Session 5: How Culture Works PDF

Session 5: How Culture Works Chapter 4 Learning Objectives ​Explain how culture and stereotypical expectations influence behavior Discuss the concepts of culturally based scripts, norms, and causal attributions Explain how people from different cultures can look at the same t...

Session 5: How Culture Works Chapter 4 Learning Objectives ​Explain how culture and stereotypical expectations influence behavior Discuss the concepts of culturally based scripts, norms, and causal attributions Explain how people from different cultures can look at the same thing but see it differently Understand the relationship between an individual’s independent or interdependent self-concept and their motivation When managers work with people from other cultures, their knowledge of cultural differences can help them to anticipate the cultural assumptions that both they and their foreign colleagues may make and the likely responses that will result. Knowledge of societal culture dimensions, however, is only a first step. ○ Knowing that a person is Japanese, Mexican, or French provides only a rough guide to their likely attitudes and behavior. Because this knowledge does not indicate precisely the interactions between people from different societies, it does not fully explain the influence of culture. Culture influences managers through psychological and interpersonal mechanisms involving how they think about, evaluate, and respond to people from other cultures. Sometimes people link characteristics of societal culture to individuals by noting the individuals’ personal values and assuming that these reflect the culture of their society. Our approach in this book is different. In exploring how culture influences managers and their work relationships, we examine how people think—their social cognition—when they work with others from different cultures. Social Cognition Social cognition explains how, based on our past experiences, we develop mental images that include the specific features of an object, event, or situation. By using these images, we simplify the complex things these images represent, and this influences how we see and understand people and events. ★ When these images define a category (e.g., Native American, boss), they are called schemas; ★ When they contain a behavioral sequence (e.g., befriending, giving orders), they are called scripts. ★ Schemas and scripts develop slowly through repeated experiences Schemas and scripts develop slowly through repeated experiences. They are like pigeon holes in a non-automated post office. Mail is sorted into them. Each hole might be labeled with a postal code. As letters are sorted, the post office worker (our brain) does not have to read the name or street address but needs only to glance at the code (a schema or script—for example, the French), and the letter can be sorted into the appropriate pigeonhole. The work of the sorters (us!) is reduced and speeded up. Letters without postal codes or whose codes don’t match any of the pigeonhole labels will be thrown into the dead letter bin or placed into a special location, to be dealt with later. Social Cognition How people process, store and apply information about other people and social situations. Schema A mental framework or concept that helps organize and interpret information. Script A sequence of expected behaviors for a given situation. These mental representations help us to reduce the complexity around us to a manageable set of categories. ○ For example, fish is a schema that defines a category that contains salmon, but it does not perfectly describe a salmon. ○ The schema French people contains French president Emanuel Macron, soccer personality Zinedine Zidane, and singer Edith Piaf but does not fully describe any of them. A script can describe a particular kind of interaction among people, but we recognize that these interactions may take many different forms. Once we have formed schemas and scripts in our minds, we use them in our thinking. We chunk information (group it together) to help us to recall it later. For example, we use our knowledge of the features of fish to infer information about all kinds of fish. And in our cross-cultural thinking about the French, we may use prior experiences, including meeting French people, reading about them, and hearing others talk about them, to infer information about Macron, Zidane, Piaf, or other individual French people. Next we consider two different types of social cognition: Type 1 and Type 2 cognition. Type 1 cognition Relatively fast, unconscious Is spontaneous, with little or no conscious thought. (automatic) mental processing. For example, a U.S. person might meet someone with whom they have a friendly, casual relationship and, without thinking about it, shake hands with the person in greeting. Type 2 cognition Relatively slow, conscious Is less automatic and requires more conscious (controlled) mental processing. thought. Here, the U.S. person might encounter someone with whom they have a tense relationship or someone from an unfamiliar culture. The U.S. person might think about whether to shake hands and about the possible consequences of different options, such as shaking  hands, saying “hi,” nodding, bowing, or ignoring the other person. Most of our behavior is based on Type 1 cognition. We often don’t have time