A Cross‐Cultural Study of Preference of Accounts: Relationship Closeness, Harm Severity, and Motives of Account Making1
A Cross‐Cultural Study of Preference of Accounts: Relationship Closeness, Harm Severity, and Motives of Account Making1
复制标题
账户偏好的跨文化研究：关系亲密程度、危害严重程度和账户创建动机1
DOI：
10.1111/j.1559-1816.1996.tb01117.x
复制
发表时间：
1996
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Mitsuteru Fukuno
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ritsu Itoi;K. Ohbuchi;Mitsuteru Fukuno
我们向174名美国和169名日本受试者展示了一个演员无意中伤害某人的场景。我们要求他们评估6种不同的账户策略和3种账户动机的可能性。研究发现，与个人主义者（美国人）相比，集体主义者（日本人）更倾向于使用诸如道歉或借口之类的缓和方式，而较少使用诸如辩护之类的自信方式。集体主义者的缓和风格变得明显，尤其是当参与者是群体内成员时；性别差异在集体主义者中比在个人主义者中更大。伤害严重程度是账户选择的一个独立而有力的决定因素：动机的因果分析表明，每种账户策略都有独特的动机，其假定的动机过程在两个文化群体之间非常相似。
We presented 174 American and 169 Japanese subjects with scenarios in which an actor unintentionally harmed someone. We asked them to rate the likelihood of each of 6 different account tactics and 3 motives of account making. Collectivists (Japanese) were found, compared with individualists (Americans), to show more preference for the mitigating accounts, such as apologies or excuses, but less the assertive accounts, such as justifications. The collectivists’ mitigating style became distinguished, particularly when the participants were in-group members; and also gender differences were larger among collectivists than among individualists. Harm severity was an independent and powerful determinant of account choice: The causal analysis of the motives revealed that each account tactic was uniquely motivated, and that its supposed motivational process was quite similar between the two cultural groups.