1. Culture and perceptual inference: Inferring the identity of an object from its parts or its blurred image Keiko Ishii (Hokkaido University) Collaborators: Takafumi Tsukasaki (Hokkaido University) and Shinobu Kitayama (University of Michigan)

2. A cultural difference for Starbucks

4. Cultural differences in cognition Nisbett, Peng, Choi, & Norenzayan (2001, Psych Review)  North Americans: Analytic and context- independent cognition  East Asians (e.g., Japanese): Holistic and context-dependent cognition

5. Cultural differences in cognition - Absolute task - Accuracy: Americans > Japanese Frame and line task (FLT) (Kitayama, Duffy, Kawamura, & Larsen, 2003, Psych Science)

6. Cultural differences in cognition - Relative task - Accuracy: Japanese > Americans Frame and line task (FLT) (Kitayama, Duffy, Kawamura, & Larsen, 2003, Psych Science)

7. Identify an object from its parts Cultural differences in perceptual inference? Parts Blurred Accuracy Americans > East Asians Identify an object from its blurred image Accuracy East Asians > Americans

8. Study 1: Method Participants: 30 Japanese and 23 American undergraduates 90 trials (= 30 objects x 3 types)

9. Three types of images SingleMultipleBlurred

10. Study 1: Method Participants: 30 Japanese and 23 American undergraduates 90 trials (= 30 objects x 3 types)

11. Procedure ＋ Question 1 Space bar 300msec 3000msec

12. Study 1: Method Participants: 30 Japanese and 23 American undergraduates 90 trials (= 30 objects x 3 types) Task: Report the name of each object There was no difference in frequency of daily exposure to the objects between the two cultures

13. Study 1: Results (DV = Accuracy) F (2, 82) = 8.22, p <.001 p <.01 Parts A Parts B Blurred Japanese Americans Single part Multiple parts

14. Study 1: Results in the first block p <.01 F (2, 82) = 4.37, p <.02 Single parts Multiple parts Blurred Japanese Americans

15. Study 2 Study 1: Consistent with the prediction Two problems  Small difference in the blurred condition: Influence by a carry-over effect?  Type of image as a between-subject variable  Running the study for Japanese and Americans in different rooms: No guarantee that the experimental conditions were identical  Comparison between Asian and European Americans in the US

16. Study 2: Method Participants: 31 Asian American and 53 European American undergraduates 90 trials (= 30 objects x 3 times, either multiple parts or blurred image) Task & materials: Same as in Study 1

17. Study 2: Results (DV = Accuracy) p <.01 F (1, 80) = 4.98, p <.05 Parts Blurred Asian Americans European Americans

18. Study 2: Results in the first block p <.01 F (1, 80) = 4.51, p <.05 Parts Blurred Asian Americans European Americans

19. Discussion Cultural differences in perceptual inference  European Americans were more accurate than Japanese and Asian Americans for parts  The tendency was reversed for blurred image, although the difference was small  People may constantly rely on gestalt information regardless of cultures

20. Discussion What task is diagnostic of holistic cognition?  A task in which participants are capable of perceiving elements holistically in a context while they perceive each element analytically  The relative task in Frame and Line Task (FLT)

21. Discussion Asians were holistic regardless of test locations  Rather than exposure to perceptual environment and language (i.e., English) in North American cultures, daily communication and practices in Asian societies have a larger influence in perception

22. Cultural differences in perceptual inference? What is the original object? Parts image

23. Cultural differences in perceptual inference? Blurred image

24. Cultural differences in cognition Masuda & Nisbett (2001, JPSP) Three fish are swimming. The middle one is the smallest among them… Americans This is a scene of underwater. Water is somehow green… Japanese