This article was downloaded by: [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] On: 27 February 2015, At: 04:06 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
The Journal of Social Psychology Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vsoc20
Cultural Differences in Perceptual Selectivity a
K. D. Broota & H. C. Ganguli
a
a
University of Delhi , India Published online: 01 Jul 2010.
To cite this article: K. D. Broota & H. C. Ganguli (1975) Cultural Differences in Perceptual Selectivity, The Journal of Social Psychology, 95:2, 157-163, DOI: 10.1080/00224545.1975.9918698 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1975.9918698
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] at 04:06 27 February 2015
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
The Journal of Social Psychology, 1975, 95, 157-163.
CULTURAL DIFFERENCES I N PERCEPTUAL SELECTIVITY*
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] at 04:06 27 February 2015
University of Delhi, India
K . D. BROOTAAND H.
c. GANGULI
SUMMARY Children in India from three different cultural backgrounds-Hindu, Muslim, and U.S. white-were the subjects in a study of perceptual organization under the controlled conditions of perceptual learning. With the use of a scheme of monetary reward and punishment it was found that the Hindu and the Muslim children perceived significantly more often than the Americans those aspects of the figure-ground situation which were previously associated with punishment during perceptual learning. On the other hand, the American children perceived the reward associated aspects significantly more often than the Hindu and the Muslim children. Further, perceptual responses of both the Hindu and the Muslim children were found to be significantly different from the responses of the American children. A. INTRODUCTION A variety of psychological, anthropological, a?d sociological data is available to substantiate the hypothesis that the cultural background of an individual influences his perceptual and cognitive processes. Some evidence for this view comes from the studies of illusions on different cultural groups (7, 10, 11). Perhaps the most striking example of perceptual selectivity is the study by Bagby ( 2 ) on binocular rivalry in Mexican and American subjects: the culturally less familiar pictures were perceptually suppressed, and the culturally more familiar pictures were perceived. In an effort to replicate the Schafer-Murphy (9) experiment on Hindu (Indian) subjects, Broota (3) found quite opposite results from those reported by Schafer and Murphy and others (1, 6, 13, 15) in the United States. The results of the latter experiment prompted us to examine the influence of culture on
* Received in the Editorial Office, Provincetown, Massachusetts, on June 7, 1974, and given special consideration in accordance with our policy for cross-cultural research. Copyright, 1975, by The Journal Press. 157
158
JOURNAL O F SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
perceptual selectivity on subjects from three different cultural backgrounds, under controlled conditions of perceptual learning. B.
METHOD
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] at 04:06 27 February 2015
1. Subjects
The Ss were 24 children from three different cultural backgrounds in India: eight Hindus; eight Muslims; and eight U.S. white. Their ages ranged from 8-12 years with a modal age of 9 years. All had normal or corrected vision. All belonged to a high economic level: the majority of parents of the American children were on diplomatic assignment in India, and the family income of the Hindu and the Muslim children was rupees one thousand or more, with family size of five or less. The Hindu children came from exclusively Hindu schools, the Muslim children from exclusively Muslim schools, and the American children from the American International School in New Delhi. 2. Apparatus The apparatus consisted of two units: a Constant Illumination Tachistoscope (Lafayette Instrument Co.) and a glass-beaded projection screen. The tachistoscope has two projectors mounted side by side. I t has two shutters, one in front of each projector, operating 180 degrees out of phase with each other. The normally closed projector is for stimulus slides, and the normally open projector provides constant illumination on the screen. In the normally open projector a blank slide is placed so that the illumination and area of its projection matches with the projected image of the stimulus by the other projector. Both shutters are operated by a common control, and in operation the normally open shutter closes and normally closed shutter opens instantaneously for the set duration of exposure. Thus, the apparatus provides the S with a fixation area, controls the formation of negative afterimages, and avoids a startle reaction resulting from the sudden illumination of the projected image. There is no time loss from the heating of the filament of the lamps. 3.
