DOCSLIB.ORG

Culture and Cognition Author(S): Paul Dimaggio Source: Annual Review of Sociology, Vol

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Culture and Cognition Author(S): Paul Dimaggio Source: Annual Review of Sociology, Vol Culture and Cognition Author(s): Paul DiMaggio Source: Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 23 (1997), pp. 263-287 Published by: Annual Reviews Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2952552 Accessed: 18/10/2010 10:56 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=annrevs. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual Review of Sociology. http://www.jstor.org Annu.Rev. Sociol. 1997. 23:263-87 Copyright? 1997 byAnnual Reviews Inc. All rightsreserved CULTURE AND COGNITION Paul DiMaggio Departmentof Sociology,2-N-2 Green Hall, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey08544; e-mail:[email protected] KEY WORDS: sociologyof culture, social classification,social cognition,schemata ABSTRACT Recentwork in cognitivepsychology and social cognition bears heavily on con- cernsof sociologistsof culture. Cognitive research confirms views of cultureas fragmented;clarifies the roles of institutions and agency;and illuminates supra- individualaspects of culture.Individuals experience culture as disparatebits of informationand as schematicstructures that organize that information. Culture carriedby institutions,networks, and social movementsdiffuses, activates, and selectsamong available schemata. Implications for the study of identity, collective memory,social classification,and logics of action are developed. INTRODUCTION The studyof culturein everydaylife remains a virtuosoaffair. Interpretive studiesoffer great insight but fail to buildon one another.Cultural theory has becomehighly sophisticated but not fully operational. These riches ready the fieldfor takeoff, like the study of social stratificationin Sorokin's day (1957 [1927]). But beforethe study of livedculture can becomea cumulativeenter- prise,scholars must clarify the cognitive presuppositions behind their theories ofwhat culture does andwhat people do withit, and the fundamental concepts andunits of analysis (Jepperson & Swidler1994, Wuthnow 1987). Recentwork in cognitive psychology and social cognition provides resources forboth tasks. Afterdescribing recent convergence between cultural sociol- ogyand psychology, this chapter considers lessons of recent work on cognition forpresuppositions about the nature of culture;develops implications of these lessonsfor sociological work on identity,collective memory, social classifi- cation,logics of action,and framing;and pointsto keyproblems that remain unsolved. 263 0360-0572/97/0815-0263$08.00 264 DiMAGGIO Ratherthan offer an exhaustivereview of cognitivesociology per se (see Zerubavel1997) or workin psychologyrelevant to culture(see D'Andrade 1995), I emphasizetensions and affinitiesbetween recent cognitive research andwork in the sociology of culture with the aim of bringing the former into the serviceof the latter. I focus on how people use culture, rather than the production of culture,ideology, or cultureembedded in thephysical environment. The pointis notto psychologizethe study of culture,but to lay a foundationfor a viewof culture as workingthrough the interaction of sharedcognitive structures andsupra-individual cultural phenomena (material culture, media messages, or conversation,for example) that activate those structures to varyingdegrees. SOCIOLOGY AND PSYCHOLOGY: POINTS OF CONVERGENCE A handfulof sociologistshave appreciatedthe potential of cognitivescience to informsociological work on culture(Carley 1989, Cicourel 1973, Schwartz 1981,White 1992), and some social constructionistshave anticipated impor- tantresults of cognitiveresearch (Berger & Luckman1967, Garfinkel1987 [1967], Zerubavel1991). For themost part, however, sociologists of culture have ignoredrelevant work by cognitivepsychologists, social psychologists, and public-opinionresearchers. This omissionreflects a mismatchbetween themodal intellectual styles of humanistic, interpretively oriented cultural so- ciologistsand experimentally oriented positivistic psychologists, as wellas the disappointinglegacy of Parsons' efforts at disciplinaryfusion, which psychol- ogizedculture, reducing it to sharedvalues, norms, and attitudes. Sociology:More ComplexViews of Culture In recentyears, however, common ground between sociology of cultureand psychologyhas grown. The majordevelopment within sociology has been a shiftto a morecomplex understanding of culture.Thirty years ago, most sociologistsviewed culture as a "seamlessweb" (Swidler1997), unitary and internallycoherent across groups and situations.In effect,culture was por- trayedas a latentvariable influencing incommon such manifestations as media images,responses to attitudequestionnaires, and thevalues embodied in ev- erydaypractices. Individuals were presumed to acquire culture in the course of socializationand, in thepopular oversocialized view (Wrong 1961), to enactit unproblematically.It followed from this perspective that there was littlereason to worryabout constructs used to studyculture, for any kind of "cultural stuff" couldserve as an indicatorof the underlying latent variable. By contrast,recent work depicts culture as fragmentedacross groups and inconsistentacross its