Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Comparison of Canadian and Korean preadolescent’s attribution patterns affecting inductive rule learning Lee, Hyun Sook 1996

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1996-0458.pdf [ 3.59MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0087662.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0087662-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0087662-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0087662-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0087662-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0087662-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0087662-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0087662-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0087662.ris

Full Text

COMPARISON OF CANADIAN AND KOREAN PREADOLESCENT'S ATTRIBUTION PATTERNS AFFECTING INDUCTIVE RULE LEARNING B Y H Y U N SOOK L E E B.A. K O R E A UNIVERSITY, 1986 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE D E G R E E OF MASTER OF ARTS IN THE F A C U L T Y OF G R A D U A T E STUDIES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL P S Y C H O L O G Y AND SPECIAL EDUCATION WE ACCEPT THIS THESIS AS CONFORMING TO THE REQUIRED STANDARD THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August, 1996 © H y u n SookLee, 1996 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada DE-6 (2/88) ABSTRACT The primary purpose of this study was to test the attribution theory of motivation cross-culturally by comparing performance and attribution patterns on inductive rule learning in two different cultures (Canadian & Korean) within the framework of collectivism vs. individualism. Two hypotheses were formed: 1) Korean and Canadian students would show differences in attribution patterns following success or failure outcome due to different cultural emphasis. 2) Given the effort attribution of failure, Korean students would perform more accurately on the reasoning task than Canadian students, and given higher ability attribution of success, Canadian students may perform better or at least equally as well as Korean students. A Total of 120 grade seven students (60 Canadian and 60 Korean) from a middle-class community from Korea and Canada participated in the computerized experimental tasks. The research design involved two culture groups (Canadian and Korean) and three outcome feedback (control, failure, and success), as independent variables, and the number of instances, response rate and accuracy on the inductive reasoning tasks as dependent variables. Findings of this study indicate that Canadian culture may not be defined as more individualistic than Korean culture. The study results did not provide a clear cut distinction of collectivistic vs. individualistic cultures between Korean and Canadian cultures. In terms of attribution patterns, both culture groups showed similar patterns, but different from Weiner's theory of motivation, not only effort but also ability attribution influenced positively the accuracy of performance on the subsequent task upon receiving failure feedback. Given failure feedback, Korean grade seven students performed better, while Canadian counterparts' performance level on the subsequent task deteriorated with failure feedback. Further research on cross-cultural study of attribution theory has been suggested along with educational implications. TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ... ii Table of Contents iii List of Tables v List of Figures ; vi Acknowledgement vii CHAPTER I. ANALYSIS OF RESEARCH ISSUES AND PROBLEMS 1 A. Cultural Factors on Human Cognition and Motivation 1 B. Background of Attribution Research 6 C. Performance Tasks for Attribution Research 11 D. Development of Hypothesis .....12 E. Summary of Statements of Hypotheses , 21 CHAPTER H. METHODOLOGY 25 A. Subjects and Design :. 25 B. Test and Task Materials '. • -.28 C. Apparatus 34 D. Experimental Procedure 35 E. Measurement and Analysis 38 CHAPTER III. RESULTS..... 39 A. Culture Type Differences of Canadian and Korean Grade 7 Students 40 B. Predictive Relations between the Causaf Attribution and Inductive Reasoning 44 C. Culture Group Differences in Objective Causal Attribution in Patterns and Simple Rule Inductive Reasoning Performance 45 D. Shifts in Causal Attribution from Objective to Self Performance Attribution 50 E. Interaction Analysis of Self Attribution on Reasoning , '. 54 F. Outcome Feedback and Culture Group Effects on Reasoning 56 G. Summary of the Major Findings • • 59 i l l CHAPTER IV, DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 64 A. Summary of the Findings as Empirical Evidence . 64 B. Discussion ; .68 C. Internal Validity of the Experimental Findings..... : '.. 74 D. Generalizability of the Present Findings :., 76 E. Conclusion 77 F. Educational Implications 80 REFERENCES.... .82 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Culture Type Classification Test....:.....:... 88 APPENDIX B: Objective Causal Belief Scale !90. r iv LIST OF T A B L E S Table 1. Experimental Design 27 Table 2. Observed Means of Cultural Orientation Scores by Culture Groups 42 Table 3. Observed Means of Aggregated Causal Attribution Scores by Culture Groups.... 47 Table 3.1 Means and Sds of the Total Nember of Rule Instances, Response Rate, and Accuracy required for the Mastery of the Conjunctive Induction Task(Task2)..... 49 Table 4. Pre- vs. Post- Performance Causal Attribution Patterns by Culture Groups... 51 Table 4.1 Shifts in Causal Attribution from Pre- to Post- Performance.. 51 Table 5. Means of the Number of Instances(Inst4), Response Rate(Restat4) and Accuracy (Accura4) of Conditional Inductive Performance(Task4) by Culture Groups '. 55 v LIST OF F IGURES Figure 1. Diagram of Research Issues for Investigation..: 20 Figure 2. Cultural Preference 42 Figure 3. Culture Effects on Conjunctive Rule Learning Performance..... 49 Figure 4. Joint Effects of Culture and Outcome Feedback on Reasoning: Control vs. Failure vs. Success ., .' 57 vi . A C K N O W L E D G M E N T Words can not appropriately express my love and appreciation for the constant encouragement and support of my family. I wish to express my genuine thanks especially to both of my parents. I would like to express my gratitude to Dr. Seong-Soo Lee, my thesis supervisor. I have greatly appreciated his guidance, wisdom and mentoring through this program. Also, I would like to purvey kind regards to the other thesis advisory committee members, Dr. David Whittaker and Dr. Robert Conry for their valued input and feedback. Lastly, I would like to thank everyone who has helped me, including teachers and students who participated in this study. v i i COMPARISON OF KOREAN AND CANADIAN PREADOLESCENT'S CAUSAL ATTRIBUTION PATTERNS AFFECTING INDUCTIVE RULE LEARNING CHAPTER I . ANALYSIS OF RESEARCH ISSUES AND PROBLEMS The primary purpose of th i s study i s to i d e n t i f y and explain elements of the cu l t u r a l differences i n a s p e c i f i c psychological domain by comparing cognitive performance i n inductive reasoning as related to causal a t t r i b u t i o n patterns of children from Korea and Canada. Hopefully, the present study can generate empirical evidence-bearing on val i d a t i n g the att r i b u t i o n theory of motivation cross-c u l t u r a l l y i n the context of conditional rule learning within the framework of individualism vs.'collectivism. A. Cultural Factors on Human Cognition and Motivation •Reasoning i s a universal a b i l i t y . However, according to the so c i o c u l t u r a l perspective espoused by Vygotsky (1978), people i n d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l contexts reason d i f f e r e n t l y because of d i f f e r e n t •1 s o c i o c u l t u r a l m i l i e u , including, s o c i a l languages and c u l t u r a l t o o l s such as s t r a t e g i e s f o r processing verbal, i n f o r m a t i o n . C u l t u r e i n f l u e n c e s the way humans s e l e c t , i n t e r p r e t , process, and use 'information. Culture shapes what we t a l k about and the meaning of what we say, the way we cat e g o r i s e the world, the way we move about i n i t , and above a l l , our motives and i n t e n t i o n s i n doing so. I t i s time that c u l t u r e has a place i n p s y c h o l o g i c a l t h e o r i e s of c o g n i t i o n and l e a r n i n g (Strauss and Quinn, 1991). S o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s have proposed various d e f i n i t i o n s of c u l t u r e which d i f f e r i n important ways, but agree i n that c u l t u r e i s both learned and shared ( T r i a n d i s , Bontempo, Leung, & Hui, 1990). In t h i s study, c u l t u r e i s defined as a set of human-made o b j e c t i v e and s u b j e c t i v e elements that i n the past have increased the p r o b a b i l i t y of s u r v i v a l and r e s u l t e d i n s a t i s f a c t i o n f o r the p a r t i c i p a n t s i n an e c o l o g i c a l niche. Thus, i t becomes shared among those who could communicate w i t h each other, because they have a common language and they l i v e i n the same time and place ( T r i a n d i s , 1994). According to T r i a n d i s , m u l t i f a c e t e d " c u l t u r e " can be broken down i n t o two p a r t s , i . e . , s u b j e c t i v e c u l t u r e and o b j e c t i v e c u l t u r e . S u b j e c t i v e c u l t u r e includes elements such as c a t e g o r i z a t i o n s , a s s o c i a t i o n s , e v a l u a t i o n s , goals, s o c i a l norms, r o l e s , b e l i e f s and values, w h i l e o b j e c t i v e c u l t u r e r e f e r s to things, (e.g., t o o l s , 2 roads, and r a d i o s t a t i o n s ) . These s u b j e c t i v e c u l t u r a l elements i n c l u d e a wide range of t o p i c s , such as f a m i l y r o l e s , communication p a t t e r n s , a f f e c t i v e s t y l e s , and values regarding personal c o n t r o l , i n d i v i d u a l i s m , c o l l e c t i v i s m , s p i r i t u a l i t y , and r e l i g i o s i t y (Betancourt and Lopez, 1993), and such as causal b e l i e f s i n the environmental events. T r i a n d i s (1989, 1994) defined three dimensions of c u l t u r a l v a r i a t i o n : a) the i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c vs. c o l l e c t i v i s t i c dimension, b) the t i g h t vs. loose dimension, and c) the simple vs. complex dimension.. He p o s i t e d that c u l t u r a l v a r i a t i o n i n b a s i c values shape the process by which c e r t a i n b a s i c aspects of human f u n c t i o n i n g develop. A review of the l i t e r a t u r e shows that one of the most promising dimensions i d e n t i f i e d to measure c u l t u r a l ' v a r i a t i o n s i s i n d i v i d u a l i s m vs. c o l l e c t i v i s m . T r i a n d i s (1989) made a good c o n t r a s t of a t t r i b u t e s of people i n c o l l e c t i v i s t and i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c c u l t u r e s . I n d i v i d u a l i s t s give p r i o r i t y to t h e i r personal goals over the goals of c o l l e c t i v e s (e.g., f a m i l y , co-workers), tend to be high i n d i s t a n c e from in-groups, t h i n k themselves of as autonomous, independent of in-group members, tend to be low i n f a m i l y i n t e g r i t y , and l i k e to challenge a u t h o r i t i e s . In c o n t r a s t , c o l l e c t i v i s t s are w i l l i n g to subordinate t h e i r personal goals to the c o l l e c t i v e goals, tend t o share resources w i t h in-group members based on e q u a l i t y or J need r a t h e r than equity, f e e l interdependent w i t h in-group members, tend to have t i g h t f a m i l y t i e , get i n v o l v e d i n the l i v e s of in-group members, and tend to obey a u t h o r i t i e s . Some c u l t u r e s impose more norms, r u l e s and c o n s t r a i n t s on s o c i a l behavior, while others are r a t h e r loose i n imposing such c o n s t r a i n t s . Therefore, the f i r s t k i n d of c u l t u r e s ( t i g h t c u l t u r e s , e.g., Japan) tend to s o c i a l i z e t h e i r c h i l d r e n by emphasizing the expectations of the g e n e r a l i z e d other and l i t t l e d e v i a t i o n from normative behavior i s t o l e r a t e d , while the l a t t e r (loose c u l t u r e s , > e.g., North Americans) e i t h e r have unclear norms or t o l e r a t e deviance from norms. In a t i g h t c u l t u r e , c h i l d r e n are encouraged to behave p r o p e r l y , by doing .what everyone e l s e i s doing, w h i l e c h i l d r e n i n a loose c u l t u r e are encouraged to be. autonomous and be "themselves". A s s o c i a t e d w i t h higher complexity of c u l t u r e are urban settlement, many l e v e l s of p o l i t i c a l i n t e g r a t i o n , high p o p u l a t i o n d e n s i t y , numerous l e v e l s of s o c i a l s t r a t i f i c a t i o n , r e l i g i o u s and aesthetic._ p a t t e r n s , and t e c h n i c a l s p e c i a l i z a t i o n . Therefore, i n f o r m a t i o n and i n d u s t r i a l s o c i e t i e s tend to have more complex c u l t u r e s than a g r i c u l t u r a l s o c i e t i e s , and hunting and food g a t h e r i n g s o c i e t i e s , i n that order. According to T r i a n d i s ' s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of c u l t u r e , Canadian culture can be defined as individualistic, loose, 4 and complex, while Korean culture c o l l e c t i v i s t i c , t i g h t , and also complex. In c o l l e c t i v i s t i c cultures, the s e l f i s defined i n terms of membership i n in-groups which influence a wide range of s o c i a l behaviours. Emphases i n c o l l e c t i v i s t i c cultures are on proper behaviour ( i . e . , acting appropriately to other people's eyes), conformity, obedience, d i s c i p l i n e , r e l i a b i l i t y , and persistence. Conversely, i n d i v i d u a l i s t s are emotionally detached from t h e i r i n -groups and emphasize s e l f - r e l i a n c e , s e l f - a c t u a l i z a t i o n , independence, pleasure, achievement and the pursuit of t h e i r own happiness (Triandis, 1994). Thus, the study of causal b e l i e f s from i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c perspectives can help our understanding of achievement-related processes c r o s s - c u l t u r a l l y , so that a more comprehensive grasp of the dimension of individualism vs. c o l l e c t i v i s m can be f a c i l i t a t e d . Hofstede (1980) found that individualism i s very high i n the United States and the English-speaking countries i n general, as well as i n Northern and Western European cultures, while c o l l e c t i v i s m i s high i n the countries of A f r i c a , East Asia and Latin America. 5 B. Background of Attribution Research Motivational research has been of continuing i n t e r e s t to educational psychologists. B a l l (1984) did a content analysis of a r t i c l e s published i n the Journal of Educational Psychology from 1910 to 1980 and found that, every second decade, motivation ranked i n the top half of categories commanding attention. In the 1960s, with a more general s h i f t i n psychology away from mechanistic behaviors and toward cognition, motivational researchers began to concentrate on human rather than on infrahuman behaviour, dealing with issues associated with success and f a i l u r e and achievement s t r i v i n g s (Weiner, 1990). By early 1980s, there was an increasing range of cognition documented as having motivational significance, such as causal' a s c r i p t i o n (Weiner); more attention has been paid to a t t r i b u t i o n theory. Many researchers focused on the issues associated with achievement, motivation, anxiety about f a i l u r e , self-esteem and perceptions of control. Weiner (1990) i d e n t i f i e d some constructs i n motivational research i n the 1990s as important,- including the cognition of causal a t t r i b u t i o n s , s e l f - e f f i c a c y , learned helplessness, the in d i v i d u a l differences of need for achievement, locus of control, 6 and a t t r i b u t i o n a l s t y l e . Even though-a l o t of a t t r i b u t i o n research has been done i n the past, i t was not u n t i l two decades ago that a t t r i b u t i o n was st u d i e d i n conjunction w i t h c o g n i t i v e performance. A ba s i c assumption of a t t r i b u t i o n t h e o r i s t s i s that i n d i v i d u a l s ' seek to understand why events have occurred (Weiner, 1986) be-fore f u r t h e r engagement i n achievement contexts. This helps i n d i v i d u a l s determine t h e i r r e l a t i o n s to those events and t h e i r expectations about f u t u r e events. O v e r a l l , the f i n d i n g s suggest that people assume causal r e s p o n s i b i l i t y more f o r t h e i r p o s i t i v e performance outcomes than f o r negative outcomes. • The theory of a t t r i b u t i o n was f i r s t proposed by Heider (1958) who d i d systematic a n a l y s i s of causal s t r u c t u r e , c l a i m i n g that people make sense out of a sequence of events by a t t r i b u t i n g them to \ c e r t a i n causes, that i s , f a c t o r s u n d e r l y i n g the events i n the world. There are a multitude of perceived causes of success and f a i l u r e . Among them, a few are dominant, i n c l u d i n g a p t i t u d e and acquired a b i l i t i e s , m o t i v a t i o n a l f a c t o r s such as long-term and immediate e f f o r t or a t t e n t i o n and concentration, the ease or d i f f i c u l t y of the task, help or hindrance from others, luck, and mood (Weiner, 19'86) . Inasmuch as the l i s t of conceivable causes of success and f a i l u r e i s i n f i n i t e , i t i s e s s e n t i a l to create a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n -scheme or a taxonomy of causes (Weiner, 1979). 