to think about interactions in advance. In any case, our capacity for Type 2 cognition is limited, and Type 2 cognition is tiring. When we are in novel intercultural circumstances, such as arriving in a new country, we often find that the situation requires conscious attention and therefore Type 2 cognition. ○ But the extra demands of Type 2 thinking make ordinary events challenging (for example, “How much should I tip?”) and new tasks even more so (for example, “How do I persuade the local people here to accept the company’s strategic plan?”). ○ In another example, an international manager might be aware that when they greet others in southern Europe, a kiss on the cheek rather than a handshake is sometimes appropriate. But in what situations? How many kisses? As we develop cultural expertise in new settings, we gradually learn new practices. Eventually, we respond to people in that setting appropriately, almost automatically, and with less effort (Type 1 social cognition). Cultural Schemas Although we rarely become aware of schemas, they affect everything we encounter: everyday aspects of life, social groups, such as one’s family, and even abstract ideas, such as quality music. Schemas in turn are affected by culture. One schema that is particularly helpful for understanding intercultural interactions is the Self-schema. Self-schema: Ideas and beliefs about ourselves. Each of us has an inner or private self consisting of thoughts and feelings that are unknown by others. ○ This inner self can include not only personally significant personality traits, such as competent, attractive, irritable, or conscientious, but also memories of experiences that we see as having shaped who we are. Self-schemas are based on extensive experience and therefore detailed. But because our self-awareness is only partial, they are also simplifications. Some aspects of the inner self are probably universal (e.g., I am hungry), but because of culturally shared understandings, others can be culture specific (e.g., My soul will be reincarnated.). In all cultures, people understand themselves as physically different from others, but some characteristics of their inner selves differ between cultures. An important one is people’s view of themselves as independent (separate from others) or interdependent (connected with others).  ○ In individualistic Western cultures, an independent self-schema is typical: People are expected to think and act as autonomous individuals with unique qualities, who will organize and act based on their own thoughts and feelings. ○ In contrast, people from collectivistic cultures tend to develop an interdependent self-schema and feel more connected to particular groups. Their behavior depends on their perception of the thoughts, feelings, and actions of others in the family, tribe, organization, or society. Reference groups: Groups that influence our opinions, beliefs, attitudes, and behavior. Interdependent self-schemas relate to different Reference groups (e.g., extended family, neighborhood, school friends, nation). As with individualistic versus collectivistic societies, the idea of an independent or interdependent self is a convenient simplification: Some people raised in individualistic societies wish for more sense of community while some in collectivist societies feel overwhelmed by their social obligations and seek more autonomy. ○ But we do not fully choose or control our independent or interdependent self-schema and it is not readily changed. Brain imaging research has shown that, depending on our culture and its support for independent or interdependent self-schemas, particular sections of the brain work differently in relation to various tasks and social situations.Thus, our self-schema may be partly “wired in”! Cultural Identity We often sort ourselves and others into groups. To do so, we consider characteristics that group members share, such as gender, physical appearance, religion, political views, lifestyle, country of origin, attitudes, and behavior. The total of the social categories that we use to describe ourselves is our social identity. And we differ in the relative importance of its different components. People from collectivist societies distinguish more clearly between those who are and those who are not members of their group. However, for all of us, one group that forms our social identity is our cultural group, from which we get our Cultural identity, such as American, African American, French, New Caledonian, and so on. For many of us, our cultural identity is simple to determine, but for others, it is a more complex matter. Cultural identity: Part of a person’s self-conception that is related to nationality, ethnicity, religion, social class, generation, locality, or any kind of social group that has its own distinct culture. By assigning characteristics to a particular national culture label, we create a schema for people of that nationality. We also tend to categorize individuals according to their cultural group. The descriptions of national cultures are one form of such categorization. However, the most important way we categorize others is by deciding whether they belong to our own cultural group (them and us grouping). Cultural Scripts and Norms Scripts are largely unconscious mental representations that shape how we think and act in a given situation. They