manifestations(Martin 1992). The view of cultureas CULTURE AND COGNITION 265 values thatsuffuse other aspects of belief,intention, and collectivelife has succumbedto one of cultureas complexrule-like structures that constitute resourcesthat can be putto strategic use (Bourdieu1990, Sewell 1992,Swidler 1986). This shiftmakes studying culture much more complicated. Once we ac- knowledgethat culture is inconsistent-thatpeople's norms may deviate from whatthe media represent as normal,or thatour preconscious images and dis- cursiveaccounts of a phenomenonmay differ-it becomes crucial to identify unitsof cultural analysis and to focus attention upon the relations among them. In effect,our measures stop being indicators of a latentvariable (culture), and theirrelationship to culturebecomes analogous to thatof education,income, andplace of residence to social stratification: separate phenomena, analytically relatedto a commontheoretical construct, the relations among them a matterfor empiricalinvestigation (D'Andrade 1995 notes similar trends in anthropology). Similarly,once we acknowledgethat people behave as if theyuse culture strategically,itfollows that the cultures into which people are socialized leave muchopportunity for choice and variation. Thus our attention turns to waysin whichdiffering cultural frames or understandingsmay be situationallycued. Addressingsuch issues requires more elaborate and contestable psychological presuppositionsthan did theculture-as-latent-variable view. Psychology:More ComplexViews of Cognition Suchquestions make it sensible for sociologists of culture to turn to psychology forinsight into the mechanisms through which shared culture enters into cog- nition.Yet nothing guarantees that psychologists, who have their own research agendas,can helpus. Thirtyyears ago, behaviorismmade psychology essen- tiallyirrelevant to thestudy of culture. Twenty years ago, psychologists casting offthe yoke of behaviorismfocused primarily on theacquisition of skillsand capacitiesof littleinterest to mostsociologists of culture.Even a dozenyears ago, theimplications for cultural sociology of manyof the ideas and research traditionsthat are most useful today were still unclear. Whathas happenedto makepsychology useful to sociologistsof culture? First,psychologists have rejected behaviorism, accepted and demonstrated the existenceof mentalstructures used to perceive,process, and retrieve informa- tion,and foundways to makeinferences about such structures. Second, just as sociologicalresearch has demonstratedculture's complexity and fragmenta- tion,psychological research has demonstratedthe complexity of memoryand providedglimpses of thepartitioning of mentalstructures by domain.Third, recentfoci of psychologicalresearch (schemata, categories, mental models, andso on) aremuch richer in culturalcontent than the formal operations or in- tellectualcapacities that once preoccupiedcognitivists and developmentalists 266 DiMAGGIO (Rogoff& Chavajay1995). Fourth,some psychologists have taken notice of suchsociological topics as cross-culturaldifferences in cognition(Shweder & Bourne1991, Markus & Kitayama1991), elite/popular interaction in cultural change(Moscovici 1984), and "distributedcognition" (i.e. thesocial division of cognitivelabor) (Resnick et al 1991,Salomon 1993). In additionto expanding the grounds of shared interest between the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cultural Distance, Perception of Emotional Display Rules, And
    CULTURAL DISTANCE, PERCEPTION OF EMOTIONAL DISPLAY RULES, AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON SOJOURNER ADJUSTMENT A thesis presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science Nicole L. Gullekson August 2007 2 This thesis titled CULTURAL DISTANCE, PERCEPTION OF EMOTIONAL DISPLAY RULES, AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON SOJOURNER ADJUSTMENT by NICOLE L. GULLEKSON has been approved for the Department of Psychology and the College of Arts and Sciences by ________________________________________________ Jeffrey B. Vancouver Associate Professor of Psychology ________________________________________________ Benjamin M. Ogles Dean, College of Arts and Sciences 3 Abstract GULLEKSON, NICOLE L., M.S., August 2007, Experimental Psychology CULTURAL DISTANCE, PERCEPTION OF EMOTIONAL DISPLAY RULES, AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON SOJOURNER ADJUSTMENT (109 pp.) With increased globalization, more individuals temporarily leave home to work and study in foreign countries. These sojourners are confronted with societal norms different from their home cultures. The present study investigated the extent to which international student sojourners perceive differences in emotional display norms between their home and host cultures, as well as the influence of such perception on adjustment. Although accurate perception of the host culture’s emotional display rules was not related to adjustment, a “guest” effect existed. Specifically, international student participants reported that one should
    [Show full text]
  • Managers of the Arts Managers Theal S
