Sunday, October 28, 2012
Japanese Aquisitions and Masaki Yuki's Research
Due to the strength of the yen and the shrinking Japanese domestic market, there were more mergers and aquistions of Western companies by Japanese companies this year, than at any other time in history, or at least the past twenty two years. I wonder how Japanese companies, such as Dentsu (電通), the largest Japanese advertising company, will manage Western companies, such as the Aegis Group.
I guess that it will depend upon the industry. In manufacturing and hard (as in hardware) industries the Japanese will bring with them praxis that is successful and will be respected by their Western workforce. But in industries whose products are formal (read linguistic) constructions, such as finance, (non-game) software and to a significant extent, advertising, importing Japanese workways may be more fraught.
If the Japanese managers read up on the cultural differences between Westerners and Japanese they may be persuaded that their new British employees need to be taught to be more harmonious, to work better in teams. If they reach this conclusion then I think that they will have been, in my humble opinion, misguided.
I want to recommend to the management at Dentsu the only mainstream research that espouses a qualitative rather than quantitative difference between Western and Japanese ways of thinking: the excellent research by Masaki Yuki (2003).
For the most part Japanese are argued to be more sensitive to the group (Hofsteded, 1991) or more sensitive to context and more information (the varied and also excellent research of Nisbett and Masuda). The mainstream rhetoric regarding the differences between Western and Japanese culture, is quantitative: one of more rather than less.
Masaki Yuki however, argued that the difference between Japanese and Western social behaviour is a qualitative one. Westerners are not more individual or more collective but they interact with groups in different ways to Westerners. Indeed in their group behaviour, it is Westerners that are more inclined to loose their individuality since they identify with their groups, differentiating ingroup (e.g. my company) from outgroup (e.g. competitor company). Japanese on the other hand, in their group behaviour, pay little attention to other groups (other companies) but instead focus on the relationships with other ingroup members, and indeed upon the individuality of other ingroup members. The Japanese managers might therefore even encourage their new British employees to be more individual, to give each other more room for creative freedom and being themselves, as -- according to Yuki's theory -- occurs within Japanese groups.
Masaki Yuki (2003) argues that while Westerner groups have a tendency to focus upon shared group traits and ideals, and identifying with these lose a sense of who they are as individuals, Japanese groups have a tendency to focus upon the symbioses within the group: the fact that the group is made up of a network of many different individuals with different traits and skills.
Jacques Lacan argued that if one *imagines* ones interpersonal relationships then one *see* them as diadic, one-to-one, interpersonal relationships. What he failed to realised - or implicitly rejected - is that one can visualise a group as a whole, as a network, since he believed that it is only in language that one can simulate generalised third person viewpoint (ear-point, superaddressee, impartial auditor) or in his terminology, the "Other". Can one imagine a group? Sure one can, especially if one takes group photographs, as was recommended by recent research on the promotion of group efficiency.
Back in 2003, when I was still almost a researcher, Professor Yuki had me make English correction suggestions on his paper. I was honoured and excited. I recommended to him the connection with Lacan's theory of "diadic relationships" in the imaginaire (world of imaginable representations) but, of course, he did not take it up. Indeed, perhaps due to the extremely controversial nature of his paper, he has undertaken relatively little research in that paper's direction, despite the fact that it was great.
Bibliography
Yuki, M. (2003). Intergroup comparison versus intragroup relationships: A cross-cultural examination of social identity theory in North American and East Asian cultural contexts. Social Psychology Quarterly, 166–183.
I guess that it will depend upon the industry. In manufacturing and hard (as in hardware) industries the Japanese will bring with them praxis that is successful and will be respected by their Western workforce. But in industries whose products are formal (read linguistic) constructions, such as finance, (non-game) software and to a significant extent, advertising, importing Japanese workways may be more fraught.
If the Japanese managers read up on the cultural differences between Westerners and Japanese they may be persuaded that their new British employees need to be taught to be more harmonious, to work better in teams. If they reach this conclusion then I think that they will have been, in my humble opinion, misguided.
I want to recommend to the management at Dentsu the only mainstream research that espouses a qualitative rather than quantitative difference between Western and Japanese ways of thinking: the excellent research by Masaki Yuki (2003).
For the most part Japanese are argued to be more sensitive to the group (Hofsteded, 1991) or more sensitive to context and more information (the varied and also excellent research of Nisbett and Masuda). The mainstream rhetoric regarding the differences between Western and Japanese culture, is quantitative: one of more rather than less.
Masaki Yuki however, argued that the difference between Japanese and Western social behaviour is a qualitative one. Westerners are not more individual or more collective but they interact with groups in different ways to Westerners. Indeed in their group behaviour, it is Westerners that are more inclined to loose their individuality since they identify with their groups, differentiating ingroup (e.g. my company) from outgroup (e.g. competitor company). Japanese on the other hand, in their group behaviour, pay little attention to other groups (other companies) but instead focus on the relationships with other ingroup members, and indeed upon the individuality of other ingroup members. The Japanese managers might therefore even encourage their new British employees to be more individual, to give each other more room for creative freedom and being themselves, as -- according to Yuki's theory -- occurs within Japanese groups.
Masaki Yuki (2003) argues that while Westerner groups have a tendency to focus upon shared group traits and ideals, and identifying with these lose a sense of who they are as individuals, Japanese groups have a tendency to focus upon the symbioses within the group: the fact that the group is made up of a network of many different individuals with different traits and skills.
Jacques Lacan argued that if one *imagines* ones interpersonal relationships then one *see* them as diadic, one-to-one, interpersonal relationships. What he failed to realised - or implicitly rejected - is that one can visualise a group as a whole, as a network, since he believed that it is only in language that one can simulate generalised third person viewpoint (ear-point, superaddressee, impartial auditor) or in his terminology, the "Other". Can one imagine a group? Sure one can, especially if one takes group photographs, as was recommended by recent research on the promotion of group efficiency.
Back in 2003, when I was still almost a researcher, Professor Yuki had me make English correction suggestions on his paper. I was honoured and excited. I recommended to him the connection with Lacan's theory of "diadic relationships" in the imaginaire (world of imaginable representations) but, of course, he did not take it up. Indeed, perhaps due to the extremely controversial nature of his paper, he has undertaken relatively little research in that paper's direction, despite the fact that it was great.
Bibliography
Yuki, M. (2003). Intergroup comparison versus intragroup relationships: A cross-cultural examination of social identity theory in North American and East Asian cultural contexts. Social Psychology Quarterly, 166–183.