Stimuli
The stimuli for the training session were four profile faces which made up two pairs of complementary faces. These were the same as those used by Schafer and Murphy (9, Figure 1, p. 336) and were assigned nonsense names, Bif-Del and Gid-Yup.
K. D. BROOTA AND H. C. GANGULI
159
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] at 04:06 27 February 2015
Two ambiguous figures, in a complete circle, were obtained by combining complementary profiles of the training series (9, Figure 2 , p. 342). Thus, each figure represents a circle with an irregular vertical line in which either face can be seen as figure and the other half as ground. To break the directional and idiosyncratic set of the S, the two ambiguous composites were interspersed with their mirror images. 4. Procedure
a . Training session. One of the profiles of the complementary set was associated with a reward (positive reinforcement) of 20 paisa (1/5 of a rupee) and the other with a punishment (negative reinforcement) of 20 paisa. Similarly, the two profiles of the second set were associated each with a reward or punishment of 10 paisa. That is, whenever a particular profile associated with reward was presented, the S acquired 20 or 10 paisa from a cup containing coins; and for punishment, a similar amount was taken from the S and put back into the cup. The procedure was intended to build up a strong association between certain profiles and reward, and between other profiles and punishment. Before presenting a profile on the screen, E called out its name and S repeated the name aloud after the exposure. To facilitate learning of the names of the profiles, rough sketches with the names of the profiles were prepared on a white card and kept before S , and he was encouraged to refer to them between the trials. Every time the S repeated the name, he was asked to take an appropriate amount if the face was associated with reward and put back an appropriate amount if the face was associated with punishment. To maintain the interest of the S, he was told that it was a game of chance and he would end up with at least one rupee and possibly more, if chance favored. As a matter of fact, each S was left with one rupee at the end of the training session. This money was given to the S after the training session. There were a total of 100 tachistoscopic exposures of the four profiles, 25 times each, randomly presented. The number of trials was found to be adequate for the perceptual learning task. The projection of the profile subtended a visual angle of 6" 25' of an arc. T o obviate the possibility of figure-ground reversal, the exposure time was kept at 200 milliseconds. A rest pause of five minutes was provided in the middle of the session. At the end of the training session a trial test was given to see if the Ss could recognize the profiles and their names.
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] at 04:06 27 February 2015
160
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
b. Testing session. The testing session followed after 10 minutes of the training session. The two ambiguous composites were exposed tachistoscopically in order to study the efficacy of the reinforcing events in directing figure-ground organization. The exposure time and visual angle were the same as in the training session. The time was sufficient for a single fixation but not adequate for perceptual alteration of figure and ground. There were 40 tachistoscopic exposures of the two ambiguous composites, 20 times for each situation. These exposures were interspersed with an equal number of their mirror images. The task of the S was to report and write the name of the profile he had perceived and also to indicate, by hand movement, the direction in which the perceived profile face was looking. If a discrepancy was found in the two responses (verbal report and indicator response), the trial was repeated later during the session. This converging operation ( 5 ) insured that the observed effects could be properly assigned to the perceptual system, and conclusions could be drawn with confidence that the percepts reflected the effect of reinforcement and not merely of verbal conditioning. A rest pause of five minutes was provided in the middle of the session. 5.
Design
A 3 X 2 factorial design was employed with repeated measures on the last factor (16, p. 518). The first factor represents three groups of children from three different cultures, having eight Ss in each group. The second factor represents two levels of reinforcement (20 and 10 paisa). To obviate confounding of profiles and reinforcements, all the eight possible combinations of four profiles and rewards (20 and 10 paisa) and punishments (20 and 10 paisa) were used, and each S in a particular group was randomly assigned to one of the eight combinations. In each complementary set one profile was associated with reward and the other with punishment, and also in each pair the amount of reward and punishment was kept equal. The equiprobability of perceiving the four profiles, without any reinforcement, has amply been tested by Broota (3).
