In this chapter, we aim to integrate the existing evidence on the cultural grounding of well-bein... more In this chapter, we aim to integrate the existing evidence on the cultural grounding of well-being and health and to delineate a cultural approach to understand optimal human functioning. The theoretical framework of a cultural approach is presented at the beginning. Building on this framework, we first review findings on cultural differences in conceptualizations of well-being and health. We then provide an overview of evidence on cultural differences in predictors of well-being and health. Subsequently, we review studies that show how cultural contexts and social structural factors (i.e., social hierarchy) work together and sometimes interact with each other to influence well-being and health. Future directions are discussed at the end.). Such cultural systems can shape how individuals view, experience, and strive for a good life and "optimal functioning" (which we define here as well-being and health). Thus, cultural contexts play a pivotal role in shaping optimal human functioning. In this chapter, we first propose and outline a cultural approach to the study of optimal human functioning. We then review findings on cultural differences in the meanings of well-being and health, and cultural influences on predictors of, and pathways to, well-being and health. Subsequently, we review a social structural factor, namely, social hierarchy, that has been shown to influence well-being and health; in particular, cultural contexts influence and moderate the meaning of social hierarchy and its effects on well-being and health. We conclude with future directions. APPROACHES TO WELL-BEING AND HEALTH To situate a cultural approach, we first review existing influential approaches to well-being and health, and the role culture plays, or does not play, in each approach. We then outline a cultural approach to examining well-being and health.
The present research proposes that Buddhist teachings involve a non influence emotion regulation ... more The present research proposes that Buddhist teachings involve a non influence emotion regulation strategy, an emotion regulation strategy that consists of individuals not influencing their emotions in any way, more so than do Protestant teachings. We examined religious teachings surrounding the strategy, practitioners’ use of the strategy, and its links with depression. Further, the nature of this non-influence strategy was explored. Across three studies that employed student, community, and online samples, results showed that in fact Buddhist practitioners were more likely than were Protestant practitioners to report that their religion teaches them to use non-influence strategies of emotion regulation, and that they use noninfluence strategies of emotion regulation. Moreover, the use of non-influence emotion regulation strategies was predictive of lower depressive symptoms across both religions (Studies 1 and 2). Additionally, it was found that to practitioners, non-influence strategies of emotion regulation are active, purposeful strategies and, especially to Buddhist practitioners, they involve acceptance of emotions (Study 2). Furthermore, religion was indirectly linked to the behavioral preference for a non-influence strategy through the self-reported general use of a non-influence emotion regulation strategy (Study 3). Implications for research on religion, self-regulation, and mental health are briefly discussed.
People generally perceive positive emotions more favorably than negative emotions and try to incr... more People generally perceive positive emotions more favorably than negative emotions and try to increase positive emotions and decrease negative emotions. However, the extent to which people hold such pro-positive and contra-negative orientations to emotions differs across cultures. We review research that examines cultural influences on the valuation, regulation, and experiences of positive and negative emotions. Based on this research, we propose that a propositive and contra-negative system of emotion is more prevalent in Western, especially American cultural contexts, whereas a balanced system of emotion is more dominant in East Asian cultural contexts. At the end, we propose directions for future research.
Interpersonal influence and interpersonal adjustment play crucial roles in structuring social int... more Interpersonal influence and interpersonal adjustment play crucial roles in structuring social interactions. However, not much is known about whether their consequences are culturally contingent. We hypothesized that in order to effectively influence others, people need to employ a perceptual style that serves their cultural imperative. Specifically, we predicted that in the United States, interpersonal influence fosters an analytic, context-independent perceptual style that helps people focus on their goal; however, in Japan, where the cultural imperative is to attend to other people and fit into social contexts, this pattern may be absent or reversed. In two studies, we tested this hypothesis by measuring interpersonal interactions (Study 1) and then by manipulating interpersonal interactions (Study 2). Overall, the findings support a culturally contingent situated-cognition approach, which highlights not only interpersonal underpinnings of perceptual styles but also the role that culture plays in ascribing meaning to interpersonal interactions.