Labels: individualism, japan, japanese culture, Nacalian, nihonbunka, 個人主義, 日本文化, 集団主義
Saturday, October 27, 2012
142 Japanese Cultural Artifacts 142 日本文化の物体
100 yen shop 100円ショップ, ASIMO アシモ, baku 獏 Aibou アイボウ ロボット犬, banchizu 番地図 tourou 灯篭, butsudan 仏壇, calpis カルピス, capsule
Hotel キャップスールホテル, chawan
茶碗, chonmage ちょんまげ, chouchin 提灯, coin seimaiki コイン精米機, cosplay clothes コスプレの服, daikon 大根, daruma だるま, denki nabe 電気鍋, , dohyou土俵dojou 道場 meron pan メロンパン, doraemon ドラえもん, eiyouzai 栄養剤, ema 絵馬, endless tape
売り場で使われる宣伝用の永遠な録音テープ, engrish
t-shirts 間違った英語の印刷されたT-shirt,
esute salon エステサロン, fami-con
ファミコン, fugu 河豚, fusuma ふすま, futon 布団, gachagacha ガチャガチャ , gakuran 学ラン, game boy ゲームボイ, gattaisuruomocha 合体する玩具, genkan 玄関, geta 下駄, Godzilla ゴジラ, goshuugibukuro, haiku 俳句, hakama 袴, haniwa 埴輪, happi 法被（はっぴ）, haramaki 腹巻, hennshin belt kabuto mushi カブトムシ, hyousatsu 表札, igo 囲碁, inkan 印鑑, irezumi 刺青, jidouhannbaiki 自動販売機, jika tabi, jinja 神社, juku 塾, juzu 数珠, ka-bu mirror カーブミラー, kado matsu 門松, kagami mochi 鏡餅, kakejiku 掛け軸, kamen rider 仮面ライダー, kamidana 神棚, kamon 家紋, karesannsui 枯山水 禅寺にある砂利の庭, katorisenkou
蚊取り線香, kendama 剣玉, kimono 着物, koi 鯉 washikitoire 和式トイレ, koi-nobori 鯉幟, koma コマ, koseki 戸籍, koto 琴, kouban 交番, kuwagata クワガタ, kyuusu 急須（きゅうす）, long
cooking chopsticks 調理用の長い箸, loose
socks ルースソックス, love
hotel ラブホテル, mahjong 麻雀, maneki neko 招き猫, manga マンガ, mimi kaki 耳かき, model food 食べ物の模型, mukae dango 迎え団子, negajou 現賀状, nobori 幟, nokorigi のこぎり, noren のれん, obentou お弁当, obi 帯, oden おでん, ojizou お地蔵, okonomiyaki お好み焼き, okyou お経, omamori お守り, omen お面, omiki お神酒, omikoshi お神輿, omikuji お御籤, omikuji お御籤, onikan car 鬼カン車, onsen 温泉, origami 折り紙, oto hime 音姫, Pachinko パチンコ, puri-Kura プリクラ, randoseru ランドセル, rencon レンコン, renge レンゲ (ラーメンのスプーン）, ryokucha 緑茶, saisen-bako賽銭箱, sake お酒, samue 作務衣, sashimi さしみ, sentou 銭湯, se-ra-fuku セーラー服, shakuhachi 尺八, shamisen 三味線, shichirin 七輪, shimenawa 注連縄, shinkasen 新幹線, shouchuu 焼酎, shougi 将棋, shouji 障子, sodaigomi 粗大ゴミ, soroban 算盤, sound truck 街宣車・宣伝カー, sports-shinbun スポーツ新聞, Suihanki 炊飯器, taketonbou 竹とんぼ, tamagocchi たまごっち, tatami 畳 , tawara 俵 senkyou posters 選挙ポスター, tetsuwan atom 鉄腕アトム, tokonoma 床の間, torii 鳥居, toy figures フィギア, tsunokakushi 角隠し, ukiyoe 浮世絵, unchi-gumi うんちぐみ®, usu 臼, wakaba no
ma-ku 若葉のマーク, washiki
toilette 和式トイレ, wasshletto
ワシュレット, wedding chapel ウェディングチャペル, yama Imo 山芋, yatai 屋台, zabuton 座布団, dohyou土俵
Labels: japan, japanese culture, nihonbunka, 日本文化
Friday, October 26, 2012
Individualism and Collectivism in Magazine Photos
Don't get me wrong. I don't think that "collectivism" does not exist as an "ism" in Japan or that individualism is not prevalent as an "ism" in the USA. Nothing could be further from the truth. The name of Japan is sometimes "Wa" or "harmony," the Japanese call themselves "The Harmonious." And Westerners are always calling themselves individualists. Jeremy Paxman, possibly the most famous British television jouralist described the London Olympics opening ceremony in the following way:
"Whatever nit-picking worries anyone has about the Opening Ceremony (for me, it was the almost total absence of the golden thread of British history, the fight for personal liberty), it set a tone that was amplified throughout the games. Could a nation of cussed individualists ever bring off an opening show to rival the spectacular we saw in Beijing?" [my emphasis] (Paxman, 2012)
There can be no doubt that at the level of linguistic philosophy, the Japanese espouse harmony and cooperation, whereas Westerners espouse personal liberty and individualism.
How about in the real world? I find the Japanese to as individual as the English. The excellent review paper by Beth Morling (Morling & Lamoreaux, 2008), "Culture outside the head," however reaches the opposite conclusion, so I thought I had better see what it had to say.
The first paper reviewed paper I could download, claimed that since Japnaese adverts used more imagery and were less likely to mention the product directly, they were therefore colectivistic; trying to build up a relationship with the purchaser (Javalgi, Cutler, & Malhotra, 1995). I thought that this analysis was unfair. Readers of this blog (?!) would know that it is my opinion that Japanese use imagery because they identify with images and have a God (or generalised other) that looks rather than listens (Leuers & Sonoda, 1999b).
While clicking around on analysises of print media, however, I cam up with a result that made me pleased. Wang (2006) noted that Taiwanese magazines are Westernised and that collectivist messages (table page 73) and individualist messages (table page 68） are aboult equal at the linguistic level in adverts in Taiwanese and American magazines. Let us assume that this result is due to Westernisation.
However, Wang also noted that when it comes to photographs, Taiwanese magazines are more likely to show individuals (Taiwan 73.1%, US 59%) and correspondingly far less likely to show groups (Taiwa 26.9%, US 41%) (see table page 65). This is not at all unusual. Japanese magazines are lonely (or narcissistic). Their protagonists are displayed on their own.
This result mirrors that found in my research on autophotography (Leuers & Sonoda, 1999b: see Heine 2007, p213). Japanese autophotography displays not only more positivity, but more pictures of self, whereas American photos show more pictures of other people.
Having a look at some Japanese and American fashion magazines, it seems that the same pattern is repeated. American women want to be kissed and appear with men in US Cosmopolitan. Japanese women are more self-reliant and rarely show men in their magazines (or collages) because men's demands for affection are rather annoying (uzai).
Westerners are linguistically individualist since they consider themselves to be linguistic entities (narratives) and try to differentiate their narratives from those of others (largely unsuccessfully, see Leuers & Sonoda, 1999a). Japanese see themselves as their self-images, first and foremost their face (Watsui), and as seperate embodied existances they yearn for communitas and harmony which they express in their "let's make friends" philosophy of harmony (Yamagishi, 2002).
In any event, I do feel that at a personal level the Japanese are extremely self~possessed, self-reliant and difficult to push around. Anyone married to a Japanese woman should know that, but despite the fact that some famous cultural psychologists are, they do not reach the same conclusion. I guess that they presume that they have married an unusual Japanese. (You know who I am thinking of...Fat chance that he reads my blog).
Bibliography
Heine, S. J. (2007). Cultural Psychology (First ed.). W. W. Norton & Company.
Javalgi, R. G., Cutler, B. D., & Malhotra, N. K. (1995). Print advertising at the component level: A cross-cultural comparison of the United States and Japan. Journal of Business Research, 34(2), 117–124. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/014829639400116V
Leuers, T. R. S., & Sonoda, N. (1999a). Independent self bias. Progress in asian social psychology, 3, 87–104. Retrieved from httyp://www.nihonbunka.com/docs/independent_self.rtf
Leuers, T., & Sonoda, N. (1999a). The eye of the other and the independent self of the Japanese. Symposium presentation at the 3rd Conference of the Asian Association of Social Psychology, Taipei, Taiwan. Retrieved from http://nihonbunka.com/docs/aasp99.htm
Morling, B., & Lamoreaux, M. (2008). Measuring culture outside the head: A meta-analysis of individualism—collectivism in cultural products. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12(3), 199–221.
Paxman, J. (2012, August 12). London 2012 Olympics: Who thinks Britain is rubbish now? Telegraph.co.uk. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/9469017/London-2012-Olympics-Who-thinks-Britain-is-rubbish-now.html
Wang, I. C. (2006). I‘ or’ WE"? A comparative analysis of individualism in Taiwanese and US print advertisements. Retrieved from http://etd.lib.nsysu.edu.tw/ETD-db/ETD-search/view_etd?URN=etd-0728106-154652
山岸俊男. (2002). 心でっかちな日本人―集団主義文化という幻想. 日本経済新聞社.
"Whatever nit-picking worries anyone has about the Opening Ceremony (for me, it was the almost total absence of the golden thread of British history, the fight for personal liberty), it set a tone that was amplified throughout the games. Could a nation of cussed individualists ever bring off an opening show to rival the spectacular we saw in Beijing?" [my emphasis] (Paxman, 2012)
There can be no doubt that at the level of linguistic philosophy, the Japanese espouse harmony and cooperation, whereas Westerners espouse personal liberty and individualism.
How about in the real world? I find the Japanese to as individual as the English. The excellent review paper by Beth Morling (Morling & Lamoreaux, 2008), "Culture outside the head," however reaches the opposite conclusion, so I thought I had better see what it had to say.
The first paper reviewed paper I could download, claimed that since Japnaese adverts used more imagery and were less likely to mention the product directly, they were therefore colectivistic; trying to build up a relationship with the purchaser (Javalgi, Cutler, & Malhotra, 1995). I thought that this analysis was unfair. Readers of this blog (?!) would know that it is my opinion that Japanese use imagery because they identify with images and have a God (or generalised other) that looks rather than listens (Leuers & Sonoda, 1999b).
While clicking around on analysises of print media, however, I cam up with a result that made me pleased. Wang (2006) noted that Taiwanese magazines are Westernised and that collectivist messages (table page 73) and individualist messages (table page 68） are aboult equal at the linguistic level in adverts in Taiwanese and American magazines. Let us assume that this result is due to Westernisation.
However, Wang also noted that when it comes to photographs, Taiwanese magazines are more likely to show individuals (Taiwan 73.1%, US 59%) and correspondingly far less likely to show groups (Taiwa 26.9%, US 41%) (see table page 65). This is not at all unusual. Japanese magazines are lonely (or narcissistic). Their protagonists are displayed on their own.
This result mirrors that found in my research on autophotography (Leuers & Sonoda, 1999b: see Heine 2007, p213). Japanese autophotography displays not only more positivity, but more pictures of self, whereas American photos show more pictures of other people.