C. RESULTS The perceptual responses, in terms of frequences, were converted into proportions of punished percepts (P/R+P) in each reinforcement condition. The data after arcsin transformation were subjected to analysis of variance. Significant differences were obtained for the perceptual responses of the three groups of Ss [ F ( 2 , 21) = 7.41;p < .01]. t tests indicate that the
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] at 04:06 27 February 2015
K. D. BROOTA A N D H. C. GANGULI
161
differences between the Hindu and the American and also between the Muslim and the American groups are significant beyond the .01 level of confidence, but the differences between the Hindus and the Muslims are not significant. The second factor represents the two levels of reinforcement (20 and 10 paisa), and the nonsignificant F value of this component indicates that the level of reinforcement had no effect on the perceptual responses. Interaction is also nonsignificant. The means derived from the transformed data were retranslated into proportions, resulting in a mean proportion of punished percepts for each group. The mean proportions are .70, .59, and .37 for the Hindu, the Muslim, and the American groups, respectively. The proportions above .5 indicate that the Ss perceived the punished faces more often, and below .5 the rewarded faces. Thus the perceptual responses of the Ss from the Hindu and Muslim groups significantly favored those aspects of the ambiguous composites which were associated with punishment during the perceptual learning phase, whereas those of the American Ss significantly favored the rewarded aspects (p < .01).The total wrong responses were only two percent of the total responses. D.
DISCUSSION
The similarity in the perceptual responses of the Hindu and the Muslim groups may have been due to the similarity in their socialization processes brought about by constant interaction, geographic proximity, common friends, and many other common features in these two cultures. These subjects may be said to belong to two subcultural groups within the Indian cultural fold. On the other hand, American subjects distinctly belong to another culture and also show maximum differences in perceptual responses from the subjects of the two Indian groups. The American group, furthermore, perceived significantly more often those aspects of the ambiguous figure-ground situation which were associated with reward, whereas the Hindu and the Muslim groups perceived significantly more often the punished aspects. The results obtained from the American subjects are in conformity with the results of studies reported by Schafer and Murphy (9) and others in the U.S.A. Postexperimental interviews with the subjects revealed that children in all the three groups liked to win (reward) and disliked to lose money (punishment) in the experiment. All subjects thus had similar perceptions of the coins as rewards and punishment in the experiment, but their perceptual organizations were affected differently.
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] at 04:06 27 February 2015
162
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
The obtained differences in the perceptions of the three groups may reflect the influence of differing socialization practices on the development of perceptual processes, through the conditioning of attentional processes. The literature on child training practices (4, 8) and reports of the Hindu and the Muslim subjects indicate that there is considerable emphasis on physical punishment as a means of training the children both by parents and by teachers. On the other hand the American children receive predominantly reward-oriented training. The reports of the American children revealed that the type of punishment they generally receive is isolation, withdrawal of privileges, rebukes, etc., and they rarely are punished physically. American parents of course, punish their children, but, in general, Hindu and Muslim parents punish their children more frequently and more severely. We can only speculate as to why the American children tended to perceive reward-associated aspects and the Hindu and the Muslim, punishment-associated aspects. Solley and Murphy (14, p. 109) argue that “if the individual can avoid the punishment by recognizing the percept as a sign of subsequent pain, he will operate wisely (in the biological sense) by becoming alert to the occurrence of that percept.” The attentional processes of children, because of frequent punishments, will so develop that they become very sensitive to stimuli that are associated with punishment or would bring them punishment. Thus, the perceptual emphasis on punished material in the Hindu and the Muslim groups may have been due to the sensitization and conditioning of their attentional processes during the process of socialization, so that they subsequently search and scan their environment and their own actions which are associated with punishment or are likely to bring punishment. This view is similar to one developed by Silverman (12) in connection with attentional processes in schizophrenia. Similarly, the reward-oriented training of the American children may sensitize and condition the attentional processes so that they look for gratifying objects and events in the environment.
REFERENCES AYLLON,T . , & S O M M ~ R R., Autism, emphasis, and figure ground perception. J . of P s p h o l . , 1956, 41, 163-176. 2 . BAGBY,J. W. A cross cultural study of perceptual dominance in binocular rivalry. J . Abn. 6. SOL. Psychol., 1957, 54, 331-334. 3. BROOTA,K. D. A study on the nature of reinforcement and perceptual response. An unpublished Ph.D dissertation. University of Dethi, Delhi, fndia, 1969. 4. CORMACK, M. The Hindu Woman. New Delhi, India: Asia Publishing House, 1961. 1
K. D. BROOTA AND H. C. GANGULI 5. 6.
7.
