Cross Cultural Differences in Biased Cognition

Lay Summary

The way in which we process information in the world around us has a significant effect on our health and well being. For example, some people are more prone than others to notice potential dangers, to remember bad things from the past and assume the worst, when the meaning of an event or comment is uncertain. These tendencies are called negative cognitive biases and can lead to low mood and poor quality of life. They also make people vulnerable to mental illnesses.

In contrast, those with positive cognitive biases tend to function well and remain healthy. To date most of this work has been conducted on white, western populations and we do not know whether similar cognitive biases exist in Eastern cultures. This project will examine cognitive biases in Eastern (Hong Kong nationals ) and Western (UK nationals) people to see whether there are any differences between the two. It will also examine what happens to cognitive biases when someone migrates to a different culture. This will tell us whether influences from the society and culture around us have any effect on our cognitive biases. Finally the project will consider how much our own cognitive biases are inherited from our parents.

Together these results will tell us whether the known good and bad effects of cognitive biases apply to non Western cultural groups as well, and how much cognitive biases are decided by our genes or our environment.

Healthy individuals tend to have positive cognitive biases, which are protective against psychological distress and promote good quality of life. The project investigates cross-cultural differences in these biases, predicting greater negativity and therefore vulnerability in Easterners. It looks at the degree of genetic and environmental influence and whether migration normalises any cultural differences. The data will therefore generate new information about the consequences for health and well-being of life in increasingly internationalised societies.

Who might benefit?

Five stakeholder groups include:
1) The general public, specifically the interface between migrant and non migrant communities.
2) Third sector organisations (e.g. charities) operating within ethnically diverse communities.
3) Overseas students in Higher Education. With the increasing squeeze on resources, higher education institutions are increasingly looking to the overseas market for recruitment, with targets of 30% or higher.
4) Entry point healthcare providers, such as primary care, operating in ethnically diverse settings.
5) Government organisations dealing with migration. This might include the UK Immigration Service, the Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner and downstream organisations.

How might they benefit?

1) The general public/ migrant community interface can benefit from raised awareness of innate and malleable cross-cultural differences in cognition. Findings will enhance understanding of the psychological process of acculturation and promote tolerance and acceptance. Acknowledgement of cultural differences can improve social cohesion and cultural enrichment within host communities. Migrants themselves benefit from greater awareness of the psychological challenges they face, or will face, when adapting to alternative cultures.

2) Third sector organisations will have access to the latest research on cultural differences and acculturation from experts in the field, through this project. They will have the opportunity to hear and consider the scientific the evidence base, and adjust professional practice, where appropriate. For example, if indicated by our findings, some may wish to offer and evaluate novel low cost interventions, designed to redress negative cognitive biases (so called 'bias modification' procedures, which the UK PI has helped to develop).

3) For the UK Higher Education sector there is potential to feed into policy development around overseas admissions. For example, results might inform overseas inductions /summer schools and act to align expectations and evidence on the likely process and timeline of acculturation.

4) Primary healthcare providers are usually the first point of contact for those suffering psychological distress. Findings might improve migrants' health and well-being by highlighting where needs differ, and where they converge, with those of non-migrants. Understanding culturally specific needs and differing vulnerabilities allows better targeting of services, which in turn can yield cost savings. As mentioned in 2 (above) novel low cost interventions might be indicated.

5) Impact on government migration bodies may include shaping policy and enhancing effectiveness. For example a culturally unique profile of cognitive bias might render Eastern migrants to the UK particularly vulnerable to psychological distress. In this case simple changes, such as adjustments to the order and manner in which information is presented, might help mitigate unhelpful biases and promote more balanced information processing.