Cross-Cultural Consistency and Relativity in the Enjoyment of Thinking Versus Doing
Authorized Users Only
2019
Authors
Buttrick, N.R.
Choi, Hyewon
Wilson, Timothy D.
Oishi, Shigehiro
Boker, Steven M.
Gilbert, Daniel T.
Alper, Sinan

Aveyard, Mark
Cheong, Winnee
Colić, Marija V.
Dalgar, Ilker

Dogulu, Canay

Karabati, Serdar

Kim, Eunbee
Knežević, Goran

Komiya, Asuka
Ordonez Lacle, Camila
Lage, Caio Ambrosio
Lazarević, Ljiljana

Lazarević, Dušanka

Lins, Samuel
Blanco Molina, Mauricio

Neto, Felix
Orlić, Ana
Petrović, Boban

Arroyo Sibaja, Massiel
Torres Fernandez, David

Vanpaemel, Wolf
Voorspoels, Wouter
Wilks, Daniela C.
Article (Published version)

Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Which is more enjoyable: trying to think enjoyable thoughts or doing everyday solitary activities? Wilson et al. (2014) found that American participants much preferred solitary everyday activities, such as reading or watching TV, to thinking for pleasure. To see whether this preference generalized outside of the United States, we replicated the study with 2,557 participants from 12 sites in 11 countries. The results were consistent in every country: Participants randomly assigned to do something reported significantly greater enjoyment than did participants randomly assigned to think for pleasure. Although we found systematic differences by country in how much participants enjoyed thinking for pleasure, we used a series of nested structural equation models to show that these differences were fully accounted for by country-level variation in 5 individual differences, 4 of which were positively correlated with thinking for pleasure (need for cognition, openness to experience, meditation ...experience, and initial positive affect) and 1 of which was negatively correlated (reported phone usage).
Keywords:
thinking / replication / individual differences / cultural differencesSource:
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2019, 117, 5, E71-E83Publisher:
- Amer Psychological Assoc, Washington
Funding / projects:
- National Science Foundation (NSF) [BCS-1423747]
DOI: 10.1037/pspp0000198
ISSN: 0022-3514
PubMed: 30035566
WoS: 000488842400001
Scopus: 2-s2.0-85050481524
Collections
Institution/Community
Psihologija / PsychologyTY - JOUR AU - Buttrick, N.R. AU - Choi, Hyewon AU - Wilson, Timothy D. AU - Oishi, Shigehiro AU - Boker, Steven M. AU - Gilbert, Daniel T. AU - Alper, Sinan AU - Aveyard, Mark AU - Cheong, Winnee AU - Colić, Marija V. AU - Dalgar, Ilker AU - Dogulu, Canay AU - Karabati, Serdar AU - Kim, Eunbee AU - Knežević, Goran AU - Komiya, Asuka AU - Ordonez Lacle, Camila AU - Lage, Caio Ambrosio AU - Lazarević, Ljiljana AU - Lazarević, Dušanka AU - Lins, Samuel AU - Blanco Molina, Mauricio AU - Neto, Felix AU - Orlić, Ana AU - Petrović, Boban AU - Arroyo Sibaja, Massiel AU - Torres Fernandez, David AU - Vanpaemel, Wolf AU - Voorspoels, Wouter AU - Wilks, Daniela C. PY - 2019 UR - http://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/2994 AB - Which is more enjoyable: trying to think enjoyable thoughts or doing everyday solitary activities? Wilson et al. (2014) found that American participants much preferred solitary everyday activities, such as reading or watching TV, to thinking for pleasure. To see whether this preference generalized outside of the United States, we replicated the study with 2,557 participants from 12 sites in 11 countries. The results were consistent in every country: Participants randomly assigned to do something reported significantly greater enjoyment than did participants randomly assigned to think for pleasure. Although we found systematic differences by country in how much participants enjoyed thinking for pleasure, we used a series of nested structural equation models to show that these differences were fully accounted for by country-level variation in 5 individual differences, 4 of which were positively correlated with thinking for pleasure (need for cognition, openness to experience, meditation experience, and initial positive affect) and 1 of which was negatively correlated (reported phone usage). PB - Amer Psychological Assoc, Washington T2 - Journal of Personality and Social Psychology T1 - Cross-Cultural Consistency and Relativity in the Enjoyment of Thinking Versus Doing EP - E83 IS - 5 SP - E71 VL - 117 DO - 10.1037/pspp0000198 ER -
