Attribution of Responsibility by Japanese and Americans as a Function of Age

Abstract

Two age groups of Japanese and Americans were experimentally compared in the attribution of responsibility. Forty Japanese and 40 Americans were administered the AR Questionnaire, which incorporates five levels of causality (Association, Commission, Foreseeability, Intentionality, and Justification), two outcome qualities (good and bad), and two outcome intensities (high and low). Half of each nationality were age 9-10 and half were age 11-13; half of each age group in each culture were male and half were female. The results replicated previous findings due to levels, outcome quality, and outcome intensity, and supported the following conclusions: 1) Americans attribute greater responsibility for negative than for positive outcomes, whereas Japanese attribute about the same for both negative and positive outcomes; 2) although both nationalities attribute more responsibility for high than for low intensity outcomes, this difference is greater for Japanese than for Americans; 3) Japanese attribute greater responsibility at levels I and II, and less at level V than Americans; 4) the magnitude of cultural differences varies with age of subjects, level of causality, quality of outcome, and intensity of outcome. The findings were interpreted in terms of cultural differences in values and parental reward patterns.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Berrien, F. K. Japanese values and the democratic process . Journal of Social Psychology 1966, 68, 129-138.

Caudill, W. , & Scarr, H. A. Japanese value orientations and cultural change. Ethnology 1962, 1 53-91.

Cole, D. L. Intercultural variations in recall of parental reward patterns . Sociology and Social Research 1966, 50, 436-447.

Heider, F. The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley, 1958.

Klinger, M. R. B. , & Veroff, J. Cross-cultural dimensions in expressed moral values. Personnel and Guidance Journal 1964, 899-903.

Kohlberg, L. Moral development and identification . In H. W. Stevenson (Ed.), Child psychology Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I, 1963, Pp. 277-332.

Matsumoto, Y. S. Contemporary Japan: The individual and the group. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 1960.

Pelzel, J. , & Kluckhohn, F. A theory of variation in values applied to aspects of Japanese social structure. Bulletin of the Research Institute of Comparative Education and Culture Kyushu University, English Edition 1, 1957, Pp. 62-76.

Piaget, J. The moral judgment of the child. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1932.

10.

Shaw, M. E. Attribution of responsibility by adolescents in two cultures . Adolescence 1965, 3 23-32.

11.

Shaw, M. E. , Briscoe, M. E. , & Garcia-Esteve, J. A cross-cultural study of attribution of responsibility. International Journal of Psychology 1968, 3 51-60.

12.

Shaw, M. E. , & Reitan, H. T. Attribution of responsibility as a basis for sanctioning behavior. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 1969, 8 217-226.

13.

Shaw, M. E., & Schneider, F. W. Social class differences in attribution of responsibility and sanctioning behavior. Technical Report No. 5, NSF Grant GS-647, University of Florida, Gainesville, 1967.

14.

Shaw, M. E. , & Sulzer, J. L. An empirical test of Heider's levels in the attribution of responsibility. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 1964, 69, 39-46.