Having a look at some Japanese and American fashion magazines, it seems that the same pattern is repeated. American women want to be kissed and appear with men in US Cosmopolitan. Japanese women are more self-reliant and rarely show men in their magazines (or collages) because men's demands for affection are rather annoying (uzai).
Westerners are linguistically individualist since they consider themselves to be linguistic entities (narratives) and try to differentiate their narratives from those of others (largely unsuccessfully, see Leuers & Sonoda, 1999a). Japanese see themselves as their self-images, first and foremost their face (Watsui), and as seperate embodied existances they yearn for communitas and harmony which they express in their "let's make friends" philosophy of harmony (Yamagishi, 2002).
In any event, I do feel that at a personal level the Japanese are extremely self~possessed, self-reliant and difficult to push around. Anyone married to a Japanese woman should know that, but despite the fact that some famous cultural psychologists are, they do not reach the same conclusion. I guess that they presume that they have married an unusual Japanese. (You know who I am thinking of...Fat chance that he reads my blog).
Bibliography
Heine, S. J. (2007). Cultural Psychology (First ed.). W. W. Norton & Company.
Javalgi, R. G., Cutler, B. D., & Malhotra, N. K. (1995). Print advertising at the component level: A cross-cultural comparison of the United States and Japan. Journal of Business Research, 34(2), 117–124. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/014829639400116V
Leuers, T. R. S., & Sonoda, N. (1999a). Independent self bias. Progress in asian social psychology, 3, 87–104. Retrieved from httyp://www.nihonbunka.com/docs/independent_self.rtf
Leuers, T., & Sonoda, N. (1999a). The eye of the other and the independent self of the Japanese. Symposium presentation at the 3rd Conference of the Asian Association of Social Psychology, Taipei, Taiwan. Retrieved from http://nihonbunka.com/docs/aasp99.htm
Morling, B., & Lamoreaux, M. (2008). Measuring culture outside the head: A meta-analysis of individualism—collectivism in cultural products. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12(3), 199–221.
Paxman, J. (2012, August 12). London 2012 Olympics: Who thinks Britain is rubbish now? Telegraph.co.uk. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/9469017/London-2012-Olympics-Who-thinks-Britain-is-rubbish-now.html
Wang, I. C. (2006). I‘ or’ WE"? A comparative analysis of individualism in Taiwanese and US print advertisements. Retrieved from http://etd.lib.nsysu.edu.tw/ETD-db/ETD-search/view_etd?URN=etd-0728106-154652
山岸俊男. (2002). 心でっかちな日本人―集団主義文化という幻想. 日本経済新聞社.
Labels: collectivism, image, individualism, japan, japanese culture, logos, Nacalian, nihonbunka, reversal, theory, 個人主義, 日本文化, 集団主義
Monday, October 22, 2012
Red Lights and Risky Shift
Americans are called individualists. Japanese
are called collectivists. At the level of the prevalent philosophies pertaining in each culture, these are fair descriptions.
But when it comes to behaviour it seems to me that these labels are sometimes used unfairly since
1) The labels are always applied, in accordance with the stereotype, despite the fact that
2) All social behaviour has both aspects, and can be labelled in both ways.
First of all I would like to justify the second assertion. Markus and Kitayama (1991) in the paper that started cultural psychology, replaced the distinction between individualism and collectivism, with the following more complex distinction:
Westerners tend to think that the self is independent, and that groups are just for joining. The biggest distinction that groups have is that they are dangerous, in that they are seen as having the potential to de-individuate, or de-personalise; make their members forget about the unalienable individuality that they had in the first place.
But when it comes to behaviour it seems to me that these labels are sometimes used unfairly since
1) The labels are always applied, in accordance with the stereotype, despite the fact that
2) All social behaviour has both aspects, and can be labelled in both ways.
First of all I would like to justify the second assertion. Markus and Kitayama (1991) in the paper that started cultural psychology, replaced the distinction between individualism and collectivism, with the following more complex distinction:
Westerners tend to think that the self is independent, and that groups are just for joining. The biggest distinction that groups have is that they are dangerous, in that they are seen as having the potential to de-individuate, or de-personalise; make their members forget about the unalienable individuality that they had in the first place.
Japanese, tend to think that the self is interdependent: created by groups and social bonds without which they would hardly have any individuality at all. Individuals and groups are mutually creating.
I have heard cultural psychologists group collectivism with the latter interdependent view of self, not without just cause. But it should be remembered that there is a paradigm shift separating the old "Individualism Collectivism" theory from that of Markus and Kitayama. The latter is a theory about theories. This fact can be forgotten.
Importantly, from a "Interdependent" perspective, individualism and collectivism do not exist , or at least they are not opposed to one another. Every so called "individualist behaviour" is made possible by social relationships, and every collectivist behaviour is formative of and beneficial for individuals. In so far as every human behaviour is social (other than the most basic, and then even those), all behaviours therefore have a collective and individual aspect. Lets consider some examples.
Risky Shift (group polarisation: Stoner, 1961: see e.g. Isenberg, 1986) is something that is found in the US but far less so in Asia. Risky shift is the tendency for Western groups to behave more riskily after group discussion - such as the Bay of Pigs, Cuban invasion disaster. The generals that got together to discuss what to do about Cuba started out moderate but converged on an initially extreme, and risky decision, to invade Cuba.
In Asian on the other hand, Isozaki's research tried hard but failed to find persuasive evidence for risky shift in Japan. Sometimes the opposite -- cautious shift -- is found, in 1/3 of Isogaki (1981) experiments and cautious shift in groups (Hong, 1978) and just by giving reasons (Briley, Morris, & Simonson, 2000a, 2000b) is also found among Chinese.
In accordance with the stereotype, it is explained that extreme actions, appearing unique, are highly evaluated in Western culture so groups tend to converge on the most daring of options, whereas Japanese value harmony and converge on compromises.
I have heard cultural psychologists group collectivism with the latter interdependent view of self, not without just cause. But it should be remembered that there is a paradigm shift separating the old "Individualism Collectivism" theory from that of Markus and Kitayama. The latter is a theory about theories. This fact can be forgotten.
Importantly, from a "Interdependent" perspective, individualism and collectivism do not exist , or at least they are not opposed to one another. Every so called "individualist behaviour" is made possible by social relationships, and every collectivist behaviour is formative of and beneficial for individuals. In so far as every human behaviour is social (other than the most basic, and then even those), all behaviours therefore have a collective and individual aspect. Lets consider some examples.
Risky Shift (group polarisation: Stoner, 1961: see e.g. Isenberg, 1986) is something that is found in the US but far less so in Asia. Risky shift is the tendency for Western groups to behave more riskily after group discussion - such as the Bay of Pigs, Cuban invasion disaster. The generals that got together to discuss what to do about Cuba started out moderate but converged on an initially extreme, and risky decision, to invade Cuba.
In Asian on the other hand, Isozaki's research tried hard but failed to find persuasive evidence for risky shift in Japan. Sometimes the opposite -- cautious shift -- is found, in 1/3 of Isogaki (1981) experiments and cautious shift in groups (Hong, 1978) and just by giving reasons (Briley, Morris, & Simonson, 2000a, 2000b) is also found among Chinese.
In accordance with the stereotype, it is explained that extreme actions, appearing unique, are highly evaluated in Western culture so groups tend to converge on the most daring of options, whereas Japanese value harmony and converge on compromises.
Consider another behaviour, pictured in the above photo. It is described by Japanese comedian Beat Takeshi's adage: "Red Light, Everyone Crosses, We aren't scared"（赤信号、皆で渡れば、怖くない). The lady at rear looks like she she
is following or conforming to the red-light breaking
behaviour of the guy striding out in front. She isn't scared,
because someone else is doing it. So is she being a collectivist? Yes and no. In general, crossing the road in this way, free loading on the cognitive effort of other
road crossers, especially when there are a lot of them, might also be
described as an individualist behaviour.
On the other hand again, risky shift (group polarisation) may be more similar to the above "Red Light, If everyone crosses, We're not scared" phenomena. All those generals that got together and decided to invade Cuba may have been thinking"well everyone else here thinks it'll be okay". Indeed one explanation of risky shift is that people in groups feel less responsible and make riskier decisions due to the evasion of responsibility.
Both crossing the road in groups and risky shift have their negative aspects. The guy in the photo above may be in a daze too and a truck may be coming along. Unfortunately, there was a truck, called Castro, coming along and the bay of pigs invasion was a disaster.
There are several reasons why a behaviour is labelled
"collectivist," two of them are
1) Lack of individual uniqueness (not risky, moderate)
2) Lack of individual mindfulness (just goin' with the flow)
Both these came up in the same factor in a recent study on individualism.
1) Lack of individual uniqueness (not risky, moderate)
2) Lack of individual mindfulness (just goin' with the flow)
Both these came up in the same factor in a recent study on individualism.
