asian cultures have been associated with holistic cognitive styles, while Western cultures tend to exhibit more analytical cognitive approaches. 

Leveraging this contrast, researchers put forth the concept of “cultural cognitive design,” which delves into how cognitive styles shaped by culture lead to distinct ways of organizing and designing information for the web. 

Cultures Use the Internet Differently

Studies in information technology have uncovered a correlation between culture’s influence on cognitive styles and individuals’ information-seeking behavior online.

Cognitive Styles & Online Learning – A representative study by Chen and Macredie (2002) highlighted how cognitive style impacts online learning, revealing that users with different cognitive preferences exhibit varying learning inclinations when navigating hypermedia systems. 

Graff et al. (2004) also examined how individual differences in cognitive styles are significantly linked to nationality, urging the design of online learning modules to consider the impact of learning styles on attitudes.

Communication Technology & Social Relationships – Lin’s (2003) mediated communication model emphasized the integral role of communication technology in shaping the social relationships of its users. 

Further, Chau et al. (2002) presented a four-factor model based on the diverse online behaviors of cross-cultural users, demonstrating that Hong Kong users tend to use the Web for social communication more frequently than US users. 

These insights carry profound implications for site designers who aim to cater to an international audience.

Creating web content for millions of global users necessitates careful organization that considers cultural differences. 

Ultimately, a user-centered approach acknowledging cultural nuances becomes the key to delivering a rich and meaningful online experience for people worldwide.

The Experimental Study

In an experimental setting, participants in the present study were asked to evaluate the quality of six different websites using a culturally influenced appraisal process. 

This in-lab test seemingly evoked emotional responses from the participants due to the open-ended and qualitative nature of the research questions, allowing for deeper consideration compared to typical performance-based studies. 

The participants’ reflections played a crucial role in cultural cognition, where affect became intertwined with attitudes, expectations, and motivations. 

While long-established cultural traits shape cognitive processes, spontaneous emotional responses based on evolving values can rapidly alter behavior. 

The in-lab experiment provided participants with time to reflect on their experience with the websites, leading to affective appraisals. 

At the same time, an online experiment by Faiola & Matei (2005b) showed that participants from the same culture as the web designer completed tasks more quickly. 

Introducing the influence of cultural preference triggered emotional processes of appraisal. 

Additionally, the participants’ cognitive performance in the online experiment exhibited a strong relationship between web design and national origin. 

The cultural preferences of the participants aligned with their developed cultural cognitive processes, indicating that emotional responses heavily influenced participant web preferences.

Interpreting the Results

The findings suggested that individuals with a holistic cognitive style tend to adopt a global approach to learning and organizing information, identifying clear interrelationships among topics during the discovery process. 

Chinese designers, for instance, may create implicit relationships between different parts of a web menu system. 

On the other hand, individuals with an analytic cognitive style, like Americans, emphasize the division of information into hierarchical categories, keeping most information hidden within the hierarchy.

These cognitive patterns, influenced by cultural styles, significantly impact content design. 

By embracing cultural diversity in information design, the online user experience can be enriched, and developers can foster more inclusive digital environments.

Holistic vs. Analytic Thinking in Culture

Posted on by Leave a comment

How would you describe your living room?

Would you say it’s a space to commune with your family and entertain your friends? Would you describe it as a welcoming area to offer your guests food and drink?

Or would you list its working parts? Would you explain that it has two sofas, a coffee table, an entertainment center, and a 65″ flat-screen TV?

If you’d describe your living room the former way, you’re thinking holistically; if you’d describe it the latter way, you’re thinking analytically. 

Last week, we discussed how cross-cultural research might take a more positive approach to cultural differences.

In seeking out the positive, researchers took a look at Hyun-Jung Lee’s interview with renowned cognitive social psychologist, Richard Nisbett, who authored The Geography of Thought.

In the paper, Nisbett analyzes these two dominant cultural thinking styles – holistic and analytic thinking – and outlines some pros and cons of each.

Before we get to his analysis, let’s take a closer look at these two thinking styles.

Holistic Thinking

The holistic thinking style is characteristic of East Asian cultures.

This thinking style perceives everything as interconnected.

It sees the whole, and specifically the relationships between objects.

The style of thinking relates to the broader philosophy of East Asian cultures with their focus on balance, harmony, and cyclical change.

Holistic thinking also blends with the values of these cultures, which are collectivist in nature.

The understanding of the world as an interconnected whole has its benefits, as we will discuss shortly.

Analytic Thinking

As you may have guessed, the analytic thinking style is characteristic of Western cultures.

Analytic thinking identifies separate objects and categorizes them according to their attributes.

This style of thinking relates to the broader philosophy of Western cultures with their focus on individualism and personal motivations. 

Analytic thinking corresponds to the values of Western cultures, which are individualist in nature.

The understanding of the world’s moving pieces in isolation is valuable as well, as Nisbett will explain.

Nisbett’s Analysis

In Hyun-Jung Lee’s interview, Nisbett examines each thinking style.

He notes that holistic thinking allows one to notice a great depth of the physical world and context, enabling one to accept contradictions.

Whereas analytic thinking is more black-and-white, holistic thinking allows shades of grey.

Due to the lack of universalistic rules in this style of thinking, however, Nisbett concludes that one is more vulnerable to potential abuse.

As for analytic thinking, it is scientific.

This logical type of thinking has given the world all of the advantages of modern science and technology, taking us leaps and bounds.

However, its “hyper”-logicizing can give way to disconnecting from the phenomenon itself. 

Rather than suggesting that one thinking style is better than the other, Nisbett concludes that the best thinking lies in between these two ways of thought.

It’s the attempt to understand the different cognitive and intellectual styles that can help us improve our own method of reasoning.