Nudity in Japanese visual media: A cross-cultural observation

1990 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 583-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
James F. Downs
Keyword(s):  
Visual Media ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Cultural Observation

A Paradigm for Looking: Cross-Cultural Research with Visual Media.

Social Forces ◽  
1978 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 348
Author(s):  
Allen D. Grimshaw ◽  
Beryl L. Bellman ◽  
Bennetta Jules-Rosette
Keyword(s):  
Visual Media ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research

Understanding Cross-Cultural Meaning through Visual Media

2002 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
John G Hedberg ◽  
Ian Brown
Keyword(s):  
Visual Media ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Cultural Meaning

A Paradigm for Looking: Cross Cultural Research with Visual Media

1979 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 432
Author(s):  
Philip H. Ennis ◽  
Beryl L. Bellman ◽  
Bennetta Jules-Rosette
Keyword(s):  
Visual Media ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research

Enhancing Operational Cross-Cultural Observation Skills

2013 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 2111-2115
Author(s):  
Julio C. Mateo ◽  
Kyle J. Behymer ◽  
Michael J. McCloskey
Keyword(s):  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Cultural Observation

The sense of obligation is culturally modulated

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Bender
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Studies ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Human Populations ◽  
Cultural Group ◽  
Target Article ◽  
Sense Of Obligation ◽  
Cross Cultural Studies

Abstract Tomasello argues in the target article that, in generalizing the concrete obligations originating from interdependent collaboration to one's entire cultural group, humans become “ultra-cooperators.” But are all human populations cooperative in similar ways? Based on cross-cultural studies and my own fieldwork in Polynesia, I argue that cooperation varies along several dimensions, and that the underlying sense of obligation is culturally modulated.

Cognitive gadgets: A provocative but flawed manifesto

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Del Giudice
Keyword(s):  
Theory Of Mind ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Twin Studies ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Evolutionary Approach ◽  
Genetic Inheritance ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Cross Cultural Differences ◽  
Cherry Picking ◽  
Dichotomous Thinking

Abstract The argument against innatism at the heart of Cognitive Gadgets is provocative but premature, and is vitiated by dichotomous thinking, interpretive double standards, and evidence cherry-picking. I illustrate my criticism by addressing the heritability of imitation and mindreading, the relevance of twin studies, and the meaning of cross-cultural differences in theory of mind development. Reaching an integrative understanding of genetic inheritance, plasticity, and learning is a formidable task that demands a more nuanced evolutionary approach.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document