    Managers of the Arts Managers theAl s Careers and opinions of senior administrators of U.S. art museums, symphony orchestras, resident theaters, and local arts agencies. Paul DiMaggio Research Division Report #20 ~ National Endowment for the Arts seven ~ocks press Publishers Washington, D.C./Cabin John, Md. Managers of the Arts is Report # 20 in a series on matters of interest to the arts community commissioned by the Research Division of the Na­ tional Endowment for the Arts. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data DiMaggio, Paul. Managers of the arts. (Research Division report; no. 20) "Published for the National Endowment for the Arts." Includes index. 1. Arts administrators--United States. 2. Arts surveys--United States. I. National Endowment for the Arts. II. Title. III. Series: Research Division report (National Endowment for the Arts. Research Division); 20. NX765.D56 1987 700’ .92’2 87-9719 ISBN 0-932020-50-X (pbk.) Supported by the National Endowment for the Arts, Research Division, under Grant NEA-02-4050-001. Edited by Jane Gold Designed by Dan Thomas Printed by Thomson-Shore, Inc., Dexter, Michigan Manufactured in the United States of America First edition, September 1987 Seven Locks Press Publishers P.O. Box 27 Cabin John, Maryland 20818 301-320-2130 Books of Seven Locks Press are distributed to the trade by National Book Network Inc. 4720A Boston Way Lanham, MD 20706 Contents I ntrod uctio n vii Executive Summary 1 1. Backgrounds, Recruitment, and Careers 11 2. Rewards and Expectations 25 3. Training 41 4. Professional Participation and Attitudes Toward Professionalism 52 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Dimaggio Et Al
    From Unequal Access to Differentiated Use: A Literature Review and Agenda for Research on Digital Inequality* Paul DiMaggio, Eszter Hargittai, Coral Celeste, and Steven Shafer Report prepared for the Russell Sage Foundation. Authors are from Princeton University except for Har- gittai, whose teaches at Northwestern University. Support from the Russell Sage Foundation, the National Science Foundation (grant IIS0086143) and the Markle Foundation is gratefully acknowledged, as is instit- utional support from the Princeton Center for Arts and Cultural Policy Studies and Office of Population Re- search. This paper reflects the impact on the first author’s thinking of several helpful and provocative com- ments by participants at the Russell Sage Foundation Inequality project’s Harvard meeting in Summer 2001. From Unequal Access to Differentiated Use: A Literature Review and Agenda for Research on the Digital Inequality The Internet boosts immeasurably our collective capacity to archive information, search through large quantities of it quickly, and retrieve it rapidly. It is said that the Internet will expand access to education, good jobs, and better health; and that it will create new deliberative spaces for political discussion and provide citizens with direct access to government. In so far as such claims are plausible, Internet access is an important resource and inequality in Internet access is a significant concern for social scientists who study inequality. This paper reviews what we know about inequality in access to and use of new digital technologies. Until recently, most research has focused on inequality in access (the “digital divide”), measured in a variety of ways. We agree that inequality of access is important, because it is likely to reinforce inequality in opportunities for economic mobility and social participation.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Acculturation' in Relation to Diasporic Cultures and Postcolonial Identities
    Paper Human Development 2001;44:1–18 Rethinking ‘Acculturation’ in Relation to Diasporic Cultures and Postcolonial Identities Sunil Bhatia a Anjali Ram b aConnecticut College, New London, Conn., bRoger Williams University, Bristol, R.I., USA Key Words Acculturation W Cross-cultural psychology W Cultural identity W Diaspora W Human development W Immigrants W Postcolonial theory Abstract In this article, we reexamine the concept of ‘acculturation’ in cross-cultural psy- chology, especially with respect to non-western, non-European immigrants living in the United States. By drawing primarily on postcolonial scholarship, we specifi- cally reconsider the universalist assumption in cross-cultural psychology that all immigrant groups undergo the same kind of ‘psychological’ acculturation process. In so doing, (1) we consider some of the historical and political events related to immigration in the United States; (2) we question the conflation of nation with cul- ture that emerges in many theories of acculturation; (3) we use the notion of diaspo- ra as theorized in postcolonial studies to rethink the concept of ‘integration strategy’ as developed in cross-cultural psychology. Our article has implications for general issues of culture and self in human development, and particular issues in the area of acculturation. Copyright © 2001 S. Karger AG, Basel Given the fact that currently 20% of all children in the United States are immigrant children [Hernandez, 1999], questions related to acculturation and migrant identity are central to human development. Much of the psychological research on the development of immigrant identity has been studied under the topic of ‘acculturation’ in cross-cultur- al psychology. Scholars working with this body of research have been primarily occu- pied with developing universal, linear models to understand the various stages of identi- ty that an immigrant might experience.
