jin li 2001_high abilities and excellence, a cultural perspective

7/31/2019 Jin Li 2001_high Abilities and Excellence, A Cultural Perspective

1/45

Good Work Project Report Series, Number 12

High Abilities and Excellence: A CulturalPerspective

Jin Li

Education DepartmentBrown University

March, 2001

Jeff Solomon, Series Editor

Project ZeroHarvard University

COPYRIGHT 2001. All Rights Reserved


2/45

The G ood Work Project

Febru ary 2001

Since 1995, three teams of investigators, und er the d irection of How ard Gardn er, of

Harvard University, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi of Claremont Grad uate Un iversity, and William

Damon of Stanford Un iversity, have been researching the w ays in w hich lead ing professionals

in a variety of domains carry out good w ork. Good w ork is used in a d ual sense: 1) work

that is deemed to be of high qu ality and 2) work th at is socially responsible. Throughintensive, face-to-face interviews, the researchers have investigated several domains, including

journ alism, genetics, business, jazz music, theater, philanth ropy, and high er ed ucation . Pilot

stud ies have been conducted of medicine and the rapid ly emerging d omain of cyberlaw,

with p lans to explore these areas more fully in the future.

In addition to this central line of stud y, several other related lines of investigation have

been launched:

1. The Origins of Good Work p roject is an examination of teenagers who excel in

extracurr icular activities.

2. The Dedicated Young Professionals Study focuses on those who have just begu n (or will

soon begin) promising professional careers.

3. Good Work in Interd isciplinary Contexts. Pilot studies of new arts/ science media and of

the Massachu setts Institu te of Technologys Media Lab have been completed . Plans are

un derw ay to stu dy interdisciplinary w ork at th e pre-collegiate, college, and research

institution level.

4. The Role of Contem plative Practices investigates the ways in whichcontemplation/ med itation influence how p rofessionals carry out work.

5. Encouraging Good Work in Journalism. This project, carried out in conjunction with the

Comm ittee of Concerned Journ alists, is currently developing a "traveling curriculum " for u se

in newsrooms around the country.

6. Good Work as Transmitted through Lineages examines how the principle of doing good

work is passed dow n throu gh continuous generations of teachers to stud ents or from mentors

to less experienced p rofessionals.

7. Good Work in Other Societies is a project spearh eaded by colleagu es at Denmarks Royal

Danish School of Edu cation that investigates good work in Denm ark and Latvia. In the future,

add itional international components w ill be add ed.

The Project expects to issue a variety of books, reports, and related docum entation. The

present series, launched in early 2001, includ es repor ts on severa l of the lines of research

mentioned above. For further information on the Good Work Project, contact Professor

Howard Gardners office at 617-496-4929, via email at hgasst@harvard .edu , or through regular

mail at 201 Larsen H all, Harvard Grad uate School of Education, Cambrid ge, MA, 02138.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


3/45

Papers On Good Work

Febru ary 2001

1. The Project on Good Work: A Description (April, 2000), How ard Gardner,

Mihaly Csikzentmihalyi, and William Damon.

2. The Ethical Respon sibilities of Professionals (July, 1998), Howard Gard ner

3. The Emp irical Basis of Good Work: Methodological Considerations (Jun e,

1997), Howard Gardner, Anne Gregory, Mihalyi Csikzentmihalyi, William

Damon, and Mimi Michaelson.

4. Good Work in Business (Augu st, 2000), Kim Barberich and Howard Gardner.

5. Good Work Amon g Dedicated Young Professionals (July, 2000), Becca

Solomon, Greg Feldm an, and Marcy LeLacheur.

6. Contem plation and Implications for Good Work in Teaching (August, 1998),

Laurinda Morway , Jeff Solomon, Mimi Michaelson, and How ard Gardn er.

7. Good Work in a Complex World: A Cross Cultural Comparison (Novem ber,

1998), Han s Henrik Knoop and How ard Gard ner.

8. Opportu nities and Obstacles for Good Work in Medicine (August, 2000), Jeff

Solomon , Jennifer DiBara, Sara Simeon e, and Dan Dillon.

9. New Med ia Art: A New Frontier or Continued Trad ition? (Janu ary, 2001),

Kaley Midd lebrooks.

10. The Origins of Good Work (April, 2000), Wend y Fischman an d Grace Lam.

11. Good Work among Albert Schw eitzer Fellows (April, 1999), Wend y

Fischman , Becca Solomon, and Deborah Shu tte.

12. High Abilities and Excellence: A Cultural Perspective (2000), Jin Li

13. Interdisciplinary Research and Education: Preliminary Perspectives from the

MIT Media Laboratory (Janu ary, 2001), Dan Dillon.

14. Good Work in Cyberlaw (Augu st, 2000), Evan Zullow.

15. Getting Kids, Parents, and Coaches on the Same Page (2000), Becca Solomon

and H oward Gardner.


4/45

Acknowledgement

The Good Work Project is made possible by the generous sup port of:

The Baum an Found ation

The Carnegie CorporationThe Nathan Cumm ings Found ation

The J. Epstein Found ation

Fetzer Institute

The Ford Found ation

The William and Flora H ewlett Found ation

The Christian A. Johnson Endeavor Foun dation

Thomas E. Lee

The Jesse Phillips Foundation Fund

Louise and Claude Rosenberg Jr. Family Foundation

Ross Family Charitable FoundationThe Spencer Founda tion

The John Temp leton Foundation


5/45

1

This pap er was originally prepared for L. V. Shavin ina & M. Ferrari (Eds.),

Beyond Knowledge: Extracognitive Facets in Developing High A bility

I. Zhu ge Liang--a Chinese Ideal of High Ability and Excellence

When Chinese people find themselves having to rack their brains to solve a

challenging p roblem, they often say to each oth er Remember, three cobblers with th eir

wits combined equal one Zhu ge Liang!, whereby they gather th eir strength an d

courage to embark on the task. By frequent u sage of this saying, the Chinese subscribe

to the idea th at it takes several ord inary folks to replace a highly intelligent, able, wise

person.