7 Rotter(1966) and h i s colleagues proposed the f i r s t dimension of i n t e r n a l - e x t e r n a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of c a u s a l i t y , which he l a b e l l e d locus of c o n t r o l ; causes were e i t h e r w i t h i n ( i n t e r n a l ) or outside-( e x t e r n a l to) the a c t i n g i n d i v i d u a l . The second dimension of c a u s a l i t y was suggested by Weiner and h i s colleagues (Weiner, F r i e z e , Kukla, Reed, Rest & Rosenbaum, 1971), to be s t a b i l i t y ; the s t a b i l i t y dimension describes causes as e i t h e r s t a b l e (constant) or unstable (variable) over time. The t h i r d dimension, i n i t i a l l y l a b e l l e d as i n t e n t i o n a l i t y , was r e - l a b e l l e d as c o n t r o l l a b i l i t y by Weiner since causes could be e i t h e r v o l i t i o n a l l y c o n t r o l l a b l e ( a l t e r a b l e ) , or u n c o n t r o l l a b l e ( u n a l t e r a b l e ) . Weiner (1979) presented a theory of m o t i v a t i o n based upon a t t r i b u t i o n s of c a u s a l i t y f o r success and f a i l u r e by i d e n t i f y i n g the three c e n t r a l dimensions of causal perceptions: locus of c o n t r o l , s t a b i l i t y and c o n t r o l l a b i l i t y . A f o u r t h c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of causes, i n i t i a l l y proposed by Abramson, Seligman, and Teasdale (1978), has been suggested; g l o b a l i t y or c r o s s - s i t u a t i o n a l g e n e r a l i t y , but i t s s t a t u s as a b a s i c dimension remains i n doubt (Weiner, 1986). Researchers (e.g., Lee & Lee, 1983) found that i n achievement-r e l a t e d contexts the causes perceived as most r e s p o n s i b l e f o r success and f a i l u r e were a b i l i t y ( i n t e r n a l , s t a b l e and 8 r u n c o n t r o l l a b l e ) , e f f o r t ( i n t e r n a l , unstable and c o n t r o l l a b l e ) , task d i f f i c u l t y ( e x t e r n a l , s t a b l e and c o n t r o l l a b l e ) and luck ( e x t e r n a l , unstable and uncontrollable).. P a r t i c u l a r l y many i n v e s t i g a t i o n s have y i e l d e d evidence concerning the contrasting•consequences of a b i l i t y versus e f f o r t a t t r i b u t i o n s on performance e v a l u a t i o n . Recently, Weiner (1994) provided a conceptual a n a l y s i s of the voluminous l i t e r a t u r e e x p l o r i n g s o c i a l m o t i v a t i o n and personal m o t i v a t i o n i n an e f f o r t to i n t e g r a t e them i n a u n i f y i n g theory. Weiner suggested that f a i l u r e perceived by a student as caused by l a c k of a b i l i t y or aptitude ("I. cannot") r e s u l t e d i n performance decrements, whereas f a i l u r e a s c r i b e d to the absence of e f f o r t (" I d i d not t r y hard enough") provided performance increments. Based on the f i n d i n g s from Meyer's (1970) study, Weiner advanced that given f a i l u r e , the higher the a t t r i b u t i o n of f a i l u r e to low a b i l i t y , the worse the f u t u r e performance, whereas the higher the e f f o r t a s c r i p t i o n , the greater the enhancement of performance. That i s , l a c k of e f f o r t ( i n t e r n a l , c o n t r o l l a b l e and unstable) has more p o s i t i v e e f f e c t s on achievement s t r i v i n g than does l a c k of a b i l i t y ( i n t e r n a l , u n c o n t r o l l a b l e and stable) as the perceived cause of f a i l u r e . In a broader term, causal c o n t r o l l a b i l i t y and i n s t a b i l i t y , which are s u b s t a n t i a t e d by l a c k of e f f o r t , generate b e t t e r performance than do causal u n c o n t r o l l a b i l i t y and s t a b i l i t y , which 9 are embodied w i t h i n low a b i l i t y ( a p t i t u d e ) . Weiner concluded t h a t v • . . f a i l u r e due to l a c k of a b i l i t y gave r i s e t o a f f e c t i v e r e a c t i o n s (shame and embarrassment) which l e d to performance decrements, w h i l f a i l u r e due to l a c k of e f f o r t r a i s e g u i l t and improves performance. Whether t h i s i n t e g r a t i n g theory of m o t i v a t i o n can be a p p l i e d t o Korean s u b j e c t s as w e l l as to Canadian s u b j e c t s i s t o be e v a l u a t e d i n t h i s study. What lead s i n d i v i d u a l s t o adopt p a r t i c u l a r a t t r i b u t i o n a l s t y l e What u n d e r l y i n g b e l i e f s about o n e s e l f and the world would prime an i n d i v i d u a l t o i n t e r p r e t events i n p a r t i c u l a r way (Dweck, & Leggett, 1988)? In an attempt to i d e n t i f y the source of a t t r i b u t i o n a l s t y l e s Dweck and Leggett suggest that i n d i v i d u a l s have i m p l i c i t t h e o r i e s o t h e i r a t t r i b u t e s which o r i e n t them toward p a r t i c u l a r g o a l s (e.g., performance g o a l s vs. l e a r n i n g g o a l s ) , and i l l u s t r a t e how these g o a l s s e t up d i f f e r e n t p a t t e r n s . I argue that c u l t u r a l elements, such as s o c i a l v a l u e s and b e l i e f s , might be a source of d i f f e r e n t a t t r i b u t i o n a l s t y l e s along w i t h many other f a c t o r s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r d i f f e r e n t a t t r i b u t i o n s among people. 10 C. Performance Tasks for Attribution Research A t t r i b u t i o n has been studied i n a wide range o f cognitive performance tasks such as reading (Chapin and Dyck,. 1976), arithmetic (Dweck, 1975), and anagrams (Andrew and Debus, 1978) . But these tasks may.not provide a good testing ground for the a t t r i b u t i o n a l theory. It i s d i f f i c u l t to measure motivational processes that a f f e c t success on these tasks. In my opinion, tasks i n a t t r i b u t i o n research should be complex learning tasks, such as reasoning which provide subjects with enough opportunities to make e f f o r t s and to reveal some tractable achievement motivational processes. However, as fair as I know, only few a t t r i b u t i o n a l studies have been done using reasoning tasks, even though i t i s frequently such an important part of our d a i l y a c t i v i t i e s as well as i n s c i e n t i f i c a f f a i r s (Lipe, 1991). Reasoning i s a fundamental function of human mind which i s a universal a b i l i t y across a l l cultures. The study of reasoning has distinguished between.two basic kinds of reasoning: deductive and inductive' reasoning. Deductive reasoning involves reaching a conclusion based upon assumptions (premises) ttiat are known to be true.-In contrast, inductive reasoning i s the process by which we draw a conclusion based upon s p e c i f i c happenings. Thurstone (1938) 11 defined induction as finding a rule or p r i n c i p l e . An induction i s something that i s l i k e l y to be true on the basis of past experience, but there i s no guarantee that i t w i l l be absolutely true (Pellegrino, 1985). Of the two types of reasoning processes, more tedious and c o g n i t i v e l y demanding i s the inductive learning task, i n which the chance of observing motivational a t t r i b u t i o n processes i s greater than i n the deductive reasoning s i t u a t i o n . In l i n e with t h i s thinking, inductive tasks are chosen for learning tasks i n t h i s study. Almost a l l of the studies concerning reasoning were conducted i n only one culture, r e s u l t i n g i n no consideration of c u l t u r a l elements into the studies (Haygood & Bourne, 1965, Lee, 1984,1985, Margolis, 1994, and Medin, 1989). Viewing from s o c i o - c u l t u r a l perspective, human reasoning i s affected by i n d i v i d u a l s ' s o c i o c u l t u r a l contexts. Therefore, though reasoning i s a basic universal function of the human mind, i t i s affected by i t ' s environmental contexts. D. Development of Hypothesis As we have seen, the influence of culture i s obvious i n s o c i a l behaviours, however, "mainstream" s o c i a l psychologists where the 12 m a j o r i t y are from the "West" have l a r g e l y n e g l e c t e d c u l t u r a l f a c t o r s r e f l e c t e d i n b e l i e f s , v a l u e s and norms i n t h e i r r e s e a r c h and t h e o r i e s (Betancourt, Hardin, & Manzi, 1992), d e s p i t e the f a c t t h a t 70 percent of the w o r l d ' s . p o p u l a t i o n l i v e s o u t s i d e of Europe and North America. As T r i a n d i s (1994)has claimed, one of the important b e n e f i t s from c r o s s - c u l t u r a l .studies i s t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e to d i f f e r e n t i a t e the u n i v e r s a l , and the c u l t u r e - s p e c i f i c aspects of p s y c h o l o g i c a l phenomena. Bond (1983) has argued t h a t the t e s t i n g of a t t r i b u t i o n models i n d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l m i l i e u s w i l l e i t h e r support c l a i m s f o r u n i v e r s a l s o c i a l and c o g n i t i v e processes' or suggest c u l t u r a l f a c t o r s t h a t must be i n t r o d u c e d to g e n e r a l i z e the t h e o r i e s beyond a s i n g l e c u l t u r e . Some r e s e a r c h e r s have i n v e s t i g a t e d the g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of a t t r i b u t i o n t h e o r i e s to non-western c u l t u r e s ( C r i t t e n d e n , 1991; S t i p e k , Weiner, & L i , 1989). S t i p e k et a l , based on t h e i r study u s i n g c o l l e g e students as s u b j e c t s , r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e r e was l i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e i n a t t r i b u t i o n behavior between the s u b j e c t s from the People's R e p u b l i c of China and t h e . U n i t e d S t a t e s . That i s , the s u b j e c t s from both c u l t u r e groups emphasized a b i l i t y and e f f o r t as . important f a c t o r s f o r success. In f a i l u r e s i t u a t i o n s , Chinese c o l l e g e students s t i l l r e c o g n i z e d a b i l i t y as w e l l as low e f f o r t as important f a c t o r s , while American c o l l e g e students a t t r i b u t e d t h e i r 13 s f a i l u r e only to low e f f o r t . The scant research on a t t r i b u t i o n i n non-western cultures suggests that Western models may require modification i f they are to be useful i n other cultures (Bond, 1983): • Recently, there has been an increasing number of c r o s s - c u l t u r a l studies based on a t t r i b u t i o n theory. Betancourt and Weiner (1982) examined the c r o s s - c u l t u r a l generality of an a t t r i b u t i o n theory of motivation, using subjects from Chile and the United States. They found that the relationship between the perceived s t a b i l i t y and expectancy of success was s i m i l a r for both groups. But the perception of control and the effects of causal c o n t r o l l a b i l i t y were i found to be c u l t u r a l l y determined. Important elements of the culture, such as values, s o c i a l b e l i e f s , and norms were suggested to be responsible for influencing perceptions of c o n t r o l l a b i l i t y , causing c r o s s - c u l t u r a l differences (Betancourt et a l , 1982, 1992) . Therefore, these c u l t u r a l elements should be considered i n studying a t t r i b u t i o n processes. Many of the c r o s s - c u l t u r a l studies have been conducted on a t t r i b u t i o n that contrast mainly American with Chinese or Japanese subjects (Blinco, 1992; Chiu, 1986; Crittenden, 1991; Hess,' Chang, & McDevitt, 1987; Holloway, 1988; Holloway, Kashima & Triandis, 1986; Kashiwagi, Hess, & Azuma, 1986). Despite the use of subjects from 14 d i v e r s e c u l t u r e s a l l around the world as the r e s u l t of a r e c e n t growing i n t e r e s t i n c r o s s c u l t u r a l s t u d i e s on a t t r i b u t i o n , , v e r y few i n v e s t i g a t i o n s can be found i n the p s y c h o l o g i c a l . l i t e r a t u r e t h a t d e a l t w i t h e i t h e r Korean c u l t u r e or Canadian c u l t u r e (Bae, 1985; Bae, 1991; Bae & C r i t t e n d e n , 1989; Kim, 1980; C r i t t e n d e n & Bae, 1994; Schuster, F o e s t e r l u n g , & Weiner,, 1989) . L i t e r a t u r e review r e v e a l s that people i n c o l l e c t i v i s t c u l t u r e s (e.g., those of Chinese and Japanese) tend to a t t r i b u t e success to e x t e r n a l f a c t o r s (e.g.,.help from others) and f a i l u r e t o i n t e r n a l f a c t o r s (e.g., l a c k of e f f o r t ) . On the other hand, people i n i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c c u l t u r e s (e.g., Americans) are most l i k e l y t o a s c r i b e success to i n t e r n a l (e.g., a b i l i t y ) and f a i l u r e t o e x t e r n a l f a c t o r s (e.g., task d i f f i c u l t y , and l u c k ) . Although most a t t r i b u t i o n r e s e a r c h done i n A s i a has been couched i n a g l o b a l c o n t r a s t between E a s t e r n and Western c u l t u r e , A s i a n c u l t u r e s should not be viewed as a u n i t a r y whole. A s i a n s o c i e t i e s do e x h i b i t c u l t u r a l s i m i l a r i t i e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n c o n t r a s t w i t h the U n i t e d S t a t e s , but not s u r p r i s i n g l y , g i v e n t h e i r range of s o c i o p o l i t i c a l h i s t o r i e s and circumstances, they a l s o v a r y s i g n i f i c a n t l y ( C r i t t e n d e n & Bae, 1994). Therefore, i n o r d e r to e s t a b l i s h the g e n e r a l i t y of the findings- xabout a t t r i b u t i o n theory, r e s e a r c h e r s should i n v e s t i g a t e them across d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l 15 settings, i . e . , d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l groups from c o l l e c t i v i s m as well as'from individualism. According to Hofstede (1980), Koreans are characterized as c o l l e c t i v i s t s along with Japanese and Chinese, while Canadians as i n d i v i d u a l i s t s . Triandis (1989), also took Korea as an example of a very c o l l e c t i v i s t i c culture i n his argument. However, cultures are constantly changing and i n most cases, the change i s slow (Triandis, 1994). Korean culture i s currently one of the fastest changing cultures i n the world, owing to rapid i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n and g l o b a l i z a t i o n . Korea used to be r e l a t i v e l y i s o l a t e d from other c u l t u r a l influences, u n t i l she opened up her door widely to the West aft e r the Korean War. Rapid change and progress i n economic growth and technology, increased world-wide trade and t r a v e l , and open market p o l i c y from the USA introduced Korean people to an enormous exposure to western culture and l i f e s tyle change. This exposure to western culture has been even more dominant e s p e c i a l l y i n the l a s t 10 to 15 years r e s u l t i n g i n more trade 'and t r a v e l and more western ( i . e . , American) entertainment i n Korean culture. For example, the mass media i n Korea are introducing American c u l t u r a l elements to Korea as much as, i f not more, to the rest of the globe nowadays. Western (mainly American) movies, sports events (NBA, NFL, Major League, PGA and Etc.) and pop music are r e a d i l y available almost at 16 the same time as i n the country they o r i g i n a t e from. The younger g e n e r a t i o n , i n p a r t i c u l a r , seems to p r e f e r western music over Korean, western"foods such as Mcdonald's burger and KFC's c h i c k e n over t r a d i t i o n a l Korean snacks. There i s a new word i n Korean c a l l e d "Shinsedae", which means c h i l d r e n of new g e n e r a t i o n . They tend to t h i n k and behave d i f f e r e n t l y than the t r a d i t i o n a l ways, as w e l l as to have d i f f e r e n t moral and s o c i a l v a l u e s . One cannot help wondering whether Korean c u l t u r e i s i n a g r e a t t r a n s i t i o n p e r i o d through l e a n i n g more toward i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c c u l t u r e , although Hofstede (1980) and others c l a s s i f i e d Korea i n t o v e r y c o l l e c t i v i s t i c c u l t u r e . I t may be worthwhile t a k i n g i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h a t Hofstede's survey data were c o l l e c t e d i n 1968 and 1972, n e a r l y 30 years ago ( i . e . , one g e n e r a t i o n ago). T r i a n d i s (1989) argues t h a t the greater the affluence of a society, the more f i n a n c i a l independence can be turned into social and emotional independence. Thus, as s o c i e t i e s become more complex and a f f l u e n t , they also can become more i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c . These two major antecedents of i n d i v i d u a l i s m appear