Ethnic Group Differences in Lay Philosophies of Behavior in the United States

Abstract

This study tested whether national representative samples of Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, and Whites in the United States varied in their endorsements of dispositionist, situationist, and interactionist lay philosophies of behavior. Results were generally inconsistent with a lay philosophy of behavior account for ethnic differences in attribution tendencies. Specifically, Asians, Blacks, and Hispanics more strongly endorsed a dispositionist lay philosophy of behavior than did Whites. The only other ethnic group difference the authors found was that Blacks endorsed a situationist lay philosophy of behavior more strongly than did Whites. Endorsements of an interactionist lay philosophy did not differ across ethnic groups. Results also revealed that age, income, and education had more consistent and sometimes larger effects than ethnic category on endorsement of different lay philosophies of behavior. Implications are discussed.

Keywords

lay philosophies ethnicity race attribution

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aiken, L. S. , & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Chiu, C. , Hong, Y. , & Dweck, C. S. (1997). Lay dispositionism and implicit theories of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 19-30.

Choi, I. , Nisbett, R. E. , & Norenzayan, A. (1999). Causal attribution across cultures: Variation and universality. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 47-63.

Coon, H. M. , & Kemmelmeier, M. (2001). Cultural orientations in the United States: (Re)-examining differences among ethnic groups. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 348-364.

Gilbert, D. T. , & Malone, P. S. (1995). The correspondence bias. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 21–38.

Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: John Wiley.

Jones, E. E. , & Harris, V. A. (1967). The attribution of attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 3, 1–24.

Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton.

Knowles, E. D. , Morris, M. W. , Chiu, Y. , & Hong, Y. (2001). Culture and the process of person perception: Evidence for automaticity among East Asians in correcting for situational influences on behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1344-1356.

10.

Massey, D. S. , & Fischer, M. J. (2001). Segregation of Asians in U.S. metropolitan areas: 1980-1990. EurAmerica, 31, 431-460.

11.

Miller, J. G. (1984). Culture and the development of everyday social explanation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 961-978.

12.

Newman, L. S. (1991). Why are traits inferred spontaneously? A developmental approach. Social Cognition, 9, 221–253.

13.

Nisbett, R. E. (2003). The geography of thought: How Asians and Westerners think differently... and why. New York: Free Press.

14.

Nisbett, R. E. , & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

15.

Norenzayan, A. , Choi, I. , & Nisbett, R. E. (2002). Cultural similarities and differences in social inference: Evidence from behavioral predictions and lay theories of behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 109-120.

16.

Ross, L. , Amabile, T. M. , & Steinmetz, J. L. (1977). Social roles, social control, and biases on social perception processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 485-494.

17.

Ross, L. , & Nisbett, R. E. (1991). The person and the situation: Perspectives of social psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.

18.

Sears, D. O. (1986). College sophomores in the laboratory: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology's view of human nature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 515-530.

19.

Zárate, M. A. , Uleman, J. S. , & Voils, C. I. (2001). Effects of culture and processing goals on the activation and binding of trait concepts. Social Cognition, 19, 295-323.