Growing evidence has demonstrated cultural differences in cognitive processes. Whereas individual... more Growing evidence has demonstrated cultural differences in cognitive processes. Whereas individuals living in interdependent social worlds, as illustrated by East Asian cultures, have been shown to have a more holistic cognitive style, those living in independent social environments, as exemplified by Western cultures, have been shown to have a more analytic cognitive style. Recent evidence has also begun to show the mechanisms underlying cultural differences, both by examining within-cultural differences and by showing effects of sociocultural contexts on cognitive processes. This chapter aims to highlight dynamic relationships between sociocultural contexts and cognitive processes by providing an overview of research on cultural differences and their mechanisms. First, we briefly summarize different approaches to studying cultural differences in cognition. Then, we review studies showing cultural differences in various cognitive processes, by focusing on holistic versus analytic cognition. Finally, we outline recent evidence showing the causes and mechanisms of cultural differences, as well as suggest future directions.
Previous research has shown that there are cultural differences in self-concept consistency acros... more Previous research has shown that there are cultural differences in self-concept consistency across situations. However, little is known about cultural differences in preference consistency over time. The present research examined whether Americans are more consistent in their preferences over time than are Japanese. As hypothesized, there were cultural differences in self-reported (Studies 1 and 2) and actual (Studies 2 and 3) preference consistency over time. Further, cultural differences in preference consistency at the individual level (Study 1) were found to aggregate into collective level differences (Studies 2 and 3) in the consistency of preference trends, such as the popularity of baby names. Implications and future directions are discussed. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Society for Consumer Psychology.
In this chapter, we aim to integrate the existing evidence on the cultural grounding of well-bein... more In this chapter, we aim to integrate the existing evidence on the cultural grounding of well-being and health and to delineate a cultural approach to understand optimal human functioning. The theoretical framework of a cultural approach is presented at the beginning. Building on this framework, we first review findings on cultural differences in conceptualizations of well-being and health. We then provide an overview of evidence on cultural differences in predictors of well-being and health. Subsequently, we review studies that show how cultural contexts and social structural factors (i.e., social hierarchy) work together and sometimes interact with each other to influence well-being and health. Future directions are discussed at the end.). Such cultural systems can shape how individuals view, experience, and strive for a good life and "optimal functioning" (which we define here as well-being and health). Thus, cultural contexts play a pivotal role in shaping optimal human functioning. In this chapter, we first propose and outline a cultural approach to the study of optimal human functioning. We then review findings on cultural differences in the meanings of well-being and health, and cultural influences on predictors of, and pathways to, well-being and health. Subsequently, we review a social structural factor, namely, social hierarchy, that has been shown to influence well-being and health; in particular, cultural contexts influence and moderate the meaning of social hierarchy and its effects on well-being and health. We conclude with future directions. APPROACHES TO WELL-BEING AND HEALTH To situate a cultural approach, we first review existing influential approaches to well-being and health, and the role culture plays, or does not play, in each approach. We then outline a cultural approach to examining well-being and health.
The present research proposes that Buddhist teachings involve a non influence emotion regulation ... more The present research proposes that Buddhist teachings involve a non influence emotion regulation strategy, an emotion regulation strategy that consists of individuals not influencing their emotions in any way, more so than do Protestant teachings. We examined religious teachings surrounding the strategy, practitioners’ use of the strategy, and its links with depression. Further, the nature of this non-influence strategy was explored. Across three studies that employed student, community, and online samples, results showed that in fact Buddhist practitioners were more likely than were Protestant practitioners to report that their religion teaches them to use non-influence strategies of emotion regulation, and that they use noninfluence strategies of emotion regulation. Moreover, the use of non-influence emotion regulation strategies was predictive of lower depressive symptoms across both religions (Studies 1 and 2). Additionally, it was found that to practitioners, non-influence strategies of emotion regulation are active, purposeful strategies and, especially to Buddhist practitioners, they involve acceptance of emotions (Study 2). Furthermore, religion was indirectly linked to the behavioral preference for a non-influence strategy through the self-reported general use of a non-influence emotion regulation strategy (Study 3). Implications for research on religion, self-regulation, and mental health are briefly discussed.
People generally perceive positive emotions more favorably than negative emotions and try to incr... more People generally perceive positive emotions more favorably than negative emotions and try to increase positive emotions and decrease negative emotions. However, the extent to which people hold such pro-positive and contra-negative orientations to emotions differs across cultures. We review research that examines cultural influences on the valuation, regulation, and experiences of positive and negative emotions. Based on this research, we propose that a propositive and contra-negative system of emotion is more prevalent in Western, especially American cultural contexts, whereas a balanced system of emotion is more dominant in East Asian cultural contexts. At the end, we propose directions for future research.