to f i t the d e s c r i p t i o n of ever so r a p i d l y changing Korean s o c i e t y . I t seems t h a t Korea i s f a s t becoming i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c , n e v e r t h e l e s s Korea s t i l l has c o l l e c t i v i s t i c t e ndencies, and Canada i s somewhat l e s s i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c and more c o l l e c t i v i s t i c than the 17 United States (Lipset, 1990.) . However, i n t h i s study I w i l l use the e x i s t i n g c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of Korean being more or less c o l l e c t i v i s t i c and Canada being r e l a t i v e l y i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c , which has been documented by many researchers. If t h i s c u l t u r a l d i s t i n c t i o n i s v a l i d , the noticeable differences i n a t t r i b u t i o n patterns as well as i n performance should be observed from samples i n the two d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l contexts. It would be of interest to see whether the findings from other c o l l e c t i v i s t i c cultures ( i . e . , Japanese and Chinese) and i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c cultures ( i . e . , American) can be found i n Korean culture and Canadian culture, respectively. Korea i s a c u l t u r a l l y homogeneous society where" modesty, respect for authorities and elders, duty, order, in-group harmony, concerns for correct action and s o c i a l approval, hard work, s e l f -d i s c i p l i n e and persistence are highly valued, r e s u l t i n g from t r a d i t i o n a l Confucian teachings. On the contrary, Canada i s a c u l t u r a l l y d i v e r s i f i e d society where self-assurance, s e l f - r e l i a n c e , s e l f - a c t u a l i z a t i o n , independence, pleasure, achievement, competition, c r e a t i v i t y , o r i g i n a l i t y , freedom and the pursuit of i n d i v i d u a l happiness are highly valued. R e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e research on Korean's a t t r i b u t i o n a l s t y l e s has been generated by a t t r i b u t i o n theory and i t s findings are inconclusive. Kim (1980) found Korean adolescents to be as i n t e r n a l 18 as t h e i r age peers i n Canada. Bae & Crittenden (1989), found an a t t r i b u t i o n a l style that i s internal and neither s e l f - s e r v i n g nor s e l f - e f f a c i n g i n t h e i r study of Korean un i v e r s i t y students. However, Crittenden & Fugita (1987) have reported that Korean students are more s e l f - e f f a c i n g and pessimistic i n t h e i r explanations of the events that happen to them. Yet i n another c r o s s - c u l t u r a l study of f i v e nations (Belgium, West Germany, India, South Korea, and England) with two d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l class groups (tax drivers and c i v i l servants), Schuster et a l . (1989) suggest that four of the f i v e nations (the Indian sample being an exception) did not d i f f e r from one.another i n t h e i r ratings of s p e c i f i c causes on the causal dimensions. It would not be appropriate to generalize'the findings of these subgroups to the general populations of the same culture. To date, no research attempt has been made to compare a t t r i b u t i o n patterns i n the context of cognitive performances cross-c u l t u r a l l y , although interest i n c r o s s - c u l t u r a l studies on a t t r i b u t i o n has been receiving increasingly more attention. Thus, the focus of the present study i s on comparing a t t r i b u t i o n patterns on inductive conditional rule learning i n two d i f f e r e n t cultures, (Korean and Canadian) within the framework of c o l l e c t i v i s m versus individualism. This i s to determine whether and how c u l t u r a l values 19 a f f e c t motivational processes therefore, leading to influence cognitive performance i n reasoning. Learning tasks i n t h i s study are presumably based on inductive rather than deductive processes. The tasks involving inductive reasoning .will be c u l t u r e - f a i r tasks by using geometric figures of d i f f e r e n t colors and shapes, which e n t a i l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s of rule instances into defining p o s i t i v e or negative instance categories. These research issues can be put and i l l u s t r a t e d as shown i n Figure 1. Figure 1.: Diagram of Research Issues for investigation I n d u c t i v e R e a s o n i n g Performance (Conjunctive & Conditional Rule Learning) 20 E. Summary of Statements of hypotheses According.to Triandis's. (1989, 1994) and others' assertion, i t i s assumed that people•in i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c cultures tend to give primacy to personal goals over in-group goals, a t t r i b u t e t h e i r success to t h e i r own a b i l i t y and emphasize equity i n the d i s t r i b u t i o n of resources. In contrast, people i n c o l l e c t i v i s t i c cultures subordinate t h e i r personal goals to the goals of in-groups, ascribe t h e i r achievement to help from others than t h e i r own a b i l i t y and are w i l l i n g to share resources based on equality and need.' Therefore, i t would be necessary to examine the v a l i d i t y of the assumption. Descriptively, Canadian subjects are expected to show interes t i n personal goals and achievements i n contrast to Korean subjects who would be concerned with goals and achievements of t h e i r in-group (e.g., family, society), under the assumption that Canadian i s an i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c while Korean i s a c o l l e c t i v i s t i c culture. For conjunctive inductive reasoning task, provided that the two culture groups are representative of respective'populations at si m i l a r l e v e l s of schooling and socio-economic make-up of neighbourhood (i . e . , both being the upper-middlle c l a s s ) , there may not be any s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n the performance l e v e l between Korean and Canadian students. It should be the case i n view of the 21 fact that the task involved i s a c u l t u r e - f a i r task dealing with only-geometric figures which carry l i t t l e or no c u l t u r a l biases. Based on the l i t e r a t u r e review of a t t r i b u t i o n theory and d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l contexts, it was hypothesized that Korean and Canadian, subjects would show differences i n a t t r i b u t i o n patterns following success or f a i l u r e situations examined i n the study because of the d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l values, norms and causal b e l i e f s . S p e c i f i c a l l y , i n Korean context, c u l t u r a l emphasis i s placed on hard work, s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e , persistence, s o c i a l approval and t r a d i t i o n a l inward looking of oneself when evaluating the' consequences of behaviours and performances. In contrast, in' Canada, emphasis i s placed on a b i l i t y , independence and competition. On the basis of the hypotheses stated above,.it was predicted that: 1) Korean subjects would l i k e l y a t tribute t h e i r success as well as f a i l u r e i n inductive reasoning tasks as defined earlier,, to i n t e r n a l , controllable factors (e.g., e f f o r t ) , and that 2) Canadian subjects would l i k e l y ascribe t h e i r success to i n t e r n a l factors ( a b i l i t y , effort) and f a i l u r e to external factors (task d i f f i c u l t y or bad luck) ... More' s p e c i f i c a l l y , given in. the context of reasoning performance that requires subjects dealing with the influence of . a b i l i t y , e f f o r t , task d i f f i c u l t y and other uncontrollable factors, Koreans would at t r i b u t e t h e i r low l e v e l performance as' well as t h e i r 22 high l e v e l performance to lack of/ making l o t s of e f f o r t s . In contrast, Canadians would ascribe t h e i r low l e v e l performance to task d i f f i c u l t y or bad luck and high l e v e l performance to a b i l i t y . Also, because of the di f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l values and c u l t u r a l emphases between Korean and Canadian cultures, i t was predicted that the s h i f t s i n causal a t t r i b u t i o n from others' performance (objective attribution) to one's own success or f a i l u r e (self attribution) performance might occur. Further, i t was hypothesized that the Korean students who att r i b u t e t h e i r low performance (failure) to lack of e f f o r t (controllable), would perform more e f f i c i e n t l y than the CanadOian students who attribute the low performance to other factors than e f f o r t (e.g., a b i l i t y , the task d i f f i c u l t y or bad luck), when performing on the conditional c r i t e r i o n task a f t e r getting a manipulated feedback on t h e i r own performance. It was also hypothesized that when a subject ascribes success to higher a b i l i t y , his/her subsequent performance would not be affected much. However, , a subject who attributes success to making e f f o r t would l i k e l y perform better on the subsequent reasoning task. Therefore, i t was predicted that given the e f f o r t a t t r i b u t i o n of f a i l u r e , Korean subjects would perform more accurately on the reasoning task than Canadian subjects, and that given higher a b i l i t y a t t r i b u t i o n of 23 success, Canadian subjects may perform better or at least equally well as Korean subjects. 1 CHAPTER H . METHODOLOGY A. Subjects and Design Subjects : A t o t a l of 120 Grade•7 students from two culture groups (Korean and Canadian) were i d e n t i f i e d i n a suburban community. Each c u l t u r a l group consisted of 60 children, with equal numbers of male students (30) and female students (30). Canadian subjects i n public schools were drawn from a middle-class community i n Delta, B r i t i s h Columbia. Korean counterparts were sought from a public school i n a middle-class suburban area c a l l e d Jam-sil of metropolitan Seoul. Even though i t i s extremely d i f f i c u l t to ensure the same degree of manipulation of the independent variables, attempts were made to maximize s i m i l a r i t y between two c u l t u r a l groups with respect to comparable c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of school ft populations such as socio-economic status, as well as to maximize homogeneity of each group. However since a l l the subjects were randomly selected from school, and a l l the experimental tasks were ca r r i e d out i n a natural classroom setting to prevent students from 25 perceiving heightened pressure to make extra efforts., there were 2 Canadian students of Asian o r i g i n . Research Design : The present study has two factors, culture and outcome feedback. The f i r s t can not be manipulated but were based on the sampling scheme to be used. The second factor i s the treatment of performance outcome feedback i n terms of success, f a i l u r e and control following the experimental subjects' completion of the f i r s t task, which could also function as a warm-up task. In addition, the culture factor has two.levels, Canadian and Korean, and the outcome feedback factor has three l e v e l s ; success, f a i l u r e , and control. To test the hypotheses formed i n Chapter I, altogether 5 sets of tests and tasks were u t i l i z e d . These tasks were provided i n two phases; the f i r s t phase being pre-experimental tests such as objective a t t r i b u t i o n test and culture.type c l a s s i f i c a t i o n test, and the second phase being two experimental inductive- learning tasks (conjunctive and conditional) and s e l f a t t r i b u t i o n t e s t . A l l the tests and tasks were computerized and the subject' responses and response.time were automatically recorded by computers. Sixty students within each group were delivered randomly to one of the three treatments, "success", " f a i l u r e " or "control" outcome 26 I feedback upon completion'of the'warm up task of inductive reasoning based on a bi-dimensional conjunctive c l a s s i f i c a t i o n task ( i . e . , Red C i r c l e ) . The outcome feedback, success or f a i l u r e , was given with no contingency on the performance on the f i r s t reasoning task (to be elaborated upon below). Therefore, t h i s research design can be described as a 2 (culture: Canadian vs. Korean) x 3 ( feedback condition: success, f a i l u r e , control) f a c t o r i a l design. The experimental design layout i s shown i n Table 1. Table 1. Experimental Design Phase I Pre-Experimental Tasks Phase II Inductive Reasoning Tasks Culture Obj ective a t t r i b u t i o n task Culture Type Task Conjunctive Non-verbal Task(Task2) Self a t t r i b u t i o n task Conditional Non-verbal Task(Task4) Canadian 60 60 60 Control 20 Control 20 Failu r e 20 F a i l u r e 20 Success 20 Success 2 0 Korean 60 60 60 Control 20 . Control 20 ' Failu r e 20 F a i l u r e 20 Success 20 Success 20 Dependent Measures = (a)number of instances to c r i t e r i o n (b) response rate (c) accuracy 27 B. Test and Task Materials Pre-experimental Measure (Objective causal a t t r i b u t i o n test) :-. In order to i d e n t i f y each student's a t t r i b u t i o n a l o r i e n t a t i o n and to check whether Canadian and Korean students have d i f f e r e n t a t t r i b u t i o n patterns on-other people's success or f a i l u r e s i t u a tions, a new scale of causal b e l i e f s which was developed and construct-validated by Lee & Lee (1983) was used p r i p r to the -presentation of the experimental, tasks. This scale was o r i g i n a l l y , written i n English and was translated into Korean along with a l l the other tasks i n t h i s study, i n agreement with three native Koreans including the researcher. Back tr a n s l a t i o n was not necessary due to the straightforward nature of the tasks to be translated into Korean. It i s thought that students' i n d i v i d u a l differences i n a t t r i b u t i o n pattern would aid our understanding of the e f f e c t of s i t u a t i o n a l performance outcome feedback, when they are performing on inductive reasoning tasks. The scale as such consisted of 12 items (situations), 6 of which provided the context of success scenarios and the other 6 provided that of f a i l u r e scenarios. The half of the items (6) were generated from women and the other half from men as agents of each s i t u a t i o n to prevent gender biases from, occurring. Students' a t t r i b u t i o n a l patterns could be .revealed by the 28 paired comparison method , (Torgerson, 1975), from which each student's score on the perceived four causal factors: a b i l i t y , e f f o r t , task d i f f i c u l t y and luck could be derived. For each si t u a t i o n , four causal statements were provided corresponding to these four s a l i e n t causal factors. For example, i n one of the six Success scenario, Q. Sally did very well on the spelling test. Why do you think this happened? a) She is good at spelling.(ability) b) The spelling test was easy.(test difficulty) c) .She studied a lot for the test.(effort) 1 d) She was lucky.(luck) , These four alternatives were presented pairwise i n a l l possible combinations y i e l d i n g six paired comparisons for each s i t u a t i o n , altogether amounting to 72 pairs of statements. The 6 pairs were randomly sequenced within each s i t u a t i o n i n order to minimize any systematic response biases, and the success and f a i l u r e s i t u a t i o n s were alternated i n order of presentation (Lee & Lee, 1983) . Subjects' task was to choose one of each p a i r of four response alter n a t i v e s ( i . e . , a, b, c, d above). Culture Type C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Test by Selected Features (Goal Pursuit, Success A t t r i b u t i o n , Resource Sharing): To help confirm the v a l i d i t y 29 of the assumption based on l i t e r a t u r e review that Korean culture i s c o l l e c t i v i s t i c while Canadian i s i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c , a culture type c l a s s i f i c a t i o n questionnaire was administered to the. subjects of both c u l t u r a l groups. Three c r i t i c a l features (goal, a t t r i b u t i o n , and resources) of culture were selected from Triandis's (1994) c u l t u r a l elements to make up 3 questions of the questionnaire. Each question has four response alternatives matching 4 c u l t u r a l l e v e l constructs of egocentricity representing the exclusive-self of individualism (Lee, 1994), ind i v i d u a l , family and society. For each question item 4 response alternatives were paired i n a l l possible combinations y i e l d i n g s i x pa i r s . Subjects were asked to make preference judgements over 18 paired comparisons by choosing one from each p a i r . The following i s a question on Goal pursuit. 1. Jack is 19 years old and is selecting his major at UBC. He wants' to go to medical school and become a doctor. Why do you think Jack wants to be a medical doctor? a. Jack wants to live a comfortable l i f e in the future. b. Jack wants to be somebody. c. Jack wants to bring glory to his family. d. Jack wants to help those less fortunate in society. 