The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reasons as Carriers of Culture: Dynamic versus Dispositional Models of Cultural Influence on Decision Making
Abstract
We argue that a way culture influences decisions is through the reasons that individuals recruit when required to explain their choices. Specifically, we propose that cultures endow individuals with different rules or principles that provide guidance for making decisions, and a need to provide reasons activates such cultural knowledge. This proposition, representing a dynamic rather than dispositional view of cultural influence, is investigated in studies of consumer decisions that involve a trade-off between diverging attributes, such as low price and high quality. Principles enjoining compromise are more salient in East Asian cultures than in North American culture, and accordingly, we predict that cultural differences in the tendency to choose compromise options will be greater when the decision task requires that participants provide reasons. In study 1, a difference between Hong Kong Chinese and North American participants in the tendency to select compromise products emerged only when they were asked to explain their decisions, with Hong Kong decision makers more likely and Americans less likely to compromise. Content analysis of participants' reasons confirmed that cultural differences in the frequency of generating particular types of reasons mediated the difference in choices. Studies 2 and 3 replicate the interactive effect of culture and the need to provide reasons in a comparison of North American versus Japanese participants and in a comparison of European-American and Asian-American participants, respectively. Studies 4 and 5 found that Hong Kong Chinese participants, compared with Americans, evaluate proverbs and the reasons of others more positively when these favor compromise. We discuss the value of conceptualizing cultural influences in terms of dynamic strategies rather than as dispositional tendencies.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.98.2.224 · Cited by 21,995
Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes.
Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.3.231 · Cited by 11,317
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
(1982) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511809477 · Cited by 8,240
The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts.
Triandis, H. C. (1989) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.96.3.506 · Cited by 5,019
Who is this "We"? Levels of collective identity and self representations.
Brewer, M. B., & Gardner, W. (1996) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.1.83 · Cited by 3,401
Multicultural minds: A dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition.
Hong, Y.-Y., Morris, M. W., Chiu, C.-Y., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2000) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.55.7.709 · Cited by 2,203
Self-citationCulture and cause: American and Chinese attributions for social and physical events.
Morris, M. W., & Peng, K. (1994) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.6.949 · Cited by 1,537
Self-citationShafir, E. (1993) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(93)90034-s · Cited by 1,453
Thinking too much: Introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions.
Wilson, T. D., & Schooler, J. W. (1991) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.2.181 · Cited by 1,417
Cited by
Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition.
Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. (2001) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.108.2.291 · Cited by 4,263
Can Mixed Emotions Peacefully Coexist?
Williams, P., & Aaker, J. L. (2002) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/338206 · Cited by 488
The effects of religion on consumer behavior: A conceptual framework and research agenda
Mathras, D., Cohen, A. B., Mandel, N., & Mick, D. G. (2016) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2015.08.001 · Cited by 399
Zou, X., Tam, K.-P., Morris, M. W., Lee, S.-L., Lau, I. Y.-M., & Chiu, C.-Y. (2009) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0016399 · Cited by 369
Self-citationService Recovery and Fairness Perceptions in Collectivist and Individualist Contexts
Mattila, A. S., & Patterson, P. G. (2004) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670503262947 · Cited by 325
The spread of technological innovations: effects of psychology, culture and policy interventions
Tverskoi, D., Babu, S., & Gavrilets, S. (2022) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.211833 · Cited by 29
Thinking orientation and preference for research methodology
Murshed, F., & Zhang, Y. (2016) · Journal of Consumer Marketing · doi:10.1108/jcm-01-2016-1694 · Cited by 16
Metadata
- Authors
- Briley, D. A., Morris, M. W., & Simonson, I.
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2000-09
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 157-178
- ISSN
- 0093-5301 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5277
- OpenAlex
- W2084069287
- Cited by
- 374
- References
- 13
- FWCI
- 16.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.