Wonder, a fictional story told both in print (2/2012) and movie (11/2017) formats, depicts a middle-school student, Auggie, who struggles with social exclusion and being the target of school based relational bullying due to his genetically based facial deformity. Internationally popular, abundant everyday reviews by non-professional commenter are easily accessible on-line, e.g., on Douban (Chinese) and Common-Sense Media (English). Access to these comments enables the investigation of what perspectives (knowledge and understanding, beliefs and opinions, etc.) reviewers draw upon in sharing their thoughts about the protagonist's struggles. In this study we undertook two analyses. In analysis 1, we asked, how do Chinese-/English-speaking reviewers comment on Auggie's struggles to be accepted by his peers at school, both the causes of his social problem and the ways Auggie dealt (or might deal) with his situation. In analysis 2, we explored comments that reviewers made about Auggie's only sibling, his elder sister, Via, a first-year high school students who, in the story, struggles to find a balance between meeting her own need for her parents’ love and attention, and fulfilling her familial role and obligations, given Auggie's special needs.
Based on data from open-source “every day” books/movies review websites, we compared, culturally, the perspectives on the story expressed by Chinese and English commenters through emic (both thematic and discursive) exploratory analyses. Analysis 1 suggests that comparatively, Chinese-speaking reviewers tend to more often focus on the value of solving the problem, and in doing so, articulating the corresponding ways a victim of bullying or neglect can be or become both strong and interdependent, whereas English-speaking reviewers more often tend to emphasize exploring and understanding the causes of the relational problems and tend to suggest independence-oriented ways of solving the social problem by changing the actions of others. Analysis 2 suggests differences across Chinese-and English-speaking reviewers in perceptions of and judgements about the fundamental “culture based” determinants and ways for Via to deal with her relational struggle within the family.
AbellJ., StokoeE. H., & BilligM. (2000). The discursive (re)construction of events. In AndrewsM., S. Day SclaterS., SquireC., & TreacherA. (Eds.), Lines of narrative: psychosocial perspectives (pp. 180–192). London: Routledge.
2.
ArseneaultL., BowesL., & ShakoorS. (2010). Bullying victimization in youths and mental health problems: ‘Much ado about nothing'?Psychological Medicine, 40(5), 717–729. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291709991383.
3.
BaldryA. C. (2004). The impact of direct and indirect bullying on the mental and physical health of Italian youngsters. Aggressive Behavior, 30(5), 343–355. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20043.
4.
BaumeisterR., DeWallC., CiaroccoN., TwengeJ., & Devine, Patricia. (2005). Social Exclusion Impairs Self-Regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(4), 589–604.
5.
BaumeisterR., TwengeJ., NussC., & Devine, Patricia. (2002). Effects of Social Exclusion on Cognitive Processes: Anticipated Aloneness Reduces Intelligent Thought. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(4), 817–827.
6.
BowmanR. (2018). Teaching and Learning in a Storytelling Culture. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 91(3), 97–102.
7.
BoyatzisR. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. SAGE. Sage Publication, London.
8.
BraunV., & ClarkeV. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
9.
BrunerJ. (1991). The narrative construction of reality. Critical inquiry, 18(1), 1–21.
10.
CambodiaM., & GoossensF. A. (2005). Children's opinions on effective strategies to cope with bullying: The importance of bullying role and perspective. Educational research, 47(1), 93–105.
11.
CordiK., & MasturzoK. (2013). Using literature and digital storytelling to create a safe place to address bullying. Voices from the Middle, 20(3), 21.
12.
ChenX., CenG., LiD., & HeY. (2005). Social Functioning and Adjustment in Chinese Children: The Imprint of Historical Time. Child Development, 76(1), 182–195. Retrieved from JSTOR.
13.
ChenX., HuangX., ChangL., WangL., & LiD. (2010). Aggression, social competence, and academic achievement in Chinese children: A 5-year longitudinal study. Development and Psychopathology, 22(3), 583–592. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095459410000295.
14.
ChengY., NewmanI. M., QuM., MbuloL., ChaiY., ChenY., & ShellD. F. (2010). Being Bullied and Psychosocial Adjustment Among Middle School Students in China. Journal of School Health, 80(4), 193–199. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2009.00486.x.
15.
Deniston-TrochtaG. M. (1998). The meaning of storytelling as pedagogy. Visual Arts Research, 24(2), 27–32.
16.
ElgarF. J., McKinnonB., WalshS. D., FreemanJ., DonnellyD., P., de MatosM. G., … CurrieC. (2015). Structural Determinants of Youth Bullying and Fighting in 79 Countries. Journal of Adolescent Health, 57(6), 643–650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2015.08.007.
17.
ElginC., (2006) From Knowledge to Understanding. Ed. Stephen Hetherington, Epistemology Futures. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 199–215.
EvansC., CotterB., SmokowskiR. (2017). Giving victims of bullying a voice: a qualitative study of post bullying reactions and coping strategies. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal. 34(6), 543–555.
20.
FerransS., SelmanR. L., & FeigenbergL. (2012) Rules of the culture and personal needs: Witnesses’ decision-making process to deal with situations of bullying in middle school. Harvard Educational Review, 82, 445–470.
21.
GeertzC. (1975). On the Nature of Anthropological Understanding: Not extraordinary empathy but readily observable symbolic forms enable the anthropologist to grasp the unarticulated concepts that inform the lives and cultures of other peoples. American Scientist, 63(1), 47–53. Retrieved from JSTOR.
22.