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] at 04:06 27 February 2015
8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.
163
GARNER,W. R., HAKE,H . W . , & ERIKSEN,C. W. Operationism and the concept of perception. Psychol. Rev., 1956, 63, 149-159. Jackson, D. N. A further examination of the role of autism in a visual figure-ground relationship. J . of Psychol., 1954, 38, 339-357. JAHODA,G . Geometric illusions and environment: A study in Ghana. Brit. J. Psychol., 1966, 97, 193-199. KHER,N . , DURRET,M. E . , & BHOOTA,K. K. An Introduction to Child Development. New Delhi: Asia Publishing House, 1962. SCHAFER,R . , & MURPHY,G. The role of autism in a visual figure-ground relationship. J. Exper. Psychol., 1943, 32, 335-343. SEGALL,M. H . , CAMPBELL, D. T . , & HERSKOVITS, M. J. The Influence of Culture on Visual Perception. Indianapolis, Ind.: Bobbs Merrill, 1966. . Cultural differences in the perception of geometric illusions. Science, 1963, 139, 769-771. SILVERMAN, J. The problem of attention in research and theory in schizophrenia. Psychol. R e v . , 1964, 71, 352-379. SNYDER,F. W., & SNYDER,C. W. The effects of reward and punishment on auditory perception. J . of Psychol,, 1956, 41, 177-184. SOLLEY,C. M . , & MURPHY,C. Development of the Perceptual World. New York: Basic Books, 1960. SOMMER,R. The effects of rewards and punishments during perceptual organization. J. Personal., 1957, 25, 550-559. WINER, B. J . Statistical Principles in Experimental Design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 197 I .
Department of Psychology University of Delhi Delhi-110007, India
The Journal of Social Psychology Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vsoc20
Cultural Differences in Perceptual Selectivity a
K. D. Broota & H. C. Ganguli
a
a
University of Delhi , India Published online: 01 Jul 2010.
To cite this article: K. D. Broota & H. C. Ganguli (1975) Cultural Differences in Perceptual Selectivity, The Journal of Social Psychology, 95:2, 157-163, DOI: 10.1080/00224545.1975.9918698 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1975.9918698
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] at 04:06 27 February 2015
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
The Journal of Social Psychology, 1975, 95, 157-163.
CULTURAL DIFFERENCES I N PERCEPTUAL SELECTIVITY*
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] at 04:06 27 February 2015
University of Delhi, India
K . D. BROOTAAND H.
c. GANGULI
SUMMARY Children in India from three different cultural backgrounds-Hindu, Muslim, and U.S. white-were the subjects in a study of perceptual organization under the controlled conditions of perceptual learning. With the use of a scheme of monetary reward and punishment it was found that the Hindu and the Muslim children perceived significantly more often than the Americans those aspects of the figure-ground situation which were previously associated with punishment during perceptual learning. On the other hand, the American children perceived the reward associated aspects significantly more often than the Hindu and the Muslim children. Further, perceptual responses of both the Hindu and the Muslim children were found to be significantly different from the responses of the American children. A. INTRODUCTION A variety of psychological, anthropological, a?d sociological data is available to substantiate the hypothesis that the cultural background of an individual influences his perceptual and cognitive processes. Some evidence for this view comes from the studies of illusions on different cultural groups (7, 10, 11). Perhaps the most striking example of perceptual selectivity is the study by Bagby ( 2 ) on binocular rivalry in Mexican and American subjects: the culturally less familiar pictures were perceptually suppressed, and the culturally more familiar pictures were perceived. In an effort to replicate the Schafer-Murphy (9) experiment on Hindu (Indian) subjects, Broota (3) found quite opposite results from those reported by Schafer and Murphy and others (1, 6, 13, 15) in the United States. The results of the latter experiment prompted us to examine the influence of culture on
* Received in the Editorial Office, Provincetown, Massachusetts, on June 7, 1974, and given special consideration in accordance with our policy for cross-cultural research. Copyright, 1975, by The Journal Press. 157
158
JOURNAL O F SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
perceptual selectivity on subjects from three different cultural backgrounds, under controlled conditions of perceptual learning. B.
