Unrealistic optimism. update#

After 127 students from the University of Iowa (United States) and 123 students from Kansai University (Japan) were tested through both the direct and the indirect methods, researchers acknowledged that in order to determine whether there are cross-cultural differences in unrealistic optimism they needed to take in consideration on whether direct or indirect comparisons were made.Ĭonsidering the direct method, there was evidence that both Japanese and U.S.

In contrast, for the direct method investigators predicted that participants across cultures would report similar patterns of unrealistic optimism since cognitive biases such as egocentrism on direct comparisons will have a significant influence over respondents. In the other hand, they predicted that U.S participants would present higher risk estimates for themselves than for the average student for most events. For instance, they expected that Japanese participants would report equal or higher risk estimates than for the average student for most events. In the other hand, the indirect method involved a single question in which participants made absolute separate ratings for themselves (e.g., “How likely are you to have a heart attack?”).įor the indirect method, the researchers predicted that participants across cultures would present different patterns. The direct method involved a question in which participants compared themselves to the average group (e.g., “How likely are you to have a heart attack, relative to the average student of your age/sex?”).

The overall purpose of this study was to examine cultural differences in unrealistic optimism and pessimism through the direct versus the indirect method. Study #1 – Cultural differences in unrealistic optimism and pessimism For this particular study participants form Japan and the United States responded to questions about negative health events that varied in event frequency and severity. Additionally, they stated that the cultures that have developed an independent construal of self are characterized by having an autonomous sense of self that’s different from others and the environment, whereas cultures that have fostered an interdependent construal of self are mutually reliant on each other and don’t attribute their individuality and uniqueness separately from the social world. Markys and Kitayama stated that this bias influences every culture in a different way because they emphasize to tasks relevant to everyday life in different forms independence and interdependence. Researchers have found that people from Western cultures tend to be more unrealistically optimistic than people from Eastern cultures when comparing their chances of experiencing negative events to the average’s person. The tendency of believing that one has better-than-average attributes has been researched and discussed lately.

In other words, if a negative future event is perceived to be particularly serious, it’s more likely that the person will feel invulnerable toward that particular event.

Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that optimistic bias appears to be motivated by threat.

Unrealistic optimism. update#

In addition, it can also affect the way in which people process information to update their beliefs. This bias is significantly important because it can impact people’s intentions to engage in preventive behaviors. However, unrealistic optimism has also shown favorable effects over and individual’s well-being. Unrealistic optimism could cause a negative effect over an individual’s life as it can distort their perception about reality. The purpose of this essay is to determine the extent to which cultural and gender differences are influenced by unrealistic optimism.