30 This test was designed i n English f i r s t and translated into Korean for Korean subjects. A l l the nouns (e.g., Jack, UBC) were replaced with appropriate Korean pronouns. Conjunctive Inductive Reasoning Task: As mentioned e a r l i e r , a l l the learning tasks involved inductive reasoning rather than deductive reasoning. The reason for t h i s was that inductive reasoning was thought to be cogn i t i v e l y more demanding than deductive reasoning so 'that i t gave a better chance to observe motivational a t t r i b u t i o n processes. Also, learning tasks i n t h i s study were c u l t u r e - f a i r tasks using geometric figures, which can be c a r r i e d out without t r a n s l a t i o n . The only text that needs t r a n s l a t i o n was the instructions which were provided with redundancy and context to maximize l i n g u i s t i c equivalency between English and Korean. The f i r s t inductive rule learning as a reasoning task was constructed by the use of tri-dimensional geometric designs. It was e s s e n t i a l l y a rule-learning variant of the Brunerian (1956) conceptual•rule formation task, where two dimensions of color and form, each with 3 attribute valued, ( i . e . , color: red, yellow, blue; form: c i r c l e , square, triangle) geometric figures on a design would be made relevant to c l a s s i f y i n g each figure into p o s i t i v e (Yes) or negative (No) rule instance group. Subjects were asked to f i n d the 31 rule by means of c l a s s i f y i n g the instances into two categories. The rule involved was a conjunctive (AND) one of color and form ( i . e . , Red C i r c l e was a po s i t i v e instance, while a l l the other colored shapes were negative). The rule instances were displayed continuously i n a set of 18 colored shapes on computer screen on at a time with a rectangular border around each design. As soon as the subject made a response choice on each instance, the feedback was provided automatically on the screen whether they made a correct choice or not. Subjects continued to work on the task at her/his own pace u n t i l s/he reached the mastery c r i t e r i o n , i . e . , 18 consecutive correct answers. The number of t r i a l s and the t o t a l time taken to master the rule were recorded by the computer. This task served two purposes: (a) as a warm up task, and (b) as the basis of de l i v e r i n g outcome \feedback (success, f a i l u r e or control) for subjects' s e l f a t t r i b u t i o n . Self A t t r i b u t i o n Test: One t h i r d of the subjects was given "success" (better than the average) outcome feedback, another t h i r d " f a i l u r e " (below the average), and the f i n a l t h i r d "control" (just the average) outcome feedback at random with no contingency on t h e i r actual performance on the f i r s t inductive task (conjunctive rule f i n d i n g ) . 32 Upon delivery of outcome feedback, a questionnaire of post-task a t t r i b u t i o n asking the subject to i d e n t i f y his or her own reasons for the performance outcome was administered. S p e c i f i c a l l y , four options corresponding to four causal factors for each "success"/ " f a i l u r e " were provided. a) I am always good/bad at this kind of game (ability). b) The game was easy / d i f f i c u l t to me (task d i f f i c u l t y ) . c) I have made my best effort/very l i t t l e effort working on this game(effort). d) I just happened to have played this game very well /have a bad luck with this game today(luck). As for control group, i n which each subject received a average feedback ( i . e . , your score i s just about the average) with no contingency on the performance on the conjunctive inductive task, a di f f e r e n t questionnaire was given to control for the e f f e c t of outcome feedback of success or f a i l u r e on the consequent performance task. S p e c i f i c a l l y , four options for control group "were as follows. a) I like this game very much. , b) I like this game somewhat. c) I like this game a l i t t l e bit. d) I like this game very l i t t l e . Inductive Conditional Reasoning Task: The second inductive reasoning task was constructed the same way as the f i r s t inductive reasoning 33 by employing two tri-dimensional geometric designs which vary i n terms of color, form the figures except for that the rule students had to f i n d was a conditional one ( IF..., THEN...) instead of conjunctive one.- Therefore, the task was defined as a conditional rule learning task by making color and form as relevant ( i . e . , IF i t i s Red, THEN i t must be C i r c l e ) . It was presented as c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of varying geometric designs into two response categories, p o s i t i v e (Yes) or negative (No) instance groups by the conditional rule.•Each student performed on the task u n t i l s/he found the rule to help her/him get 18 correct responses i n a row. A l l the i n s t r u c t i o n a l materials for the experiment were o r i g i n a l l y written i n English', then they were translated into Korean for Korean subjects. C. Apparatus A l l four tasks were computerized using Microsoft QuickBasic Version 4.5, and presented to subjects with color computers. For. Korean data c o l l e c t i o n , a computer lab equipped with 3 0 PC terminals of 486 IBM compatible at the public school s i t e i n Seoul, Korea was used. As,for the counterpart Canadian school, a computer lab at the elementary school s i t e i n Delta, BC, equipped with 15 operating 34 286 IBM PS 2 computers was'used for the experiment. Also paper and pe n c i l was provided to aid memory i n mastering the f i r s t and the second inductive rule learning tasks. D. Experimental Procedure The same experimental procedure was used i n each culture. As a class of 'students arrived at the computer laboratory at each school s i t e , the research, and the experimenter of the same ethnic group using the same language as the subjects welcomed the subject's p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the project. And the experimenter gave a short description of the process to the subjects and ensured that the subject had computer keyboarding s k i l l s and understanding of the task procedure i n terms of concrete actions on each of inductive tasks. P r i o r to running experimental sessions, the new scale of causal' b e l i e f s (other-attribution) was given on computer'screen i n d i v i d u a l l y to both c u l t u r a l groups. Sixty students i n each c u l t u r a l groups were asked to make preference judgements over 72 paired comparisons by choosing one from each pai r . This a t t r i b u t i o n test was followed by culture type c l a s s i f i c a t i o n t e s t . No feedback was given for neither tests. 35 A f t e r completing the culture type c l a s s i f i c a t i o n test, each student was allowed to go on to the next task, the conjunctive rule learning task. A short i n s t r u c t i o n for the f i r s t inductive task (conjunctive rule learning task) was given just before displaying rule instances, one at a time on computer screen i n t h e i r native languages, respectively. Subjects were t o l d the number of dimensions and att r i b u t e s of each dimension, and they had to develop the conceptual rule by themselves (Lee, 1985). Each subject operated the computer at her or his own pace while getting a feedback on each rule•instance on the computer screen whether the answer they gave for the p a r t i c u l a r instance was the correct one or not. This procedure was continued u n t i l the subject reached the mastery c r i t e r i o n of 18 correct answers i n a row. Subjects were encouraged to respond as fast as they could although there was no l i m i t i n time to complete the task. Upon completion of the conjunctive rule learning task, students were.provided with a feedback on the performance, i . e . , above the average, below the average or just the average (success, f a i l u r e or control) i n a random .order of three conditions. Shortly a f t e r the feedback, each subject was asked to answer a questionnaire of causal a t t r i b u t i o n on her/his own performance (se l f - a t t r i b u t i o n ) by choosing one of four statements, each of which represented four 36 dominant causes of a t t r i b u t i o n (e.g., a b i l i t y , task d i f f i c u l t y , e f f o r t , and luck). F i n a l l y , students were given another inductive learning task, very s i m i l a r to the f i r s t one, except that t h i s time the rule they had to f i n d to arrive at the mastery c r i t e r i o n was a conditional one instead of a conjunctive one. Almost i d e n t i c a l i n s t r u c t i o n as the one for the f i r s t inductive task was given with a caution saying that t h i s i s a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t and more challenging task. Subjects were n o t i f i e d of the terminal performance c r i t e r i a , i . e . , 18 consecutive correct responses on the second inductive task as well as on the f i r s t inductive task. Subjects' response time on a l l the tests and tasks was recorded on the computer automatically with b u i l t - i n timing device." The time for completing the experiment ranged from 12 to 53 minutes. Most students took 2 0 to 3 0 minutes and the average time for f i n i s h i n g the experimental tasks was 24 minutes. Subjects were also provided with a sheet of paper and a p e n c i l to a i d them i n terms of memory, while tr y i n g to f i n d a rule dealing with geometric figures i n the f i r s t and the second inductive reasoning tasks. 37 E. Measurements and Analysis The primary dependent variables included the number of instances required for the mastery of the conjunctive reasoning task and the conditional .reasoning task as well-as response rate and accuracy. Subject's objective a t t r i b u t i o n responses were observed using the new scale of causal beliefs,, and post-task s e l f - a t t r i b u t i o n responses were described and\compared across two culture groups. The e f f e c t of objective causal'•• a t t r i b u t i o n patterns on conjunctive rule learning (Task2), and.the" ef f e c t of conjunctive rule learning and s e l f causal a t t r i b u t i o n patterns on conditional rule learning (Task4) were analyzed by the analysis of variance, combined with the analysis of i n t e r a c t i o n between causal .attribution scores and inductive reasoning performance, and f i n a l l y analysis of covariance. Data, c o l l e c t e d and stored i n 3.5" diskettes were downloaded into 486 IBM computer for analysis. SPSS for Windows Version 6.0 was used to carry: out the analysis. 38 CHAPTER HL RESULTS The r e s u l t s of t h i s study are presented i n t h i s chapter i n s i x sections:(a) culture type differences of Canadians and Koreans grade 7 preadolescent, (b) predictive relations between the causal a t t r i b u t i o n and inductive reasoning, (c) c u l t u r a l group differences i n objective causal a t t r i b u t i o n i n patterns and simple rule inductive reasoning performance, (d) s h i f t s i n causal a t t r i b u t i o n from objective to s e l f performance a t t r i b u t i o n , (e) i n t e r a c t i o n analysis of s e l f a t t r i b u t i o n on reasoning, and (f) outcome feedback and culture group e f f e c t s on reasoning. As stated i n Chapter I, the primary purpose of t h i s study was to i d e n t i f y and explain elements of the c u l t u r a l differences in., a s p e c i f i c psychological domain by comparing cognitive performance i n inductive reasoning as related to causal a t t r i b u t i o n patterns of children from Korea and Canada. A l l s t a t i s t i c a l tests were carried.out using the data co l l e c t e d through computerized learning program at the conventional Type T error of 0.05. C r i t e r i o n measures used were the number of instances to the mastery (Inst), response rate (Resrat: measured by d i v i d i n g the t o t a l amount of time to reach the mastery by t o t a l number of 3 9 instances), and accuracy (Accura: measured by d i v i d i n g the number of correct responses by t o t a l number of instances). Before the analysis was made, the number of instances (Inst) and Response irate (Resrat) were transformed using the power function of " - . O i l " , ' and "-1.318", respectively, to s t a b i l i z e heterogeneous variances across two c u l t u r a l groups. There were no gender differences i n terms of simple conjunctive task and conditional task. Therefore, gender was dropped i n the f i n a l data analysis. A. Culture Type differences of Canadian and Korean Grade 7 Students In chapter I, based on the culture c l a s s i f i c a t i o n theory proposed by Triandis et a l . (1988) and Hofstede, the assumption was made that Korean culture was c o l l e c t i v e as compared to Canadian culture, which was presumed tp.be r e l a t i v e l y i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c . To . help determine i f the presumed differences i n the culture type between Korean and Canadian cultures, a culture c l a s s i f i c a t i o n test was administered. The test.contained three c r i t i c a l constructs of culture (goal pursuing, success a t t r i b u t i o n , and resources sharing) as i d e n t i f i e d by Triandis (1994). Each of the three constructs was converted into a question with four choice statements, each representing four c u l t u r a l l e v e l s : egocentric!ty, i n d i v i d u a l , 40 family, and society. The four choices' for each construct question were presented i n a l l possible pairs producing s i x pairs of choices for each question. The Task was to choose one of the two statements from each p a i r . Within each construct item, for any one of the four given c u l t u r a l l e v e l s , the maximum'number of choices a subject could make was 3 and the minimum number of choices was 0. Therefore, the scores across the four lev e l s for each construct are i p s a t i v e . Table 2 shows the observed mean scores of the three c u l t u r a l constructs (goal pursuing, a t t r i b u t i o n of success-, and resource sharing) by four c u l t u r a l l e v e l s . As can be seen from Table 2 and Figure 2, there were differences between Canadian ..and Korean sub j ects i n terms of the three c r i t i c a l c u l t u r a l constructs (goal pursuing, success a t t r i b u t i o n , and.resources, sharing) on the four culture l e v e l s (egocentricity, s e l f , family, and society). ANOVA test r e s u l t s show that Canadian and Korean subjects d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y , i n each of the three c r i t i c a l c u l t u r a l constructs on a l l four c u l t u r a l l e v e l s . S p e c i f i c a l l y , Korean subjects are more egocentric than Canadian subjects i n a l l three c u l t u r a l constructs, i.e.', i n goal pursuing (1.53 vs. 1.43), resource sharing (0.97 vs. 0.83), and p a r t i c u l a r l y in. success a t t r i b u t i o n (1.87 vs. 0.58), Fa,us, = 62.344, P< . 000 (MSe=.7925). However, Canadians are more i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c than Koreans i n goal pursuing (1.70 vs. 1.08), Fa,ne)=13.304, p<.000 (MSe=.857), but Koreans are more i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c i n resource sharing (1.43 vs..1.78), Fu,u8,=4.989, p<. 027 (MSe=.737), while both culture • groups remain the same i n success a t t r i b u t i o n (-2.30 vs. 2.22) . Table 2. Observed Means of Cultural Orientation (Preference) Scores by Culture Groups (N=i2o) • . . ' - j - . . ' . . ' Cultural Level Egocentricity Individualism Family Society • Context . G s . R G S R G S R G S R Canadian 1.433 .583 .833 1.700 2.300 1.433 .867 1.483 2.150 2.000 1.633 1.583 Korean 1.533 1.867 .967 1.083 2.217 1.783 1.100 1.050 . 1.917 2.283 .867 • 1.333 Aggregated Mean Scores by Four Culture Levels within Each Group (Rank order of Aggregated Mean Scores) Canadian 2.849 (4) 5.433 (1) 4.500 (3) 5.216(2) Korean 4.367 (3) 5.083 (1) 3,967 (4) 4.483 (2) Numbers in parentheses are rank orders within each culture group. Figure 2: Cult u r a l Preference 2 1.43 .1.53 1.5 J Egocentricity 1.87 0.5 0 3 2 1 0.867 1.1 0.83 0-97 • Can BKor Family 2 1 5 1917 1.48 , , rtfTM, • Can BKor .2.5 2 1.5 . 1 . 0.5 . Individualism 2.3 2.217 1.43 1.78 • Can IKor 2.283 Society 1 63 1.583 a 1 5 8 3 1.333 • Can BKor 42 In addition, Canadians tended to be more family-oriented than Koreans i n success a t t r i b u t i o n (1.48 vs. 1.05), F(i,uS>=18.212, p<.000 (MSe=.626), while both remaining about the same i n goal pursuing (1.10 vs. 0.87) as well as i n resource sharing (2.15 vs. 1.92) . S i m i l a r l y , Canadians are more society-oriented than Koreans i n success a t t r i b u t i o n (1.63 vs. 0.87), Fn;ut»=12.446, p<.001 (MSe=.820), while both Koreans and Canadians remaining about the same i n goal pursuing (2.28 vs. 2.00) and i n resource sharing (1.58 vs. 1.33) Findings from the culture c l a s s i f i c a t i o n test showed that Canadian subjects were more i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c i n pursuing goals and more family-and society-oriented i n a t t r i b u t i n g t h e i r success than Koreans, while Koreans were more egocentric i n a t t r i b u t i n g t h e i r success, and more i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c i n sharing resources than t h e i r counterparts. As can be seen from the aggregated mean scores of Table 2, Canadian and Korean subjects were, o v e r a l l , s i m i l a r to each other i n terms of i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c and society-orientated culture le v e l s , with Canadian subjects being more so than Korean subjects. 43 B. Predictive Relations between the Causal Attribution and Inductive Reasoning A question was posed as to whether students' pre-task causal a t t r i b u t i o n s of other's hypothetical performance outcomes (success or f a i l u r e ) a f f e c t t h e i r performance i n inductive reasoning. In order to answer t h i s question, an interaction analysis was made of Conjunctive Rule Learning (task 2). performance (transformed, transformed Resrat2, and Accura2 as dependent variables) as a function of Culture groups as an independent variable, and 6 causal a t t r i b u t i o n scores (2 dropped to deal'with the ipsative nature of the scores). ' The res u l t s of the inte r a c t i o n analysis showed that none of the four success and four f a i l u r e causal a t t r i b u t i o n scores d i f f e r e n t i a l l y predict (interact with) Task 2 performances i n terms of Inst2, Resrat2, and Accura2. Therefore, i t was decided to see i f objective a t t r i b u t i o n scores of others' success and f a i l u r e situations could be used as s t a t i s t i c a l control variables (covariates). To t h i s end, ANOCOVA was performed on transformed Tnst2, Resrat2, and Accura2 as dependent measures, with culture groups as the independent factor, the 6 a t t r i b u t i o n scores ( a b i l i t y , task, and e f f o r t for success as well as for f a i l u r e situations) of 44 each student as covafiates. Univ. Fa, 112) tests of a l l regression c o e f f i c i e n t s indicated that none of the 8 a t t r i b u t i o n scores predicted simple,inductive reasoning performance. On the basis of the aptitude treatment i n t e r a c t i o n analysis as well as ANO.COVA analyses, i t can be concluded that students' pre-task objective causal a t t r i b u t i o n of others' success and f a i l u r e outcomes influence neither Canadian nor Korean students' simple inductive reasoning performance. Accordingly, students' objective causal attribution•scores and conjunctive rule learning (Task2) performance measures were subjected to separate ANOVAs i n order to determine culture group differences between Canadian and Korean children. These differences are addressed i n the following section. C. Culture Group Differences in Objective Causal Attribution in Patterns and Simple Rule Inductive Reasoning Performance Cultural Group differences i n Objective Causal A t t r i b u t i o n : To determine individuals' causal a t t r i b u t i o n a l orientation and to check to see whether Canadian and Korean students have d i f f e r e n t a t t r i b u t i o n patterns on other people's performance situations, a causal a t t r i b u t i o n task was administered before the experimental tasks. 45 It was hypothesized i n chapter I that Korean students would be more l i k e l y a t t r i b u t e t h e i r success as well as f a i l u r e to i n t e r n a l , c ontrollable factors, such as e f f o r t s , due to the c u l t u r a l emphasis on hard work, s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e and persistence. In contrast, Canadian students would ascribe t h e i r success to inter n a l . f a c t o r s such as a b i l i t y or e f f o r t , and f a i l u r e to external factors such as task d i f f i c u l t y or bad luck. The Objective Causal A t t r i b u t i o n Task (i . e . , a t t r i b u t i n g other people's success or f a i l u r e situations) which was composed of 12 hypothetical situations (six success and six f a i l u r e ) , was administered to a l l the subjects. For each s i t u a t i o n , four causal choices corresponding to the perceived four causal factors ( i . e . , a b i l i t y , task d i f f i c u l t y , e f f o r t and luck) were presented pairwise i n a l l possible combinations, r e s u l t i n g i n 6 paired comparisons. A t o t a l of 72 pairs- for the 12 si t u a t i o n items were given for students to choose one out of each'- pair. Therefore, the maximum number of choices a student could make was 3 and the minimum number was 0 for each s i t u a t i o n a l item. In other words, the maximum number of answers a subject could choose for any one of four given causal factors was 18,v and the minimum was 0 within the s i x success situations (this was the case for the six f a i l u r e situations as well). The observed means of 8 causal a t t r i b u t i o n scores derived are shown i n Table 3. 46 Table 3. Observed Means of Aggregated Causal A t t r i b u t i o n Scores by-Culture Groups ,. . ^ Causal Factors Situations A b i l i t y • Task D i f f i c u l t y E f f o r t Luck Canadian ( N=60 ) Success 11.167 6.417 13.867 - 4 .550 Failure 9.633 . .8 . 933 13.067 4 .367 Korean ( N=6 0 ) Success 10.750 6.267 14 .950 4.033 Failure 7.833 8.700 14.867 4 .600 AN ANOVA procedure was run with culture group as the independent variable and the eight types of aggregated a t t r i b u t i o n scores ( a b i l i t y , task d i f f i c u l t y , e f f o r t and luck) as dependent variables. ' As can be seen from Table 3, test results showed that Canadian and Korean subjects d i f f e r e d i n causal a t t r i b u t i o n s of others' success or f a i l u r e situations. S p e c i f i c a l l y , given success situations, Koreans attributed others' success more to e f f o r t (14.95 vs. 13.87), Fa,ii8) = 4.440, p< . 037 ' (MSe=7.930) than Canadians. Two culture groups did n o t . d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n ascribing others' high performance to a b i l i t y , task, and luck. On the other hand, given f a i l u r e situations, Koreans perceived lack of e f f o r t as the cause of low performance more than Canadians did (14.87 vs. 13.07), Fd,ii8) = 10 . 574, p<.001 (MSe=9.192) ,. whereas Canadians at t r i b u t e d 4 7 f a i l u r e to low a b i l i t y more often than Koreans (9.63 vs. 7.83),. • F(i.iie) = 8 .930, p< .003 (MSe=10 .883) . , Simple"Rule Inductive Reasoning Performance Simple rule inductive task (Task.2) was a c u l t u r e - f a i r learning task. The mastery c r i t e r i o n was 18 consecutive correct responses. The r e s u l t of t h i s analysis w i l l test the hypothesis formed i n Chapter I regarding the f i r s t inductive Task; i t was predicted that there would be no s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n the performance l e v e l between Canadian and Korean students since the task involved was a c u l t u r e - f a i r task. To test t h i s hypothesis, ANOVA was made' on the basis of data on Task 2 with the number of instances (Inst2), response rate (Resrat2), and accuracy (accura2) as the dependent variable and culture group as the independent variable. Summary data i n terms of means and SDs are presented i n Table 3a. Transformed data values are presented i n the parentheses due to the heterogeneity of observed within-group variance. It was found from Table 3.1 and Figure 3 that Canadian subjects t r i e d fewer instances (48.23 vs. 69.08), and spent more time on each instances (4.50 vs. 2.34 seconds) than Korean subjects i n order to learn-the' culture f a i r rule. 48 Table 3.1 Means and SDs of the Total Number of Rule Instances. Response rate. . and Accuracy required for the Mastery of the Conjunctive Induction Task(Task?) No. of Instances to Mastery (Inst2) Response rate (Resrat2) Performance Accuracy (Accura2) Group Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Canadian 48.233 (.960) 26.068 . (.006) 4. 501 (-.442) '4.135 ( .507) .854. .077 Korean 69.083 (.957) ' 43.94 0 ( .007) 2 . 341 '( .607) 1.705 ( .578) .862 .072 Figure 3: Culture effects on Conjunctive Rule Learning Performance • Canadian B Korean INST2 ANOVA re s u l t s indicate that the difference i n the number of instances i s s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , Fa.iisi=8. 011, P< .005 (MSe=.00004); the significance of the difference i n response-rate was on the borderline, Univ. Fa.iw=2.761, P<.099 (MSe=.2955) . These p values were somewhat reduced from .002, and .000 for the untransformed o r i g i n a l data of Inst2 and Resrat2, respectively,, when transformed data for Inst2 and Resrat2 were used. In terms of accuracy, there was no difference between Canadian and- Korean subjects. In conclusion, both culture group's showed more or.less the' 4 9 same accuracy of response i n the performance on non-verbal inductive reasoning task, while Canadians t r i e d fewer instances and spent more time per rule instance than t h e i r Korean counterparts. D. Shifts in Causal Attribution from Objective to Self Performance Attribution Two causal a t t r i b u t i o n tests were administered. The f i r s t one, objective a t t r i b u t i o n test ( i . e . , a t t r i b u t i n g others' performance outcomes) was given to a l l the subjects i n both culture groups before Task2 (conjunctive rule learning). The second one was given only to the subjects i n success and f a i l u r e conditions as soon as the subjects received t h e i r outcome feedback, which was given to the subjects, independent of t h e i r actual performance l e v e l s on Task2. The subjects were asked to choose one of the four causes for t h e i r success or f a i l u r e ( a b i l i t y , task d i f f i c u l t y , e f f o r t , and luck). The purpose of administering these two tests was to determine whether there was any difference i n causal a t t r i b u t i o n patterns between Canadian and Korean students, as well as to see whether there was any s h i f t i n a t t r i b u t i o n patterns from when a t t r i b u t i n g others' performance to when a t t r i b u t i n g t h e i r own performance. 50 A cross-tabulation of the responses to the Objective Causal A t t r i b u t i o n test with the responses from the S e l f - A t t r i b u t i o n test was shown i n Table 4. Table 4. Pre- vs. Post- Performance Causal Attribution Patterns by Culture Groups Canadian Subjects' Causal Attribution Pattern Other people's success Personally Experienced Success Other people's failure Personally experienced Failure attribution situation Ability TaskD. Effort Luck N Ability TaskD. Effort Luck N Ability 0 1 2 1.5 3.5 Ability 0 0 0 0 0 Task Difficulty 1 0 0 0 1 Task Difficulty 1.5 0 0 0 1.5 Effort 1 2 9 2.5 14.5 Effort 2.5 1 9 6 18.5 Luck 0 0 0 0 0 Luck 0 0 0 0 0 N 2 3 11 4 20 N 4 1 9 6 20 Korean Subjects' Causal Attribution Pattern Other people's success Personally Experienced Success Other people's failure Personally experienced Failure attribution situation Ability TaskD. Effort Luck N Ability TaskD. Effort Luck N Ability .5 0 0 2 2.5 Ability 0 1 0 0 1 Task Difficulty 0 0 ' 0 0 0 Task Difficulty 0 1 1 1 3 Effort 3.5 0 10 4 17.5 Effort 0 2 10 3 15 Luck 0 0 0 0 0 Luck 0 0 1 0 1 N 4 0 10 6 20 N 0 4 12 4 20 Table 4.1 Shifts in causal attribution from Pre- to Post- performance Pre-Task A t t r i b u t i o n Pattern (Other's Performance) Canadian Students Korean Students Canadian Students Korean Students Situation Success Success Failure Failure Expected Cause High Ability Lots of Efforts Task difficulty/bad luck Lack of Efforts Observed Primary Cause Lots of Efforts Lots of Efforts Lack of Efforts Lack of Efforts Observed Secondary Cause High Ability High Ability Low Ability Task Difficulty Post-Task A t t r i b u t i o n Pattern (One's own performance) Canadian Students Korean Students Canadian students Korean Students Situation Success Success Failure Failure Expected Cause High Ability Lots of Efforts Task difficulty/ bad luck Lack of Efforts Observed Primary Cause Lots of Efforts Lots of Efforts Lack of Efforts Lack of Efforts Observed Secondary Cause Good Luck Good Luck Bad Luck Task difficulty/bad luck 51 In table 4 and 4.1, subjects' objective a t t r i b u t i o n patterns were derived from using t h e i r most prominent choice responses i n the test. When a subject's objective a t t r i b u t i o n scores had a t i e between two scores (e.g., 12 for e f f o r t , and 12 for a b i l i t y ) , 0.5 was given to both a t t r i b u t i o n scores instead of choosing one over another. Subjects' s e l f - a t t r i b u t i o n patterns turned out to be d i f f e r e n t from those i n the Objective a t t r i b u t i o n test. Under success conditions, Canadians (11/20) as well as Koreans (10/20) att r i b u t e d t h e i r high performance to making e f f o r t . S i m i l a r l y , under f a i l u r e conditions, Canadians (9/20) as well as Koreans (12/20) held lack of e f f o r t as responsible for t h e i r low performance. The differences i n a t t r i b u t i o n patterns between the two culture groups were too l i t t l e to require any s t a t i s t i c a l test. It was found that subjects from both culture groups at t r i b u t e d t h e i r success or f a i l u r e d i f f e r e n t l y from when a t t r i b u t i n g other people's performance. S p e c i f i c a l l y , a f t e r experiencing successful performance on the Conjunctive rule learning task (Task2), Canadian students' objective causal a t t r i b u t i o n score of e f f o r t (14.5/20) was somewhat reduced (11/20), p a r t l y giving away to good luck (4/20) as a secondary cause of success. Similar to Canadians, Korean's e f f o r t a t t r i b u t i o n (17.5/20) of others' successful performance was reduced 52 to e f f o r t (10/20), and good luck (6/20), only more so compared to-Canadians. After experiencing personal f a i l u r e on the Task 2, Canadians' predominant e f f o r t a t t r i b u t i o n of others' f a i l u r e situations (18.5/20) were spread out across e f f o r t (9/20), luck (6/20), and a b i l i t y (4/20). While Koreans' a t t r i b u t i o n patterns had changed s i m i l a r l y to those of t h e i r counterparts, i t was only to a lesser degree, i . e . , objective e f f o r t a t t r i b u t i o n score (15/20) was reduced to (12/20), and luck (4/20) as well as Task d i f f i c u l t y (4/20)emerged as secondary causes of t h e i r personal f a i l u r e on the Task2. In sum, both Canadian and Korean children predominantly believed that e f f o r t was the primary cause to the performance outcome when a t t r i b u t i n g other people's success or f a i l u r e . However, af t e r experiencing personal success, Korean subjects gave cr e d i t to t h e i r good luck as a secondary cause more often than Canadian subjects while maintaining making e f f o r t as a primary cause to t h e i r success. A f t e r experiencing personal f a i l u r e , Canadians blamed having bad luck more often than Koreans while both culture groups believed lack of e f f o r t was responsible for t h e i r f a i l u r e i n the simple rule learning Task. 53 E. Interaction Analysis of Self Attribution on Reasoning In order to answer a question as to whether students' post-task causal a t t r i b u t i o n s ( i . e . , a t t r i b u t i n g t h e i r own performance outcomes (success or fail u r e ) a f f e c t t h e i r performance i n the subsequent inductive reasoning, An analysis of Conditional inductive reasoning (Task4) was made using Culture groups and t h e i r a t t r i b u t i o n of performance outcome (i . e . , a b i l i t y , task, e f f o r t , and luck)as independent variables, and transformed Inst4, transformed Resrat4, and Accura4 as dependent variables. The r e s u l t s of the inter a c t i o n analysis showed that none of the success and f a i l u r e a t t r i b u t i o n choices d i f f e r e n t i a l l y predict Task4 performances i n terms of Inst4, Resrat4, and Accura4. In other words, Univ. F«,?s> test results indicated that neither two way (culture group* a t t r i b u t i o n , and feedback condition* attribution) nor three way (culture*condition*attribution) i n t e r a c t i o n was s i g n i f i c a n t . Observed means of conditional inductive reasoning performance (Task4) were presented i n Table 5 with transformed scores i n the parentheses. Combined adjusted means of success and f a i l u r e f or culture groups showed that the difference i n response rate between Canadian and Korean (3.641 vs. 2.175 seconds) was s i g n i f i c a n t , Fa,7e>=10.41, 54 p<.002 (MSe=.00145). That i s , Canadian subjects spent more time on each instance than Korean subjects i n order to learn the culture f a i r conditional rule. Table 5. Means of the Number of Instances (Inst4) , Response Rate(Resrat4) and Accuracy (Accura4) of Conditional Inductive Performance (Task4) by Culture Groups (N=120) Culture Group Task4 Control F a i l u r e Success Canadian Inst4 48 800 (1. 719) 86 750 (1.860) 63 700 (1.798) Resrat4 3 910 (.935) 3 970 (.937) 3 313 (.929) Accura4 818 743 803 Korean Inst4 80 750 (1.845) 63 250 (1.785) 62 900 (1.793) Resrat4 2 020 (.964) 2 050 (.965) 2 302 (.955) Accura4 725 812 776 Therefore, i t was decided to see i f s e l f - a t t r i b u t i o n scores of success and f a i l u r e situations could be used as s t a t i s t i c a l control variables (covariates). ANOCOVA was used, with culture groups as the independent factor, 3 a t t r i b u t i o n choices ( a b i l i t y , task, and effort) of each'student as covariates, and transformed Inst4, transformed Resrat4, and Accura4 as dependent measures. Test r e s u l t s showed that a t t r i b u t i o n choices influenced the subsequent task performance i n terms of accuracy, F(3,?3)=2.804, p<.046 (MSe=.007). S p e c i f i c a l l y , regression analysis results indicated that e f f o r t , and a b i l i t y a t t r i b u t i o n choices predicted Conditional rule learning (Task4) performance i n terms of accuracy of responses; beta 55 coefficient=-.294, tm> = -2.24, p<.028, beta coefficient=-.243, tm> = -1.97, p<.053, respectively for e f f o r t , and a b i l i t y . On the basis of the ATI analysis as well as ANOCOVA analyses, i t can be concluded that students' post-task causal a t t r i b u t i o n of t h e i r own success and f a i l u r e outcomes influence neither Canadian nor Korean students' subsequent conditional inductive reasoning performance under d i f f e r e n t outcome feedback conditions. However, regardless of culture group (Canadian and Korean) or treatment condition (success and f a i l u r e ) , t h e i r e f f o r t a t t r i b u t i o n and a b i l i t y a t t r i b u t i o n influence the accuracy of performance on the subsequent task. That i s , students i n both cultures who at t r i b u t e d t h e i r high or low performance of the preceding task to e f f o r t (internal, controllable) or a b i l i t y (internal, stable) performed more accurately on the conditional reasoning task (Task4). F. Outcome Feedback and Culture Group Effects on Reasoning We have noted that subjects' s e l f - a t t r i b u t i o n did not influence d i f f e r e n t i a l l y t h e i r subsequent task performance under d i f f e r e n t feedback conditions. Knowing that, separate ANOVAs were made using transformed Inst4, transformed Resrat4 and Accura as dependent variables, and culture groups and outcome feedback conditions as 56 independent variables, to see whether there was any i n t e r a c t i o n between culture group and outcome feedback. F i r s t , main e f f e c t of culture group (Canadian vs. Korean; 3.73 vs. 2.12 seconds) was found highly s i g n i f i c a n t , only for the response rate, Univ. Fu.110=15. 089, p<.000 (MSe=.00152). No main effects of the outcome feedback conditions were found s i g n i f i c a n t . As can be seen from Figure 4, while there was no s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n of culture group with control vs. success outcome feedback, there was a s i g n i f i c a n t interaction of culture group with control vs. f a i l u r e feedback, for the number of instances , Univ. F(i,in> = 8.259, p<.005 (MSe=.0244), and for accuracy, Univ. Fa,iw=16.689, p<.000 (Mse=.0078). Based on the test results, i t can be stated that Korean subjects spent s i g n i f i c a n t l y less time per each rule instance of the conditional reasoning task than Canadian counterparts. The outcome feedback had a d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t for Canadian and Korean subjects. Figure 4: Joint E f f e c t s of Culture and Outcome Feedback on Reasoning: Control vs. Failure vs. Success - * — Canadian • - - Korean ACCURA4 0.85 0.8 0.75 J 0.7 J 0.65 Control Failure Success Control Failure Success 57 S p e c i f i c a l l y , given f a i l u r e feedback, Koreans completed the inductive reasoning task with s i g n i f i c a n t l y fewer t r i a l s and better accuracy, as compared to the performance of control feedback condition. In contrast, Canadians needed s i g n i f i c a n t l y more t r i a l s to reach the mastery and t h e i r accuracy rate decreased under f a i l u r e feedback compared to control group. To examine the predictive r e l a t i o n between Performance on simple rule learning (Task2) and performance on conditional rule learning (Task4), ANOCOVA with 3 covariates (Inst2, Resrat2, and Accura2) was used. Regression analysis results showed that only Resrat2 of the conjunctive task (Task2) was the s i g n i f i c a n t predictor for the conditional rule learning performance (Task4). Therefore, another ANOCOVA was run with transformed Inst4, transformed Resrat4, and Accura4 as dependant variables, and the e a r l i e r response rate (Resrat2) as a covariate. Regression analysis results indicated that response rate of Task2 predicted Conditional rule learning (Task4) performance, beta c o e f f i c i e n t = -.337, tai3> = -3.73, p<.000 for the number of instances to the mastery of Task4, beta coefficient=-.562, tai3> = -7.310, p<.000 for response rate, and beta c o e f f i c i e n t ^ . 1 8 1 , tdi3> = 1.99, p<.049 for accuracy. A f t e r being adjusted for Response rate of the conjunctive rule task (Task 2), the inte r a c t i o n e f f e c t of culture group with 58 control vs. f a i l u r e feedback condition on conditional reasoning performance (Task4) remained s t i l l s i g n i f i c a n t , for the number of instances, Fu,ii3> = 7. 854, p<.006 (MSe=.0218), and for accuracy on Task4, Fd,ii3,=16.167, p<.000 (MSe=.0077). This means that Canadian students needed more rule instances with lower accuracy under the f a i l u r e feedback condition, r e l a t i v e to the control group; while Korean students needed fewer instances with higher accuracy under the f a i l u r e feedback condition, r e l a t i v e to the control group. Also the main e f f e c t of culture group (Canadian vs. Korean; 3.14 vs. 2.71 seconds) for the response rate was reduced, Univ. Fu,ii3>=4.206, p<.043 (MSe=.0010). Nevertheless, culture group e f f e c t was s t i l l s i g n i f i c a n t for Response rate. No main ef f e c t s of the outcome feedback were found s i g n i f i c a n t most l i k e l y due to the s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n between culture group and outcome feedback condition. G. Summary of the major findings 1. Culture Type C l a s s i f i c a t i o n : Canadian students and Korean students are s i m i l a r to each other i n the i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c and society-orientated culture levels, with Canadians being more d i s t i n c t i v e than Koreans. In the respect of egocentricity and 59 family-orientation, the two group are opposite i n that Koreans are more egocentric and less family-oriented than Canadians. 2. Relations between the Causal A t t r i b u t i o n and Inductive Reasoning: Both Canadian and Korean pre-adolescents' objective causal a t t r i b u t i o n patterns, given others' success and f a i l u r e s i t u a t i o n s do not influence t h e i r simple inductive reasoning performance. 3. Cultural Group Differences i n Causal A t t r i b u t i o n and Simple Rule Inductive Reasoning Performance: F i r s t , Canadians and Koreans d i f f e r e d i n causal attributions of others' success or f a i l u r e s i t u a t i o n s . While both Canadians and Koreans perceived exerting e f f o r t was the major cause to the performance outcome, Koreans at t r i b u t e d other's success to e f f o r t more often than Canadians and other's f a i l u r e to lack of e f f o r t more often than Canadians. In contrast, Canadians attributed other's f a i l u r e to low a b i l i t y more often than Koreans. Second, the two culture groups d i f f e r e d i n terms of Conjunctive inductive task (Task2) performance. Canadian subjects reached the mastery c r i t e r i o n with a fewer number of instances (Inst2) and slower Response rate (Resrat2) than Koreans, but not d i f f e r e n t l y i n 60 terms of performance accuracy. That i s , Koreans needed more rule instances to master the inductive reasoning task and responded faster than Canadian counterparts. 4. S h i f t s i n Causal a t t r i b u t i o n from Objective to Self A t t r i b u t i o n : Both Canadian and Korean children predominantly believed e f f o r t was the primary cause of the performance outcome when a t t r i b u t i n g other people's success or f a i l u r e . However, i n the s e l f a t t r i b u t i o n test, a f t e r experiencing personal success, Korean subjects gave c r e d i t to t h e i r good luck as a secondary cause more often than Canadian subjects while maintaining making e f f o r t as a primary cause of t h e i r success. While both culture groups believed lack of e f f o r t was responsible for t h e i r f a i l u r e i n the simple rule learning Task, Canadians blamed having bad luck more than Koreans a f t e r experiencing personal f a i l u r e . Therefore, i t was concluded that subjects i n two culture groups showed by and large s i m i l a r a t t r i b u t i o n patterns i n the objective and s e l f - a t t r i b u t i o n t e s t s . While both culture groups recognized e f f o r t as the key to good performance as well as to poor performance, a f t e r experiencing personal success or f a i l u r e , Canadians as well as Koreans showed reduced e f f o r t a t t r i b u t i o n and increased luck a t t r i b u t i o n . This was 61 the case with Canadians, given f a i l u r e feedback, and with Koreans, given success feedback. 5. Outcome Feedback and Self a t t r i b u t i o n E f f e c t s on Conditional Reasoning: Both Canadian and Korean children's a t t r i b u t i o n of the preceding task performance outcome (i . e . , success or f a i l u r e ) did not influence d i f f e r e n t i a l l y t h e i r subsequent performance on the conditional reasoning task. But, i n general, t h e i r e f f o r t a t t r i b u t i o n d e f i n i t e l y , and a b i l i t y a t t r i b u t i o n somewhat influence the accuracy of performance. 6. Outcome Feedback and Culture Group Ef f e c t s on Reasoning: In general, Koreans studied the examples of the conditional rule s i g n i f i c a n t l y faster than Canadians. Further, Koreans needed s i g n i f i c a n t l y fewer examples to mastery and t h e i r accuracy of responses increased under f a i l u r e feedback condition as compared to that under the control condition, whereas Canadian needed s i g n i f i c a n t l y more examples to mastery under f a i l u r e feedback and t h e i r accuracy l e v e l of performance decreased. Koreans' r e l a t i v e l y faster ( i . e . , impulsive response) responding mode was observed and originated from the i n i t i a l simple inductive reasoning task performance (Task2). Thus, when t h e i r 62 e a r l i e r response rate was used as a covariate, i t s i g n i f i c a n t l y predicted the number of examples to mastery, and response rate as well as accuracy on the conditional c r i t e r i o n task (Task4). It means that Koreans' greater need for the number of examples to mastery than Canadians stemmed from t h e i r impulsive response mode, which was evident i n the preceding simple inductive task performance. 63 CHAPTER IV. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION A. Summary of the Findings As Empirical Evidence Culture type c l a s s i f i c a t i o n : The findings from the present study provided only p a r t i a l support for the assumption that Canadian culture i s r e l a t i v e l y i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c as compared to Korean culture, which was assumed to be c o l l e c t i v i s t i c . In general, Canadians and Koreans are si m i l a r to each other i n the i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c and . society-orientated culture levels, with Canadians being more so. S p e c i f i c a l l y , Canadian students showed a tendency to be more i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c i n goal pursuing, and more society-oriented i n success a t t r i b u t i o n than t h e i r counterparts, whereas Koreans tended to be more i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c i n resource .sharing than Canadians. In the egocentricity and family-orientation, the two culture groups are opposite i n that Korean students are more egocentric, and less family-oriented i n a t t r i b u t i n g t h e i r success than Canadian students. A t t r i b u t i o n patterns: Canadians and Koreans showed by and large s i m i l a r a t t r i b u t i o n patterns i n the objective ( i . e . , a t t r i b u t i n g " 64 other people's success or f a i l u r e s i t u a t i o n s ) , and s e l f - a t t r i b u t i o n ( i . e . , a t t r i b u t i n g t h e i r own experience of success or f a i l u r e situations) tests. When a t t r i b u t i n g other people's.hypothetical success or f a i l u r e , both culture groups perceived exerting e f f o r t (an i n t e r n a l , and c o n t r o l l a b l e factor) was the primary cause of the performance outcome. However, Koreans attributed others' success and f a i l u r e to e f f o r t more often than Canadians, while Canadians att r i b u t e d others' f a i l u r e to low a b i l i t y (an in t e r n a l , stable, and uncontrollable factor) more often than Koreans. After experiencing t h e i r personal success or f a i l u r e , while maintaining e f f o r t as a main cause of success and f a i l u r e , Canadians as well as Koreans showed reduced e f f o r t a t t r i b u t i o n and increased luck (an external, and uncontrollable factor) a t t r i b u t i o n . It i s noteworthy that t h i s was the case with Canadians under f a i l u r e feedback, and with Koreans under success feedback. These findings, i n general, support the predictions regarding Korean students' a t t r i b u t i o n patterns, but not about Canadian students'. It was expected that Canadians would attribute t h e i r success to an int e r n a l , uncontrollable factor ^ a b i l i t y ) , and f a i l u r e to external factors (task d i f f i c u l t y , or bad luck). 65 Overall, both culture groups showed sim i l a r a t t r i b u t i o n patterns i n that they both believed e f f o r t was the main reason for the performance outcome, whether i t was others' o r ' t h e i r own performance. A t t r i b u t i o n of outcome feedback and inductive reasoning: Both Canadian and Korean students' pre-task objective causal a t t r i b u t i o n patterns ( i . e . , a t t r i b u t i n g others' success or f a i l u r e performance outcome) did not influence t h e i r simple rule learning performance. Further, students' post-task causal a t t r i b u t i o n of t h e i r own success or f a i l u r e outcomes did not influence t h e i r subsequent conditional inductive reasoning performance under d i f f e r e n t outcome feedback conditions, either. However, t h e i r e f f o r t a t t r i b u t i o n strongly influenced the accuracy o f performance, while a b i l i t y a t t r i b u t i o n somewhat influenced the accuracy of performance on the subsequent task. In other words, students i n both cultures who a t t r i b u t e d t h e i r good or poor performance of the preceding task to e f f o r t (an in t e r n a l , unstable and controllable factor) or a b i l i t y (an i n t e r n a l , stable, and uncontrollable factor) performed more accurately on the conditional reasoning task (Task 4 ). These findings, o v e r a l l , lend support to the predictions made i n Chapter I i n that subjects who ascribe t h e i r performance to e f f o r t would perform better on the 66 subsequent reasoning task. However, d i f f e r e n t from what was predicted was that Canadians as well as Koreans ascribed t h e i r good and poor performance to e f f o r t . .Culture e f f e c t s on simple rule reasoning performance: Canadian and Korean students d i f f e r e d i n t h e i r performance on simple rule learning task (Task 2). Canadian subjects required fewer rule instances and spent more time per rule instance than Korean subjects i n mastering a rule whose content^was c u l t u r e - f a i r . However, as predicted, both culture groups showed more or less the same l e v e l of performance accuracy on the simple inductive reasoning task. Culture e f f e c t s on conditional reasoning performance: Both culture groups' performance on the conditional rule learning task (Task 4) was si m i l a r to each other, except for the response rate. Korean subjects spent much less time (i . e . , impulsive response) for each rule instance of the conditional reasoning task than Canadian counterparts to acquire a conditional rule. Koreans' r e l a t i v e l y faster ( i . e . , impulsive response) response rate on the simple rule learning task predicted the number, of examples to mastery as well as response rate on the current c r i t e r i o n task. In other words, Koreans' greater need for more rule 67 i n s t a n c e s to mastery than Canadians stemmed from t h e i r i m p u l s i v e response mode, which was more evident i n the p r e c e d i n g simple i n d u c t i v e task p e r f cprmance . J o i n t e f f e c t s of c u l t u r e and outcome feedback on r e a s o n i n g : J o i n t e f f e c t s of c u l t u r e and outcome feedback were found on Canadian s u b j e c t s as w e l l as on Korean s u b j e c t s who r e c e i v e d f a i l u r e feedback. Under f a i l u r e feedback c o n d i t i o n , Koreans l e a r n e d a c o n d i t i o n a l r u l e w i t h much fewer t r i a l s and b e t t e r accuracy, r e l a t i v e t o the c o n t r o l feedback c o n d i t i o n . In c o n t r a s t , Canadians r e q u i r e d more t r i a l s to l e a r n the c o n d i t i o n a l r u l e and t h e i r performance became l e s s ' a c c u r a t e a f t e r e x p e r i e n c i n g p e r s o n a l f a i l u r e as compared to t h a t of the c o n t r o l group. B. Discussion The r e s u l t s f o r c u l t u r e type c l a s s i f i c a t i o n d i d not p r o v i d e a c l e a r d i s t i n c t i o n between c o l l e c t i v i s t i c and i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c c u l t u r e s , as found i n other t y p i c a l c u l t u r e s ( T r i a n d i s , 1994). The assumption t h a t Canada i s an i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c c u l t u r e and Korea i s a c o l l e c t i v i s t i c c u l t u r e was not v a l i d a t e d from the data c o l l e c t e d f o r t h i s study. As expected, Canadians showed more i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c 68 tendency i n pursuing goals. However, d i f f e r e n t from what was expected was that Canadians are more family-oriented, while Koreans are as much i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c as Canadians and more egocentric than Canadians. Considering that the less difference was observed i n c u l t u r a l o r i e n t a t i o n between Canadian and Korean than what was assumed i n t h i s study, i t was not surprising to f i n d out two c u l t u r a l groups showed by and large s i m i l a r a t t r i b u t i o n patterns i n the objective-as well as s e l f - a t t r i b u t i o n t e s t . Unlike the findings from cross-c u l t u r a l studies with t y p i c a l i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c and c o l l e c t i v i s t i c cultures ( i . e . , American vs. Japanese), both Koreans and Canadians recognized the importance of e f f o r t s i n success situations as well as i n f a i l u r e s i t u a t i o n s . Those findings from other c r o s s - c u l t u r a l studies of a t t r i b u t i o n theory appear to be supported i n t h i s study, only when we consider the secondary cause of performance outcomes. That i s , people i n i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c (in t h i s study, presumably Canadian) culture tend to blame external factors for t h e i r f a i l u r e ( i . e . , bad luck), while people i n c o l l e c t i v i s t i c culture (e.g., Korean) at t r i b u t e t h e i r success to external factors ( i . e . , having good luck). But the degree of difference i n a t t r i b u t i o n patterns between Canadians and Koreans was not s i g n i f i c a n t . 