Interpersonal influence and interpersonal adjustment play crucial roles in structuring social int... more Interpersonal influence and interpersonal adjustment play crucial roles in structuring social interactions. However, not much is known about whether their consequences are culturally contingent. We hypothesized that in order to effectively influence others, people need to employ a perceptual style that serves their cultural imperative. Specifically, we predicted that in the United States, interpersonal influence fosters an analytic, context-independent perceptual style that helps people focus on their goal; however, in Japan, where the cultural imperative is to attend to other people and fit into social contexts, this pattern may be absent or reversed. In two studies, we tested this hypothesis by measuring interpersonal interactions (Study 1) and then by manipulating interpersonal interactions (Study 2). Overall, the findings support a culturally contingent situated-cognition approach, which highlights not only interpersonal underpinnings of perceptual styles but also the role that culture plays in ascribing meaning to interpersonal interactions.
Growing evidence has demonstrated cultural differences in cognitive processes. Whereas individual... more Growing evidence has demonstrated cultural differences in cognitive processes. Whereas individuals living in interdependent social worlds, as illustrated by East Asian cultures, have been shown to have a more holistic cognitive style, those living in independent social environments, as exemplified by Western cultures, have been shown to have a more analytic cognitive style. Recent evidence has also begun to show the mechanisms underlying cultural differences, both by examining within-cultural differences and by showing effects of sociocultural contexts on cognitive processes. This chapter aims to highlight dynamic relationships between sociocultural contexts and cognitive processes by providing an overview of research on cultural differences and their mechanisms. First, we briefly summarize different approaches to studying cultural differences in cognition. Then, we review studies showing cultural differences in various cognitive processes, by focusing on holistic versus analytic cognition. Finally, we outline recent evidence showing the causes and mechanisms of cultural differences, as well as suggest future directions.
Previous research has shown that there are cultural differences in self-concept consistency acros... more Previous research has shown that there are cultural differences in self-concept consistency across situations. However, little is known about cultural differences in preference consistency over time. The present research examined whether Americans are more consistent in their preferences over time than are Japanese. As hypothesized, there were cultural differences in self-reported (Studies 1 and 2) and actual (Studies 2 and 3) preference consistency over time. Further, cultural differences in preference consistency at the individual level (Study 1) were found to aggregate into collective level differences (Studies 2 and 3) in the consistency of preference trends, such as the popularity of baby names. Implications and future directions are discussed. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Society for Consumer Psychology.
Uploads
Papers by Brooke Wilken
depression. Further, the nature of this non-influence strategy was explored. Across three studies that employed student, community, and online samples, results showed that in fact Buddhist practitioners were more likely than were Protestant practitioners to report that their religion
teaches them to use non-influence strategies of emotion regulation, and that they use noninfluence strategies of emotion regulation. Moreover, the use of non-influence emotion regulation strategies was predictive of lower depressive symptoms across both religions (Studies 1 and 2). Additionally, it was found that to practitioners, non-influence strategies of emotion
regulation are active, purposeful strategies and, especially to Buddhist practitioners, they involve acceptance of emotions (Study 2). Furthermore, religion was indirectly linked to the behavioral preference for a non-influence strategy through the self-reported general use of a non-influence
emotion regulation strategy (Study 3). Implications for research on religion, self-regulation, and mental health are briefly discussed.
depression. Further, the nature of this non-influence strategy was explored. Across three studies that employed student, community, and online samples, results showed that in fact Buddhist practitioners were more likely than were Protestant practitioners to report that their religion
teaches them to use non-influence strategies of emotion regulation, and that they use noninfluence strategies of emotion regulation. Moreover, the use of non-influence emotion regulation strategies was predictive of lower depressive symptoms across both religions (Studies 1 and 2). Additionally, it was found that to practitioners, non-influence strategies of emotion
regulation are active, purposeful strategies and, especially to Buddhist practitioners, they involve acceptance of emotions (Study 2). Furthermore, religion was indirectly linked to the behavioral preference for a non-influence strategy through the self-reported general use of a non-influence
emotion regulation strategy (Study 3). Implications for research on religion, self-regulation, and mental health are briefly discussed.