tell us how a sequence of events will unfold and how we can adjust our actions appropriately. Scripts allow us to judge new situations through their similarity with previous situations in the cultures with which we have been most involved. For example, Wong’s avoidance of conflict was based on a cultural script learned from her Chinese parents. Consequently, in cross-cultural interactions, we often utilize scripts that we have formed from experience with our home culture. Culturally based scripts affect much business life. For example, U.S. managers often have a script for attending a business meeting that includes arriving on time (or early); chatting briefly with others, then rapidly getting down to business; pressing their point of view; striving to reach clear decisions; and confirming these decisions at the end. By following this sequence, members can easily switch from one phase to the next. However, for members of other cultures, attending a meeting may evoke different behaviors in which people might arrive late (Brazil), begin and end with a round of hand-shaking (Germany), or end the meeting without a final decision (Mexico). In our opening case, Bill Turnbull had a script of a brisk task-oriented American-style meeting. Instead, he encountered an easy-going, polite, modest, and chatty script, which he found strange. When we are in situations that seem familiar, we follow our scripts automatically (Type 1 cognition). However, when something interferes with our script, we need to pay careful attention. In the meeting example, when people from different cultural backgrounds work together, differences in their scripts can create confusion about the nature of the meeting, the degree of formality or conflict or hierarchy to be expected, the sequence of events, the length of each phase, and the cues that enable them to switch to the next phase. Cultural differences in scripts mean that the behavior of people from particular cultures will often surprise others and will require everyone to make thoughtful (Type 2 cognition) rather than spontaneous (Type 1 cognition) adjustments. Schemas and scripts influence each other. If you categorize yourself and others into groups and identify with a particular group, this will influence the scripts you seek to apply. ○ For example, you may consciously seek to adopt the group’s norms. Cultural norms are standards of acceptable behavior that are shared within a cultural group. Norms tell us what, in certain situations, to expect from others and what is expected of us. Although we do not have to adopt the norms of groups with which we identify, they have a powerful influence on our behavior. To be accepted as a member of our cultural group often requires that our behavior is socially acceptable. For example, African Americans sometimes identify those among them who think and act stereotypically like white Americans, referring to them by the derogatory term Oreo (black on the outside but white on the inside). In some Asian countries, the equivalent term is banana (yellow on the outside, white on the inside). Norms are enforced by sanctions (punishments) for noncompliance. ○ Sanctions can be automatic in that the violator’s action carries its own penalty: For example, the sanctions that may apply to those who wear casual clothing to a job interview (not getting the job). Alternatively, other reference group members can punish the violator—for example, by excluding them from a group. The value orientations of different cultures (e.g., individualistic versus collective) provide a general way of thinking about various specific societal norms that help us to know what to expect and how to behave in a given society. But if we merely understand the norms of a society, this is insufficient for us to understand and predict cross-cultural interactions. Societal norms do not all apply in all situations, and managers must be sensitive to the situation, judging when different norms are important and acting accordingly. Social groups only enforce norms when they perform at least one of the following functions: Making the group’s survival easier—for example, by protecting it from other groups Increasing the predictability of group member’s behavior Reducing embarrassment for group members Communicating the central values of the group—that is, clarifying the group’s identity Therefore, an individual’s behavior is influenced by the cultural norms of society, but only to the extent that a norm is relevant to the particular situation. In different situations within the same society, people apply societal norms with different historical origins Norms guide scripts for particular situations. We often learn our scripts from members of our cultural group, who pass them on and reinforce them. ○ For example, most Chinese people are strongly influenced to be respectful and obedient to superiors when they are present or even indirectly involved in a work situation.This situational cue automatically invokes respect and obedience. It would be dangerous for an American supervisor in a Chinese factory to joke to their fellow workers about the incompetence of the boss. Even if the Chinese workers also thought that the boss was incompetent, they would never say so publicly. The American’s action, commonplace in the United States, is culturally inappropriate in China. Much of our