In a recent survey on who m ay be regarded as the most creative Chinese ind ividual

of the past and present by college stud ents from m ainland China, Taiwan, and Hong

Kong (Yue, 2000), Zhu ge Liang again ranked am ong the top nominees. Who is this

Zhu ge Liang that requires three ordinary p eople to be his equivalent and that also won

the h igh regard of todays Chinese?

Zhu ge Liang (or Chukeh Liang) was a rea l person (A. D. 181-234) who lived dur ing

the period of the Three Warring States (A. D. 220-280). Despite his hu mble backgrou nd ,

Zhu ge Liang was said to be extremely bright; he pu rsued knowledge and learning on

his own and became a h ighly esteemed scholar in politics and m ilitary stud ies in h is

time. His writing is among the permanent an thologies of Chinese literature, and his

debates are stud ied and held in awe by his admirers. He also knew how to observe and

forecast weather, invented new weap ons, and bu ilt vehicles that could transport larger

cargoes. Clearly, Zhu ge Liang fitted the image of the encycloped ic man. But most


6/45

2

adm irable of all was the ability and wisdom that enabled h im to assist a royal offspring

in establishing an equally powerful kingdom from scratch. Zhuge Liang accomp lished

this by p ersuad ing others to join his force and by u sing creative strategies (e.g., winn ing

man y battles without losing a single man ). How ever, his long-lasting influence cannot

be fully und erstood w ithout considering the non-cognitive side: his moral character

and virtue. Legend has it that, being a p erson of integrity with lifelong ded ication to his

cause, Zhuge Liang worked u ntil the moment he stopped breathing, hand led pu blic

affairs with fairness and pru dence, app eased conflicts between different ethn ic

minorities, treated people with respect, sincerity, and humility, and served h is coun try

withou t regard for fame and p ersonal gain. What Zhu ge Liang did was so

un imaginable that he became an eternal source of inspiration to the Chinese in virtually

every area of life for nearly two m illennia. Every Chinese adu lt and child know s who

Zhu ge Liang is and knows, to varying degrees, what h e stands for because his stories

are in the classics, in textbooks, and in contemp orary med ia. His image may h ave been

idealized and id olized, but w hen it comes to what Chinese people think high ability and

excellence are, it is predictable that Zh uge Liang w ill emerge as the d efinition.

Is this image of high ability and excellence universally acclaimed ? Or is it cultur ally

based and therefore un iquely Chinese? These are comp licated questions to which no

straight answers can be found. In this chapter, I will present an argum ent that, while

high ability and excellence assume u niversal foundations, culture also has a role to p lay

in how these hu man qualities are conceptualized and developed . Cultures role is also

indispensable in d elineating the general realm of what these mod els might be (LeVine,


7/45

3

1999) and in making th ese models available to its members. To proceed w ith this

argument, I will first discuss w hat asp ects might be considered common across

cultures. Then, I will use primarily Chinese notions and examp les from recent

emp irical data against their well researched and described Western coun terpartsto

discuss possible d ifferences in conceptualization and developm ent of high ability and

excellence. I will conclud e by suggesting some imp lications for futur e research in this

area.

II. Common View of High Ab ility and Excellence

Any discussion of high ability and excellence in any domain necessarily requires

that one first examine the notion of ability and achievement in general. In the West, the

most d iscussed an d researched area pertaining to ability and achievement is the notion

of intelligence, genera lly und erstood to be a persons general menta l capacity. This

capacity is typically determined by a measured IQ score (Hernstein & Murray, 1994;

Spearman, 1927; Terman , 1925). For several decades, though, IQ as a singular concept

has been challenged as being limited to logico-mathem atical and verbal skills (leaving

out other in telligences such as musical and spatial, Gard ner, 1983), academ ic ability

(leaving out the p ractical and the creative, Sternberg, 1985a), and measured individu al

level (leaving ou t the cultural, Vernon, 1969). However, desp ite these different

delineations of intelligence, there is hard ly any d oubt that intelligence is un derstood as

an innate property of the hu man mind, wh ich enables hum ans to do m any things that

are im possible for other sp ecies to accomplish (Pinker , 1997).


8/45

4

But th e scholarly d ebate per taining to intelligence is, for the most part, not centered

aroun d d ifferences between species, but among ind ividuals and the often p roblematic

comparisons am ong cultures and grou ps (Irvine & Berry, 1987, Neisser et al., 1996;

Lynn, 1987; Rush ton, 1989). Thus, the notion of high ability inevitably involves

different levels of intelligence on a hierarchy, how ever it might be defined (e.g., a higher

IQ score and a larger or faster m emory). And the existence of giftedn ess, prod igies,

talents, and extraordinary abilities that ar e recognized across cultur es (Feldman , &

Goldsmith, 1991; Gardner, 1983, 1993; Winner, 1996) makes it difficult to ignore

individual differences in intelligence.

The concept of achievement, especially academic achievement, is also intimately

related to the notion of intelligence because schooled know ledge both requires and

further results in adep t mental functioning as valued in the West (e.g., abstract

reasoning, which und erlies mu ch of the decontextualized learning in school, Gardn er,

1991; Olson, 1994; Perkins, 1981). It is no w ond er w hy the id ea of ability (used largely

interchangeably w ith intelligence) is so m uch an integral part of research on academ ic

achievement (Bempechat & Drago-Severson, 1999; