Premium
A Cross‐Cultural Study of Preference of Accounts: Relationship Closeness, Harm Severity, and Motives of Account Making 1
Author(s) -
Itoi Ritsu,
Ohbuchi KenICHI,
Fukuno Mitsuteru
Publication year - 1996
Publication title -
journal of applied social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.822
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1559-1816
pISSN - 0021-9029
DOI - 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1996.tb01117.x
Subject(s) - harm , psychology , closeness , social psychology , collectivism , preference , style (visual arts) , individualism , assertiveness , political science , microeconomics , economics , mathematical analysis , mathematics , archaeology , law , history
We presented 174 American and 169 Japanese subjects with scenarios in which an actor unintentionally harmed someone. We asked them to rate the likelihood of each of 6 different account tactics and 3 motives of account making. Collectivists (Japanese) were found, compared with individualists (Americans), to show more preference for the mitigating accounts, such as apologies or excuses, but less the assertive accounts, such as justifications. The collectivists’ mitigating style became distinguished, particularly when the participants were in‐group members; and also gender differences were larger among collectivists than among individualists. Harm severity was an independent and powerful determinant of account choice: The causal analysis of the motives revealed that each account tactic was uniquely motivated, and that its supposed motivational process was quite similar between the two cultural groups.