I think that, perhaps excepting the above photographed example,
when Japanese choose harmony, they are often be
doing it quite mindfully and deliberately, and when Westerners
choose uniqueness they are often not being so
mindful, even though they may debate at length.
Bibliography
Briley, D. A., Morris, M. W., & Simonson, I. (2000a). Reasons as Carriers of Culture: Dynamic versus Dispositional Models of Cultural Influence on Decision Making. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2), 157–178. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/314318
Briley, D. A., Morris, M. W., & Simonson, I. (2000b). Reasons as Carriers of Culture: Dynamic vs. Dispositional Models of Cultural Influence on Decision Making. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2), 157–178. Retrieved from http://works.bepress.com/briley/1
Hong, L. K. (1978). Risky Shift and Cautious Shift: Some Direct Evidence on the Culture-Value Theory. Social Psychology, 41(4), 342–346. doi:10.2307/3033587
Isenberg, D. J. (1986). Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(6), 1141. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1986-24477-001
Isozaki, M. (1984). The effect of discussion on polarization of judgments. Japanese Psychological Research, 26(4), 187–193.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review; Psychological Review, 98(2), 224. Retrieved from http://www.biu.ac.il/PS/docs/diesendruck/2.pdf
Stoner, J. A. F. (1961). A comparison of individual and group decisions involving risk Unpublished master’s thesis, School of Industrial Management. MIT.
磯崎三喜年. (1981). 集団分極化現象に関する研究. 心理学研究, 52(4), p248–251. Retrieved from http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/40001977542
磯崎三喜年. (1982). 集団分極化とその説明理論について. 愛知教育大学研究報告, 教育科学, p181–191. Retrieved from http://repository.aichi-edu.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/10424/3474/1/kenkyo31181191.pdf
磯崎三喜年. (1995). 自己生成的態度変化としての極性化効果とその持続性に関する研究. 心理学研究, 66(3), p161–168. Retrieved from http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/40001978174
磯崎三喜年, 天根哲治, 上野徳美, & 横川和章. (1980). 521 集団分極化現象に関する研究(1)(社会3,社会). 日本教育心理学会総会発表論文集, (22), 640–641. Retrieved from http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110008128465
岡本浩一. (1986). 社会心理学ショート・ショート―実験でとく心の謎. 新曜社.
橋口捷久. (1974). 集団内の意思決定者数とリスク・テイキングの水準. 実験社会心理学研究, 14(2), 123–131.
上野徳美, 横川和章, 天根哲治, & 磯崎三喜年. (1980). 522 集団分極化現象に関する研究(2)(社会3,社会). 日本教育心理学会総会発表論文集, (22), 642–643. Retrieved from http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110008128466
Bibliography
Briley, D. A., Morris, M. W., & Simonson, I. (2000a). Reasons as Carriers of Culture: Dynamic versus Dispositional Models of Cultural Influence on Decision Making. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2), 157–178. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/314318
Briley, D. A., Morris, M. W., & Simonson, I. (2000b). Reasons as Carriers of Culture: Dynamic vs. Dispositional Models of Cultural Influence on Decision Making. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2), 157–178. Retrieved from http://works.bepress.com/briley/1
Hong, L. K. (1978). Risky Shift and Cautious Shift: Some Direct Evidence on the Culture-Value Theory. Social Psychology, 41(4), 342–346. doi:10.2307/3033587
Isenberg, D. J. (1986). Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(6), 1141. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1986-24477-001
Isozaki, M. (1984). The effect of discussion on polarization of judgments. Japanese Psychological Research, 26(4), 187–193.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review; Psychological Review, 98(2), 224. Retrieved from http://www.biu.ac.il/PS/docs/diesendruck/2.pdf
Stoner, J. A. F. (1961). A comparison of individual and group decisions involving risk Unpublished master’s thesis, School of Industrial Management. MIT.
磯崎三喜年. (1981). 集団分極化現象に関する研究. 心理学研究, 52(4), p248–251. Retrieved from http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/40001977542
磯崎三喜年. (1982). 集団分極化とその説明理論について. 愛知教育大学研究報告, 教育科学, p181–191. Retrieved from http://repository.aichi-edu.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/10424/3474/1/kenkyo31181191.pdf
磯崎三喜年. (1995). 自己生成的態度変化としての極性化効果とその持続性に関する研究. 心理学研究, 66(3), p161–168. Retrieved from http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/40001978174
磯崎三喜年, 天根哲治, 上野徳美, & 横川和章. (1980). 521 集団分極化現象に関する研究(1)(社会3,社会). 日本教育心理学会総会発表論文集, (22), 640–641. Retrieved from http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110008128465
岡本浩一. (1986). 社会心理学ショート・ショート―実験でとく心の謎. 新曜社.
橋口捷久. (1974). 集団内の意思決定者数とリスク・テイキングの水準. 実験社会心理学研究, 14(2), 123–131.
上野徳美, 横川和章, 天根哲治, & 磯崎三喜年. (1980). 522 集団分極化現象に関する研究(2)(社会3,社会). 日本教育心理学会総会発表論文集, (22), 642–643. Retrieved from http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110008128466
Labels: collectivism, individualism, japanese culture, nihonbunka, 個人主義, 日本文化, 集団主義
Sunday, October 21, 2012
Hospitality and Regulatory Focus
渡部さま・ご出席者各位、取り下げご希望でありましたら一筆ください。
As demonstrated by Hamamura and Heine (2008;Hamamura, Meijer, Heine, Kamaya & Hori, 2009), the Japanese have a prevention, as opposed to promotion, regulatory focus (Higgins and Spiegel, 2004), or motivation style. This means that the Japanese hare happy when nothing goes wrong, or if all goes smoothly (todokoorinaku 滞りなく) and they don't care if things are especially "wow". Westerners are more inclined to want the "wow"-- something raw and unique -- and they are less concerned if there are a few mishaps along the way.
These differences in what motivates the Japanese and Westerners are especially visible in hospitality preferences, so tourism providers should take note. To Japanese, Western hospitality can seem hapzard, scruffy, or poorly planned. To Westerners, Japanese hospitality can seem clinical, hermetically sealed, mass-produced. Japanese weddings parties are a prime example of flawless, raw-less hospitality of Japan.
This particular wedding party had a spontaenity and uniqueness that I had not experienced before. It should be remembered that the Japanese hold an after-party (ni-ji-kai), and a after-after-party (sanjikai) where there is much more spontaneous "wow". Thank you for inviting me. I had a great time.
Bibliography
Briley, D. A., & Wyer, R. S. (2002). The Effects of Group Membership on the Avoidance of Negative Outcomes: Implications for Social and Consumer Decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(3), 400–415. Retrieved from http://works.bepress.com/briley/3
Hamamura, T. (2008). Approach and avoidance motivations across cultures. In A. J. Elliot (Ed.), Handbook of Approach and Avoidance Motivation (pp. 557–570). Mahwah, NJ, US: Erlbaum. Retrieved from http://www.psych.ubc.ca/%7Eheine/docs/avoidancehandbook.rtf
Hamamura, T., & Heine, S. J. (2006). Self-Regulation Across Cultures: New Perspective on Culture and Cognition Research. International Conference of the Cognitive Science, Vancouver, BC.
Hamamura, T., Meijer, Z., Heine, S. J., Kamaya, K., & Hori, I. (2009). Approach—Avoidance Motivation and Information Processing: A Cross-Cultural Analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(4), 454–462. Retrieved from http://www.psych.ubc.ca/%7Eheine/docs/2009approach.pdf
Higgins, E. T., & Spiegel, S. (2004). Promotion and prevention strategies for self-regulation: A motivated cognition perspective. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/2004-00163-008
Labels: japan, japanese culture, nihonbunka, 日本文化
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Social Loafing in Japan Revisited
Nakano, one of my seminar students, did a replication of the classic experiment on social loafing (Ringleman, 1913; see Kravitz & Martin, 1986), using a chocolate grabbing task. Earlier replications of this experiment have shown mixed results. In a shouting task, Latane, Williams, & Harkins (1979) found social loafing present pan-culturally, even among subjects from Malaysia, Thailand and Japan. In a similar task Shirakashi (1984) found no social loafing among Japanese. Furthermore two studies (Gabrenya, Wang, & Latane, 1985; Matsui, Kakuyama, & Onglatco, 1987) found the reverse effect, social labouring or social effort in counting tasks among Taiwanese and Japanese Children. Early (1989,1993) found in a tendency towards social labouring among Hong Kong Adults, and Karau & Williams (1993) in a review of social loafing research in the West and Asia found an overall tendency for Westerners to loaf and for Asians to labour with greater effort. Kugihara (1999) found that Japanese females do not loaf but that Japanese men do, and that the tendency to loaf was related to the tendency to have an interdependent self concept (Markus and Kitayama) which is itself decreasing in Japan.