behavior is an almost automatic response influenced by cultural norms. How we respond to others’ behavior depends, in part, on our ability to perceive it. Selective Perception Perception is the process by which we interpret the information received through our senses and thereby give meaning to what is going on around us. The environment presents us with much more information than we can deal with. We therefore rely on Type 1 cognition and automatically screen out much of what we see and hear. What we perceive and what we screen out are influenced by our characteristics, those of the person (or object) being perceived, and the situation. As individuals perceive the world, they have goals that focus their attention on information that will help meet those goals. ○ For example, subordinates awaiting instructions will attend to their superior. Being in the workplace prepares people to be on the alert for work-related information. ○ But perceivers can be distracted by cues to which they are not attending: For example, fire alarms catch everyone’s attention, at least momentarily. Sights, sounds, and smells that are extreme or unusual receive attention and thereby distract. The cues in the environment that a person perceives are shaped by the schemas and scripts that they use from habit. Selective perception: The process in which a person only perceives what they desire to, and sets aside or ignores other perceptions or viewpoints. ○ The fact that different people who are presented with the same stimulus can perceive it differently is called selective perception. ★ Of particular importance to international management are differences in the way people from different cultures perceive both events and each other. As we are socialized into particular cultural groups, we learn how to perceive. From prevailing cultural patterns, we gradually prioritize the stimuli to which we should attend. They become integrated in our schemas and scripts. With others from our culture, we share certain expectations and understandings of situations. For example, Mexican and U.S. children, when presented with pictures (stimuli) of both a bullfight and a baseball game, perceived them differently. The Mexican children recalled primarily the bullfight, whereas the U.S. children recalled primarily the baseball game. These two cultural groups had learned to attend to particular stimuli. Anyone observing an unfamiliar sporting event for the first time can attest to selective perception. For example, one research study reported that people from China and Australia differed in their perceptions of social episodes (recurring interaction sequences such as meeting someone for lunch or visiting a doctor). When we perceive people, a key part of our perception is whether a person is categorized as a member of our in-group. A number of factors seem to influence this: Certain category indicators, such as race and gender, may be universal indicators of group membership. If the number of different others is small, their distinctiveness against the wider population may be a primary categorization factor. For example, in rural Japan, Europeans are obvious.  The extent to which a person is typical of a particular group influences categorization into that group. Non-typical persons are harder to categorize. Speech is important: Differences in accent, syntax, or grammar are important cues for group membership. The most dramatic speech difference is, of course, the use of a foreign language. Finally, interactions with another group will enhance the ability to categorize them. For example, being brought up in New York City makes it easier to categorize the many different ethnic groups there. An important effect of categorizing others as out-group members is that once categorized, they will be perceived as being more similar to each other than are in-group members. We see differences between members of our own cultural group but perceive people from other cultures as similar. For example, to non-Japanese, all Japanese people tend to seem very similar in appearance and behavior. You have probably heard the phrase, referring to an out-group, “They all look the same to me.” Selective perception also depends on the characteristics of what is being perceived. We tend to pay more attention to information that is distinctive or somehow inconsistent with what we expect. We recall more accurately the behavior of members of another culture that seems “out of place” or uncharacteristic of our culture. For example, a colorfully dressed man will stand out among the designer suits of a giant corporation. When we are confronted with information contrary to our existing views, we also filter what we perceive through: Selective avoidance: We “tune it out” by diverting our attention elsewhere from information that challenges existing beliefs. Perceived Similarity and Attraction Our perceptual bias in favor of our own group has an additional effect on cross-cultural interactions. Perceptions of similarity lead to interpersonal attraction—we tend to be attracted to people who we see as similar to us because this similarity upholds our view of the world and the way it should be. ○ Other similarities, such as those of communication style, religion, race, and of course culture, can predict interpersonal attraction. In fact, we may be biologically programmed to respond