@article{ author = "Buttrick, N.R. and Choi, Hyewon and Wilson, Timothy D. and Oishi, Shigehiro and Boker, Steven M. and Gilbert, Daniel T. and Alper, Sinan and Aveyard, Mark and Cheong, Winnee and Colić, Marija V. and Dalgar, Ilker and Dogulu, Canay and Karabati, Serdar and Kim, Eunbee and Knežević, Goran and Komiya, Asuka and Ordonez Lacle, Camila and Lage, Caio Ambrosio and Lazarević, Ljiljana and Lazarević, Dušanka and Lins, Samuel and Blanco Molina, Mauricio and Neto, Felix and Orlić, Ana and Petrović, Boban and Arroyo Sibaja, Massiel and Torres Fernandez, David and Vanpaemel, Wolf and Voorspoels, Wouter and Wilks, Daniela C.", year = "2019", abstract = "Which is more enjoyable: trying to think enjoyable thoughts or doing everyday solitary activities? Wilson et al. (2014) found that American participants much preferred solitary everyday activities, such as reading or watching TV, to thinking for pleasure. To see whether this preference generalized outside of the United States, we replicated the study with 2,557 participants from 12 sites in 11 countries. The results were consistent in every country: Participants randomly assigned to do something reported significantly greater enjoyment than did participants randomly assigned to think for pleasure. Although we found systematic differences by country in how much participants enjoyed thinking for pleasure, we used a series of nested structural equation models to show that these differences were fully accounted for by country-level variation in 5 individual differences, 4 of which were positively correlated with thinking for pleasure (need for cognition, openness to experience, meditation experience, and initial positive affect) and 1 of which was negatively correlated (reported phone usage).", publisher = "Amer Psychological Assoc, Washington", journal = "Journal of Personality and Social Psychology", title = "Cross-Cultural Consistency and Relativity in the Enjoyment of Thinking Versus Doing", pages = "E83-E71", number = "5", volume = "117", doi = "10.1037/pspp0000198" }
Buttrick, N.R., Choi, H., Wilson, T. D., Oishi, S., Boker, S. M., Gilbert, D. T., Alper, S., Aveyard, M., Cheong, W., Colić, M. V., Dalgar, I., Dogulu, C., Karabati, S., Kim, E., Knežević, G., Komiya, A., Ordonez Lacle, C., Lage, C. A., Lazarević, L., Lazarević, D., Lins, S., Blanco Molina, M., Neto, F., Orlić, A., Petrović, B., Arroyo Sibaja, M., Torres Fernandez, D., Vanpaemel, W., Voorspoels, W.,& Wilks, D. C.. (2019). Cross-Cultural Consistency and Relativity in the Enjoyment of Thinking Versus Doing. in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Amer Psychological Assoc, Washington., 117(5), E71-E83. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000198
Buttrick N, Choi H, Wilson TD, Oishi S, Boker SM, Gilbert DT, Alper S, Aveyard M, Cheong W, Colić MV, Dalgar I, Dogulu C, Karabati S, Kim E, Knežević G, Komiya A, Ordonez Lacle C, Lage CA, Lazarević L, Lazarević D, Lins S, Blanco Molina M, Neto F, Orlić A, Petrović B, Arroyo Sibaja M, Torres Fernandez D, Vanpaemel W, Voorspoels W, Wilks DC. Cross-Cultural Consistency and Relativity in the Enjoyment of Thinking Versus Doing. in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2019;117(5):E71-E83. doi:10.1037/pspp0000198 .
Buttrick, N.R., Choi, Hyewon, Wilson, Timothy D., Oishi, Shigehiro, Boker, Steven M., Gilbert, Daniel T., Alper, Sinan, Aveyard, Mark, Cheong, Winnee, Colić, Marija V., Dalgar, Ilker, Dogulu, Canay, Karabati, Serdar, Kim, Eunbee, Knežević, Goran, Komiya, Asuka, Ordonez Lacle, Camila, Lage, Caio Ambrosio, Lazarević, Ljiljana, Lazarević, Dušanka, Lins, Samuel, Blanco Molina, Mauricio, Neto, Felix, Orlić, Ana, Petrović, Boban, Arroyo Sibaja, Massiel, Torres Fernandez, David, Vanpaemel, Wolf, Voorspoels, Wouter, Wilks, Daniela C., "Cross-Cultural Consistency and Relativity in the Enjoyment of Thinking Versus Doing" in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117, no. 5 (2019):E71-E83, https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000198 . .