METHOD
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] at 04:06 27 February 2015
1. Subjects
The Ss were 24 children from three different cultural backgrounds in India: eight Hindus; eight Muslims; and eight U.S. white. Their ages ranged from 8-12 years with a modal age of 9 years. All had normal or corrected vision. All belonged to a high economic level: the majority of parents of the American children were on diplomatic assignment in India, and the family income of the Hindu and the Muslim children was rupees one thousand or more, with family size of five or less. The Hindu children came from exclusively Hindu schools, the Muslim children from exclusively Muslim schools, and the American children from the American International School in New Delhi. 2. Apparatus The apparatus consisted of two units: a Constant Illumination Tachistoscope (Lafayette Instrument Co.) and a glass-beaded projection screen. The tachistoscope has two projectors mounted side by side. I t has two shutters, one in front of each projector, operating 180 degrees out of phase with each other. The normally closed projector is for stimulus slides, and the normally open projector provides constant illumination on the screen. In the normally open projector a blank slide is placed so that the illumination and area of its projection matches with the projected image of the stimulus by the other projector. Both shutters are operated by a common control, and in operation the normally open shutter closes and normally closed shutter opens instantaneously for the set duration of exposure. Thus, the apparatus provides the S with a fixation area, controls the formation of negative afterimages, and avoids a startle reaction resulting from the sudden illumination of the projected image. There is no time loss from the heating of the filament of the lamps. 3.
Stimuli
The stimuli for the training session were four profile faces which made up two pairs of complementary faces. These were the same as those used by Schafer and Murphy (9, Figure 1, p. 336) and were assigned nonsense names, Bif-Del and Gid-Yup.
K. D. BROOTA AND H. C. GANGULI
159
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] at 04:06 27 February 2015
Two ambiguous figures, in a complete circle, were obtained by combining complementary profiles of the training series (9, Figure 2 , p. 342). Thus, each figure represents a circle with an irregular vertical line in which either face can be seen as figure and the other half as ground. To break the directional and idiosyncratic set of the S, the two ambiguous composites were interspersed with their mirror images. 4. Procedure
a . Training session. One of the profiles of the complementary set was associated with a reward (positive reinforcement) of 20 paisa (1/5 of a rupee) and the other with a punishment (negative reinforcement) of 20 paisa. Similarly, the two profiles of the second set were associated each with a reward or punishment of 10 paisa. That is, whenever a particular profile associated with reward was presented, the S acquired 20 or 10 paisa from a cup containing coins; and for punishment, a similar amount was taken from the S and put back into the cup. The procedure was intended to build up a strong association between certain profiles and reward, and between other profiles and punishment. Before presenting a profile on the screen, E called out its name and S repeated the name aloud after the exposure. To facilitate learning of the names of the profiles, rough sketches with the names of the profiles were prepared on a white card and kept before S , and he was encouraged to refer to them between the trials. Every time the S repeated the name, he was asked to take an appropriate amount if the face was associated with reward and put back an appropriate amount if the face was associated with punishment. To maintain the interest of the S, he was told that it was a game of chance and he would end up with at least one rupee and possibly more, if chance favored. As a matter of fact, each S was left with one rupee at the end of the training session. This money was given to the S after the training session. There were a total of 100 tachistoscopic exposures of the four profiles, 25 times each, randomly presented. The number of trials was found to be adequate for the perceptual learning task. The projection of the profile subtended a visual angle of 6" 25' of an arc. T o obviate the possibility of figure-ground reversal, the exposure time was kept at 200 milliseconds. A rest pause of five minutes was provided in the middle of the session. At the end of the training session a trial test was given to see if the Ss could recognize the profiles and their names.
