Understanding cultural differences in human behavior: a cultural neuroscience approach

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 68-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shihui Han
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Human Behavior ◽  
Cultural Neuroscience

Cultural Neuroscience of Compassion and Empathy

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joan Y. Chiao
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Health Disparities ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Emotional Experience ◽  
Emotional Responses ◽  
Social Cooperation ◽  
Cultural Neuroscience ◽  
Gene Environment ◽  
Human Ability

“Compassion” and “empathy” refer to adaptive emotional responses to suffering in oneself and others that recruit affective and cognitive processes. The human ability to understand the emotional experience of others is fundamental to social cooperation, including altruism. While much of the scientific study of compassion and empathy suggests that genes contribute to empathy and compassion, recent empirical advances suggest gene–environment interactions, as well as cultural differences in development, influence the experience, expression, and regulation of empathy and compassion. The goal of this chapter is to review recent theoretical and empirical advances in the cultural neuroscience of empathy and compassion. Implications of the cultural neuroscientific study of empathy and compassion for public policy and population health disparities will be discussed.

The weirdest brains in the world

2010 ◽  
Vol 33 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 88-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joan Y. Chiao ◽  
Bobby K. Cheon
Keyword(s):  
Human Behavior ◽  
Levels Of Analysis ◽  
Cultural Neuroscience ◽  
Behavioral Sciences ◽  
Compelling Argument ◽  
The World ◽  
Multiple Levels

AbstractHenrich et al. provide a compelling argument about a bias in the behavioral sciences to study human behavior primarily in WEIRD populations. Here we argue that brain scientists are susceptible to similar biases, sampling primarily from WEIRD populations; and we discuss recent evidence from cultural neuroscience demonstrating the importance and viability of investigating culture across multiple levels of analysis.

Cultural diversity

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shihui Han
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Human Behavior ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Causal Attribution ◽  
Imaging Techniques ◽  
East Asian ◽  
Psychological Research ◽  
Self Reflection ◽  
Shared Beliefs

Chapter 1 provides a brief overview of cultural differences in human behavior by giving examples of human behaviors in East Asian and Western societies. It reviews the concept of culture used by psychologists, anthropologists, and philosophers, introduces several dimensions of culture, and emphasizes shared beliefs and behavioral scripts as the key components of culture that influence human behavior. It also reviews cross-cultural psychological research that has revealed differences in multiple cognitive processes including perception, attention, memory, causal attribution, and self-reflection between individuals in East Asian and Western cultures. It gives an overview of cultural neuroscience studies that employ brain imaging techniques to reveal neural mechanisms underlying cultural differences in human behavior and mental processes.

10. Cross‐Cultural Examination of the Use of Affect as Information

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle Tong
Keyword(s):  
Life Satisfaction ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Human Behavior ◽  
Personal Experience ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Evaluative Judgment ◽  
Aesthetic Quality ◽  
Information Hypothesis ◽  
The University ◽  
Source Of Information

The function of mood and emotion in human behavior has long been a subject of interest for researchers and lay thinkers alike. Personal experience may tell us that our moods and feelings indeed influence our judgment of things like personal happiness or aesthetic quality. The affect‐as‐information hypothesis, however, distinguishes itself from intuition in that it asserts that our mood is used as an actual source of information in these judgments. Cultures differ in values ascribed to mood and affect, and thus may influence the degree to which affect is used in judgment. The present study examines cultural differences in the use of affect, or positive and negative moods, as information in evaluative judgment. The study represents an international collaboration between Queen’s University and the University of Macau. In two experiments, we induced negative and positive moods in participants and randomly assigned them into conditions in which they were either made aware or not of the source of their mood. Participants were then asked to evaluate the attractiveness of images (Study 1) and rate their life satisfaction (Study 2). I hypothesize that the Chinese will rely less on affect as information than Canadians and propose that this attenuated dependence is mediated by lower clarity and less attention to mood on the part of the Chinese. Preliminary data from the University of Macau appear to support the hypothesis that the Chinese do not rely on affect as information.35

scholarly journals Culture: by the brain and in the brain?