    [Show full text]
  • Varieties of American Popular Nationalism.” American Sociological Review 81(5):949-980
    Bonikowski, Bart, and Paul DiMaggio. 2016. “Varieties of American Popular Nationalism.” American Sociological Review 81(5):949-980. Publisher’s version: http://asr.sagepub.com/content/81/5/949 Varieties of American Popular Nationalism Bart Bonikowski Harvard University Paul DiMaggio New York University Abstract Despite the relevance of nationalism for politics and intergroup relations, sociologists have devoted surprisingly little attention to the phenomenon in the United States, and historians and political psychologists who do study the United States have limited their focus to specific forms of nationalist sentiment: ethnocultural or civic nationalism, patriotism, or national pride. This article innovates, first, by examining an unusually broad set of measures (from the 2004 GSS) tapping national identification, ethnocultural and civic criteria for national membership, domain- specific national pride, and invidious comparisons to other nations, thus providing a fuller depiction of Americans’ national self-understanding. Second, we use latent class analysis to explore heterogeneity, partitioning the sample into classes characterized by distinctive patterns of attitudes. Conventional distinctions between ethnocultural and civic nationalism describe just about half of the U.S. population and do not account for the unexpectedly low levels of national pride found among respondents who hold restrictive definitions of American nationhood. A subset of primarily younger and well-educated Americans lacks any strong form of patriotic sentiment; a larger class, primarily older and less well educated, embraces every form of nationalist sentiment. Controlling for sociodemographic characteristics and partisan identification, these classes vary significantly in attitudes toward ethnic minorities, immigration, and national sovereignty. Finally, using comparable data from 1996 and 2012, we find structural continuity and distributional change in national sentiments over a period marked by terrorist attacks, war, economic crisis, and political contention.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Neuroscience: a Historical Introduction and Overview Nicholas O
    Unit 9 Biological Psychology, Neuropsychology and Culture Article 1 Subunit 2 Neuropsychology and Culture 8-1-2014 Cultural Neuroscience: A Historical Introduction and Overview Nicholas O. Rule University of Toronto, [email protected] Please address correspondence to: Nicholas O. Rule, Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, [email protected]; this work was supported in part by NSERC 491593. Recommended Citation Rule, N. O. (2014). Cultural Neuroscience: A Historical Introduction and Overview. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1128 This Online Readings in Psychology and Culture Article is brought to you for free and open access (provided uses are educational in nature)by IACCP and ScholarWorks@GVSU. Copyright © 2014 International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology. All Rights Reserved. ISBN 978-0-9845627-0-1 Cultural Neuroscience: A Historical Introduction and Overview Abstract The integration of cognitive neuroscience with the study of culture emerged from independent ascensions among both fields in the early 1990s. This marriage of the two previously unconnected areas of inquiry has generated a variety of empirical and theoretical works that have provided unique insights to both partners that might have otherwise gone overlooked. Here, I provide a brief historical introduction to the emergence of cultural neuroscience from its roots in cultural psychology and cognitive neuroscience to its present stature as one of the most challenging but rewarding sub-disciplines to have come from the burgeoning growth of the study of the brain and behavior. In doing so, I overview some of the more studied areas within cultural neuroscience: language, music, mathematics, visual perception, and social cognition.
