Making sense of (exceptional) causal relations. A cross-cultural and cross-linguistic study.
Making sense of (exceptional) causal relations. A cross-cultural and cross-linguistic study.
复制标题
DOI：
10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01645
复制
发表时间：
2015
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Brown P
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Le Guen O;Samland J;Friedrich T;Hanus D;Brown P
为了理解世界，人类倾向于在几乎所有地方都看到因果关系。尽管大多数因果关系可能看起来很简单，但它们在跨文化中并不总是以相同的方式解释。在这项研究中，我们研究了“机会”、“巧合”或“随机性”等概念，这些概念指的是情境中意图、行动和结果之间假定的关系，并询问来自不同文化的人们如何理解这种非法律类联系。基于阿里克提出的框架，我们管理了一项任务，旨在成为跨文化和跨语言调查因果解释的中立工具。四个不同文化群体的成员，来自墨西哥的乡村玛雅尤卡坦语和采尔塔尔语使用者以及来自墨西哥和德国的城市学生，被呈现了一系列涉及各种类型的因果关系和非因果关系的场景，并被要求解释所描述的事件。三个链接根据场景中是否存在而有所不同：意图到行动、行动到结果和意图到结果。我们的结果表明，所有四个文化群体都承认因果关系。然而，如何解释因果关系，尤其是非法律关系，取决于联系的类型、文化背景和所使用的语言。在所有三组中，行动到结果是认识因果关系的决定性环节。尽管这两个玛雅群体具有相似的文化背景，但他们在非法律关系概念方面表现出不同的意识形态。数据表明，“机会”的概念并不普遍，但似乎只是某些文化群体用来理解特定情况的解释。特别重要的是每种语言中都存在语言概念，这些概念在每个文化群体的反应中引发了因果关系的想法。
In order to make sense of the world, humans tend to see causation almost everywhere. Although most causal relations may seem straightforward, they are not always construed in the same way cross-culturally. In this study, we investigate concepts of “chance,” “coincidence,” or “randomness” that refer to assumed relations between intention, action, and outcome in situations, and we ask how people from different cultures make sense of such non-law-like connections. Based on a framework proposed by Alicke, we administered a task that aims to be a neutral tool for investigating causal construals cross-culturally and cross-linguistically. Members of four different cultural groups, rural Mayan Yucatec and Tseltal speakers from Mexico and urban students from Mexico and Germany, were presented with a set of scenarios involving various types of causal and non-causal relations and were asked to explain the described events. Three links varied as to whether they were present or not in the scenarios: Intention-to-Action, Action-to-Outcome, and Intention-to-Outcome. Our results show that causality is recognized in all four cultural groups. However, how causality and especially non-law-like relations are interpreted depends on the type of links, the cultural background and the language used. In all three groups, Action-to-Outcome is the decisive link for recognizing causality. Despite the fact that the two Mayan groups share similar cultural backgrounds, they display different ideologies regarding concepts of non-law-like relations. The data suggests that the concept of “chance” is not universal, but seems to be an explanation that only some cultural groups draw on to make sense of specific situations. Of particular importance is the existence of linguistic concepts in each language that trigger ideas of causality in the responses from each cultural group.