Valence-based biases in collective temporal thought: The role of question framing, culture, and age.

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Zizhan Yao, Kristi S Multhaup, Phia S Salter
{"title":"Valence-based biases in collective temporal thought: The role of question framing, culture, and age.","authors":"Zizhan Yao, Kristi S Multhaup, Phia S Salter","doi":"10.3758/s13421-024-01680-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Collective temporal thought includes individuals' memories of group experiences and expectations about the group's collective future. Prior studies have found inconsistent valence biases (e.g., positivity) in North American collective memory and consistently negative biases in collective future thought. Discrepancies in collective memory valence biases may be due to different question framing across studies. Moreover, a limited number of studies extend collective temporal thought research beyond Western nations and few studies examine potential age-related differences in this area. Therefore, the present study investigates valence-based biases in collective temporal thought from the perspective of question framing, culture, and participant age. Participants (N = 1,548) included younger (20-39 years) and older (60+ years) adults from the USA and mainland China. Whereas Americans' collective memory biases varied across question framings, Chinese participants consistently displayed positivity biases. The American bias patterns were specific to collective memory and did not carry over to collective future thought ratings. Chinese participants showed higher dialectical thinking than American participants and dialectical thinking positively correlated with the proportion of positive events reported. Older adults generated significantly more positive events than younger adults, more so in collective memory than in collective future thought. Overall, collective temporal thinking is influenced by question framing, cultural context, and participant age.</p>","PeriodicalId":48398,"journal":{"name":"Memory & Cognition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory & Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-024-01680-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Collective temporal thought includes individuals' memories of group experiences and expectations about the group's collective future. Prior studies have found inconsistent valence biases (e.g., positivity) in North American collective memory and consistently negative biases in collective future thought. Discrepancies in collective memory valence biases may be due to different question framing across studies. Moreover, a limited number of studies extend collective temporal thought research beyond Western nations and few studies examine potential age-related differences in this area. Therefore, the present study investigates valence-based biases in collective temporal thought from the perspective of question framing, culture, and participant age. Participants (N = 1,548) included younger (20-39 years) and older (60+ years) adults from the USA and mainland China. Whereas Americans' collective memory biases varied across question framings, Chinese participants consistently displayed positivity biases. The American bias patterns were specific to collective memory and did not carry over to collective future thought ratings. Chinese participants showed higher dialectical thinking than American participants and dialectical thinking positively correlated with the proportion of positive events reported. Older adults generated significantly more positive events than younger adults, more so in collective memory than in collective future thought. Overall, collective temporal thinking is influenced by question framing, cultural context, and participant age.

集体时间思维中的基于价值的偏见:问题框架、文化和年龄的作用。
集体时间思维包括个体对群体经历的记忆和对群体未来的期望。先前的研究发现,在北美集体记忆中存在不一致的效价偏差(如积极性),而在集体未来思维中存在一致的负性偏差。集体记忆效价偏差的差异可能是由于研究中不同的问题框架造成的。此外,有限数量的研究将集体时间思维研究扩展到西方国家之外,很少有研究检查这一领域潜在的与年龄相关的差异。因此,本研究从问题框架、文化和参与者年龄的角度探讨集体时间思维中基于价值的偏见。参与者(N = 1548)包括来自美国和中国大陆的年轻人(20-39岁)和老年人(60岁以上)。美国人的集体记忆偏差在不同的问题框架中有所不同,而中国参与者一致表现出积极的偏见。美国人的偏见模式是特定于集体记忆的,并没有延续到集体未来的想法评级。中国参与者的辩证思维水平高于美国参与者,且辩证思维与报告的积极事件比例正相关。老年人产生的积极事件明显多于年轻人,在集体记忆中比在集体未来思考中更明显。总体而言,集体时间思维受问题框架、文化背景和参与者年龄的影响。
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
Memory & Cognition
Memory & Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
112
期刊介绍: Memory & Cognition covers human memory and learning, conceptual processes, psycholinguistics, problem solving, thinking, decision making, and skilled performance, including relevant work in the areas of computer simulation, information processing, mathematical psychology, developmental psychology, and experimental social psychology.
×
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