positively to similarity of all kinds. We also look to others in order to obtain what is called consensual validation. When someone agrees with us, this agreement confirms our view. Disagreement has the opposite effect. Much research supports the idea that similarity leads to interpersonal attraction. Regardless of our other biases, other things being equal, perceptions of similarity lead to more positive interactions. We selectively perceive others in a certain way because of socialization in our culture. However, we also rely on expectations of how people from other cultures will behave. Stereotypical Expectations Stereotypes are like schemas. We categorize groups of people according to what they look like and how they act. The formation of stereotypes is an example of the natural process of social categorization. In using these categories, we simplify a lot of information that we obtain from what goes on around us. Stereotypes affect not just how we see the cultural group and expect its members to act but also how we feel about them. Although stereotypes need not be negative, they often are so that stereotypes are often linked to prejudice and even discrimination. National Stereotypes National stereotype: A fixed, over-generalized belief about people from a particular country. People can hold intense stereotypes about other national cultures, even though they have never met anyone from those cultures. These cultural stereotypes are often associated with other groups with which one’s culture has had a long history of association. The suggestion, made in previous chapters, that we can categorize cultures based on a limited number of dimensions is a form of national stereotyping. Unlike much stereotyping, this type of stereotyping is at least based on systematic information. This presents us with a simple, some would say too-simple, representation of a cultural group. However, if we are aware of both the helpful and the potentially destructive influences of stereotyping, these average cultural expectations can be useful. Stereotypes are based on limited information about others. We use very basic physical or social evidence (e.g., skin color or country of birth) to categorize people and to organize information about them. Once this categorization has occurred, we apply the stereotype to the same degree to each individual in the category. For example, if you have had little or no contact with Chinese people, your stereotype might consist almost entirely of information gained from secondary sources, such as films or television, and you would expect all Chinese people to behave in a certain way. The opportunity for inaccuracy in your expectation of typical Chinese behavior is. Resistance to New Information Once stereotypes are formed, stereotypical expectations tend to become self-perpetuating. We tend to reconstruct information about the category (culture) to be consistent with our stereotype and to behave toward members of the culture in ways that confirm our expectations. If there is information that is inconsistent with our stereotype, we may simply not notice it (selective perception), or we may discount it as not representative, thereby maintaining the stereotype. ○ For instance, when confronted with a Japanese business person behaving in a very Western way,—for example, by using informal greetings—we discount the behavior as being atypical and maintain our stereotypical expectation that Japanese businesspeople are formal. Stereotype Complexity and Evaluation Because we learn our stereotypes, we tend to have more complex stereotypes about categories with which we are familiar.  Because we have the most familiarity with our own culture, we have more complex mental pictures (schemas) of it than we do of other cultures. This complexity explains why we expect people in our own culture to show more differences than do people in other cultures. However, when we evaluate new information about an unfamiliar culture about which we will most likely have a very simple stereotype, we do so more extremely (more positively if the information is positive and more negatively if the information is negative). Interestingly, bicultural people seem to have more complex schema of both their cultures than do monocultural people in each culture. This suggests that significant exposure to another culture may increase one’s ability to detect, process, and organize cultural information. Social Dominance National stereotypes can also be explained by social dominance theory, which suggests that within every society, certain groups are dominant over others and enjoy a greater amount of privilege. Similarly, at a global level, there may be a generally accepted ranking of nationalities based on status. High status can be attached to a nation because of its economic dominance or other desired characteristics. Accordingly, a nation’s high or low status will influence the attitude of others toward it and their attachment to it. Social dominance theory: A theory of intergroup relations that focuses on the maintenance and stability of group-based social hierarchies. As discussed previously, the usefulness of stereotypical expectations about members of another culture may be increased by the following: Mental images containing accurate information Recognition of the positive or negative feelings about the cultural group