    [Show full text]
  • Center for Institutional Reform and the Informal Sector
    CENTER FOR INSTITUTIONAL REFORM AND THE INFORMAL SECTOR University of Maryland at College Park Center Office: IRIS Center, 2105 Morrill Hall, College Park, MD 20742 Telephone (301) 405-3110 l Fax (301) 405-3020 RECOMBINANT PROPERTY IN IN EAST EUROPEAN CAPITALISM September, 1994 David Stark Working Paper No. 133 This publication was made possible through support provided by the U.S. Agency for International Development, under Cooperatlve Agreement No. DHR-0015-A-00-0031-00. The views and analyses in the paper do not necessarily reflect the official position of the IRIS Center or the U.S.A.I.D. Author: David Stark, Department of Sociology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York. Recombinant Property in East European Capitalism David Stark Department of Sociology Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853 tel: 607-255-1419 FAX: 607-255-8473 e-mail: [email protected] Research for this paper was supported by grants from IRIS (Institutional Reform and the Informal Sector) and from the Project on Corporate Governance of the World Bank/Central European University. My thanks to Ronald Breiger, Rogers Brubaker, I&z16 Bruszt, Christopher Clague, Ellen Comisso, Paul DiMaggio, Geoff Fougere, Istvan Gabor, Peter Gedeon, Gernot Grabher, Szabolcs Kern&y, Janos Kollo, Jrinos Koruai, JBnos LukBcs, L&z16 Neumann, Claus Offe, Eva Palocz, &OS Rona-Tas, Monique Djokic Stark, Marton Tardos, Eva Voszka, and Harrison White for their criticisms of an earlier draft. Recombinant Property in East European Capitalism David Stark Cornell University Executive Summary for IRIS The starting premise of this paper is that the greatest obstacle to understanding change in contemporary Eastern Europe is the concept of transition.
    [Show full text]
  • A Workable Concept for (Cross-)Cultural Psychology?
    Unit 2 Theoretical and Methodological Issues Article 14 Subunit 1 Conceptual Issues in Psychology and Culture 9-1-2015 Is “Culture” a Workable Concept for (Cross- )Cultural Psychology? Ype Poortinga Tilburg University, [email protected] I would like to thank for comments and debate on a previous draft of this paper: Ron Fischer, Joop de Jong, and cross-cultural psychologists at Tilburg University in the Netherlands and at Victoria University in Wellington, New Zealand. For readers not convinced by the argument in this paper, I may note that several of these, mainly young, cross-cultural researchers insisted that culture should be seen as something real, like the three blind men who are touching parts of one and the same elephant (see footnote 5). This should bode well for the future of the concept of culture and for one prediction of this paper: that “culture” is unlikely to suffer any time soon the fate of ether or generatio spontanea. Recommended Citation Poortinga, Y. (2015). Is “Culture” a Workable Concept for (Cross-)Cultural Psychology?. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1139 This Online Readings in Psychology and Culture Article is brought to you for free and open access (provided uses are educational in nature)by IACCP and ScholarWorks@GVSU. Copyright © 2015 International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology. All Rights Reserved. ISBN 978-0-9845627-0-1 Is “Culture” a Workable Concept for (Cross-)Cultural Psychology? Abstract In this essay three points are addressed: First, despite repeated findings of limited cross-cultural variation for core areas of study, research in cross-cultural psychology continues to be directed mainly at finding differences in psychological functioning.
    [Show full text]
  • Inventing Opera As “High Culture”
    For many people opera represents (whether this is understood posi- tively or negatively) the very embodiment of “high culture.”Yet lately there have been signs that its status is changing, as opera becomes more and more a feature of everyday cultural life.1 What I want to explore in this chapter is whether these changes have now made it possible to describe opera as popular culture. Inventing Opera as “High Culture” In order to fully understand what has been happening to opera in recent years, I think it is first necessary to examine something of the history of opera. Traditionally, opera is said to have been invented in the late sixteenth century by a group of Florentine intellectuals known as the Camerata.2 However, according to musicologist Susan McClary, Despite the humanistic red herrings proffered by Peri, Caccini [members of the Camerata], and others to the effect that they were reviving Greek performance practices, these gentlemen knew very well that they were basing their new reciting style on the improvisatory practices of con- temporary popular music. Thus the eagerness with which the humanist myth was constructed and elaborated sought both to conceal the vulgar origins of its techniques and to flatter the erudition of its cultivated patrons. (McClary, 1985: 154–5) Although there may be some dispute over the intellectual origins of opera, there is general agreement about its commercial beginnings. “Expecting Rain”: Opera as Popular Culture? 33 Significantly, the opera house was the “first musical institution to open its doors to the general public” (Zelochow, 1993: 261). The first opera house opened in Venice in 1637: it presented “commercial opera run for profit .
