Table 1.
Participant demographics.
Table 2.
Tasks used in the present study, and previously-found cultural differences.
Table 3.
Summary of predicted models used in model comparison.
Fig 1.
Cultural group differences indicated as meaningful by the culture-only regression analyses, for (A) social orientation, (B) closeness to a significant other, and (C) dispositional/situational attribution.
Error bars show 95% confidence intervals. 1st gen = 1st generation British Bangladeshi, 2nd gen = 2nd generation British Bangladeshi.
Table 4.
Summary of culture-only means and regression coefficients.
Means and standard deviations are raw values before transformation. Unstandardised regression coefficients estimate the difference denoted in the column heading, with 95% confidence intervals in square brackets. Note that in the regressions several measures are logged, and some models are non-linear (see text for details), so coefficients should not be compared across models/measures. Differences comprising CIs that do not cross zero are shown in bold. 1st gen = 1st generation British Bangladeshi, 2nd gen = 2nd generation British BangladeshiFor categorisation, higher values indicate holistic cognition, lower indicate analytic.
Table 5.
Best-fitting predicted models.
∆i = difference in AICc from best-fitting model; ωi = Akaike weight. See text and Table 3 for model specifications. All models with ∆i<4 are listed. ∆i for best-fitting models is always 0 and so not shown. For four measures (self-enhancement, categorisation, horizon ratio and additional objects), the global model did not fit the data so model comparison was not possible. See S1 Table for full model comparison statistics.
Fig 2.
Significant interactions that emerged from the exploratory regression analyses, for (A) closeness, (B) self-enhancement and (C) situational attribution.
Shaded areas show conditional means.
Table 6.
Summary of exploratory regression models.