that are invariably attached to the stereotype The ability to adjust our expectations based on new information about the group Differential Attributions The concept of attribution helps us to understand and react to our environment by linking our observation of an event to its causes. One way that cultures are all similar is that their members use similar mental processes to search for and decide the causes of other people’s behavior. For any behavior we observe, we might assign any number of causes: (“Why is the girl running?” “She is running because she enjoys it”; “she is running because she wants to win the race”; “she is running because someone is chasing her”; “she is running because the shop she is going to will close soon”). The central distinction is between factors that are internal to the individual (personality, motivation, cultural values [first two examples above]) and factors external to the individual (last two examples above).  Internally caused behaviors are under the control of the individual, and externally caused behaviors are forced on the person by the situation. In order to assign causes for behavior, we rely on cues from the situation that indicate the extent to which individuals are in control, such as whether or not their behavior is particular to similar situations and consistent over time. Inconclusive Information Often, the situational cues that we rely on to make attributions are inconclusive. When we can’t determine the cause of behavior, we make a judgment based on information we already have about the individual. (Oh, that’s Katie—she always runs,” versus “I’ve never seen her run before—there must be something wrong!”) In cross-cultural interactions, we might rely on our stereotypical expectations of a culture to fill in the gaps. Alternatively, we can project our own cultural behavior on the situation. Attribution Error When we attribute the cause of a person’s behavior, we are influenced by whether or not the person is a member of our own cultural group. Because we derive part of our self-identity from our association with our cultural group, we tend to be biased in favor of it. We therefore tend to attribute desirable actions by members of our in-group to internal causes but desirable actions by out-group members to external causes. ○ If members of our cultural group exhibit positive behavior (e.g., perform well on a task), we tend to attribute that behavior to their ability or effort (“Our national team won because of their skill.”). ○ In contrast, when we observe the same behavior by members of another cultural group, we tend to attribute it to luck or other favorable circumstances (“The foreign team won because the referee favored them.”). Biased belief systems about members of one’s own national culture are common. They include favoring products coming from one’s own country, the so-called country-of-origin effect. Ultimate attribution error: The tendency to attribute negative outgroup and positive in-group behavior to the individual and to attribute positive out-group and negative in-group behavior to external factors. Fundamental attribution error: The tendency people have to overemphasize personal characteristics and ignore situational factors in judging others’ behavior. Cultural Differences in Attribution Bias The common tendency to attribute any behavior to characteristics of the individual (e.g., “She’s poor because she’s lazy.”) and to underestimate the effects of the situation (e.g., “She’s poor because of government policy.”) is called the Fundamental attribution error. This effect has been found to be much more obvious in North America and Europe than in Asia. For example, one study found that U.S. people generally explained events by talking about individual characteristics: “Her new venture succeeded because of her good ideas and hard work”; whereas Indian people preferred to attribute the same events to the situation: “Her new venture succeeded because market conditions were favorable at the time.” In another study, Chinese people were more likely to explain murders in terms of situational or societal factors: “He killed because poverty forced him into a life of crime” whereas U.S. people explained murders in terms of characteristics of the murderer: “He killed because he was a bad person.” This is not to say that Asians always attribute behavior to external conditions or U.S. people to individual characteristics, but they may be more likely to do so. Our interactions with culturally different others partly depend on the causes to which we attribute their behavior. Cultural differences influence these attributions through both our expectations of behavior in the other culture and our interpretation of situational cues. Usually we can expect differences in the attributions for the behavior of members of our own culture compared with members of other cultures. Cross-Cultural Interaction Model We have now identified several mechanisms through which culture influences behavior: cultural schemas and scripts, norms, selective perceptions, stereotyping, social dominance, and internal and external attributions. Below are the processes of cross-cultural interaction typical of those that occur regularly in international management. It highlights the effect of cultural differences. At each step of the sequence, we make inferences about how