RESUMEN
The negativity bias favours the cultural diffusion of negative beliefs, yet many common (mis)beliefs-naturopathy works, there's a heaven-are positive. Why? People might share 'happy thoughts'-beliefs that might make others happy-to display their kindness. Five experiments conducted among Japanese and English-speaking participants (N = 2412) show that: (i) people higher on communion are more likely to believe and share happier beliefs, by contrast with people higher in competence and dominance; (ii) when they want to appear nice and kind, rather than competent and dominant, people avoid sharing sad beliefs, and instead prefer sharing happy beliefs; (iii) sharing happier beliefs instead of sad beliefs leads to being perceived as nicer and kinder; and (iv) sharing happy beliefs instead of sad beliefs fleads to being perceived as less dominant. Happy beliefs could spread, despite a general negativity bias, because they allow their senders to signal kindness.
RESUMEN
A consistent finding reported in the literature is that epistemically suspect beliefs (e.g., paranormal beliefs) are less frequently endorsed by individuals with a greater tendency to think analytically. However, these results have been observed predominantly in Western participants. In the present work, we explore various individual differences known to predict epistemically suspect beliefs across both Western and Eastern cultures. Across four studies with Japanese (n = 666) and Western (n = 650) individuals, we find that the association between thinking style and beliefs varied as a function of culture. Specifically, while Westerners who scored higher on measures of Type-2 analytic thinking tended to endorse epistemically suspect beliefs less, this association was not observed in Japanese samples, suggesting that the often-observed negative association between analytic thinking and epistemically suspect beliefs may be exclusive to Western individuals. Additionally, we demonstrate that a tendency to think holistically (specifically with regards to causality) is positively associated with the endorsement of epistemically suspect beliefs within both samples. Overall, we discuss how various individual differences predict the endorsement of epistemically suspect beliefs across cultures.
RESUMEN
Many socially significant beliefs are unintuitive, from the harmlessness of GMOs to the efficacy of vaccination, and they are acquired via deference toward individuals who are more confident, more competent or a majority. In the two-step flow model of communication, a first group of individuals acquires some beliefs through deference and then spreads these beliefs more broadly. Ideally, these individuals should be able to explain why they deferred to a given source - to provide arguments from expertise - and others should find these arguments convincing. We test these requirements using a perceptual task with participants from the US and Japan. In Experiment 1, participants were provided with first-hand evidence that they should defer to an expert, leading a majority of participants to adopt the expert's answer. However, when attempting to pass on this answer, only a minority of those participants used arguments from expertise. In Experiment 2, participants receive an argument from expertise describing the expert's competence, instead of witnessing it first-hand. This leads to a significant drop in deference compared with Experiment 1. These experiments highlight significant obstacles to the transmission of unintuitive beliefs.
RESUMEN
Recent research on human behavior has often collected empirical data from the online labor market, through a process known as crowdsourcing. As well as the United States and the major European countries, there are several crowdsourcing services in Japan. For research purpose, Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk) is the widely used platform among those services. Previous validation studies have shown many commonalities between MTurk workers and participants from traditional samples based on not only personality but also performance on reasoning tasks. The present study aims to extend these findings to non-MTurk (i.e., Japanese) crowdsourcing samples in which workers have different ethnic backgrounds from those of MTurk. We conducted three surveys (N = 426, 453, 167, respectively) designed to compare Japanese crowdsourcing workers and university students in terms of their demographics, personality traits, reasoning skills, and attention to instructions. The results generally align with previous studies and suggest that non-MTurk participants are also eligible for behavioral research. Furthermore, small screen devices are found to impair participants' attention to instructions. Several recommendations concerning this sample are presented.
RESUMEN
This study investigated the common characteristics of reasoning in the two types of hypothesis testing tasks that contain similar passive information gathering procedures: reception strategy task and hypothesis evaluation task. Twenty subjects built their own hypothesis but were not allowed to choose instances to test the hypothesis in the reception strategy task, and different 20 subjects in the hypothesis evaluation task only evaluated a hypothesis generated by another person. In addition, subjects were asked to mark instances that they thought suitable to test the hypothesis on each trial. Results showed that subjects chose negative (-H) tests in the middle or later stage of the task. Otherwise, they chose confirmative tests throughout the task. Two possible interpretations of the results were offered that (a) experiencing the false negative (-H +T) made subjects to realize the usefulness of negative testing, and (b) there was a phased shift of the selection tendency between the earlier phase of extracting a possible hypothesis to the later phase of refining it.