published_or_final_version / Psychology / Doctoral / Doctor of Philosophy

published_or_final_version / Education / Doctoral / Doctor of Philosophy

published_or_final_version / Education / Doctoral / Doctor of Philosophy

With the increasing use of forgiveness interventions as therapy and educational programmes, a lot of studies have been conducted to investigate the effectiveness of the interventions. However, most of the existing intervention studies do not consider the cultural elements in forgiveness. The current study aimed to fill this gap by conducting research on forgiveness interventions in Chinese cultural context. The researcher devised a forgiveness programme by integrating the programme based on Enright-Process-Model with another programme based on Chinese cultural values. To examine the effects of the forgiveness programme on the participants’ forgiveness attitudes and other psychological variables, a 3-phase study design combining quantitative and qualitative approaches was adopted. In Phase I, the reliabilities and validities of the instruments (i.e., Decisional Forgiveness Scale, Emotional Forgiveness Scale, and Batson’s Empathy Adjectives) were examined with the sample of 194 college students (114 males and 80 females) in Nanjing. The instruments were used in the intervention studies (Phase II and Phase III). In Phase II study, two 4-session forgiveness programmes which were based on the Enright psycho-social process model and the Chinese cultural values respectively were conducted for 24 college students in Zhuhai. Based on both the quantitative and qualitative findings of the two brief programmes, a 10-session forgiveness programme integrating Chinese cultural values and the Enright Process Model was devised and implemented among 28 college students in Zhuhai (16 in experimental group and 12 in control group; 2 males and 26 females) in Phase III, the main study. The findings disclosed that gains in forgiveness attitudes in the experimental group were significantly higher than those in the control group. The improvement in the experimental group was maintained at the follow-up test after 3-month. Gains of state-anxiety in the experimental group, meanwhile, were marginally higher than those of the control group, while gains of empathy and self-esteem had no significant differences between groups. The qualitative findings further revealed the participants’ understandings of forgiveness and the strategies that influence forgiveness. The strategies facilitating forgiveness included engaging in perspective taking, taking self-responsibility, cultivating empathy, having positive thinking, and stopping rumination. In contrast, repeated offences, severe hurt experience from the offence, no apology from the offenders, and no continued relationship are perceived as factors that hinder the participants’ forgiveness. In addition, Chinese values of harmony and face were found to be pertinent factors influencing participants’ decision to forgive. The implications of the findings are discussed. Theoretically, the integration of the Enright Forgiveness Process Model and Chinese cultural values was effective in promoting forgiveness attitudes and psychological well-being with Chinese participants in the collectivist cultural setting. Practically, elements such as reconciliation need to be included in the forgiveness interventions with Chinese participants. Chinese educators are suggested to use the experiential psycho-social approach rather than the indoctrinatory approach to cultivate the value and strategies of forgiveness. The limitations of the study and suggestions for future research are also presented. / published_or_final_version / Education / Doctoral / Doctor of Philosophy

