컨텐츠로 이동
Cultural variation in choice and its consequences : implications for decision making, victim blaming, and social policies 해당 항목을 미리보기
닫기해당 항목을 미리보기
확인중입니다…

Cultural variation in choice and its consequences : implications for decision making, victim blaming, and social policies

저자: Krishna Mukundrai SavaniHazel MarkusCarol S DweckMark R LepperGregory M Walton모든 저자
출판사: 2010.
논문: Thesis (Ph. D.)--Stanford University, 2010.
판/형식:   주제/주장 : 문서 : 눈문/학위논문 : 전자도서   컴퓨터 파일 : 영어
데이터베이스:WorldCat
요약:
Choice is one of the most important categories of actions, both in American society in general and in the specific fields of psychology and economics. Extensive research over the past century has examined how people make choices, but the question of whether and when an action counts as a choice remains unstudied. While most scientists assume that whether an action counts as a choice is based upon the objective  더 읽기…
평가:

(아무런 평가가 없습니다.) 0 리뷰와 함께 - 첫번째로 올려주세요.

 

온라인으로 문서 찾기

이 항목에 대한 링크

도서관에서 사본 찾기

&AllPage.SpinnerRetrieving; 해당항목을 보유하고 있는 도서관을 찾는 중

상세정보

자료 유형: 문서, 눈문/학위논문, 인터넷 자료
문서 형식: 인터넷 자원, 컴퓨터 파일
모든 저자 / 참여자: Krishna Mukundrai Savani; Hazel Markus; Carol S Dweck; Mark R Lepper; Gregory M Walton; Stanford University. Department of Psychology.
OCLC 번호: 651127772
메모: Submitted to the Department of Psychology.
설명: 1 online resource.
책임: Krishna Savani.

초록:

Choice is one of the most important categories of actions, both in American society in general and in the specific fields of psychology and economics. Extensive research over the past century has examined how people make choices, but the question of whether and when an action counts as a choice remains unstudied. While most scientists assume that whether an action counts as a choice is based upon the objective availability of multiple options, the present research tests whether what counts as a choice is also a matter of construal, a construal that is shaped by cultural models of agency. Studies 1 to 6 find that people in U.S. American contexts, where the disjoint model of agency is prevalent, are more likely than those in Indian contexts, where the conjoint model of agency is prevalent, to construe behaviors as choices. In Study 1, Americans reported making significantly more choices during the day than did Indians. In Studies 2 and 3, after the experimenter subtly induced participants to engage in the same series of behaviors, Americans were again more likely than Indians to construe their actions as choices. In Study 4, while watching a video of an actor spending time in his apartment, Americans identified the actor as making significantly more choices than did Indians. In Studies 5a and 5b, Americans were even more likely and Indians were even less likely to construe more important real life decisions as choices. In Study 6, Indians also showed a greater tendency to construe actions as choices when these actions involved responding to other people than when they did not, but Americans were equally likely to construe personal and interpersonal actions as choices. These findings show that whether people construe actions as choices is significantly shaped by sociocultural systems of meanings and practices. Studies 7 to 12 examined some of the positive and negative consequences of construing actions as choices in American contexts. Based upon the idea that choice and control are key components of the disjoint model of agency, these studies tested whether inducing Americans to construe actions as choices makes them more likely to make personal, interpersonal, and societal decisions under the assumption of personal control. Studies 7 and 8 found that inducing Americans to construe another person's actions as choices led them to make more risk-seeking and ambiguity-seeking decisions, which have been associated in previous research with increased perceived control. Studies 9 and 10 found that inducing Americans to construe another person's actions as choices led them to blame victims of negative life outcomes for making bad choices, reflecting the assumption that people have control over their actions and outcomes. Finally, Studies 11 and 12 found that inducing Americans to construe another person's actions as choices led them to oppose social policies benefiting society at the cost of individual liberty, but to support social policies enhancing individual freedom. Together, these studies document that whether an action counts as a choice is a matter of construal to a significant extent, and whether people construe actions as choices has profound psychological consequences, both positive and negative. The findings suggest that the existing societal trend of framing more and more issues as matters of choice is unlikely to have universally positive consequences, and might also have a variety of unanticipated negative consequences.

