The majority rule or the equate-to-differentiate rule? The moderating role of regulatory focus, self-construals, and culture differences (original) (raw)
Related papers
Studia Psychologica, 2017
The majority rule has attracted much attention in recent debate on preference for aggregation strategies, which individuals may use in making choices or judgments for binary, weak-dominant multi-attribute options. The present research extends previous work on factors determining application of the majority rule. The experiment evidenced that individual decision makers are more likely to use the majority rule when increasing their orientation toward prevention rather than promotion regulatory focus. The results also confirmed a certain favorable tendency for individual decision makers to comply with the majority rule when priming their preference for interdependent rather than independent self-construal. These findings highlight a dynamic association between individual differences in goal pursuit motivation and perceived self-definition and behavioral judgment strategies.
The majority rule in individual decision making
2005
This research investigates an understudied decision heuristic, the majority rule. By using the rule, decision makers choose the option superior on most of the available cues. Cues are broadly defined, including advisors and attributes. We propose that decision makers are more likely to use the majority rule when encouraged to employ intra-cue comparison as opposed to intra-option integration, and that their choices are influenced by factors that influence which option appears majority superior. We corroborate the two propositions in four studies. In Studies 1 and 2, we explore two factors that moderate use of the majority rule through facilitating intra-cue comparison or intra-option integration-response mode and information display format. In Studies 3 and 4, we explore two factors that influence choice through influencing which option appears majority-superior-cue-unpacking and cueregrouping.
Decision Making in Individualistic and Collectivistic Cultures
Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2004
How do cultural values influence individuals' decision making? One would expect answers to this question either from cognitive psychology or from cross-cultural psychology. Cognitive theories on decision making, however, rarely consider the factor of culture, and research in cross-cultural psychology deals only to a small extent with decision making. Therefore the study of culture and decision making is a relatively new and unexplored field. In this paper normative and descriptive approaches to decision making are discussed and three cross-cultural studies on decision making in individualistic and collectivist cultures using different methodologies are described. The results are integrated into a model that can be helpful to derive specific hypotheses for further studies in this field.
Cultural differences affecting decision-making style: a comparative study between four countries
Journal of Business Economics and Management, 2014
The aim of this paper was to identify the impact of national culture on decision-making styles in selected countries: Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Hungary. The estimation of Hofstede's dimensions of national cultures and comparative analyses was carried out by using a narrow-sample strategy. The estimated positions on each dimension confirmed the Hofstede's original research ranking. The result with significant value was the confirmation of the global trend of decreasing power distance and significant movement towards the individualism. Besides the standardization procedure of comparative cross-cultural analyses, variance analyses were used to identify cultural differences in decision-making styles related to complex decisions. The proposition is that complex decisions are, above and beyond all others, the consequence of social and cultural values installed in every individual. Statistically significant dependency was identified for hyper-vigilant and vigila...
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2001
replicate past research and demonstrate improved decision quality for individuals exposed to a minority perspective. Moreover, minority influence targets with high horizontal individualism and low horizontal collectivism made higher quality decisions. Influence targets with high vertical collectivism demonstrated higher quality decisions when the influence agent held a high status position in the group. Results also demonstrate that influence agents with high vertical individualism experienced less role stress than those with low vertical individualism. Finally, influence agents with low role stress were more effective in influencing the decision making of others. We discuss our findings in terms of boundary conditions to the minority influence process. ᭧ instance, theorized that exposure to minority influence causes individuals to consider multiple alternatives and engage in more elaborate cognitive processes. Similarly, research on cognitive conflict also demonstrates that exposure to different perspectives can be beneficial to
(2006). Culture and media effects on group decision making under majority influence
39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, January 4-7 , 2006
The purpose of this study is to address questions on how collectivistic and individualistic cultures affect majority influence in a group decision making task when there are differences in media richness. We developed a theory that explains and predicts these phenomena, and tested hypotheses using 112 fourperson groups that consisted of Chinese and U.S. participants. As predicted, we found strong evidence indicating that there were significant differences between Chinese and U.S. groups, with Chinese groups being more prone to follow the view of majority. Further, traditional face-to-face (FtF) unsupported groups experienced the strongest majority influence. We found that GSS use helped diminish majority influence in both Chinese and U.S. groups. These findings have broad theoretical and applied implications, which are discussed in this paper.
Judgement and Decision Making across Cultures
Advances in Psychological Science, 2013
This paper reviews research outlining cross-cultural differences in judgement and decision making. As the majority of research in this area is directed on the differences between Asian and Western cultures, this review mainly focuses on the juxtaposition between these two cultures. Specifically, the authors outline the differences in probability judgements and confidence, risk perception, risk taking behaviours, consumer behaviour, and business and economic judgments and decisions. This review reveals that while judgement and decision making differs markedly between Asian and Western cultures, significant differences also exist within these cultures. The paper also suggests directions for future research in the area of cross-cultural judgement and decision making in order to garner a greater understanding of this subject.
Culture and Conformity: A Meta-Analysis of Studies Using Asch's (1952b, 1956) Line Judgment Task
A meta-analysis of conformity studies using an Asch-type line judgment task (1952b, 1956) was conducted to investigate whether the level of conformity has changed over time and whether it is related cross-culturally to individualism-collectivism. The literature search produced 133 studies drawn from 17 countries. An analysis of U.S. studies found that conformity has declined since the 1950s. Results from 3 surveys were used to assess a country's individualism-collectivism, and for each survey the measures were found to be significantly related to conformity. Collectivist countries tended to show higher levels of conformity than individualist countries. Conformity research must attend more to cultural variables and to their role in the processes involved in social influence.