In Nakano's experiment, seminar students were asked to grab as many "BIS" chocolates as they could from a bag under two conditions
1) Being told that they would receive an equal share of the chocolates grabbed by the group as a whole
2) Being told that they would receive all the chocolates that they themselves grabbed.
The results were as shown above, with average number of chocolates grabbed were greater in the individual condition (9.45) than the group condition (7.27) indicating the existence of social loafing in Japan, with statistically significant tendency (p<0 .1=".1" despite="despite" n="11).<!--0--" sample="sample" size="size" small="small" the="the">
Fan as I am of the Koushien Baseball Tournament I was hoping my students to "become one circle," and try harder in the group condition but the conditions for Japanese social effort, did not seem to have been met. Only one student grabbed more chocolates in the group condition. The order of the grabbing and the degree of encouragement received from the experimenter (who was not blind to the experimental conditions, had been persuaded by social loafing research) may have affected the result.
Bibliography
Dick, R. van, Tissington, P. A., & Hertel, G. (2009). Do many hands make light work?: How to overcome social loafing and gain motivation in work teams. European Business Review, 21(3), 233–245. doi:10.1108/09555340910956621
Earley, P. C. (1993). East meets West meets Mideast: Further explorations of collectivistic and individualistic work groups. Academy of management journal, 319–348. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/256525
Gabrenya, W. K., Wang, Y.-E., & Latane, B. (1985). Social Loafing on an Optimizing Task Cross-Cultural Differences among Chinese and Americans. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 16(2), 223–242. doi:10.1177/0022002185016002006
Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4), 681–706. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.65.4.681
Kravitz, D. A., & Martin, B. (1986). Ringelmann rediscovered: The original article. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(5), 936–941. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.5.936
Kugihara, N. (1999). Gender and social loafing in Japan. The Journal of social psychology, 139(4), 516–526. Retrieved from http://heldref-publications.metapress.com/index/3978hl6682r10877.pdf
Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology; Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(6), 822. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/37/6/822/
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review; Psychological Review, 98(2), 224. Retrieved from http://www.biu.ac.il/PS/docs/diesendruck/2.pdf
Matsui, T., Kakuyama, T., & Onglatco, M. U. (1987). Effects of goals and feedback on performance in groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(3), 407. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/apl/72/3/407/
Shirakashi, S. (1984). Social loafing of Japanese students. Hiroshima Forum for Psychology, 10, 35–40.
In Nakano's experiment, seminar students were asked to grab as many "BIS" chocolates as they could from a bag under two conditions
1) Being told that they would receive an equal share of the chocolates grabbed by the group as a whole
2) Being told that they would receive all the chocolates that they themselves grabbed.
The results were as shown above, with average number of chocolates grabbed were greater in the individual condition (9.45) than the group condition (7.27) indicating the existence of social loafing in Japan, with statistically significant tendency (p<0 .1=".1" despite="despite" n="11).<!--0--" sample="sample" size="size" small="small" the="the">
Fan as I am of the Koushien Baseball Tournament I was hoping my students to "become one circle," and try harder in the group condition but the conditions for Japanese social effort, did not seem to have been met. Only one student grabbed more chocolates in the group condition. The order of the grabbing and the degree of encouragement received from the experimenter (who was not blind to the experimental conditions, had been persuaded by social loafing research) may have affected the result.
Bibliography
Dick, R. van, Tissington, P. A., & Hertel, G. (2009). Do many hands make light work?: How to overcome social loafing and gain motivation in work teams. European Business Review, 21(3), 233–245. doi:10.1108/09555340910956621
Earley, P. C. (1993). East meets West meets Mideast: Further explorations of collectivistic and individualistic work groups. Academy of management journal, 319–348. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/256525
Gabrenya, W. K., Wang, Y.-E., & Latane, B. (1985). Social Loafing on an Optimizing Task Cross-Cultural Differences among Chinese and Americans. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 16(2), 223–242. doi:10.1177/0022002185016002006
Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4), 681–706. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.65.4.681
Kravitz, D. A., & Martin, B. (1986). Ringelmann rediscovered: The original article. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(5), 936–941. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.5.936
Kugihara, N. (1999). Gender and social loafing in Japan. The Journal of social psychology, 139(4), 516–526. Retrieved from http://heldref-publications.metapress.com/index/3978hl6682r10877.pdf
Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology; Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(6), 822. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/37/6/822/
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review; Psychological Review, 98(2), 224. Retrieved from http://www.biu.ac.il/PS/docs/diesendruck/2.pdf
Matsui, T., Kakuyama, T., & Onglatco, M. U. (1987). Effects of goals and feedback on performance in groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(3), 407. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/apl/72/3/407/
Shirakashi, S. (1984). Social loafing of Japanese students. Hiroshima Forum for Psychology, 10, 35–40.
Labels: collectivism, culture, economics, individualism, japan, japanese culture, nihonbunka, 個人主義, 日本文化, 集団主義
Sunday, October 14, 2012
Japanese Wedding Chapel
Many Japanese people get married in purpose built marriage complexes, which have reception rooms, banqueting halls, and a wedding chapel which is not a real chapel but a room decorated in such a way as to appear similar to a Western church. Western "celebrants" are employed to performs the role of a priest, giving a presentation in both Japanese and English to give the proceedings an authentic, Western, Christian effect. The organ and the roof vaulting were painted in but, complete with hymns and bible readings, the atmosphere and appearance was definitely church-like. The company that I know of that that supplies celebrants to wedding chapels takes its role seriously and demands that celebrants be theists and believers in the importance of holy matrimony. They insist upon not only appearance but also the message of Christianity.
Until the influence of the West arrived in Japan there was no ritual to celebrate marriage. In place of marriage ceremonies, there was a celebration of the arrival of the bride in the ancestral home and a celebration of the first shrine visiting of newborn children since it was the vertical relationships that are holy and associated with ritual in Japan, rather than the horizontal, romantic ones. That does not, of course, mean that Japanese couples don't love each other. Far from it.
Having made this 'documentary' I was feeling a little removed from the proceedings, and was surprised to see that one of the older gentlemen in the back grow opposite me was crying. "Why is this gentleman so moved?" I thought. Then I realised, that he was one of the bride's grandparents, of which there were but three in attendance, and that he was there on his own. At which point, I started crying too. Love lives on in Japan.
Labels: japan, japanese culture, nihonbunka, Shinto, 日本文化
Friday, October 05, 2012
Dangerous Water Channel
As someone pointed out (B?) there are a lot of dangerous water channels in Japan with low or non-existent guard rails, in streets with no street lighting. This channel has no railings in some areas despite being 2 metres deep.
This level of physical danger exists in spite of the fact that saftey from attack is not only non-existent, but there are emergency "I am being attacked" alarm/phone stations every 50 yards along the main street coming from university. Danger caused by others is treated by with great concern, but danger due to personal "negligence" (such as not looking where you are treading) gets short shrift. Who said that Japanese do not allow their populace to do things at their own risk (jiko-sekinin de)? Having said that, I think that this difference is more to do with the prevalence of irrigation channels in this rice farming nation rather than any difference in perceptions of personal safety.
A foreign student at Yamaguchi broke their arm falling into one of these channels. A foreign visitor found a dead Japanese man in one of these channels on a Sunday morning. Those under the influence of alcohol are particularly at risk. Visitors to Japan beware. But also bear in mind that in late May the channels, or this one in Itoyone, are populated by fireflies.
This level of physical danger exists in spite of the fact that saftey from attack is not only non-existent, but there are emergency "I am being attacked" alarm/phone stations every 50 yards along the main street coming from university. Danger caused by others is treated by with great concern, but danger due to personal "negligence" (such as not looking where you are treading) gets short shrift. Who said that Japanese do not allow their populace to do things at their own risk (jiko-sekinin de)? Having said that, I think that this difference is more to do with the prevalence of irrigation channels in this rice farming nation rather than any difference in perceptions of personal safety.
A foreign student at Yamaguchi broke their arm falling into one of these channels. A foreign visitor found a dead Japanese man in one of these channels on a Sunday morning. Those under the influence of alcohol are particularly at risk. Visitors to Japan beware. But also bear in mind that in late May the channels, or this one in Itoyone, are populated by fireflies.
Labels: culture, japan, japanese culture, nihonbunka, 日本文化
An Individualist Poem: Me, a Small Bird, and Bell
KANEKO Misuzu was a poet from Nagato in Northern Yamaguchi who lived at the beginning of the 20th century. She had a tough childhood, being sent to a foster home at the death of her father, then re-fostered by her mother's second husband, she found herself treated as a "foster child" even by her, by now estranged, mother. Leaving home, she ran a bookshop in Shimonoseki, the largest town in Yamaguchi Prefecture and wrote poetry, about 500 poems and songs mainly for children, of which 50 were published in her lifetime.