리뷰

사용자-기여 리뷰
GoodReads 리뷰 가져오는 중…
DOGObooks 리뷰를 가지고 오는 중…

태그

첫번째 되기
요청하신 것을 확인하기

이 항목을 이미 요청하셨을 수도 있습니다. 만약 이 요청을 계속해서 진행하시려면 Ok을 선택하세요.

링크된 데이터


<http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/651127772>
library:oclcnum"651127772"
owl:sameAs<info:oclcnum/651127772>
rdf:typeschema:Book
rdf:typej.1:Web_document
rdf:typej.1:Thesis
schema:contributor
schema:contributor
schema:contributor
schema:contributor
<http://viaf.org/viaf/263419986>
rdf:typeschema:Organization
schema:name"Stanford University. Department of Psychology."
schema:contributor
schema:creator
schema:datePublished"2010"
schema:description"Choice is one of the most important categories of actions, both in American society in general and in the specific fields of psychology and economics. Extensive research over the past century has examined how people make choices, but the question of whether and when an action counts as a choice remains unstudied. While most scientists assume that whether an action counts as a choice is based upon the objective availability of multiple options, the present research tests whether what counts as a choice is also a matter of construal, a construal that is shaped by cultural models of agency. Studies 1 to 6 find that people in U.S. American contexts, where the disjoint model of agency is prevalent, are more likely than those in Indian contexts, where the conjoint model of agency is prevalent, to construe behaviors as choices. In Study 1, Americans reported making significantly more choices during the day than did Indians. In Studies 2 and 3, after the experimenter subtly induced participants to engage in the same series of behaviors, Americans were again more likely than Indians to construe their actions as choices. In Study 4, while watching a video of an actor spending time in his apartment, Americans identified the actor as making significantly more choices than did Indians. In Studies 5a and 5b, Americans were even more likely and Indians were even less likely to construe more important real life decisions as choices. In Study 6, Indians also showed a greater tendency to construe actions as choices when these actions involved responding to other people than when they did not, but Americans were equally likely to construe personal and interpersonal actions as choices. These findings show that whether people construe actions as choices is significantly shaped by sociocultural systems of meanings and practices. Studies 7 to 12 examined some of the positive and negative consequences of construing actions as choices in American contexts. Based upon the idea that choice and control are key components of the disjoint model of agency, these studies tested whether inducing Americans to construe actions as choices makes them more likely to make personal, interpersonal, and societal decisions under the assumption of personal control. Studies 7 and 8 found that inducing Americans to construe another person's actions as choices led them to make more risk-seeking and ambiguity-seeking decisions, which have been associated in previous research with increased perceived control. Studies 9 and 10 found that inducing Americans to construe another person's actions as choices led them to blame victims of negative life outcomes for making bad choices, reflecting the assumption that people have control over their actions and outcomes. Finally, Studies 11 and 12 found that inducing Americans to construe another person's actions as choices led them to oppose social policies benefiting society at the cost of individual liberty, but to support social policies enhancing individual freedom. Together, these studies document that whether an action counts as a choice is a matter of construal to a significant extent, and whether people construe actions as choices has profound psychological consequences, both positive and negative. The findings suggest that the existing societal trend of framing more and more issues as matters of choice is unlikely to have universally positive consequences, and might also have a variety of unanticipated negative consequences."@en
schema:exampleOfWork<http://worldcat.org/entity/work/id/551894129>
schema:inLanguage"en"
schema:name"Cultural variation in choice and its consequences implications for decision making, victim blaming, and social policies"@en
schema:url
schema:url<http://purl.stanford.edu/xs481rq7242>

Content-negotiable representations

윈도우 닫기

WorldCat에 로그인 하십시오 

계정이 없으세요? 아주 간단한 절차를 통하여 무료 계정을 만드실 수 있습니다.