UNIVERSALS IN JUDGING WRONGDOING: JAPANESE AND AMERICANS COMPARED.

Human judgment of wrongdoing underlies all social control processes. Substantively, we argue that a universal model of how humans make such judgments must allow for assessing both deeds of the actor being judged and role-related social obligations governing what the actor should have done. Structurally, such a model can incorporate cross-cultural differences in terms of differential weights placed on these factors. The model was tested in sample surveys of Yokohama and Kanazawa, Japan, using responses to experimentally varied hypothetical vignettes. It was predicted that the Japanese would replicate previous findings for American respondents (in Detroit), but would at the same time differ significantly in their weighting of deed-related versus role-related variations in vignettes as determinants of an actor's responsibility. The bulk of results originally obtained in Detroit were in fact replicated in both Yokohama and Kanazawa. Predicted cultural differences were also confirmed in comparisons of each Japanese survey with the prior American one; Japanese placed greater emphasis on an actor's role position and an act's social context, relative to an American emphasis on aspects of an actor's deed per se. Further practical implications of these cultural differences for our legal system are also discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]