International Insights

Cognitive Differences between Westerners and East Asians, February 9, 2005

In the past, researchers believed that all peoples had the same cognitive patterns, same "mental apparatus," and the same way of thinking. However, an increasing number of cognitive studies show that different cultures have different ways of interpreting their surroundings. Cognitive studies look at the mental processes and faculties that people use to gain knowledge and understanding of the world around them.

In an effort to increase knowledge about this interesting new field of study, the Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research invited noted cognition scholar, Dr. Robert Nisbett, to speak at NIH as part of its Behavioral and Social Sciences Research Lecture Series. His October 21, 2004, lecture, "Culture and Point of View: How Culture Influences Our Thinking," covered the cognitive differences between Westerners and East Asians. The studies he highlighted included American, Chinese, and Japanese people.

Western vs. East Asian Logic

In summary, studies have shown that Westerners use logic that is analytical in nature, which means it:

• Focuses on objects and their attributes rather than the surrounding context, field or background.
• Uses attributes of the objects to categorize life.
• Uses universal laws about these categories to organize life.
• Sees these laws as being deterministic.
• Uses formal logic to derive laws and to evaluate propositions.

East Asians use logic that is more holistic, which means it:

• Sees the context, field or background more important than the object.
• Uses the relationship between the object and its field to explain behavior. Stresses the relationship between the object and the context within which it is situated.
• Has a marked absence of belief in universal laws.
• Relies more on experiential knowledge than formal logic.
• Uses a dialectical approach that looks for the middle ground between differing propositions rather than assigning right and wrong.

Explaining Cognitive Differences

Nisbett speculates that these vastly different ways of thinking stem from the philosophy of ancient Greece and ancient China. The Greek philosophy, which greatly influenced Western modern thought, developed from a belief in the unchanging, immutable essence of objects and universal laws.

Ancient Chinese philosophy was a way of thinking that did not use foundational principles, but rather experiential precedent-based knowledge. It was developed with the idea that laws were not deterministic since change happened all the time.

Another potential cause of cognitive differences comes from the social structures found in the two cultures. The Chinese society is more collectivist in nature. It values and reinforces relationships between individuals. Everyone is held accountable for the success of the group as well as the behavior of other members. In this environment, individuals are more prone to pay attention to context and see the world in form of social networks.

Western society, on the other hand, is more individualistic. It values individual rights and individuality above the needs of the group. Relationships in this society are much looser and more fluid. The result is a more individual-centered way of thinking that expects the environment to adapt to the individual. Life is determined by objects such as performance goals with little thought to its effect on others.

Implications

The implications of these findings are great. A more individual-centered way of thinking can impede most Westerners from viewing the effects and consequences of the interaction between and object and its surrounding context. For example, the abstract way of thinking might prevent a Westerner from seeing the important role a personal relationship plays in facilitating professional relationships with an East Asian colleague.

Another implication, and probably the most important one, is that there is no inherently right way to perceive the world. When individuals make decisions or analyze events, they are using a manmade cognitive structure that is pulling from a shared belief system, transmitted through formal and informal institutionalized means such as school, family, and friends.

Transferring this knowledge to the realm of grant or research work involving foreign components, it is important to keep in mind that there is more than one way of doing things and what we think the world is like and what it really is are two different things.

Contact for Article Questions or Comments

Maryam Rahman-Esene
Office of International Extramural Activities, NIAID International Awards
Email: rahmanesenem@niaid.nih.gov
Phone: +1 301 451-7372

Read more articles at International Insights.