Shinobu Kitayama - US grants

9316749 Palm A great deal of attention has been given to the development of cross-national policy in earthquake hazard reduction-particularly under the aegis of the International Decade for Natural Hazard Reduction. For example, California officials have investigated some of the policies and practices in force in Japan-and the ways in which these policies might be translated in the U.S. context. Previous research shows a relationship between the ways the risks are communicated and their salience to individuals. Studies have also analyzed the effects of public policy on individual behavior. But are the relationships observed in U.S. studies applicable in other cultures? Indeed, have our own conclusions possibly been biased and therefore impoverished as a result of their mono-cultural empirical base. Using survey methodology the study has two specific goals: (1) to determine cross-cultural similarities and differences in perception and understanding of earthquake risk; and (2) to determine cross-cultural similarities and differences in the adoption of mitigation measures, including non-mandatory earthquake insurance. ***

Recent work by Nisbett and his colleagues has demonstrated marked differences between Westerners and East Asians in a number of aspects of perception and reasoning. Westerners perceive and reason in ways that can be described as analytic. They tend to focus on some salient object, identify its attributes, categorize the object, and apply rules to model and explain the object's behavior, and the rules employed include formal logic. In contrast, East Asians perceive and reason in ways that can be called holistic. They tend to focus on the broad field in which an object is located and the relation between the object and the field. Relationships and similarities are used to organize the world, and dialectical reasoning (for example, seeking the middle way between extremes) substitutes for formal logic. The aim of this research is to establish that a particular broad aspect of culture, namely the degree of individualism vs. collectivism characteristic of a group, is a source of the cognitive differences. Westerners are independent and individualistic and they consequently have the luxury of focusing on some object with respect to which they have a goal, whereas Easterners are more interdependent and collectivist and must attend to the complicated social worlds they live in. Differences in attention, causal attribution, organization of objects and events, and reasoning derive from these differences. The proposed research measures social orientation toward individualism vs. collectivism. The anticipation is that social orientation, and not some other factor associated with differences between Westerners and Asians, will produce the relationship between culture and cognition. In order to demonstrate that social orientation influences cognitive differences, the research will examine subcultures within the West (such as northern vs. southern Italy, eastern vs. western Europe, American Catholics vs. Protestants, working class vs. middle class) which differ in social orientation. The subcultures are expected to differ in aspects of that are considered to be analytic vs. holistic. The research is relevant to a wide range of social issues, most notably in education. The research may uncover ways in which more analytic people can be taught useful aspects of holistic thinking and more holistic people can be taught useful aspects of analytic ways of thinking.

DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): This proposal aims to use a conference mechanism to capitalize on important recent research findings in three distinct areas for the purpose of enabling senior researchers in these areas to discuss the most productive future research that would build from existing research to identify the processes by which cultural factors (for example, cultural patterning of behavior through social structures, beliefs, and practices) influence biology (for example, genetic processes, brain functioning), and conversely, biology influences culture, with both mutual influences considered over the development of a life, and in terms of their effects on the retention of mental health versus the development of mental illness. To achieve these goals for future research, we have proposed a format involving a smaller conference, with background papers to be read in advance, and questions to be considered in advance. We believe that this will permit each participant, junior and senior, to have a common set of knowledge, as well as each person's specific knowledge. The conference will involve four sessions beginning with a key question of basic scientific processes and their implications for mental health. One researcher will briefly summarize knowledge in the area, followed by lead comments on needed research from other participants. By carefully selecting participants and structuring the discussions, we hope to make more rapid headway in mapping future research opportunities. We expect that the conference will have major impact on the participants, and through rapid dissemination of the results, be quickly transmitted through the research community and beyond. PUBLIC HEALTH RELEVANCE: By carefully selecting participants and structuring the discussions, we hope to make more rapid headway in mapping future research opportunities. We expect that the conference will have major impact on the participants, and through rapid dissemination of the results, be quickly transmitted through the research community and beyond.

Choice drives virtually all behavior and is one of the most studied phenomena in psychology. The present research brings together three previously separate bodies of knowledge to further illuminate the nature of choice processes, with a particular emphasis on choice justification -- a phenomenon involving increased preference for a chosen option and decreased preference for a rejected option. The research involves a Gene X Situation X Culture Interaction Framework. Although the present effort is ambitious, recent developments in three relevant areas of research make the effort, not only possible, but also potentially fruitful.

