The influence of cultural styles of reasoning on attitudinal and cognitive responses to persuasive messages

Two experiments examined the influence of Western formal logic and East Asian dialectical reasoning on responses to persuasive messages. Western formal logic reasoning is commonly observed in Western cultures such as the United States and frames an intellectual task in a manner such that contradictory propositions cannot be true at the same time. It seeks a single best perspective among competing opposites. East Asian dialectical reasoning is commonly observed in cultures such as China, Korea, and Japan and frames an intellectual task in a manner such that contradictory propositions can be true at the same time. It seeks a “middle way” among competing opposites, finding value in all perspectives.; In Study 1, Americans and Koreans were randomly assigned to one of three message conditions. Message one included four strong pro-issue arguments. Message two included four strong pro-issue and four strong anti-issue arguments. Message three included four strong pro-issue and four weak anti-issue arguments. Americans and Koreans were equally persuaded by the strong pro message. Also, Americans and Koreans were equally persuaded by the strong pro/strong anti message. In the strong pro/weak anti condition, Americans reported a higher proportion of favorable thoughts and an attitude that favored the strong pro position. However, the Koreans reported a higher proportion of unfavorable thoughts and an attitude that favored the weak anti position. The results suggest that whereas the Americans only valued the strong quality information, the Koreans valued all pieces of information.; In Study 2, Americans and Koreans were randomly assigned to either a high or low involvement setting and to read one of three types of messages. Message one included four strong arguments. Message two included four weak arguments. Message three included four strong and four weak arguments. Under high involvement, Americans were more influenced by argument quality than by argument quantity. Under low involvement, Americans were more likely to approve a message that included eight arguments than a message that included four arguments. Also, Americans under high involvement generated more critical thoughts than Americans under low involvement. Under both high and low involvement, the Koreans were more influenced by argument quantity than argument quality. Also, Koreans under high involvement did not generate significantly more critical thoughts than Koreans under low involvement. A content analysis revealed that whereas the Americans reported a similar amount of “substantial” and “non-substantial” thoughts, the Koreans reported significantly more “non-substantial” than “substantial” thoughts. The implications of these results for cross-cultural research on persuasion were discussed.