By: Dana Leighton

Dana Leighton — Thu, 01 Sep 2005 04:40:03 +0000

Dr. Dave – Nisbett agrees with you – he is saying that the differences in perception IS a product of culture (of which language and philosophy is a function). Take a look at this article:
Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. (2001). Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review, 108(2), 291-310.

By: Dr Dave

Dr Dave — Tue, 23 Aug 2005 15:19:06 +0000

Maybe I am being too simplistic here, but couldn’t most of the difference be tracked down to something so basic as the writing systems?
I believe other studies have occasionally shown how levels of literacy (e.g. reading/tv-watching) may impact general perception of objects… It doesn’t sound far-fetched then to imagine that radically different reading habits influence mental functions differently too.
The visual approach to hanzi/kanji reading is very much unlike alphabet reading… Oddly enough, native readers hardly ever consider the composing elements of a Chinese character, but instead subconsciously look at the general shape to extract the meaning and pronunciation. Even assuming a certain degree of grouping to alphabet reading (e.g. an entire word instead of composing letters), it is nowhere near the level.
Likely, this could also be attached to the traditionally holistic attitude found in Eastern philosophy, compared to Western analytical thought. But wouldn’t it then become a cause rather than a consequence of this phenomenon?

Comments on: Chinese and Americans differ in visual analysis

By: Dana Leighton

By: Dr Dave