69 A few plausible explanations for the findings regarding the s i m i l a r i t i e s rather than differences i n c u l t u r a l o r i e n t a t i o n and a t t r i b u t i o n patterns between Canadian and Korean students can be sought. F i r s t , younger generations i n Korea nowadays, are so much under Western c u l t u r a l influences that they share s i m i l a r values with other Western cultures than with t r a d i t i o n a l Korean culture which are more evident among older generations. Second, another explanation for the s i m i l a r i t i e s between Canadian and Korean subjects i s that grade 7 children have not yet i n t e r n a l i z e d c u l t u r a l norms and values, respected more highly and as desirable i n a p a r t i c u l a r culture, quite as much compared to adolescents (e.g., college students) under the influence of more than r e a d i l y available Western culture. In terms of performance i n inductive reasoning, data appear to support the hypothesis that both culture groups would show the same l e v e l of performance. Overall, Korean students' rather impulsive response mode seems to be responsible for the performance , differences i n inductive reasoning tasks between Canadians and Koreans. There also seems to be a trade-off between the number of t r i a l s and response rate. It can be argued that Korean students' fa s t e r response rate might be r e f l e c t i o n of ever so r a p i d l y changing culture i n modern Korea. S p e c i f i c a l l y , people i n Korea tend to be 70 very interested i n getting quick results i n everything nowadays. They want to make big money quickly, become ri c h e r quickly, have a country more i n d u s t r i a l i z e d , more globalized, and developed so fast, that many t r a d i t i o n a l values are deserted quickly, e s p e c i a l l y by younger generations who view these values as not more applicable to constantly changing modern Korean society. According to Weiner's integrating theory of motivation (1994), lack of e f f o r t (internal, controllable and unstable) has more po s i t i v e e f f e c t s on achievement s t r i v i n g than does lack of a b i l i t y (internal, uncontrollable and stable) as the perceived cause of f a i l u r e . The findings of t h i s study are compatible with Weiner's theory i n that subjects who attributed t h e i r f a i l u r e to e f f o r t , independent of culture groups, performed more accurately on the subsequent task. However, subjects who attributed t h e i r f a i l u r e to low a b i l i t y i n both cultures also performed s l i g h t l y more accurately on the subsequent reasoning task than subjects who showed d i f f e r e n t a t t r i b u t i o n patterns. Data also indicate that not only e f f o r t but also a b i l i t y a t t r i b u t i o n seems to have po s i t i v e effects on the subsequent performance whether performance outcome i s good or bad ( i . e . , success or f a i l u r e s i t u a t i o n s ) . It i s not clear why a b i l i t y a t t r i b u t i o n somewhat improved rather than decreased performance on 71 the subsequent task upon receiving f a i l u r e feedback. There i s both less t h e o r e t i c a l c l a r i t y and less empirical evidence regarding the ef f e c t s generated when f a i l u r e i s due to causes that are i n t e r n a l yet uncontrollable, such as low a b i l i t y (Weiner, 1994). One possible explanation on a b i l i t y a t t r i b u t i o n having p o s i t i v e e f f e c t s on performance among grade 7 children can be sought out from the findings of e a r l i e r motivation studies. Namely, the extent that e f f o r t l e v e l influences a b i l i t y perceptions among children can be di f f e r e n t from young adults. It i s c e r t a i n l y prominent among young children that e f f o r t i s seen as a cause for increases i n a b i l i t y (Blumenfeld, P i n t r i c h , Meece, & Wessels, 1981; Dweck, 1983; c i t e d i n Covington & Omelich, 1984). Covington & Omelich further concluded based on the findings of other research that by the high school and college years, students perceive a b i l i t y as a r e l a t i v e l y fixed, immutable e n t i t y which i s not increased by e f f o r t . In such a view, since the subjects for t h i s study were grade 7 children, i t might be argued that they perceived a b i l i t y as not so fixed that i t had the s i m i l a r l y p o s i t i v e e f f e c t s as e f f o r t a t t r i b u t i o n on t h e i r next task performance. This argument, however, needs further v e r i f i c a t i o n through measuring perceptions of basic causal factors ( i . e . , a b i l i t y , e f f o r t , task d i f f i c u l t y , and luck) with subjects of d i f f e r e n t age groups. 72 Regardless of a t t r i b u t i o n patterns that subjects showed under f a i l u r e conditions, Korean subjects exhibited better performance i n the conditional rule learning. In contrast, Canadian subjects' reasoning performance decreased i n terms of the number of t r i a l s and accuracy, a f t e r f a i l u r e experience. These findings provide support for the p r e d i c t i o n made i n Chapter I, that Korean subjects would perform more accurately on the conditional reasoning task, given the e f f o r t a t t r i b u t i o n of f a i l u r e . They also seem to indicate that Canadian subjects' performance i n the subsequent inductive reasoning suffer, from f a i l u r e outcome feedback on the preceding task, while Korean subjects' performance l e v e l increased a f t e r receiving f a i l u r e feedback. An explanation for these differences i n performance between Canadian and Korean students aft e r f a i l u r e experiences can be traced to d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l values between the two countries. While Canadian culture encourages children to be independent, s e l f -r e l i a n t , self-assured and creative from the very young age, therefore, no s t r i c t sense of guidance or help from other people i s as r e a d i l y available as i n Korean culture. In Korean c u l t u r a l context, children are encouraged to be obedient, modest, s e l f -restrained and s e l f - c o n t r o l l e d . Words related to s e l f - c o n t r o l such as s e l f - r e s t r a i n t , s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e , self-abandonment, s e l f -accusation, s e l f - a c t u a l i z a t i o n , self-command, self-government, s e l f -73 improvement, etc. are frequently used across a l l the d i f f e r e n t classes of Korean society, s i g n i f y i n g how much emphasis i s put on s e l f - c o n t r o l i n Korean culture. Thus, i t might be the case that to Korean students, f a i l u r e situations are perceived as more e a s i l y a l t e r a b l e or improvable i f they make more e f f o r t s . Maybe, t h i s highly valued concept of s e l f - c o n t r o l i n Korean culture can be' accounted for the d i f f e r e n t performance between Canadian and Korean students when they deal with f a i l u r e situations, despite the fact that both culture groups recognized e f f o r t as the main determinant of the performance outcome. In other words, Korean students appear to view making e f f o r t s , to cert a i n degree, as more con t r o l l a b l e than Canadian children do. C. Internal Validity Of the Experimental Findings Whenever possible, tasks for the experiments were adapted from e x i s t i n g tests with proven inte r n a l v a l i d i t y . For example, the Objective A t t r i b u t i o n Test was adapted from a task used by the Lee & Lee (1983) i n t h e i r study and was construct validated by the authors with s t a t i s t i c a l analysis (multi-dimensional unfolding technique), and the non-verbal (culture-fair) Inductive Reasoning Tasks were 74 also adapted from tasks employed and validated by Lee i n his study (1985) . Every attempt was made to control for extraneous sources of the experiment. A l l tests and tasks were given on computer and a l l subjects were provided with the same in s t r u c t i o n . A l l the subjects were at the same grade l e v e l , i . e . , grade 7 and they were randomly assigned to three conditions (success, f a i l u r e or condition). Therefore, i f there were any in d i v i d u a l differences between groups p r i o r to the experiment, they should be randomly d i s t r i b u t e d across three condition groups. However, since the experiment was c a r r i e d out i n an actual classroom settings i n two d i f f e r e n t countries, there was a pot e n t i a l threat to the inter n a l v a l i d i t y of the findings. Differences i n learning environments, such as classroom atmospheres, classroom sizes, between Korean and Canadian groups, might have affected students' performance. In addition, 8 to 10 Canadian subjects had d i f f i c u l t y running the experimental diskettes because of d i f f i c u l t y adapting computer disk operations to the network operation environment, during the presentation of the causal a t t r i b u t i o n task. Since the only i n i t i a l reading of the f i r s t a t t r i b u t i o n task was involved, no serious flaws crept into c o l l e c t e d data. This, however, might have affected the l e v e l of concentration and enthusiasm for the subsequent tasks. The two samples were drawn 75 from the two cultures based on the comparable s i m i l a r i t i e s (e.g., middle class suburban community with small or no minority populations i n a metropolitan city) observed by the researcher. However, we can not completely rule out background c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of students i n terms of socio-economic l e v e l as causes of the observed group differences i n reasoning performance between Canadians and Koreans since we did not d i r e c t l y assess them i n other ways. D. Generalizability of the Present Findings The present cr o s s - c u l t u r a l study was conducted using grade 7 subjects from two schools which served middle class suburban communities, i . e . , Delta, B.C. from Canada and Jam-sil, Seoul from Korea. The id e a l experiment would involve measuring the achievement of children who are randomly assigned to Korean or Canadian schools, while holding a l l other variables constant. S t r i c t l y speaking, there i s no way of getting such a representative sample of each culture. Therefore, as Mayer and Tajika (1993) put i t , u n t i l someone invents a foolproof procedure, there must be room for a d i v e r s i t y of methodological and t h e o r e t i c a l approaches i n c r o s s - c u l t u r a l research. With t h i s note i n mind, the findings of t h i s study can be 76 generalized to a subgroup culture of grade 7 students from middle class suburban communities i n Canada and Korea. The findings of t h i s study are compatible with other research which reported that Korean college students' a t t r i b u t i o n a l style was r e l a t i v e l y i n t e r n a l ( i . e . , a t t r i b u t i n g good and bad events to i n t e r n a l f a c t o r s ) . Also i t was neither e g o t i s t i c ( i . e . , i n t e r n a l i z i n g t h e i r success and blaming t h e i r f a i l u r e on external causes) nor s e l f - e f f a c i n g ( i . e . , a t t r i b u t i n g good events to external, bad to i n t e r n a l factors) with a s l i g h t tendency to o f f e r s e l f - e f f a c i n g accounts a f t e r success (Bae, 1991; Bae & Crittenden, 1989; Crittenden & Bae, 1994). The findings of t h i s study are also s i m i l a r to Kim's (1980) study i n that Korean adolescents were found as i n t e r n a l as t h e i r age peers i n Canada. However, Triandis's (1989, 1994) conceptualization of individualism vs. c o l l e c t i v i s m model was not supported by data from t h i s study. E. Conclusion In the present study, data were c o l l e c t e d to see whether there i s c r o s s - c u l t u r a l differences i n a t t r i b u t i o n patterns of performance outcomes as well as i n inductive reasoning performance between Canadian and Korean students, due to d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l elements such as values and norms within each culture. Several conclusions 77 follow from the analysis of the r e s u l t s . F i r s t of a l l , the findings of t h i s study indicate that we' can not claim Canadian culture i s more i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c than Korean culture. In some aspects (e.g., goal pursuing), Canadians are more i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c , but i n others, Koreans are more egocentric, as opposed to the pr e d i c t i o n derived from Triandis's culture c l a s s i f i c a t i o n theory. This may be the re s u l t of the strong Western influence i n modern Korea. Secondly, both culture groups showed si m i l a r a t t r i b u t i o n patterns, but, d i f f e r e n t from Weiner's theory of motivation, not only e f f o r t but also a b i l i t y a t t r i b u t i o n influenced p o s i t i v e l y the accuracy of performance on the subsequent task. It i s not cle a r why a b i l i t y a t t r i b u t i o n somewhat improved performance on the subsequent task upon receiving f a i l u r e feedback i n t h i s study. Thirdly, Korean grade 7 students performed better under f a i l u r e conditions, while Canadian counterparts' l e v e l of performance on the subsequent task deteriorated with f a i l u r e feedback. I argue that t h i s might be caused by d i f f e r e n t emphasis on d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l values i n the two cultures (e.g., strong emphasis on s e l f - c o n t r o l i n Korean c u l t u r e ) . It i s d i f f i c u l t to generalize these empirical findings to other subgroups i n the same cultures. Nevertheless, based on the population from which I have drawn samples, I conclude that the 78 findings of t h i s study can be generalized to grade 7 students from middle-class suburban communities i n a metropolitan c i t y i n two cultures ( i . e . , Canada and Korea). However, since l i t t l e i s known about Korean and Canadian students' a t t r i b u t i o n patterns, more research of a t t r i b u t i o n theory should be conducted using d i f f e r e n t age groups of both culture groups. As useful as Triandis's individualism vs. c o l l e c t i v i s m culture c l a s s i f i c a t i o n theory i s , the theory did not provide a clear-cut d i s t i n c t i o n between Korean and Canadian cultures. With rapid s o c i a l and economic changes around the world, e s p e c i a l l y i n Asian countries, c r o s s - c u l t u r a l researchers should incorporate measuring current c u l t u r a l l e v e l s of the p a r t i c u l a r cultures of i n t e r e s t , rather than base t h e i r study on the e x i s t i n g d i s t i n c t i o n between i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c vs. c o l l e c t i v i s t i c cultures. Because the c u l t u r a l d i s t i n c t i o n may not be v a l i d