Department of Business Administration, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL 61820, USA.
Cogn Emot. 2012;26(4):680-9. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2011.613920. Epub 2011 Nov 14.
Research in South Korea and the United States examined how affective states facilitate or inhibit culturally dominant styles of reasoning. According to the affect-as-information hypothesis, affective cues of mood influence judgements by serving as embodied information about the value of accessible inclinations and cognitions. Extending this line of research to culture, we hypothesised that positive affect should promote (and negative affect should inhibit) culturally normative reasoning. The results of two studies of causal reasoning supported this hypothesis. Positive and negative affect functioned like "go" and "stop" signals, respectively, for culturally typical reasoning styles. Thus, in happy (compared to sad) moods, Koreans engaged in more holistic reasoning, whereas Americans engaged in more analytic reasoning.
韩国和美国的研究考察了情感状态如何促进或抑制文化主导的推理风格。根据情感作为信息的假说,情绪的情感线索通过作为可及倾向和认知价值的体现信息来影响判断。将这一研究思路扩展到文化中,我们假设积极的情绪应该促进(消极的情绪应该抑制)文化规范的推理。因果推理的两项研究结果支持了这一假设。积极和消极的情绪分别充当了文化典型推理风格的“前进”和“停止”信号。因此,在愉快(相比悲伤)的情绪中,韩国人更倾向于进行整体推理,而美国人更倾向于进行分析推理。