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] at 04:06 27 February 2015
160
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
b. Testing session. The testing session followed after 10 minutes of the training session. The two ambiguous composites were exposed tachistoscopically in order to study the efficacy of the reinforcing events in directing figure-ground organization. The exposure time and visual angle were the same as in the training session. The time was sufficient for a single fixation but not adequate for perceptual alteration of figure and ground. There were 40 tachistoscopic exposures of the two ambiguous composites, 20 times for each situation. These exposures were interspersed with an equal number of their mirror images. The task of the S was to report and write the name of the profile he had perceived and also to indicate, by hand movement, the direction in which the perceived profile face was looking. If a discrepancy was found in the two responses (verbal report and indicator response), the trial was repeated later during the session. This converging operation ( 5 ) insured that the observed effects could be properly assigned to the perceptual system, and conclusions could be drawn with confidence that the percepts reflected the effect of reinforcement and not merely of verbal conditioning. A rest pause of five minutes was provided in the middle of the session. 5.
Design
A 3 X 2 factorial design was employed with repeated measures on the last factor (16, p. 518). The first factor represents three groups of children from three different cultures, having eight Ss in each group. The second factor represents two levels of reinforcement (20 and 10 paisa). To obviate confounding of profiles and reinforcements, all the eight possible combinations of four profiles and rewards (20 and 10 paisa) and punishments (20 and 10 paisa) were used, and each S in a particular group was randomly assigned to one of the eight combinations. In each complementary set one profile was associated with reward and the other with punishment, and also in each pair the amount of reward and punishment was kept equal. The equiprobability of perceiving the four profiles, without any reinforcement, has amply been tested by Broota (3).
C. RESULTS The perceptual responses, in terms of frequences, were converted into proportions of punished percepts (P/R+P) in each reinforcement condition. The data after arcsin transformation were subjected to analysis of variance. Significant differences were obtained for the perceptual responses of the three groups of Ss [ F ( 2 , 21) = 7.41;p < .01]. t tests indicate that the
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] at 04:06 27 February 2015
K. D. BROOTA A N D H. C. GANGULI
161
differences between the Hindu and the American and also between the Muslim and the American groups are significant beyond the .01 level of confidence, but the differences between the Hindus and the Muslims are not significant. The second factor represents the two levels of reinforcement (20 and 10 paisa), and the nonsignificant F value of this component indicates that the level of reinforcement had no effect on the perceptual responses. Interaction is also nonsignificant. The means derived from the transformed data were retranslated into proportions, resulting in a mean proportion of punished percepts for each group. The mean proportions are .70, .59, and .37 for the Hindu, the Muslim, and the American groups, respectively. The proportions above .5 indicate that the Ss perceived the punished faces more often, and below .5 the rewarded faces. Thus the perceptual responses of the Ss from the Hindu and Muslim groups significantly favored those aspects of the ambiguous composites which were associated with punishment during the perceptual learning phase, whereas those of the American Ss significantly favored the rewarded aspects (p < .01).The total wrong responses were only two percent of the total responses. D.
DISCUSSION
The similarity in the perceptual responses of the Hindu and the Muslim groups may have been due to the similarity in their socialization processes brought about by constant interaction, geographic proximity, common friends, and many other common features in these two cultures. These subjects may be said to belong to two subcultural groups within the Indian cultural fold. On the other hand, American subjects distinctly belong to another culture and also show maximum differences in perceptual responses from the subjects of the two Indian groups. The American group, furthermore, perceived significantly more often those aspects of the ambiguous figure-ground situation which were associated with reward, whereas the Hindu and the Muslim groups perceived significantly more often the punished aspects. The results obtained from the American subjects are in conformity with the results of studies reported by Schafer and Murphy (9) and others in the U.S.A. Postexperimental interviews with the subjects revealed that children in all the three groups liked to win (reward) and disliked to lose money (punishment) in the experiment. All subjects thus had similar perceptions of the coins as rewards and punishment in the experiment, but their perceptual organizations were affected differently.