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 965-983 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco Ortega ◽  
Fernando Vidal
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Cultural Psychology ◽  
Social Neuroscience ◽  
Human Sciences ◽  
Cultural Neuroscience ◽  
Human Behaviors ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Brain

Abstract Since the 1990s, several disciplines have emerged at the interface between neuroscience and the social and human sciences. For the most part, they aim at capturing the commonalities that underlay the heterogeneity of human behaviors and experiences. Neuroanthropology and cultural neuroscience, or the “neurodisciplines of culture,” appear different, since their goal is to understand specificity rather than commonality and to address how cultural differences are inscribed in the brain. After offering an overview of these disciplines, and of their relation to endeavors such as cultural psychology and social neuroscience, this article discusses some of the most representative studies in the area in order to explore in which ways they are relevant for an understanding of culture.

Anthropology as an Applied Science

1958 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Barnett
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Human Behavior ◽  
Applied Science ◽  
Public Welfare ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Policy Makers

Readers of this journal do not need to be reminded that social scientists and policy makers rarely agree on definitions of public welfare or on the means of achieving it. This has been especially true when there have been marked cultural differences between welfare planners and those for whom they plan; and the more so the less the beneficiaries of the planning have had to say about their future. Insofar as anthropology is concerned, this has usually meant that anthropologists who have interested themselves in applying their knowledge very often disagree with the objectives and procedures of those who are entrusted to administer the affairs of dependent peoples. There have been many attempts at collaboration, but the record of successful cooperation between specialists on human behavior and agents of government is not a lengthy one.

scholarly journals The effect of ethnicity and team membership on face processing: a cultural neuroscience perspective

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (9) ◽  
pp. 1017-1025
Author(s):  
Zhimin Yan ◽  
Stephanie N L Schmidt ◽  
Sebastian Saur ◽  
Peter Kirsch ◽  
Daniela Mier
Keyword(s):  
Frontal Cortex ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Face Processing ◽  
Social Categorization ◽  
Neural Correlates ◽  
Medial Frontal Cortex ◽  
Cultural Neuroscience ◽  
Imaging Results ◽  
Different Cultures ◽  
Mixed Ethnicity

Abstract In-ethnicity bias, as one of the in-group biases, is widespread in different cultures, interfering with cross-ethnicity communication. Recent studies have revealed that an in-ethnicity bias can be reduced by an in-team bias caused by the membership in a mixed-ethnicity team. However, the neural correlates of different in-group biases are still not clear, especially regarding possible cultural differences. A total of 44 participants (20 Chinese and 24 Germans) were recruited and completed a social categorization fMRI-task, categorizing faces according to their ethnicity and a learned team membership. Our behavioral results revealed both in-ethnicity and in-team bias in German participants, but not in Chinese participants. Our imaging results, however, showed both biases across all participants, as reflected in increased dorsal medial frontal cortex (MFC) activation for in-ethnicity, as well as in-team categorizations, while activation in ventral MFC was higher for in-ethnicity faces in Chinese participants than in the German participants. Our results highlight the importance of the dorsal MFC for in-group categorization across cultures and suggest that cultures might modulate in-group biases.

Cognitive gadgets: A provocative but flawed manifesto

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Del Giudice
Keyword(s):  
Theory Of Mind ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Twin Studies ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Evolutionary Approach ◽  
Genetic Inheritance ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Cross Cultural Differences ◽  
Cherry Picking ◽  
Dichotomous Thinking

Abstract The argument against innatism at the heart of Cognitive Gadgets is provocative but premature, and is vitiated by dichotomous thinking, interpretive double standards, and evidence cherry-picking. I illustrate my criticism by addressing the heritability of imitation and mindreading, the relevance of twin studies, and the meaning of cross-cultural differences in theory of mind development. Reaching an integrative understanding of genetic inheritance, plasticity, and learning is a formidable task that demands a more nuanced evolutionary approach.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document