Cultural Variations in Memory Disruption: The Part-List Cuing Impairment in Taiwan, Singapore, and the United States

IF 2.4 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Nicholas W. Pepe, Lishi Tan, Tsung-Ren Huang, Krishna Savani, S. Rajaram
{"title":"Cultural Variations in Memory Disruption: The Part-List Cuing Impairment in Taiwan, Singapore, and the United States","authors":"Nicholas W. Pepe, Lishi Tan, Tsung-Ren Huang, Krishna Savani, S. Rajaram","doi":"10.1177/00220221241246088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research examines the cultural generalizability of a well-established memory phenomenon, the part-list cuing impairment, in which people who receive a subset of a studied list as hints recall fewer items than those who do not. Extensive research conducted in North America and Europe has documented this impairment. Our investigation focused on competing hypotheses about possible cultural differences in this impairment. The first hypothesis was that the part-list cue impairment in recall is a culturally universal memory phenomenon (i.e., it is not modulated by culture). The second hypothesis focused on possible differences in part-list cuing impairment rooted in cultural differences in analytic versus holistic processing styles. Contrary to both hypotheses, our results indicated that the part-list cuing impairment was similarly strong in the United States and Taiwan, cultures that can both be considered relatively less multicultural. In contrast, the part-list cuing impairment was weaker among ethnic Chinese participants in Singapore, a culture that can be considered relatively more multicultural. The highly influential analytic-holistic cognition distinction, which would predict that ethnic Chinese in Singapore and Taiwan would be similar to each other but different from Americans, cannot account for these findings. Instead, we consider possible alternative explanations, such as the idea that multiculturalism might shape basic memory processes that are assumed to be culturally universal. Overall, this research highlights the importance of exploring psychological phenomena in cross-cultural psychology beyond two-culture comparisons and beyond the dominant paradigms for explaining East-West differences in cognition.","PeriodicalId":48354,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00220221241246088","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This research examines the cultural generalizability of a well-established memory phenomenon, the part-list cuing impairment, in which people who receive a subset of a studied list as hints recall fewer items than those who do not. Extensive research conducted in North America and Europe has documented this impairment. Our investigation focused on competing hypotheses about possible cultural differences in this impairment. The first hypothesis was that the part-list cue impairment in recall is a culturally universal memory phenomenon (i.e., it is not modulated by culture). The second hypothesis focused on possible differences in part-list cuing impairment rooted in cultural differences in analytic versus holistic processing styles. Contrary to both hypotheses, our results indicated that the part-list cuing impairment was similarly strong in the United States and Taiwan, cultures that can both be considered relatively less multicultural. In contrast, the part-list cuing impairment was weaker among ethnic Chinese participants in Singapore, a culture that can be considered relatively more multicultural. The highly influential analytic-holistic cognition distinction, which would predict that ethnic Chinese in Singapore and Taiwan would be similar to each other but different from Americans, cannot account for these findings. Instead, we consider possible alternative explanations, such as the idea that multiculturalism might shape basic memory processes that are assumed to be culturally universal. Overall, this research highlights the importance of exploring psychological phenomena in cross-cultural psychology beyond two-culture comparisons and beyond the dominant paradigms for explaining East-West differences in cognition.
记忆中断的文化差异:台湾、新加坡和美国的部分列表提示障碍
本研究探讨了一种已被证实的记忆现象--"部分列表提示障碍"--的文化普适性,在这种现象中,接受了研究列表子集提示的人比没有接受提示的人回忆起的项目要少。在北美和欧洲进行的大量研究都记录了这种障碍。我们的调查集中于关于这种障碍可能存在的文化差异的相互竞争的假设。第一个假设是,部分列表线索在回忆中的障碍是一种文化上普遍存在的记忆现象(即它不受文化的影响)。第二个假设的重点是部分列表线索障碍的可能差异,其根源在于分析与整体加工风格的文化差异。与这两个假设相反,我们的研究结果表明,在美国和台湾,部分列表线索障碍的强度相似,而这两种文化都可以被认为是相对较少的多元文化。相比之下,新加坡华裔受试者的部分列表线索障碍较弱,而新加坡的多元文化程度相对较高。根据极具影响力的分析性认知和逻辑性认知的区别,我们可以预测新加坡和台湾的华裔会彼此相似,但与美国人不同,但这并不能解释这些发现。相反,我们考虑了其他可能的解释,比如多元文化可能会影响基本的记忆过程,而这些过程被认为是具有文化普遍性的。总之,这项研究强调了在跨文化心理学中探索心理现象的重要性,它超越了两种文化的比较,也超越了解释东西方认知差异的主流范式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
6.70%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology publishes papers that focus on the interrelationships between culture and psychological processes. Submitted manuscripts may report results from either cross-cultural comparative research or results from other types of research concerning the ways in which culture (and related concepts such as ethnicity) affect the thinking and behavior of individuals as well as how individual thought and behavior define and reflect aspects of culture. Review papers and innovative reformulations of cross-cultural theory will also be considered. Studies reporting data from within a single nation should focus on cross-cultural perspective. Empirical studies must be described in sufficient detail to be potentially replicable.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信