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] at 04:06 27 February 2015
162
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
The obtained differences in the perceptions of the three groups may reflect the influence of differing socialization practices on the development of perceptual processes, through the conditioning of attentional processes. The literature on child training practices (4, 8) and reports of the Hindu and the Muslim subjects indicate that there is considerable emphasis on physical punishment as a means of training the children both by parents and by teachers. On the other hand the American children receive predominantly reward-oriented training. The reports of the American children revealed that the type of punishment they generally receive is isolation, withdrawal of privileges, rebukes, etc., and they rarely are punished physically. American parents of course, punish their children, but, in general, Hindu and Muslim parents punish their children more frequently and more severely. We can only speculate as to why the American children tended to perceive reward-associated aspects and the Hindu and the Muslim, punishment-associated aspects. Solley and Murphy (14, p. 109) argue that “if the individual can avoid the punishment by recognizing the percept as a sign of subsequent pain, he will operate wisely (in the biological sense) by becoming alert to the occurrence of that percept.” The attentional processes of children, because of frequent punishments, will so develop that they become very sensitive to stimuli that are associated with punishment or would bring them punishment. Thus, the perceptual emphasis on punished material in the Hindu and the Muslim groups may have been due to the sensitization and conditioning of their attentional processes during the process of socialization, so that they subsequently search and scan their environment and their own actions which are associated with punishment or are likely to bring punishment. This view is similar to one developed by Silverman (12) in connection with attentional processes in schizophrenia. Similarly, the reward-oriented training of the American children may sensitize and condition the attentional processes so that they look for gratifying objects and events in the environment.
REFERENCES AYLLON,T . , & S O M M ~ R R., Autism, emphasis, and figure ground perception. J . of P s p h o l . , 1956, 41, 163-176. 2 . BAGBY,J. W. A cross cultural study of perceptual dominance in binocular rivalry. J . Abn. 6. SOL. Psychol., 1957, 54, 331-334. 3. BROOTA,K. D. A study on the nature of reinforcement and perceptual response. An unpublished Ph.D dissertation. University of Dethi, Delhi, fndia, 1969. 4. CORMACK, M. The Hindu Woman. New Delhi, India: Asia Publishing House, 1961. 1
K. D. BROOTA AND H. C. GANGULI 5. 6.
7.
Downloaded by [University of New Hampshire], [Thuy Thu] at 04:06 27 February 2015
8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.
163
GARNER,W. R., HAKE,H . W . , & ERIKSEN,C. W. Operationism and the concept of perception. Psychol. Rev., 1956, 63, 149-159. Jackson, D. N. A further examination of the role of autism in a visual figure-ground relationship. J . of Psychol., 1954, 38, 339-357. JAHODA,G . Geometric illusions and environment: A study in Ghana. Brit. J. Psychol., 1966, 97, 193-199. KHER,N . , DURRET,M. E . , & BHOOTA,K. K. An Introduction to Child Development. New Delhi: Asia Publishing House, 1962. SCHAFER,R . , & MURPHY,G. The role of autism in a visual figure-ground relationship. J. Exper. Psychol., 1943, 32, 335-343. SEGALL,M. H . , CAMPBELL, D. T . , & HERSKOVITS, M. J. The Influence of Culture on Visual Perception. Indianapolis, Ind.: Bobbs Merrill, 1966. . Cultural differences in the perception of geometric illusions. Science, 1963, 139, 769-771. SILVERMAN, J. The problem of attention in research and theory in schizophrenia. Psychol. R e v . , 1964, 71, 352-379. SNYDER,F. W., & SNYDER,C. W. The effects of reward and punishment on auditory perception. J . of Psychol,, 1956, 41, 177-184. SOLLEY,C. M . , & MURPHY,C. Development of the Perceptual World. New York: Basic Books, 1960. SOMMER,R. The effects of rewards and punishments during perceptual organization. J. Personal., 1957, 25, 550-559. WINER, B. J . Statistical Principles in Experimental Design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 197 I .
Department of Psychology University of Delhi Delhi-110007, India