    [Show full text]
  • Dewey's Cultural Theory and Psychology When the History Of
    Dewey’s Cultural Theory and Psychology When the history of Cultural Psychology is being discussed one often encounters the names of Lazarus, Steinthal, and Wundt in Germany, Rivers and Bartlett in Britain, and Vygotsky in the former Soviet Union. Missing from mention is the name of the American John Dewey. This is understandable since he did not explicitly formulate a theory of culture and psychology but, nonetheless, the theme runs throughout his numerous publications. It is this that I shall endeavor to encapsulate and, in the process, reveal Dewey’s anticipation and rejection of evolutionary psychology. Such a task is impossible to do justice to in a limited space but I hope that I may at least offer some signposts to where the mind of this seminal thinker may be mined. In his eightieth year, while reflecting back upon his psychological theorizing, Dewey (1939a) noted that the traditional, mentalistic psychology was being transformed by biology and cultural anthropology. Human experience (experience meaning here “participation in activities,” and “of doings and undergoings”) is what it is, he contended, because of its subjection to cultural agencies and intercommunication. In retrospect, he referred to the approach that he had been developing as “socio-biological psychology” and “biological- cultural psychology.” His intention, with these appellations, was to convey the idea that cultures stimulate innate tendencies and remake them; they promote and consolidate those tendencies into patterns of purposes that are fitted to the prevailing cultural conditions (Dewey, 1939/1989). According to Dewey the biological constitution of humans is common to the people of whatever grouping and, because of that, innate tendencies cannot be appealed to in accounting for the differences between groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Second-Level Digital Divide: Mapping Differences in People's Online Skills*
    Eszter Hargittai TPRC 2001 (Draft) Second-Level Digital Divide :: 1 Second-Level Digital Divide: Mapping Differences in People's Online Skills* Abstract Much of the existing approach to the digital divide suffers from an important limitation. It is based on a binary classification of Internet use by only considering whether someone is or is not an Internet user. To remedy this shortcoming, this project looks at the differences in people’s level of skill with respect to finding information online. Findings suggest that people search for content in a myriad of ways and there is a large variance in how long people take to find various types of information online. Data are collected to see how user demographics, users’ social support networks, people’s experience with the medium, and their autonomy of use influence their level of user sophistication. Introduction Most of the literature on the digital divide focuses on the differences between the haves and have nots of the digital age, that is, the differences among those who have access to the Internet and other communication and information technologies and those who do not, or the differences among those who use these media and those who do not. While most reports identify differences among various segments of the population, over time studies emphasize the increasing diffusion of the medium among the population at large (see Rickert and Sacharow 2000 and Pew 2000a for gender; Austen 2000 for age, NTIA 2000 for race). As more and more people start using the Web for communication and information retrieval, it becomes less and less useful to merely look at demographic differences in who is online when discussing questions of inequality in relation to the Internet.
    [Show full text]
  • Culture and Social Behavior 1,2
    Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect Culture and social behavior 1,2 Joseph Henrich Comparative research from diverse societies shows that with nearly everything in-between. In some populations, human social behavior varies immensely across a broad range contributions declined as people played. In others, they of domains, including cooperation, fairness, trust, punishment, did not. Then, when opportunities for participants to pay aggressiveness, morality and competitiveness. Efforts to to punish other players were added to the basic game explain this global variation have increasingly pointed to the setup, the diversity across groups increased even more. importance of packages of social norms, or institutions. This Contributions in the first round now ranged from roughly work suggests that institutions related to anonymous markets, 30% in Istanbul, Riyadh and Athens to nearly 80% in moralizing religions, monogamous marriage and complex Boston, Copenhagen and St. Gallen (Switzerland). Most kinship systems fundamentally shape human psychology and striking was that, unlike the usual experiments among behavior. To better tackle this, work on cultural evolution and Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic culture-gene coevolution delivers the tools and approaches to (WEIRD) populations [14] where opportunities to punish develop theories to explain these psychological and behavioral result in the sanctioning of non-cooperators and in high patterns, and to understand their relationship to culture and rates of cooperation, the addition of punishment oppor- human nature. tunities made things worse in several places. In these Addresses places, participants punished not only low contributors 1 University of British Columbia, Department of Psychology, Canada but also high contributors, which stifled any increase in 2 University of British Columbia, Department of Economics, Canada the overall contributions.
    [Show full text]