The primary purpose of the present study was to investigate the joint effects of culture and attribution of outcome feedback on reasoning performance. This study attempted to address four major research questions: (a) Do Canadian and Chinese students have different cultural values and causal attribution patterns? (b) Do pre-experimental individual differences in causal attribution patterns lead to differences in Canadian and Chinese students' inductive reasoning performance? (c) Does attribution of outcome feedback affect Canadian and Chinese students' inductive reasoning performance? (d) Do Canadian and Chinese students conduct deductive reasoning differently as a function of outcome feedback and reasoning task contents? A total of 120 college students (60 Canadian and 60 Chinese) performed three phases of computerized experimental tasks. The research design involved 2 types of culture groups (Canadian and Chinese) under 3 conditions of outcome feedback (success, failure, and control) as two independent variables. The dependent variables observed were the number of instances used or correct responses made and response time, when possible. In terms of culture differences, Canadian students appear to be distinct and articulate about the matters of socio-cultural values, while Chinese students are relatively less distinct and articulate. When making attribution for other people's success, both Canadian and Chinese students held internal factors (i. e., good effort and high ability) as responsible. When accounting for other people's failure, Canadian students picked controllable factors (i.e., lack of effort), while Chinese students picked both controllable and uncontrollable factors (i.e., largely lack of effort and occasionally difficult task) as the reasons. However, following the success outcome feedback about their own reasoning performance, Canadian students emphasized mostly high ability and, occasionally, effort as the reasons, while Chinese students picked mostly good luck and, occasionally, high ability. Given the failure outcome feedback about their own task performance, Canadian students attributed to lack of effort and bad luck as causes, while Chinese students exclusively picked lack of effort as the explanation. Chinese subjects' inductive and deductive reasoning performances remained relatively unswayed by success or failure outcome feedback, whereas Canadian subjects' reasoning performance remained good only when success feedback was received. When failure feedback was provided, Canadian subjects' reasoning performances deteriorated and remained poor throughout the experiment. While Chinese students' reasoning performance is not predictable from their low-ability attribution of other people's failure outcome, Canadian students' reasoning performance is highly predictable; that is, the more they attributed others' failure to low ability, the faster they completed the culture-fair inductive reasoning task. On the other hand, when making attribution based on their own experience, given success feedback, Canadian students attributed their performance to their high ability. Given failure feedback, Canadian students attributed their performance to their lack of effort, with improved performance commensurable to their verbal causal attribution. The present findings indicate that Canadian and Chinese college students showed differences in causal attribution patterns, depending on when they explain others' success/failure experiences or their own, and further that upon receipt of failure outcome feedback, Canadian students' reasoning performance deteriorated, while Chinese students' performance remained insensitive to success or failure outcome feedback. Further fine-grained analyses of such causal attribution patterns interacting with outcome feedbacks and cognitive performance needs some more careful studies.

The purpose of the present study was to examine the influence of cultural factors, such as self-construal, and social beliefs, on coping for U.S. and Chinese college students. Data from 325 U.S. and 321 Chinese college students were used for the analyses. It was found that independent self-construal, beliefs in reward for application and social complexity predicted task-oriented coping and self-regulation for both the U.S. and Chinese students. It was also found that beliefs in both fate control and social cynicism were associated with avoidance and emotion-focused coping in both groups. These two patterns of relationships were also observed across gender in each sample. Differences were also noted between the two countries. For the U.S. students, independent self-construal and interdependent self-construal contributed equally to task-oriented coping and self regulation, whereas for the Chinese students, only independent self-construal predicted these coping strategies. Moreover, religiosity was associated with emotion-focused coping and self regulation for the Chinese participants, while this pattern was not found in the U.S. student sample. The results of this study support the transactional model of coping. Consistent with previous findings, significant associations were found between three of the cultural variables (independent self-construal, beliefs in social complexity, and reward in application) and taskoriented coping. In contrast to prior research, the current study indicates that both independent and interdependent self-construal predicted task-oriented coping for the U.S. students. This contradicts Lam and Zane’s (2004) findings which suggested that these two dimensions of selfconstrual affect coping differently. Moreover, the current study found associations in the U.S. sample between self-construal, social beliefs, and coping dimensions which were originally identified in Chinese populations (i.e., self-regulation and help seeking). Similarly, the current research illuminated relationships in the Chinese sample between self-construal, social beliefs, and coping dimensions which were originally identified in the West (i.e., task-oriented and emotion-oriented coping). These findings suggest that current conceptualizations of coping in the West and China may not fully capture important aspects of coping in these two cultures. These results were discussed in relation to past findings in the literature, as well as the cultural contexts of the U.S. and China. / Department of Counseling Psychology and Guidance Services