It was after her marriage however that her life became even more tragic in that her husband requested that she give up poetry and concentrate being a "housewife". When she refused, he took to having mistresses or at least prostitutes, and when he gave her a veneral disease she decided to leave him. At first she thought that she would have custody of her children but when they were taken from her, she committed suicide at the age of 27.
I imagine that she genuinely and fervently wished that her significant others would treat her on her merits, rather than according to her station or role (foster-child, housewife), so her most famous poem, in my translation below strikes me as being, very understated.
Me, a Little Bird, and a Bell
Even if I stretch out both my arms
I can't fly, not one flap, in the sky
But the little bird than can fly so well
Can't run on the ground fast, like I
Even if shake my body about
I won't make a beautiful sound
But the bell that can ring so beautifully
Doesn't know a whole heap of songs, like me
The bell, the small bird, and also me
All different, all good.
(It is much better in the original Japanese)
I often assert that the Japanese are just as individual as Westerners. I still think that this is true but it is also true that there are strong philosophical and cultural encouragements to fulfil ones roles. I think that this is because the Japanese are so individualist and full of self-love that their society would fall apart if they did not promote harmony and role-fulfilment. Perhaps Kaneko Misuzu was not so full of self-love. It is clear that she had a strong desire to be appreciated on her merits. I like to think her poems will become popular in the West.
Labels: collectivism, individualism, japan, japanese culture, 個人主義, 日本文化, 集団主義
Thursday, October 04, 2012
Hashimoto's Japan and the Monkeys
I recently compared Hirofumi Hashimoto's view of Japanese society with that described in George Orwell's 1984. A better illustration is perhaps the fictive experiment performed on monkeys, illustrated above (click through to a larger version, or 日本語版). The monkey experiment is an Internet meme. Although sometimes attributed to genuine research, the monkey experiment never actually took place.
Hashimoto does not claim that anyone ever sprayed cold water on the Japanese. However, the situation described in the penultimate picture, bottom left in which all the members of society of monkeys refrain from doing what they desire because they are, justifiably, afraid of censure is essentially the same as that which Hashimoto claims to exist in Japan. The Japanese all want to behave like individualists, but they are scared to doing so due to their fear of censure. Their fear of censure is probably justified because Japanese believe that anyone who does not censure individualists will themselves be censured.
I don't think that this does in fact describe Japanese society, where both individual (e.g. Sumo and K1 MMA fights) and group (the Koushien baseball tournament) sports are highly admired. Returning to the Orwellian analogy, to the extent that Japanese have grown to love highly cooperative acts, they have learned to love "Big Brother." Learning to love big brother is not however, as sinister as the process described in George Orwell's book. It is rather that the Japanese see their 'ideal of individualism' as will o the wisp (nai mono denari) and are able to stand back and imagine a society in which everyone gave free reign to their individual desire, and realise that it would not look like the group of happy monkeys pictured in the final frame above.
Hashimoto, H. 橋本博文. (2011). 相互協調性の自己維持メカニズム. 実験社会心理学研究, 50(2), 182–193. Retrieved from japanlinkcenter.org/JST.JSTAGE/jjesp/50.182?from=Google
Hashimoto does not claim that anyone ever sprayed cold water on the Japanese. However, the situation described in the penultimate picture, bottom left in which all the members of society of monkeys refrain from doing what they desire because they are, justifiably, afraid of censure is essentially the same as that which Hashimoto claims to exist in Japan. The Japanese all want to behave like individualists, but they are scared to doing so due to their fear of censure. Their fear of censure is probably justified because Japanese believe that anyone who does not censure individualists will themselves be censured.
I don't think that this does in fact describe Japanese society, where both individual (e.g. Sumo and K1 MMA fights) and group (the Koushien baseball tournament) sports are highly admired. Returning to the Orwellian analogy, to the extent that Japanese have grown to love highly cooperative acts, they have learned to love "Big Brother." Learning to love big brother is not however, as sinister as the process described in George Orwell's book. It is rather that the Japanese see their 'ideal of individualism' as will o the wisp (nai mono denari) and are able to stand back and imagine a society in which everyone gave free reign to their individual desire, and realise that it would not look like the group of happy monkeys pictured in the final frame above.
Hashimoto, H. 橋本博文. (2011). 相互協調性の自己維持メカニズム. 実験社会心理学研究, 50(2), 182–193. Retrieved from japanlinkcenter.org/JST.JSTAGE/jjesp/50.182?from=Google
Labels: collectivism, individualism, japan, japanese culture, nihonbunka, 個人主義, 日本文化, 集団主義
Wednesday, October 03, 2012
Yamagishi in the Middle of the Cultural Psychology Feedback Loop
In the classic (I think Richard Shweder's) diagram used in so many power point presentations by cultural psychologists to show the interrelationship between culture and psychology, culture is on the left and psychology is on the right. This is a dualistic model. After all culture is "out there" and psychology is "in here". Or is it?
What alternative models are there? One of the most eloquent critics of cultural psychology, who nonetheless mixes with cultural psychologists and performs comparative cultural experiments, is Professor Toshio Yamagishi who has consistently claimed that what cultural psychologists are calling cultural psychology are really a product of "institutional" facets of the social environment.
For example, Yamagishi demonstrated that Japanese people behave cooperatively in a game when they believe that their actions can be observed by others, but not when their actions could not. Hence it is not that Japanese are cooperative per se but that they are employing a "group heuristic model" and anticipate certain patterns of censure and encouragement from their peers (Yamagishi, 2008).
Again, while Markus and Kim (2000) had shown that Japanese show a "preference" for majority and Americans for minority coloured pencils -- when given a choice of say one pencil from four blue and one red pencils -- this "preference" was found to be the result of, again, fear of censure and anticipation of gratitude from those yet to make a choice. Japanese reason to themselves "If I take the last red pencil no one else can. So if there are any others that wanted the red pencil then they are going to be upset with me for taking it, and grateful if I do not." When told that they are the last person to make the choice, or that they are in a shop purchasing a pencil, the Japanese chose the minority (red) pencil as frequently as Americans (Yamagishi, Hashimoto, & Schug, 2008).
Or again, as argued in Hashimoto's recent research (Hashimoto, 2011) why is that Japanese tend to censure individualistic behaviour? Not because they prefer cooperative behaviour (they prefer individualistic behaviour), but because they anticipate that those that praise individualistic behaviour will censured.
Hence, Yamagishi and his colleagues consistently and persuasively argue, there is nothing particularly cooperative about the Japanese psychology, it is just that they are playing a different game according to a different "heuristic," with different "default schema" because they are in a different "institution".
But hold on a second! That which was encouraging Japanese to be cooperative was thought to be psychology. Now we find that it is out there in institutions, in society. I think that in Yamagishi's anti-cultural psychological model, there is non-dual model of how psychology can be out there, in the world in psychology, in a pattern of anticipated interpersonal behaviours. Yamagishi's psychology collapses the duality in the cultural psychological feedback loop. In this sense, perhaps Professor Yamagishi is the most cultural of psychologists?
Yes and no. It could also be said, applying the theory proposed by this blog, that Professor Yamagishi is Japanese.
Speaking as a Westerner, when faced with for instance, the choice of which coloured pencil to choose, the narrative, "I know that someone coming after me may not be able to choose the colour of pencil that they wanted to choose but I know my rights, and I know that therefore I am within them to exercise my preference and that anyone who might censure me will know that I having behaved within my rights, I will choose the red pencil," i.e. the "default schema," "the heuristic" the analytic thought (Nisbett and Masuda) of my "institutional environment," are what I am. These machinations, this narrative, are the most important part of what it is to be me. To me they are, that narratival feedback loop is, "I", my self, my psychology.
Professor Yamagishi on the other hand is Japanese. As we can see from the above photo is about 65 going on 20. Professor Yamagishi is a mountain climber, and if you meet him you (and he) can see, tremendously fit. He does not not identify with such narratival machinations (heuristics, default schema, analyses of his institutional environment). Professor Yamagishi is to himself the man, the beautiful (Abe) man that one can see. All the these analytic/heuristic/schematic/narratival machinations are merely a product of his institutional environment.
Image of Toshio Yamagishi from his website reproduced here without permission. 取り下げご希望でありましたらご一筆いただけらば幸いです。
Yamagishi, T., Hashimoto, H., & Schug, J. (2008). Preferences versus strategies as explanations for culture-specific behavior. Psychological Science, 19(6), 579–584. Retrieved from pss.sagepub.com/content/19/6/579.short
Yamagishi, Toshio, Mifune, N., Liu, J. H., & Pauling, J. (2008). Exchanges of group-based favours: Ingroup bias in the prisoner’s dilemma game with minimal groups in Japan and New Zealand. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 11(3), 196–207. doi:10.1111/j.1467-839X.2008.00258.x
橋本博文. (2011). 相互協調性の自己維持メカニズム. 実験社会心理学研究, 50(2), 182–193. Retrieved from japanlinkcenter.org/JST.JSTAGE/jjesp/50.182?from=Google
What alternative models are there? One of the most eloquent critics of cultural psychology, who nonetheless mixes with cultural psychologists and performs comparative cultural experiments, is Professor Toshio Yamagishi who has consistently claimed that what cultural psychologists are calling cultural psychology are really a product of "institutional" facets of the social environment.
