Theory

Attribution Theory
Individualistic vs. Collectivistic
Self-Serving Bias
Empathy
Connection
References

Theory

In relation to the attribution theory, individualistic cultures that emphasize independence and self-expression will prioritize a stronger sense of responsibility for one’s own behavior rather than emphasizing on external factors being a cause, however there are costs in forming dispositional attributions. I propose that individualistic cultures are more susceptible to the fundamental attribution error, which has now ultimately led to more bias against others, such as the self-serving bias, as well as reduced empathy.

Attribution Theory

When we are curious about others and their behavior, we often try to perceive them through forming attributions. Forming attributions involves assigning causes to behaviors (Jhangiani et al., 2014). In turn, many people have the tendency to try to understand other people by quickly making causations or explanations on why they would act the way they do. Additionally, the attribution theory suggests that people generally try to look for external and internal causes in behaviors and actions of others and themselves (Chiang & Birtch, 2007). This means that based on the attribution theory, the explanations on behavior that people make differ depending on their level of emphasis on external and internal causes. From the ideas of Jhangiani et al. (2014), we constantly make these biased attributions, which is seen in the way that we more often attribute the behavior of others based on personal factors, instead of considering factors in a situation that may have led to their behavior, as such we are more likely to form personal attributions about others more than for ourselves. This exemplifies the fundamental attribution error, which is the tendency to overestimate the role of personal factors and underestimate the power of social situations in influencing behavior (Jhangiani et al., 2014). In connection to the attribution theory and the fundamental attribution error, the internal causes which are known as personal or dispositional attributions refers to explaining behavior to be caused by a person, but the external causes are situational attributions refers to explaining behavior to be caused by the situation.

Individualistic vs. Collectivistic

Cross-cultural studies have found that culture has an important function within the attribution theory, which is strongly demonstrated by how people from other cultures are thought to have contrasting perspectives on the causes of successful performance or what attributes lead up to an outcome of success (Chiang & Birtch, 2007). Based on Jhangiani et al. (2014), people in Western cultures are generally focused on the idea of individualism. This emphasis on individualism has led them to have an independent self-concept that allows them to perceive themselves and other around them as distinct from their own groups or environments. In this way, individualistic cultures make attributions based on individual characteristics to explain behavior and performance. However, people in Asian cultures who are more collectivistic, emphasize the importance of the relationship between themselves and the people or things around them (Jhangiani et al., 2014). This means that collectivistic cultures put more of a focus on situational factors, rather than focusing on individual factors to explain causes of behavior and performance.It is also important to note that the cultural norms are factors in attributing the causes of behavior (Chiang & Birtch, 2007). This means that the norms of individualistic or collectivistic cultures determine the way that people view their relationships, nature, and those above them. This is demonstrated through the concept of individualism-collectivism that people in individualistic or collectivistic cultures have different perceptions of the self from each other. This is especially true considering how individualistic cultures are often seen as having more control and individual responsibility while emphasizing self-reliance and individual competition. Meanwhile, collectivistic cultures tend to emphasize working as a group, rather than focusing on an individual having full control over themselves. Collectivistic cultures emphasize a more social viewpoint, in which they are interconnected with groups that identify with and focus on collective goals (Heinke and Louis, 2009). In this case, the norms, duties, and obligations of collectivistic cultures are what shape their communal behavior, whereas individualistic cultures are more focused on the personal needs and their own rights. An example that highlights the way that culture overall plays a role in the attribution theory can be seen in the Chiang and Birtch (2007) study, which intended to examine the differences between the perceived attributes or causes of employee performance from a sample from Canada, Hong Kong, Finland, and the UK. This study revealed that there were different emphases on internal and external causes of performance between people from individualistic cultures versus collectivistic cultures. This included the data that the participants from Canada, Finland, the UK were more focused on internal factors to attribute performance outcomes as they belong in individualistic cultures. On the other hand, it was shown that the participants from Hong Kong focused both on internal and external factors to be significant in affecting performance outcomes. These results contribute to the idea that the attribution theory, in relation to the contrasts between individualistic and collectivist cultures, demonstrates the way that people will explain the causes of behaviors based on external or internal factors. It then follows that since collectivistic cultures see social conditions that are subject to change as the main focus in influencing behavior while individualistic cultures focus more on internal traits of people being the main determinant in behavior, individuals in collectivistic cultures tend to display the fundamental attribution error less often than individualistic cultures. Therefore, it can be concluded that individualistic cultures are more influenced by the fundamental attribution error.

Self-Serving Bias

Building on the fundamental attribution error and the idea that the attributions we make tend to be biased, self-serving attributions involves forming attributions that are distorted to be more positive and help us feel better about ourselves (Jhangiani et al., 2014). Hence, the self-serving bias is the way of attributing our own successes to personal factors, but attributing our failures based on others and situational factors. An example of the self-serving bias can be seen in the way that many students would attribute them passing a final exam due to them being a good student or a hard worker. However, if students do poorly on a final exam, they tend to bring up factors in the situation, such as how the teacher may have lectured poorly or how their other classes hindered their focus by giving them too much work. What can be said about the self-serving bias is that the judgments made are often not that accurate, but rather they are formed to benefit the person since it is used to take credit for successes but not for failures (Jhangiani et al., 2014). In addition, the self-serving bias is very common and it is argued that this may be due to the idea that it maintains self-esteem (Jhangiani et al., 2014). In connection to how there are cultural differences on the levels of self-enhancement, individuals in individualistic cultures display the self-serving bias more than those in collectivistic cultures. This can be supported with the idea that since individualistic cultures have a stronger emphasis on self-improvement and the individual, there is more of a focus to be biased to oneself and credit themselves more for their successes.

