Unpacking Different Approaches to Understanding Cultural Variations in Attribution Patterns

Existing studies showed inconsistent results about whether and how attribution patterns differ across cultures. To generate a systematic understanding of the complexities of cultural variations in making causal attribution, we reviewed three different theoretical approaches in this study: the relative perspective of self-enhancement, the universal perspective of self-enhancement and cultural cognition, and found that each theoretical approach has received empirical support and informed competing hypotheses. Hence, the main goal of this study is to investigate the three theoretical approaches simultaneously using experimental data and explore how these approaches explain attribution behavior across cultures in a qualitatively different manner. In Study 1, we recruited participants from the U.S., mainland China and Hong Kong of China for an online experiment. In Study 2, we recruited participants from the U.S., mainland China, Singapore and Japan, and introduced alternative measures to assess attribution behavior. Results suggested that: a) attribution behavior can be influenced by both self-enhancing motives and cognitive processes, along with measurement instruments. Specifically, the cultural cognition approach was supported when attribution was assessed with Likert scales. In contrast, when attribution was measured by rank-order questions, the relative perspective of self-enhancement approach was supported; b) attribution decisions diverged within East Asian countries but converged between the East (e.g., mainland China, Singapore) and the West; c) acknowledging the idiosyncrasy of each cultural group and investigating each group as a separate cultural unit are necessary and important for theoretical development in attribution. Future directions and management implications were also discussed.