Cultural psychological research has compellingly demonstrated that reliable East-West differences exist in basic cognitive styles: in contrast to the analytic, focal, linear thinking prevalent in the West, East Asians prefer to engage in more holistic, contextual, and intuitive thinking. However, despite the consensus on these cultural differences in thinking style, the literature on cross-cultural variation in actual cognitive biases is far more equivocal. The Fundamental Attribution Error (and by extension the Ultimate Attribution Error) has received the most attention among cognitive biases in the cultural arena; multiple studies have shown both evidence for cultural differences and evidence for universality. Similarly equivocal findings have emerged for other cognitive biases like the hindsight bias, positive illusions, and social exchange. Error Management Theory offers to reconcile this paradox of why consistent variation in thinking style do not necessarily lead to similarly consistent differences in cognitive biases; different mechanisms drive preferences (i.e., for how to think) versus actual behaviors (i.e., involving judgments/decisions). While different features of the physical environment likely gave rise to differences in preferences, pressures from the social environment likely pushed cognitive processing in common judgment tasks (like inferring another person’s mind or one’s own) in similar directions.

中文翻译：

---

认知思维方式与判断偏见的文化差异和相似性：环境因素和进化力的回顾

文化心理学研究已令人信服地证明，基本的认知方式存在可靠的东西方差异：与西方普遍的分析性，焦点性，线性思维方式不同，东亚人更喜欢采用整体，上下文和直觉思维。然而，尽管就思维方式上的这些文化差异达成了共识，但有关实际认知偏差中跨文化差异的文献却更加模棱两可。在文化领域，基本归因错误（延伸至最终归因错误）引起了人们的最多关注。多项研究均显示出文化差异的证据和普遍性的证据。类似的模棱两可的发现也出现在其他认知偏见上，例如事后眼见偏见，积极的幻想和社会交往。错误管理理论为调解这种悖论提供了一个思路，即为什么思维方式的持续变化不一定会导致认知偏见的相似持续变化。不同的机制驱动偏好（即，如何思考）与实际行为（即，涉及判断/决定）。尽管物理环境的不同特征可能会导致偏好的差异，但来自社会环境的压力却可能在相似的方向上推动普通判断任务（例如推断他人的思想或自己的思想）中的认知处理。涉及判断/决定）。尽管物理环境的不同特征可能会导致偏好的差异，但来自社会环境的压力却可能在相似的方向上推动普通判断任务（例如推断他人的思想或自己的思想）中的认知处理。涉及判断/决定）。尽管物理环境的不同特征可能会导致偏好的差异，但来自社会环境的压力却可能在相似的方向上推动普通判断任务（例如推断他人的思想或自己的思想）中的认知处理。