Definition of a "fair split" varies across cultures

[Jacob]

Interesting article about behaviour, economics, psychology, and culture. Amongst other things, it points out how special Westerners are - especially Americans: http://www.psmag.com/magazines/pacific-standard-cover-story/joe-henrich-weird-ultimatum-game-shaking-up-psychology-economics-53135/

[Admiral Yi]

Pretty interesting but too goddamn long.

[crazy canuck]

That is a very interesting read.

Thanks for posting it.

[Jacob]

I think you get the bulk of the interesting parts in the first 30-50% of the article.

... and I realize I should have titled the thread "Americans are WEIRD"

[crazy canuck]

Pretty interesting but too goddamn long.

I have often wondered whether the advent of social media has begun to blunt our ability to read, understand and communicate with pieces of information larger than a few sentences.

[fhdz]

I read this one yesterday after a friend posted it on Facebook. It's fascinating.

The section about Western social scientists doing more penance than science was particularly apt, I thought.

[MadImmortalMan]

Kinda blows away the thinking that some single way of doing things can be applied globally over all of humanity. Marketing people know this, and market products differently in different cultures. Regrettably, political activists will probably always cling to the fiction that their idea of how to do things can be successfully applied to every society in the same manner.

[Admiral Yi]

I think you get the bulk of the interesting parts in the first 30-50% of the article.

... and I realize I should have titled the thread "Americans are WEIRD"

The author asserts that but doesn't really document it very well.  Weird in what way?

The other interesting point in the article (the first being that different people have different conceptions of fair division) is that the soft social sciences are stuck between celebrating diversity and refusing to acknowledge the forms it takes.

[Berkut]

That is a really, really interesting article Jake.

Not only are we screwing up how we study cultures, we are doing so because the culture we are in per-disposes us to do so!

[Sheilbh]

Just reading through it now. It initially made me think of this great NYT piece on Napoleon Chagnon:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/17/magazine/napoleon-chagnon-americas-most-controversial-anthropologist.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

[PDH]

I remember an psychological anthropology paper from a few years ago that basically showed the Western system of syllogistic logic is not universal.  Different cultures have experience basic logic that does not accept "if A equals B, and B equals C, then A equals C" type of reasoning, despite similar regions of the brain being activated.

All of Bob's friends wear hats.
Mike is one of Bob's friends.
Does Mike wear a hat?

That could not be answered in entire regions, the main way of responding was "I can't see Mike, I don't know."  Culture is quite a filter for our weak little brains.

[Sheilbh]

The other interesting point in the article (the first being that different people have different conceptions of fair division) is that the soft social sciences are stuck between celebrating diversity and refusing to acknowledge the forms it takes.

I don't know. I think this is more your way of perceiving it My view is that there's been a shift away from 'celebrating diversity' for some time. Marxism, a lot of social psychology and other theories that have held sway at some point are other are similar in that they minimise the importance of culture.

Probably part of it has been a reaction against post-modernism on the one hand and cultural determinism on the other. Think of Pinker's work in linguistics for example, which is very against the idea of linguistic determinism (that the structure and nature of a language shapes the way we perceive the world) precisely because rationally we share a brain and evolutionary heritage that determines that. There's also solid work disproving many of the linguistic determinist arguments. The same sorts of language activates the same bits of the brain, for example cursing kicks off the basal ganglia. Even if a culture uses different language to describe space, direction or time, I believe there's papers that query how differently they experience them.

But I've always thought the swing to psychology and brain science above all other disciplines (whether linguistics, politics, economics or anthropology) has been a bit overdone. It strikes me as a theory that's valid and interesting and having its moment, but that we'll soon move on.

Also am I the only person who was baffled by the American reaction of punishing the other person? When I read the game I thought I'd take the money regardless because it's more than I came into the game with

[derspiess]

I dated a cheerleader that could do a pretty fair split

[PDH]

I dated a cheerleader that could do a pretty fair split

What, she dated you and the basketball team at the same time?

[MadImmortalMan]

Also am I the only person who was baffled by the American reaction of punishing the other person? When I read the game I thought I'd take the money regardless because it's more than I came into the game with

I see that in stock trading too. Lots of traders feel like they did badly on a trade if they get out of a trade with a small profit and then the stock keeps going up. It's like the rest of the gains are losses to them even though it's completely not true. Opportunity costs I suppose.