在文化紧张和宽松的背景下对违反规范和伊斯兰化威胁的反应:德国与俄罗斯的跨文化比较。

Culture and Brain Pub Date : 2020-01-01 Epub Date: 2018-12-13 DOI:10.1007/s40167-018-0073-3
Liza Prentice, Johannes Klackl, Dmitrij Agroskin, Igor Grossmann, Yuri Alexandrov, Vladimir Apanovich, Boris Bezdenezhnykh, Eva Jonas
{"title":"在文化紧张和宽松的背景下对违反规范和伊斯兰化威胁的反应:德国与俄罗斯的跨文化比较。","authors":"Liza Prentice,&nbsp;Johannes Klackl,&nbsp;Dmitrij Agroskin,&nbsp;Igor Grossmann,&nbsp;Yuri Alexandrov,&nbsp;Vladimir Apanovich,&nbsp;Boris Bezdenezhnykh,&nbsp;Eva Jonas","doi":"10.1007/s40167-018-0073-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Prior research shows that North Americans and Western Europeans react to threats with defensive strategies based on behavioral approach vs. inhibition systems (BAS/BIS)-i.e., a desire to approach a goal or to avoid a threat. In the present research, we explored whether this phenomenon is more pronounced in tight cultures (e.g., Germany) as compared to loose cultures (e.g., Russia), testing how Germans and Russians respond to societal threats. We expected that due to the higher levels of cultural tightness, Germans would show stronger defensive reactions to threats than Russians. Additionally, we investigated the role of need for tightness (i.e., need for strict regulation of social order) in threat management processes. In Study 1, Germans recalling violations of societal norms produced stronger rightward bias on the line bisection task than Russians, indicative of greater BAS activation in Germans than in Russians. In Study 2, we used frontal alpha asymmetry, providing the first cross-cultural test of BIS-BAS reactions utilizing neuronal markers. In this study, presentation of societal threat in a video portraying Islamic immigration as a large-scale violation of social norms led to higher BIS activation among Germans than among Russians, if their need for tightness was high. We discuss the role of tightness, need for tightness, and type of threat for cross-cultural particularities of threat-induced motivational shifts.</p>","PeriodicalId":10837,"journal":{"name":"Culture and Brain","volume":"8 1","pages":"46-69"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s40167-018-0073-3","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reaction to norm transgressions and Islamization threat in culturally tight and loose contexts: a cross-cultural comparison of Germany versus Russia.\",\"authors\":\"Liza Prentice,&nbsp;Johannes Klackl,&nbsp;Dmitrij Agroskin,&nbsp;Igor Grossmann,&nbsp;Yuri Alexandrov,&nbsp;Vladimir Apanovich,&nbsp;Boris Bezdenezhnykh,&nbsp;Eva Jonas\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40167-018-0073-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Prior research shows that North Americans and Western Europeans react to threats with defensive strategies based on behavioral approach vs. inhibition systems (BAS/BIS)-i.e., a desire to approach a goal or to avoid a threat. In the present research, we explored whether this phenomenon is more pronounced in tight cultures (e.g., Germany) as compared to loose cultures (e.g., Russia), testing how Germans and Russians respond to societal threats. We expected that due to the higher levels of cultural tightness, Germans would show stronger defensive reactions to threats than Russians. Additionally, we investigated the role of need for tightness (i.e., need for strict regulation of social order) in threat management processes. In Study 1, Germans recalling violations of societal norms produced stronger rightward bias on the line bisection task than Russians, indicative of greater BAS activation in Germans than in Russians. In Study 2, we used frontal alpha asymmetry, providing the first cross-cultural test of BIS-BAS reactions utilizing neuronal markers. In this study, presentation of societal threat in a video portraying Islamic immigration as a large-scale violation of social norms led to higher BIS activation among Germans than among Russians, if their need for tightness was high. We discuss the role of tightness, need for tightness, and type of threat for cross-cultural particularities of threat-induced motivational shifts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10837,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Culture and Brain\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"46-69\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s40167-018-0073-3\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Culture and Brain\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40167-018-0073-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2018/12/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Culture and Brain","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40167-018-0073-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/12/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

先前的研究表明,北美人和西欧人对威胁的反应是基于行为方法和抑制系统(BAS/BIS)的防御策略。即接近目标或避免威胁的愿望。在目前的研究中,我们探讨了这种现象是否在严格的文化(如德国)中比在宽松的文化(如俄罗斯)中更为明显,测试了德国人和俄罗斯人如何应对社会威胁。我们预计,由于文化紧密程度较高,德国人对威胁的防御反应会比俄罗斯人更强。此外,我们还调查了严密性需求(即严格规范社会秩序的需求)在威胁管理过程中的作用。在研究1中,德国人在回忆违反社会规范的行为时比俄罗斯人在平分线任务中产生了更强的右倾倾向,这表明德国人比俄罗斯人更容易激活BAS。在研究2中,我们使用了额叶α不对称,首次利用神经元标记物对BIS-BAS反应进行了跨文化测试。在这项研究中,在一段将伊斯兰移民描绘成大规模违反社会规范的视频中,社会威胁的呈现导致德国人比俄罗斯人更容易激活BIS,如果他们对严格的需求很高的话。我们讨论了紧致性、紧致性的需要和威胁类型在威胁诱发动机转变的跨文化特殊性中的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Reaction to norm transgressions and Islamization threat in culturally tight and loose contexts: a cross-cultural comparison of Germany versus Russia.

Prior research shows that North Americans and Western Europeans react to threats with defensive strategies based on behavioral approach vs. inhibition systems (BAS/BIS)-i.e., a desire to approach a goal or to avoid a threat. In the present research, we explored whether this phenomenon is more pronounced in tight cultures (e.g., Germany) as compared to loose cultures (e.g., Russia), testing how Germans and Russians respond to societal threats. We expected that due to the higher levels of cultural tightness, Germans would show stronger defensive reactions to threats than Russians. Additionally, we investigated the role of need for tightness (i.e., need for strict regulation of social order) in threat management processes. In Study 1, Germans recalling violations of societal norms produced stronger rightward bias on the line bisection task than Russians, indicative of greater BAS activation in Germans than in Russians. In Study 2, we used frontal alpha asymmetry, providing the first cross-cultural test of BIS-BAS reactions utilizing neuronal markers. In this study, presentation of societal threat in a video portraying Islamic immigration as a large-scale violation of social norms led to higher BIS activation among Germans than among Russians, if their need for tightness was high. We discuss the role of tightness, need for tightness, and type of threat for cross-cultural particularities of threat-induced motivational shifts.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Culture and trait inferences from facial cues Investigating individual differences in left-right confusion among healthy Japanese young adults The multicultural neuropsychological scale (MUNS): validity, reliability, normative data and cross-cultural evidence Self-assertive interdependence in Mongolian culture: evidence from cognitive anthropology Impact of social economic development on positive and negative affect among Chinese college students: a cross-temporal meta-analysis, 2001–2016
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1