Research on the Formation Mechanism of Cognitive Bias from the Perspective of East Asian Culture: An Analysis Based on the Halo Effect
Abstract
Existing studies of the halo effect have largely used Western individualistic cognitive approaches, with limited cross-cultural investigation. Drawing on East Asian cultural contexts, this paper explores the interconnected effects of relational cognition, authority structures, and face mechanisms on evaluative processes. The study finds that East Asian culture shapes cognitive biases through the interaction of three mechanisms. In particular, cultural labeling shapes overall judgments via local cues, hence reducing information complexity while limiting attention to individual differences. Furthermore, authority and hierarchy structures reinforce these judgments, increasing their stability in organizational interactions. Additionally, the face mechanism filters cues by reinforcing consistency and reducing conflict. Due to the joint effect of these three mechanisms, the halo effect gradually shifts from an individual cognitive bias to a stable social cognitive pattern, manifested through culturally based inferences in cross-cultural interactions that influence communication and decision-making. Regarding this phenomenon, this paper believes that it is necessary to introduce a reflection mechanism on existing labels in the interaction, and through counterexample testing of key judgments, reduce impression overgeneralization, while clarifying the sources and boundaries of cultural assumptions to reduce misinterpretation.
References
- Thorndike, E. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological ratings.Journal of Applied Psychology, 4(1), 25.
- Nisbett, R. E., & Masuda, T. (2003). Culture and point of view.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100(19), 11163-11170.
- Hofstede, G. (2001).Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Sage publications.
- Nakamura, H. (1964).Ways of thinking of Eastern peoples: India, China, Tibet, Japan. University of Hawaii Press.
- Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2013).Social cognition: From brains to culture. Sage.
- Kahneman, D. (2011).Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
- Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), 371-378.
- Ting-Toomey, S. (1988). Intercultural conflict styles: A face-negotiation theory. In Y. Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds.),Theories in intercultural communication(pp. 213-235). Sage.
- Adler, N. J., & Gundersen, A. (2007).International dimensions of organizational behavior. Cengage Learning.
- Allport, G. W. (1954).The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.
- Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 173-220). Academic Press.