For example, Yamagishi demonstrated that Japanese people behave cooperatively in a game when they believe that their actions can be observed by others, but not when their actions could not. Hence it is not that Japanese are cooperative per se but that they are employing a "group heuristic model" and anticipate certain patterns of censure and encouragement from their peers (Yamagishi, 2008).
Again, while Markus and Kim (2000) had shown that Japanese show a "preference" for majority and Americans for minority coloured pencils -- when given a choice of say one pencil from four blue and one red pencils -- this "preference" was found to be the result of, again, fear of censure and anticipation of gratitude from those yet to make a choice. Japanese reason to themselves "If I take the last red pencil no one else can. So if there are any others that wanted the red pencil then they are going to be upset with me for taking it, and grateful if I do not." When told that they are the last person to make the choice, or that they are in a shop purchasing a pencil, the Japanese chose the minority (red) pencil as frequently as Americans (Yamagishi, Hashimoto, & Schug, 2008).
Or again, as argued in Hashimoto's recent research (Hashimoto, 2011) why is that Japanese tend to censure individualistic behaviour? Not because they prefer cooperative behaviour (they prefer individualistic behaviour), but because they anticipate that those that praise individualistic behaviour will censured.
Hence, Yamagishi and his colleagues consistently and persuasively argue, there is nothing particularly cooperative about the Japanese psychology, it is just that they are playing a different game according to a different "heuristic," with different "default schema" because they are in a different "institution".
But hold on a second! That which was encouraging Japanese to be cooperative was thought to be psychology. Now we find that it is out there in institutions, in society. I think that in Yamagishi's anti-cultural psychological model, there is non-dual model of how psychology can be out there, in the world in psychology, in a pattern of anticipated interpersonal behaviours. Yamagishi's psychology collapses the duality in the cultural psychological feedback loop. In this sense, perhaps Professor Yamagishi is the most cultural of psychologists?
Yes and no. It could also be said, applying the theory proposed by this blog, that Professor Yamagishi is Japanese.
Speaking as a Westerner, when faced with for instance, the choice of which coloured pencil to choose, the narrative, "I know that someone coming after me may not be able to choose the colour of pencil that they wanted to choose but I know my rights, and I know that therefore I am within them to exercise my preference and that anyone who might censure me will know that I having behaved within my rights, I will choose the red pencil," i.e. the "default schema," "the heuristic" the analytic thought (Nisbett and Masuda) of my "institutional environment," are what I am. These machinations, this narrative, are the most important part of what it is to be me. To me they are, that narratival feedback loop is, "I", my self, my psychology.
Professor Yamagishi on the other hand is Japanese. As we can see from the above photo is about 65 going on 20. Professor Yamagishi is a mountain climber, and if you meet him you (and he) can see, tremendously fit. He does not not identify with such narratival machinations (heuristics, default schema, analyses of his institutional environment). Professor Yamagishi is to himself the man, the beautiful (Abe) man that one can see. All the these analytic/heuristic/schematic/narratival machinations are merely a product of his institutional environment.
Image of Toshio Yamagishi from his website reproduced here without permission. 取り下げご希望でありましたらご一筆いただけらば幸いです。
Yamagishi, T., Hashimoto, H., & Schug, J. (2008). Preferences versus strategies as explanations for culture-specific behavior. Psychological Science, 19(6), 579–584. Retrieved from pss.sagepub.com/content/19/6/579.short
Yamagishi, Toshio, Mifune, N., Liu, J. H., & Pauling, J. (2008). Exchanges of group-based favours: Ingroup bias in the prisoner’s dilemma game with minimal groups in Japan and New Zealand. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 11(3), 196–207. doi:10.1111/j.1467-839X.2008.00258.x
橋本博文. (2011). 相互協調性の自己維持メカニズム. 実験社会心理学研究, 50(2), 182–193. Retrieved from japanlinkcenter.org/JST.JSTAGE/jjesp/50.182?from=Google
Labels: collectivism, individualism, japan, japanese culture, nihonbunka, 個人主義, 日本文化, 集団主義
Profesional Co-Sleepists
The above is a screen-shot of a recently opened "Co-Sleeping Speciality Store" (Soneya) or a place where customers can pay to sleep with Japanese women, called "Sonesuto" or Co-Sleepists according the store's twitter. The prices are steep at about 70 dollars an hour for the first hour, and one has to pay for extras such as staring into your bed-partner's eyes, patting or being patted, or sleeping (for three minutes!) in their arms. But custom is booming, and media attention considerable.
There are a lot of reasons why this services is available in Japan as opposed to anywhere else.
The central theory espoused by this blog (burogu.com) is that the Japanese live in the visio-imaginary. That is to say that the visual and imagined is the most important media/channel and felt to be the most real part of the world. This is because instead of having simulated/internalised a thou, super-addressee, Other, or generalised other of self-speech, the Japanese have internalised a generalised point of view. The Japanese can see themselves from the eye of the Other.
This means that things that look the same, are, for most practical purposes, the same. Thus shrines and temples, foreign villages (gaiku-mura), food (plastic food), art works, offerings (horse sculptures and drawings called ema), and people (robots, and co-sleepists) can be copied and will be felt to be the same as, or almost the same as the original.
This encourages the Japanese to purchase far more copyist services, such as women that sit next to your and laugh at your jokes (the main job of a snack hostess), people who clean our your ears (the typical behaviour of a mother or doting female) or someone to sleep next to you, the behaviour again of a girlfriend. The Japanese do not limit themselves to prostitution (which in its coital form is illegal) but purchase all sorts of soft services that people from Britain would only require from someone who had the correct "internal" states.
The tag line of the website says, "it is just enough to have you sleep next to me". Their major clientèle are tired men in their 30s to 40s.
This brings me to another reason that Japanese are more inclined to purchase co-sleeping services. The Japanese sleep with their children. Children sleep between their parents. They are brought up feeling very secure and loved. This means that the parents on the other hand far more rarely get to sleep with someone of their own size at least. Hence the need for this service.
There are a lot of reasons why this services is available in Japan as opposed to anywhere else.
The central theory espoused by this blog (burogu.com) is that the Japanese live in the visio-imaginary. That is to say that the visual and imagined is the most important media/channel and felt to be the most real part of the world. This is because instead of having simulated/internalised a thou, super-addressee, Other, or generalised other of self-speech, the Japanese have internalised a generalised point of view. The Japanese can see themselves from the eye of the Other.
This means that things that look the same, are, for most practical purposes, the same. Thus shrines and temples, foreign villages (gaiku-mura), food (plastic food), art works, offerings (horse sculptures and drawings called ema), and people (robots, and co-sleepists) can be copied and will be felt to be the same as, or almost the same as the original.
This encourages the Japanese to purchase far more copyist services, such as women that sit next to your and laugh at your jokes (the main job of a snack hostess), people who clean our your ears (the typical behaviour of a mother or doting female) or someone to sleep next to you, the behaviour again of a girlfriend. The Japanese do not limit themselves to prostitution (which in its coital form is illegal) but purchase all sorts of soft services that people from Britain would only require from someone who had the correct "internal" states.
The tag line of the website says, "it is just enough to have you sleep next to me". Their major clientèle are tired men in their 30s to 40s.
This brings me to another reason that Japanese are more inclined to purchase co-sleeping services. The Japanese sleep with their children. Children sleep between their parents. They are brought up feeling very secure and loved. This means that the parents on the other hand far more rarely get to sleep with someone of their own size at least. Hence the need for this service.
Labels: authenticopy, image, japan, japanese culture, nihonbunka, sex, 日本文化
Tuesday, October 02, 2012
Hashimoto's Distopian Japan
Hashimoto's view of Japanese collectivism reminds me of the sort of nested web of fear that may exist in dictatorships, or more precisely, in an Orwellian dystopia (Orwell, 1949) where the austensibly loved, but in reality feared, dictator does not exist at all.
Following on from research by his mentor, Toshio Yamagishi (e.g. Yamagishi, 2002), Hirofumi Hashimoto (2011) investigated Japanese attitudes towards cooperation and independence.
First he found that while Japanese think that (1a) other Japanese people like cooperation and (2a) they themselves cooperate, they would ideally like to be (3a) independent. In other words, the Japanese appear to be wearing a mask of Japanese cooperativeness over a heart of independence. They continue to wear this mask because they believe others have a dim view of individualists and they believe that they would be ostracised or worse if they came out of the closet. To demonstrate this Hashimoto showed that (1b) Japanese believe that others negatively evaluate individualists. However, he also showed that (2b) Japanese in fact positively evaluate individualistic others.