anymore for the culture a researcher i s studying, e s p e c i a l l y not for cer t a i n subculture groups (e.g., younger generations). For example, we could have obtained quite d i f f e r e n t r e s u l t s from t h i s study, i f the study was c a r r i e d out with subjects from older generations or i n a remote r u r a l area rather than i n middle class urban area. Also, i f the culture c l a s s i f i c a t i o n theory i s to be useful for a l l culture, i t may need some modification or add some aspects which can capture newly created 79 differences i n values and perceptions across generations and across s o c i e t a l sector with fast changing culture. It i s noteworthy that Hofstede's (1980) data were co l l e c t e d i n a multinational corporation i n about 3 0 years ago, and personnel of the multinational company may not be representative of other members of the culture. Further research on cross - c u l t u r a l study of a t t r i b u t i o n theory needs to be done i n order to increase the g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of a t t r i b u t i o n theory. It would be int e r e s t i n g to see whether s i m i l a r r e s u l t s to t h i s study can be obtained from studying other c o l l e c t i v i s t i c and i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c cultures (e.g., Vietnam vs. B r i t a i n ) . In addition, further studies on the a t t r i b u t i o n theory with d i f f e r e n t developmental age groups (preadolescents vs. adolescents) within a culture or c r o s s - c u l t u r a l l y may shed some l i g h t on c l a r i f y i n g and r e f i n i n g the generality of the a t t r i b u t i o n theory of motivation. F. Educational Implications The causal a t t r i b u t i o n process appear to be a s i g n i f i c a n t determinant of learning and performance i n the classroom (Weiner, 1972). The findings from the study imply that f a i l u r e outcome feedback tends to deteriorate Canadian students' task performance, 80 while i t has a p o s i t i v e e f f e c t on Korean counterparts. According to Weiner (1994), communications of anger and punishment from others w i l l prove more e f f e c t i v e than sympathetic feedback and the absence of reprimand. Maybe, teachers i n Canada can help students learn better by giving negative feedback as well as p o s i t i v e feedback i n classroom depending on t h e i r performance lev e l s , instead of providing p o s i t i v e feedback on the performance a l l the time. There are increasing demands on educators to produce' higher le v e l s of l i t e r a c y and mathematical s k i l l s f or the children of future high tech generations. Simultaneously, educators w i l l have to deal with the unprecedented degree of d i v e r s i t y i n classrooms due to gl o b a l i z a t i o n . Educators i n B.C. face the same challenges now and i n the years to come. The findings from t h i s study can help teachers develop curriculum for the rapidl y increasing number of Korean children whose parents recently immigrated to Canada. Education i s valued as one of the most important things i n l i f e among Koreans. When they immigrate to Canada, these recent immigrants f e e l completely helpless as parents because of language b a r r i e r s and c u l t u r a l differences. Informed teachers with the a i d of culture-s e n s i t i v e curriculum, may help otherwise overwhelmed new immigrant Korean children learn better i n t h e i r new environment. . 81 REFERENCES Abramson, L.Y., Seligman, M.E.P., Teasdale, J. (1978). Learned helplessness i n humans: Critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, 49-74. Andrew, G. R. , & Debus,- R. L. (1978) . Persistence and the causal perception of f a i l u r e : Modifying cognitive a t t r i b u t i o n s . Journal of Educational Psychology. 70. 154-166. B a l l , S. (1984) . Student motivation: some r e f l e c t i o n s & projections. In R. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation i n education. Vol.1, student motivation. Academic Press (pp.313-326) . Bae, H (1985). E g o i s t i c a t t r i b u t i o n : A comparative study of a t t r i b u t i o n a l styles of Korean & American students. Paper presented at the annual meeting for the Midwest S o c i o l o g i c a l Society. Bae, H (1991). From att r i b u t i o n s to dispositions: The case of Korean a t t r i b u t i o n a l s t y l e . Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , University of I l l i n o i s at Chicago. Bae, H., & Crittenden, K. S. (1989). From a t t r i b u t i o n to dis p o s i t i o n s : Explaining the a t t r i b u t i o n a l patterns of Korean students. Journal of Social Psychology. 12 9. 481-489. Betancourt, H., Hardin, C , & Manzi, J. (1992). B e l i e f s , value orientation, and culture i n a t t r i b u t i o n processes and helping behaviour. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 23(2), 179-195. Betancourt, H., & Lopez, S. R. (1993). The study of culture, e t h n i c i t y , and race i n American psychology. American Psychologist. 48(6). 629-637. 82 Betancourt, H., & Weiner, B. (1982). Attributions for achievement-related events, expectancy, and sentiments: A study of success and f a i l u r e i n Chile and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 13. 362-374. Blinco, P. M. (1992). A c r o s s - c u l t u r a l study of task persistence of young children i n Japan and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 23(3), 407-415. Bond, M. H. (1983). A proposal for c r o s s - c u l t u r a l studies of a t t r i b u t i o n . In M. Hewstone (Eds.), A t t r i b u t i o n theory: S o c i a l and functional extensions (pp.144-157). Oxford: B a s i l Blackwell. Chapin, M., & Dyck, D. G. (1976). Persistence i n children's reading behaviour as a function of N length and a t t r i b u t i o n r e t r a i n i n g . Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 85, 511-515. Chiu, L. H. (1986) . Locus of control i n i n t e l l e c t u a l s i t u a t i o n s i n American and Chinese school children. International Journal of Psychology, 21, 167-176. Covington, M. V., & Omelich, C. L. (1984). The trouble with p i t f a l l s : A reply to Weiner's c r i t i q u e of a t t r i b u t i o n research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(6), 1199-1213. Crittenden, K. S.(1991). Asian self-effacement or feminine modesty? A t t r i b u t i o n a l patterns of women uni v e r s i t y students i n Taiwan. Gender and Society. 5(1). 98-117. Crittenden, K. S., & Bae, H. (1994). Self-effacement and s o c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . American behavioral s c i e n t i s t , 37(5), 653-671. Dweck, C. S. (1975). The role of expectations and a t t r i b u t i o n s i n the a l l e v i a t i o n of learned helplessness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 31. 674-685. 83 Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988) . A soc i a l - c o g n i t i v e approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256-273 . Haygood, R., & Bourne, L. (1965). Attribute- and rule-learning aspects of conceptual behavior. Psychological Review, 72, 175-195. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal r e l a t i o n s . New York: Wiley. Hess, R. D., Chang, CM., & McDevitt, T. M. (1987). Cu l t u r a l v a r i a t i o n s i n family b e l i e f s about children's performance i n mathematics: Comparison among People's Republic of China, Chinese-American, and Caucasian-American families. Journal of Educational Psychology. 79(2). 179-188. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences. Beverly H i l l s , CA:Sage. Holloway, S. D. (1988). Concepts of a b i l i t y & e f f o r t i n Japan and the United States. Review of Educational Research. 58(3), 327-345. Holloway, S. D., Kashiwagi, K., Hess, R. D., & Azuma, H. (1986). Causal a t t r i b u t i o n s by Japanese & American mothers and children about performance i n mathematics. International Journal of Psychology, 21, 269-286. Kashima, Y., & Triandis, H. C. (1986). The s e l f - s e r v i n g bias i n at t r i b u t i o n s as a coping strategy: A cr o s s - c u l t u r a l study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 17(1). 83-97. Kim, B. K. (1980). Attitudes, parental i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , and locus of control of Korean, new Korean-Canadian, and Canadian adolescents. In-V. Ujimoto & G. Hirabayashi (Eds.), V i s i b l e minorities and multiculturalism: Asians i n Canada. Toronto: Butterworth.(pp. 219-241). 84 Lee, S. S. (1985). Children's a c q u i s i t i o n of conditional l o g i c structure: Teachable? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10, 14-27. Lee, S. S. (1994). On culture and culture related issues. Seminar delivered to doctoral students, University of B r i t i s h Columbia. Lee, Y. K., & Lee, S. S. (1983). Multidimensional unfolding of children's causal b e l i e f s : One aspect of construct v a l i d a t i o n . Applied Psychological Measurement, 7(3), 323-332. Lipe, M. G. (1991). Counterfactual reasoning as a framework for a t t r i b u t i o n theories. Psychological B u l l e t i n , 109(3), 456-471. Lipset, S. M. (1990) . Continental divide. New York: Routledge. Margolis, E. (1994). A reassessment of the s h i f t from the c l a s s i c a l theory of concepts to prototype theory. Cognition, 51, 73-89. Mayer, R. E., & Tajika, H. (1993). Conducting and comprehending c r o s s - c u l t u r a l comparisons: Reply to S t i g l e r and M i l l e r . Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 560-565. Medin, D. (1989). Concepts and conceptual structure. American Psychologist. 44, 1469-1481. Pellegrino, J. W. (1985). Inductive reasoning a b i l i t y . In Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), Human a b i l i t i e s : An information processing approach. San Francisco: Freeman. Rotter, J. (1966). Generalized expectancies for i n t e r n a l versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 8 0 (1, Whole No. 609),1-26. 85 Schuster, B.; Foesterlung, F., & Weiner, B. (1989). Perceiving the causes of success and f a i l u r e : A cr o s s - c u l t u r a l examination of a t t r i b u t i o n a l concepts. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 20(2), 191-213. Stipek, D., Weiner, B., & L i , K. (1989). Testing some a t t r i b u t i o n -emotion re l a t i o n s i n the People's Republic of China. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(1), 109-116. Strauss, C , & Quinn, N. (1991). Preliminaries to a theory of culture a c q u i s i t i o n . In Pick, H. L., Jr . , van den Broek, P., & K n i l l , D. C. (Eds.), Cognition: Conceptual and methodological issues(pp. 267-294). American Psychological Association, Washington, DC. Thurstone, L. L. (1938).Primary mental a b i l i t i e s . Psychometric Monographs. No.1. Triandis, H. C. (1989). The s e l f and s o c i a l behavior i n d i f f e r i n g c u l t u r a l contexts. Psychological Review. 96(3). 506-520. Triandis, H. C. (1994). Culture and s o c i a l behaviour. New York: McGraw-Hill. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher psychological process. Cambridge: Harvard University Press Weiner, B. ( 1972). A t t r i b u t i o n theory, achievement motivation, & the educational process. Review of Educational Research, 42, 203-215 Weiner, B. (1979). A theory of motivation for some classroom experiences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 3-25. Weiner, B. (1985). An a t t r i b u t i o n a l theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review. 92(4). 548-573. 86 Weiner, B. (1986). An a t t r i b u t i o n a l theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag. Weiner, B. (1990). History of motivational research i n education. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(4), 616-622. Weiner, B. (1994). Integrating s o c i a l and personal theories of achievement s t r i v i n g . Review of Educational Research, 64(4), 557-573. Weiner, B., Frieze, I. H., Kukla, A., Reed, L., Rest, S., & Rosenbaum, R. M. (1971). Perceiving the causes of success and f a i l u r e . Morristown, N.J.: General Learning press. 87 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Objective Causal Belief Scale 1. S a l l y d i d very well on her French s p e l l i n g t e s t . Why do you think she did well? a. She i s good at s p e l l i n g . b. The s p e l l i n g test was easy. c. She studied a l o t for the test. d. She was lucky. 2. Ken did very poorly on his math tes t . Why do you think he f a i l e d ? a. Ken was not good at math. b. The math test was too d i f f i c u l t for everyone. c. Ken was careless. d. Ken just had bad luck that day. 3. Why d i d the i n s t r u c t o r say Tony's work was very good? a. He i s a very bright student. b. The homework problem was easy. c. He worked very c a r e f u l l y on his assignment. d. The i n s t r u c t o r was i n a good mood. 4. Anne got a poor grade on her report of modern histo r y . Why do you think that the i n s t r u c t o r didn't l i k e her paper? a. Anne i s n ' t very good at writing reports. b. The assignment was too d i f f i c u l t for everyone. c. Anne didn't spend enough time working on the report. d. The i n s t r u c t o r was i n a bad mood. 5. Nancy solved a d i f f i c u l t math problem. Why do you think she solved i t ? a. Nancy i s good at solving math problems. b. The problem i n fact was a very easy one. c. She worked on i t for a long time. d. Just by chance, she found the solution. 6. B i l l could not solve a new puzzle. Why do you think he couldn't do i t ? a. He i s not good at solving puzzles. b. The puzzle was a very d i f f i c u l t one. c. He gave up too soon. d. Some of the puzzle pieces were missing. 88 7. Why do you think that John i s the captain of the baseball team? a. He i s the best baseball player on the team. b. It i s his turn to be the captain. c. He pra c t i s e s a l o t to improve his baseball s k i l l s . d. The coach l i k e s him. 8. Kelly' s f r i e n d was climbing up a tree and f e l l down. Why do you think t h i s happened? a. She i s not good at climbing up a tree. b. It was d i f f i c u l t to climb because the tree was very s l i p p e r y . c. She was not very careful that time. d. It was an accident. 9. Suzie's college band won the f i r s t p r i z e i n the f e s t i v a l . Why do you think they were the winners? a. A l l band members are good musicians. b. The other bands weren't very good. c. A l l the band members practised very hard. d. The judges just happened to l i k e the song they played. 10. Scott's hockey team l o s t t h e i r l a s t game by a score of 12 to 2. Why do you think t h i s happened? a. They are not a very good team. b. The other team i s the best i n the league. c. They d i d not have enough practice before the game. d. They had bad luck. 11. David's college basketball team won a close game l a s t week. Why do you think they won the game? a. The coach gave them very good t r a i n i n g . b. The other team was not a very strong team. c. The team pract i s e d a l o t before the game. d. They were lucky. 12. Jane's college band played very poorly at the Christmas concert. Why do you think t h i s happened? a. Most band members were not good musicians. b. They were playing a very d i f f i c u l t piece of music. c. They d i d not pract i s e enough before the concert. d. Some of the band members were not f e e l i n g well that day. 89 APPENDIX B: Culture Type Classification Test Instruction: Before you work with a couple of learning games, we'd like you to answer some questions. Answering them w i l l take you several minutes to complete, depending on your response time. You w i l l be asked to express your opinion about paired statements. A l l you have to do is to indicate your preferred choice by pressing a required key on the computer keyboard. Are you ready? Statement 1: Jack is 19 years old and is selecting his major at UBC. He wants to go to medical school and become a doctor. Why do you think Jack wants to be a medical doctor? a. Jack wants to live a comfortable l i f e in the future. b. Jack wants to be somebody. c. Jack wants to bring glory to his family. d. Jack wants to help those less fortunate in society. Statement 2: Jane is a second-year college student majoring in journalism. She was recently nominated as the Young Writer of the Year by the Canadian Young Writer's Association. What do you think is the most important factor for Jane's success? a. Jane always wanted to defeat others and be recognized as the best. b. Jane spent a lot of time practising story-writing. c. Jane's family supported her. d. Jane's instructor did a good job teaching her. Statement 3: John is a first-year student at SFU. His mother is working two jobs to support his education. He just won $10,000 cash in a random lucky draw organized by a major car company. What do you think John should do with the money? a. John should keep the money to himself and spend i t on what he had always wished for. b. John should open a personal bank account and deposit the money under his name. c. John should give half of the money to his mother. d. John should give half of the money to the Disabled Children Society. 90 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0087662/manifest

Comment

Related Items