Green MelanieC. (2004). Transportation In to Narrative Worlds: The Role of Prior Knowledge and Perceived Realism. Discourse Processes: Multidisciplinary A. Journal, 38(2), 247–266.
23.
HasteH. (2013). Culture, Tools and Subjectivity: The (Re) Construction of Self. In MagioglouT. (Ed.), Culture and Political Psychology (pp. 27–48). Information Age.
24.
HsuJ. (2008). The Secrets of Storytelling. Scientific American Mind, 19(4), 46–51.
25.
JenG. (2013). Tiger Writing: Art, Culture, and the Interdependent Self. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
26.
KanetsunaT., SmithP. K., & MoritaY. (2006). Coping with bullying at school: children's recommended strategies and attitudes to school-based interventions in England and Japan. Aggressive Behavior, 32(6), 570–580. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20156.
27.
KillenM., & RutlandA. (2011). Children and social exclusion: Morality, prejudice, and group identity. John Wiley & Sons.
28.
KitayamaS., JackendoffR., LambertW., DuncanR., LucyJ., MarkusH., … WellerR. (n.d.). The Four Elementary Forms of Sociality: Framework for a Unified Theory of Social Relations.
29.
KitayamaS., KarasawaM., CurhanK. B., RyffC. D., & MarkusH. R. (2010). Independence and Interdependence Predict Health and Wellbeing: Divergent Patterns in the United States and Japan. Frontiers in Psychology, 1. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00163.
30.
LamA. G., & ZaneN. W. S. (2004). Ethnic Differences in Coping with Interpersonal Stressors: Test A. of Self-Construals as Cultural Mediators. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35(4), 446–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022104266108.
31.
MaT.-L., & BellmoreA. (2016). Connection or independence: Cross-cultural comparisons of adolescents’ coping with peer victimization using mixed methods. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 47(1), 109–130. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022115605386.
32.
MarkusH. R., & KitayamaS. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224.
33.
MatsumotoD. (1999). Culture and self: An empirical assessment of Markus and Kita-yama's theory of independent and interdependent self-construal. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 2(3), 289–310. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-839X.00042.
34.
MorrisM., LeungK., AmesD., & LickelB. (1999). Views from inside and outside: Integrating emic and etic insights about culture and justice judgment. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 781–796.
35.
OatleyK. (1999). Meetings of minds: Dialogue, sympathy, and identification, in reading fiction. Poetics, 26(5), 439–454.
36.
OlweusD. (1993). Bullying at School: What We Know and What We Can Do (Vol. 12). Somerset: John Wiley & Sons.
37.
RivaP., EckJ., & Riva. (2016). Social exclusion. Berlin, Germany: Springer.
38.
SalansM. (2004). Storytelling with children in crisis: Take just one star-How impoverished children heal through stories. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
39.
SelmanR. L., BeardsleeW., SchultzL, KrupaM., and PodorefskyD. (1986) Assessing adolescent interpersonal negotiation strategies: Toward the integration of structural and functional models. Developmental Psychology, 22(4), 450–459.
40.
SelmanR. L. (2003). Promotion of Social Awareness: Powerful Lessons for the Partnership of Developmental Theory and. Retrieved from http://muse.jhu.edu/book/10884.
41.
SelmanR. L. and TestaR. M. (2019). Twice-Told Tales: Re-thinking Books, Movies and Teaching Through Close Cross-Media Comparisons. hgse Alumni Bulletin, September, 2019.
42.
SelmanTesta R. L., R., & HeH. (in press) The Art and Science of Humanistic Tales Twice-told: Opening Minds Aesthetically, Academically, and Ethically. In, RiggsW. Ed. Open-mindedness & Perspective, Oxford.
43.
SkrzypiecG., SleeP., Murray-HarveyR., & PereiraB. (2011). School bullying by one or more ways: Does it matter and how do students cope?School Psychology International, 32(3), 288–311.
44.
SmithP. B., & BondM. H. (1993). Social Psychology Across Cultures: Analysis and perspectives. Hemel Hempstead, England: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
SmithP. K., KwakK., & TodaY. (2016). School Bullying in Different Cultures. Cambridge University Press.
47.
UskulA., OverH., & Simpson, JeffryA. (2014). Responses to Social Exclusion in Cultural Context: Evidence From Farming and Herding Communities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(5), 752–771.
WeinsteinE. C., SelmanR. L., ThomasS., KimJ. E., WhiteA. E., & DinakarK. (2016). How to cope with digital stress: The recommendations adolescents offer their peers online. Journal of Adolescent Research, 31(4), 415–441.
50.
WolkeD., CopelandW. E., AngoldA., & CostelloE. J. (2013). Impact of Bullying in Childhood on Adult Health, Wealth, Crime, and Social Outcomes. Psychological Science, 24(10), 1958–1970. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613481608.
51.
WoodsideA. G. (2010). Case study research: Theory, methods and practice. Emerald Group Publishing.
52.
WrightM. F., YanagidaT., Ševcíková, A., AoyamaI., Dedková, L., Machácková, H., … ShuC. (2016). Differences in Coping Strategies for Public and Private Face-to-Face and Cyber Victimization among Adolescents in Six Countries. International Journal of Developmental Science, 10(1), 43–53. (ios Press. Nieuwe Hemweg 6B, Amsterdam, 1013 bg, The Netherlands. Tel: +31-20-688-3355; Fax: +31-20-687-0039; e-mail: info@iospress.nl; Web site: http://www.iospress.nl).