Empathy

Past research has shown that many people have a decreased empathy for those that are culturally dissimilar to them, but have increased empathy when they feel like others are similar to them. Empathy is influenced by a familiarity bias, making empathy more likely to appear when people are seen as having similar attitudes and desires (Hoffman, 2000). This means that perceived similarity enables people to see from others' perspectives and ultimately allows for empathy. Past studies such as the Nelson and Baumgarte (2004) study tested how cultural similarity influences perspective taking and empathy. Participants of this study were given situations of distressed people who acted based on individualistic or collectivistic values, which was done in order to manipulate cultural similarity. The results revealed that the American participants felt like they were more similar to the people that displayed behavior aligning with individualistic values and this perceived similarity was associated with increased empathy. It was concluded from the same study that perceived cultural dissimilarity can decrease perspective taking and empathy.

The Heinke and Louis (2009) study examined the cultural differences and individualistic-collectivistic values in the Australian context. The study tested the cultural precursors of perceived similarity from past research, including those from the Nelson and Baumgarte (2004) study. To analyze the precursors of perceived similarity, roles of cultural backgrounds, and individualistic-collectivistic values, the sample of participants for the Heinke and Louis (2009) study included Asian and European Australians. This helped assess the individualistic and collectivist values while matching up the cultural heritage and values to similarity judgments. The data for this study was derived from questionnaires that were brought to introductory management and economics classes with a large percentage of the students being Asian foreign students. The participants thought that the study was related to the perceptions of reactions in social situations. They were told that they had to read two scenarios of distressed people in social situations and answer related questions. One scenario showed behavior related to collectivistic values, meanwhile the other scenario showed behavior related to individualistic values. After reading the scenarios, the participants had to rate perceived similarity, perspective taking, and empathy. Perceived similarity was rated through having single terms being rated on 5-point scales, which ranged from 1 representing "not agree at all" and 5 being "strongly agree. " Perspective taking was measured by utilizing six items from past research rated on the same 5-point scales. However, there were five positively scored items and one reverse scored item. These measures were then averaged, where a =.69 represented perspective taking towards individualists and a = .78 for collectivists. Empathy was rated through having the participants specify how much they experienced sympathetic, compassion, movement, warmth, soft-heartedness, and tenderness on the same 5-point scales. These measures were averaged with equal values of a = .90 representing perspective taking towards both individualists and collectivists.

Ultimately, the Heinke and Louis (2009) study helped reveal that empathic reactions to others’ distress is positively associated with the perceived similarity through perspective taking by replicating the similarity, perspective-taking, and empathy model. The study also separated cultural values from ethnocultural backgrounds, examined values as independent dimensions, and revealed that individualistic and collectivistic values were positively correlated. Even if the Asian participants from the study were more collectivistic and helped in displaying that collectivism was positively linked to empathy, they were still equally individualistic as the individualistic group and both groups had higher levels of collectivism than individualism. As a result, empathy is more likely when people can take other’s perspectives. In connection to these results, it was discussed before that collectivist cultures view social conditions as things that can change for different situations, rather than be limited to analyzing personality traits of others. Therefore, people belonging in collectivist cultures may be more likely to be able to dive deeper into perspective taking and empathize more on why others would behave in a way. Again, this leads into the idea that individualistic cultures are more susceptible to the fundamental attribution error and as a result of that, leads to the lower levels of perspective taking and therefore reduced empathy as it may be more difficult for them to take on perspectives of others.

Connection

In connection to what is currently happening with Covid-19, I feel like it is important to note the way that individualistic cultures have responded to the pandemic, especially the United States. It can be seen that many Americans refuse to wear masks and some have participated in anti-mask protests, with the belief that it is their right as Americans to have the option of not wearing one. The Vargas and Sanchez (2020) article suggests that the resistance of mask-wearing and the increasing health consequences in the United states are outcomes of the impact of individualism in American culture. It was found that although there has been a 12% increase in reported mask-wearing in the United States, 20% still do not wear masks even though there are state requirements to do so. The largest reason of this is the individualistic ideals from Americans, which is shown on the data on reasons why people do not wear masks and making up 40% of the data. Again, individualistic cultures prioritize independence and focusing on oneself. In the case of the pandemic, individualism actually becomes a disadvantage as it leads people to being more biased to themselves and not empathizing with others during this difficult time, such as not wearing masks and therefore not considering people that are immunocompromised or have other health problems that would make them more at risk.

References

Chiang, F. F., & Birtch, T. A. (2007). Examining the perceived causes of successful employee
performance: An East–West comparison. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(2), 232-248.Heinke, M. S., & Louis, W. R. (2009). Cultural background and individualistic-collectivistic values in relation to similarity, perspective taking, and empathy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39(11), 2570–2590.Hoffman, M. L. (2000). Empathy and moral development: Implications for caring and justice. Cambridge University Press.Jhangiani, R., Tarry, H., & Stangor, C. (2014). Principles of Social Psychology - 1st International Edition. Victoria, B.C.: BCcampus. https://opentextbc.ca/socialpsychology/Vargas, D. E., & Sanchez, R. G. (2020, August 31). American individualism is an obstacle to wider mask wearing in the US. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/08/31/american-individualism-is-an-obstacle-to-wider-mask-wearing-in-the-us/