culture influences behavior. Figure 4.2 represents the processes of cross-cultural interaction typical of those that occur regularly in international management. It highlights the effect of cultural differences. At each step of the sequence, we make inferences about the how culture influences behavior. Figure 4.2 assumes as a starting point some behavior of a person from another culture. The person might behave according to a culturally based script for the situation or might adjust their behavior to meet other expectations. Situational cues determine the extent to which the situation brings to mind an observing manager’s pre-existing script (Type 1 cognition). If the manager has no relevant script, they will think about how to behave and how such behavior might be perceived (Type 2 cognition). Next, the manager interprets the meaning of these actions and may be influenced by culturally biased selective perception, possibly categorizing the other person as a member of another culture (out-group). The manager will be influenced by whether the behavior matches a pre-existing expectation. Behavior consistent with expectations will result in an automatic categorization (Type 1 cognition), whereas information that differs from expectations must be processed more thoroughly (Type 2 cognition). Figure 4.2 assumes as a starting point some behavior of a person from another culture. The person might behave according to a culturally based script for the situation or might adjust their behavior to meet other expectations. Situational cues determine the extent to which the situation brings to mind an observing manager’s pre-existing script (Type 1 cognition). If the manager has no relevant script, they will think about how to behave and how such behavior might be perceived (Type 2 cognition). Next, the manager interprets the meaning of these actions and may be influenced by culturally biased selective perception, possibly categorizing the other person as a member of another culture (out-group). The manager will be influenced by whether the behavior matches a pre-existing expectation. Behavior consistent with expectations will result in an automatic categorization (Type 1 cognition), whereas information that differs from expectations must be processed more thoroughly (Type 2 cognition). In the last phase, the manager’s actions will depend on the attributions. If behavior is attributed to a familiar cause, the manager’s response can be scripted. If, however, the behavior does not fit an existing category, the manager may find this impossible and will have to invent a new response by drawing from other sources of information to anticipate possible reactions. The other person’s reactions start another interaction sequence. The ability to adjust old scripts and create new ones is a significant asset to managers who conduct cross-cultural interactions. In international organizations, such sequences between coworkers, between managers and subordinates, between negotiators, and among work-group members play themselves out day after day. QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION What is social cognition? How are its main components affected by culture? How do culturally stereotypic expectations affect other aspects of thought and behavior? Can cultural stereotypes be useful? If so, how? What do we mean by Type 1 and Type 2 cognition? How do culturally based attributions affect the way people draw conclusions? How does culture affect each of the steps between noticing an event and responding to it? Why are cultural differences in self-concept so important to motivation? Key Terms ➔ Social cognition explains how, based on our past experiences, we develop mental images that include the specific features of an object, event, or situation. ➔ Schema a mental framework or concepts that helps organize and interpret information. ➔ Script a sequence of expected behaviors for a given situation. ➔ Self-schema ideas and beliefs about ourselves. ➔ Reference groups groups that influence our opinions, beliefs, attitudes, and behavior. ➔ Cultural identity is part of a person’s self-conception that is related to nationality, ethnicity, religion, social class, generation, locality, or any kind of social group that has its own distinct culture. ➔ Cultural norms are standards of acceptable behavior that are shared within a cultural group. ➔ Selective perception is the process in which a person only perceives what they desire to, and sets aside or ignores other perceptions or viewpoints. ➔ Selective avoidance we “tune it out” by diverting our attention elsewhere from information that challenges existing beliefs. ➔ Stereotypes are like schemas.; we categorize groups of people according to what they look like and how they act. ➔ National stereotypes are fixed, overgeneralized beliefs about people from a particular country. ➔ Social dominance theory a theory of intergroup relations that focuses on the maintenance and stability of group-based social hierarchies. ➔ Ultimate attribution error the tendency to attribute negative outgroup and positive in-group behavior to the individual and to attribute positive out-group and negative in-group behavior to external factors. ➔ Fundamental attribution error the tendency people have to overemphasize personal characteristics and ignore situational factors in judging others’ behavior.