The primary purpose of the present study was to investigate the joint effects of culture and attribution of outcome feedback on reasoning performance. This study attempted to address four major research questions: (a) Do Canadian and Chinese students have different cultural values and causal attribution patterns? (b) Do pre-experimental individual differences in causal attribution patterns lead to differences in Canadian and Chinese students' inductive reasoning performance? (c) Does attribution of outcome feedback affect Canadian and Chinese students' inductive reasoning performance? (d) Do Canadian and Chinese students conduct deductive reasoning differently as a function of outcome feedback and reasoning task contents? A total of 120 college students (60 Canadian and 60 Chinese) performed three phases of computerized experimental tasks. The research design involved 2 types of culture groups (Canadian and Chinese) under 3 conditions of outcome feedback (success, failure, and control) as two independent variables. The dependent variables observed were the number of instances used or correct responses made and response time, when possible. In terms of culture differences, Canadian students appear to be distinct and articulate about the matters of socio-cultural values, while Chinese students are relatively less distinct and articulate. When making attribution for other people's success, both Canadian and Chinese students held internal factors (i. e., good effort and high ability) as responsible. When accounting for other people's failure, Canadian students picked controllable factors (i.e., lack of effort), while Chinese students picked both controllable and uncontrollable factors (i.e., largely lack of effort and occasionally difficult task) as the reasons. However, following the success outcome feedback about their own reasoning performance, Canadian students emphasized mostly high ability and, occasionally, effort as the reasons, while Chinese students picked mostly good luck and, occasionally, high ability. Given the failure outcome feedback about their own task performance, Canadian students attributed to lack of effort and bad luck as causes, while Chinese students exclusively picked lack of effort as the explanation. Chinese subjects' inductive and deductive reasoning performances remained relatively unswayed by success or failure outcome feedback, whereas Canadian subjects' reasoning performance remained good only when success feedback was received. When failure feedback was provided, Canadian subjects' reasoning performances deteriorated and remained poor throughout the experiment. While Chinese students' reasoning performance is not predictable from their low-ability attribution of other people's failure outcome, Canadian students' reasoning performance is highly predictable; that is, the more they attributed others' failure to low ability, the faster they completed the culture-fair inductive reasoning task. On the other hand, when making attribution based on their own experience, given success feedback, Canadian students attributed their performance to their high ability. Given failure feedback, Canadian students attributed their performance to their lack of effort, with improved performance commensurable to their verbal causal attribution. The present findings indicate that Canadian and Chinese college students showed differences in causal attribution patterns, depending on when they explain others' success/failure experiences or their own, and further that upon receipt of failure outcome feedback, Canadian students' reasoning performance deteriorated, while Chinese students' performance remained insensitive to success or failure outcome feedback. Further fine-grained analyses of such causal attribution patterns interacting with outcome feedbacks and cognitive performance needs some more careful studies. / Education, Faculty of / Educational and Counselling Psychology, and Special Education (ECPS), Department of / Graduate

published_or_final_version / Social Work and Social Administration / Doctoral / Doctor of Philosophy

Schwartz and Bilsky (1987, 1990) constructed a universal psychological structure for cross-cultural studies of motivational dynamics. To test this structure, Simmons (1991) adapted data from a twenty year broad-based value survey of student cohorts at an American university. The availability of reliable, long-term data on American students permitted a comparison with responses of contemporary Chinese college students to a standardized personal value questionnaire. Ratings and priorities assigned by the Chinese and American students differed significantly. Chinese students emphasized Achievement, Maturity, and Prosocial motivational domains. American students emphasized Self-Direction, Security, and Enjoyment. Tradition, Power, and Stimulation were listed as least important for both groups. The effects of traditional Chinese religious and philosophical teachings on the stability of community norms were noted, as was some evidence of priority shifts in the values for Chinese youth, suggesting changes in response to altered political and economic expectations in China. / Graduation date: 1992

Lau, Chun Hong. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2011. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 224-256). / Electronic reproduction. Hong Kong : Chinese University of Hong Kong, [2012] System requirements: Adobe Acrobat Reader. Available via World Wide Web. / Abstract also in Chinese. / Some appendixes in Chinese.