In research Hashimoto is currently writing, he goes on to ask, "so how does the system remain balanced or intact?" Why isn't there a small boy that says, "the emperor is wearing no clothes!" or rather "Actually, I admire independent people," bringing the ersatz "valuation of cooperation" down like a house of cards?
Hashimoto argues for, and demonstrates, another layer of sham. He further asked (1c) what other people thought of those that admire individulists and (2c) What the subjects thought of people that admire individualists. As closet admirers of individualists, it is not surprising that the subjects said that they liked others that also admire individualists. But once again, they said they believed that others negatively evaulate those that admire individualists. Hence even those that see through the sham, realise the emperor is naked, or at least that they can't see the clothes, and that they like individualists, are afraid to say so.
Hashimoto presumably believes that this web of fear is infinitely nested, lest someone should come out and say "Acutally, I like people that admire individualists," or "Actually, I like people that say that they like people who admire individualists," etc because at every level each individual presumes that they will be ostracised for saying so since at every level they believe that others do not admire individualism.
This situation is a little like that which I presume pertains in a dicatorship. The participants in the Valkerie plot to assinate Hilter where hampered by their (in part erroneous) belief that other people admired the Fuerer. Hashimoto's nested web of fear may have even more in common with that described in George Orwell's "1984," in which the feared dictator -- "big brother" -- may be dead, or may never even have existed.
According to Hashimoto's vision of Japan, collectivism as an aspiration, exists only as a bogeyman, that no one ever aspired towards but everyone was afraid to admit it due to fear of ostracism from others. And this view, inmho, plays towards Western views of Japanese, or indeed everyone else, and the commonly held Western belief that in fact everyone is a freedom and autonomy loving Westerner underneath.
Hashimoto and Yamagishi are very clever, and their data appears irrefutably sound. But, if they are right, that there is this disconnection between culture and psychology, that sheepish East Asians have the private life of woolves, then Cultural Psychology as a mutally constructing feedback system, (Markus and Kitayama, 1991) would need to be thrown out the window. The stakes are high.
Addendum
As usual my attempt to circumvent his dillemma is to argue that the apparent contradictions of the Japanese heart only exist when you are asking them to vocalise, or answer linguistically framed likert tests about cooperation and individualism. There is something so linguistically attractive or imperative about autonomy, that some economists have argued following Kant, that it has the status of a synthetic judgement a priori. How can one make a counter claim against the value of autonomy, without asserting that one does not want what one wants? One runs up into a modied form of the liar paradox, the last guardian of logocentrism.
Thus our words, including Japanese words, claim for themselves freedom, but what is the situation in the minds eye? Are independent people beautiful? Is independent behaviour beautiful? How about cooperation? Have you seen the Koshien Baseball Tournament, and why does anyone watch it? What of people that admire independent people, are they really beautiful too? The Japanese do love the way thinks are in Japan, and discount their unrealistic linguistic aspirations and admiration for independence as will o the wisp (the closest translation I could come up with of ) "nai mono denari" (ないものねだり).
Image above top modified from from Hashimoto, Ohashi and Yamagishi's 2010 presentation to the Social Psychology Association, which has now largely been published in Hashimoto, 2011 (see below).
Bibliography
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review; Psychological Review, 98(2), 224. Retrieved from http://www.biu.ac.il/PS/docs/diesendruck/2.pdf
Orwell, G. (1949). Nineteen Eighty-four (No Edition Listed.). Harcourt Brace and Co.
Hashimoto, H. 橋本博文. (2011). 相互協調性の自己維持メカニズム. 実験社会心理学研究, 50(2), 182–193. Retrieved from japanlinkcenter.org/JST.JSTAGE/jjesp/50.182?from=Google
Yamagichi, T. 山岸俊男. (2002). 心でっかちな日本人: 集団主義文化という幻想. 日本経済新聞社.
橋本博文・大橋加奈子・山岸俊男 (2010, September). 相互協調行動を支える制度的基盤 第51回日本社会心理学会 （於:広島大学, 口頭発表）
Following on from research by his mentor, Toshio Yamagishi (e.g. Yamagishi, 2002), Hirofumi Hashimoto (2011) investigated Japanese attitudes towards cooperation and independence.
First he found that while Japanese think that (1a) other Japanese people like cooperation and (2a) they themselves cooperate, they would ideally like to be (3a) independent. In other words, the Japanese appear to be wearing a mask of Japanese cooperativeness over a heart of independence. They continue to wear this mask because they believe others have a dim view of individualists and they believe that they would be ostracised or worse if they came out of the closet. To demonstrate this Hashimoto showed that (1b) Japanese believe that others negatively evaluate individualists. However, he also showed that (2b) Japanese in fact positively evaluate individualistic others.
In research Hashimoto is currently writing, he goes on to ask, "so how does the system remain balanced or intact?" Why isn't there a small boy that says, "the emperor is wearing no clothes!" or rather "Actually, I admire independent people," bringing the ersatz "valuation of cooperation" down like a house of cards?
Hashimoto argues for, and demonstrates, another layer of sham. He further asked (1c) what other people thought of those that admire individulists and (2c) What the subjects thought of people that admire individualists. As closet admirers of individualists, it is not surprising that the subjects said that they liked others that also admire individualists. But once again, they said they believed that others negatively evaulate those that admire individualists. Hence even those that see through the sham, realise the emperor is naked, or at least that they can't see the clothes, and that they like individualists, are afraid to say so.
Hashimoto presumably believes that this web of fear is infinitely nested, lest someone should come out and say "Acutally, I like people that admire individualists," or "Actually, I like people that say that they like people who admire individualists," etc because at every level each individual presumes that they will be ostracised for saying so since at every level they believe that others do not admire individualism.
This situation is a little like that which I presume pertains in a dicatorship. The participants in the Valkerie plot to assinate Hilter where hampered by their (in part erroneous) belief that other people admired the Fuerer. Hashimoto's nested web of fear may have even more in common with that described in George Orwell's "1984," in which the feared dictator -- "big brother" -- may be dead, or may never even have existed.
According to Hashimoto's vision of Japan, collectivism as an aspiration, exists only as a bogeyman, that no one ever aspired towards but everyone was afraid to admit it due to fear of ostracism from others. And this view, inmho, plays towards Western views of Japanese, or indeed everyone else, and the commonly held Western belief that in fact everyone is a freedom and autonomy loving Westerner underneath.
Hashimoto and Yamagishi are very clever, and their data appears irrefutably sound. But, if they are right, that there is this disconnection between culture and psychology, that sheepish East Asians have the private life of woolves, then Cultural Psychology as a mutally constructing feedback system, (Markus and Kitayama, 1991) would need to be thrown out the window. The stakes are high.
Addendum
As usual my attempt to circumvent his dillemma is to argue that the apparent contradictions of the Japanese heart only exist when you are asking them to vocalise, or answer linguistically framed likert tests about cooperation and individualism. There is something so linguistically attractive or imperative about autonomy, that some economists have argued following Kant, that it has the status of a synthetic judgement a priori. How can one make a counter claim against the value of autonomy, without asserting that one does not want what one wants? One runs up into a modied form of the liar paradox, the last guardian of logocentrism.
Thus our words, including Japanese words, claim for themselves freedom, but what is the situation in the minds eye? Are independent people beautiful? Is independent behaviour beautiful? How about cooperation? Have you seen the Koshien Baseball Tournament, and why does anyone watch it? What of people that admire independent people, are they really beautiful too? The Japanese do love the way thinks are in Japan, and discount their unrealistic linguistic aspirations and admiration for independence as will o the wisp (the closest translation I could come up with of ) "nai mono denari" (ないものねだり).
Image above top modified from from Hashimoto, Ohashi and Yamagishi's 2010 presentation to the Social Psychology Association, which has now largely been published in Hashimoto, 2011 (see below).
Bibliography
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review; Psychological Review, 98(2), 224. Retrieved from http://www.biu.ac.il/PS/docs/diesendruck/2.pdf
Orwell, G. (1949). Nineteen Eighty-four (No Edition Listed.). Harcourt Brace and Co.
Hashimoto, H. 橋本博文. (2011). 相互協調性の自己維持メカニズム. 実験社会心理学研究, 50(2), 182–193. Retrieved from japanlinkcenter.org/JST.JSTAGE/jjesp/50.182?from=Google
Yamagichi, T. 山岸俊男. (2002). 心でっかちな日本人: 集団主義文化という幻想. 日本経済新聞社.
橋本博文・大橋加奈子・山岸俊男 (2010, September). 相互協調行動を支える制度的基盤 第51回日本社会心理学会 （於:広島大学, 口頭発表）
Labels: collectivism, culture, individualism, japan, japanese culture, Nacalian, 日本文化, 集団主義
This blog represents the opinions of the author, Timothy Takemoto, and not the opinions of his employer.