From cultural psychological work we know that choice justification is ubiquitous and, yet, the situations in which it occurs vary systematically across cultures: Whereas European Americans (who tend to see themselves as independent from others) justify choices they make for themselves, Asians (who tend to see themselves as interdependent with others) justify choices they make for their friends. From the neuroscience of decision-making, we know that choice justification occurs at the mesocorticolimbic neural pathway of reward processing. From genetics we know that the neural pathway of reward processing is regulated closely by several dopamine system related genes. In combination, these three bodies of literature add importantly to the current view that choice making is neither static nor merely cognitive. Instead, choice making is best conceptualized as an open, dynamic process that receives constant input from genes, situations, and culture.

To investigate how choice justification depends on genes, situations (i.e., self vs. friend choice), and culture (i.e., European American vs. Asian), the current proposal involves one large-scale, cross-cultural imaging genetics study -- the first of its kind. Both European Americans and East Asians who have either high or low genetic profiles of dopamine signaling capacity will be recruited. They will be scanned while making choices for themselves or for their friends. It is anticipated that when choices are made for the self, choice justification as revealed in activity in the ventral striatal area will be most pronounced for European Americans and, moreover, among European Americans the effect will be stronger for those with genetic profiles linked to high (vs. low) dopamine signaling capacity. In contrast, when choices are made for friends, the choice justification effect as revealed in the same ventral striatal region will be most pronounced for Asians and, moreover, among Asians this effect will be stronger for those with the genetic profiles associated with high (vs. low) dopamine signaling capacity.

If confirmed, the current prediction regarding Gene X Situation X Culture interaction effects will support the view that the study of human mind requires a multi-disciplinary point of view. For example, neither genetics nor neuroscience can be neatly separated from careful analysis of society and culture that provides the context for both genes and the brain to operate. The current work will therefore contribute to teaching, training and knowledge creation of several different fields. Furthermore, the current work will be conducted by a multi-cultural and ethnic group of researchers and research assistants with participants who have multi-cultural and ethnic backgrounds. This work will therefore help educate and train underrepresented groups of individuals in the biological and behavioral sciences.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted human vulnerability to infectious disease outbreaks and reinforced the need for improved data-driven response and preparedness. The BEHIVE (BEHavioral Interaction and Viral Evolution) research team for Predictive Intelligence for Pandemic Prevention (PIPP) aims to tackle a fundamental challenge in disease outbreak prevention by integrating the study of human behavior using a computational data-driven lens. The impact of human behavior and social interactions remain underutilized in efforts spanning scenario development, forecasting, and epidemic mitigation. Proposed educational and outreach activities will train early career researchers and practitioners in PIPP. The trans-disciplinary nature of the project including connections with the humanities will encourage diverse cohorts of researchers to engage in this public-facing field.<br/><br/>Several accelerating trends, such as widening data collection, new Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) techniques, high fidelity computational modeling and recent surge in social/behavioral knowledge due to COVID-19, create an opportunity to tackle the challenge of integrating human behavior into epidemic response using a synergistic team-science approach. Project will develop methods incorporating behavioral feedback to bridge mechanistic and AI models, to provide specificity and context needed via genomic surveillance and robust predictions, and to empower coordinated decision making by building strategic portfolios. These efforts will lead to novel AI/ML frameworks, new modeling/decision-making paradigms, facilitate early warning systems and inform mitigation efforts to prevent pandemics and reduce risk of outbreaks in the first place. The diverse interdisciplinary team consists of computer scientists, biologists, engineers, and behavioral scientists, along with experts in medicine and public health (from Georgia Tech, MIT, Michigan, UGA and Mayo Clinic) with broad and significant expertise in epidemic research spanning foundational research and intervention-focused work during the COVID-19 pandemic. The project team will also partner with multiple academic, industrial, government public health and non-profit setups, which will help enlarge the impact of the proposed research. <br/><br/>This award is supported by the cross-directorate Predictive Intelligence for Pandemic Prevention Phase I (PIPP) program, which is jointly funded by the Directorates for Biological Sciences (BIO); Computer, Information Science and Engineering (CISE); Engineering (ENG) and Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences (SBE).<br/><br/>This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.