W3 – More and More Complex: The Four Basic Social Science Issues (COSI)
In the Method chapter, I was very excited after mentioning the “dynamic construction approach” and the obstacle of what the ‘cultural’ difference is or a confound since it concerns our METU society discussions on the definitions of folklore and tradition. However, throughout the chapter, I did not feel close to having a frame of ‘cultural’ difference due to the complexity of separating variables, in some cases even determining them, and the author’s contradictory arguments and unclear language (although some valuable suggestions such as considering the principles of ‘typicality’ and ‘just minimal difference and asking ‘why’ and ‘how’ questions to participants). I guess cultural psychology is more associated and progressed with matters that cannot be easily clarified.
After the last 3-4 weeks of readings and discussion, I was stuck on explaining almost all group differences by individualism versus collectivism, which is stated as a methodological problem in cultural psychology studies. In recognizing one’s cultural syndromes, the example comparing China and the US adds other dimensions to cultural differences, such as tightness, egalitarianism, homogeneity, and other non-cultural elements, which brightens me. Considering these factors, I remembered that my friend who has been in Malesia for 4 months mentioned that Malays are less judgmental than people in Turkey. Because they are collectivistic too, this difference cannot be explained with interdependence versus independence, it may be beneficial to interpret it with ethnic variation or other non-cultural elements.
It is surprising to learn that in studies most of the participants come from college students is more than just a METU problem with its ratio around 80% of psychological research with its possible consequences of a social status effect or education effect, besides decreased generalizability.
In the approach of culture and situation, the view that it is crucial not only to consider what we are sensitized and attuned to but also what we are not, is enlightening. With the cultural-institutional approach, culture change may be possible by detecting non-internalized behaviors (behaviors that disappear with the absence of situational pressures) and changing institutions in the culture cycle.
After all, this chapter was remarkably informative and explanatory for me, so rather than reflect on it, I need to internalize the material and conceptualize it even maybe by reading again. Throughout the whole semester, I will keep in mind the methodological issues of causation, operationalization, sampling, and interpretation.
‹ W2 – Culture and Mind W4 – Culture Shapes Cognition and Perception ›
Hi, you’re completely right about author’s implicit and unclear language. I may easily say that this kind of relatively techincal topic could have been explained more simply.
Also, the concrete example (I mean, Malaysian friend example…) that you gave is so meaningful because sometimes culture or social psychology topics might be abstract. Furthermore, while I reading your blog I noted a few points to apply to my following writtings; thought organisation and their optimal relation with text were absolutely remarkable.
Lastly, I may be say that you would have a flawless blog if we could see more detail related with the chapter. Yet, as I mentioned before, it’s certainly informative and fluent blog. Thank you.
Dear Burakcan, thank you for writing a comment to your friend.
I think your friend would benefit more from your feedback if it’s focused on the specific areas where you believe their writing could be improved. For this reason, you might want to highlight any gaps or unclear points you noticed in their work. Let’s try to maintain a constructive, critical approach to our feedback.
Best,
Refik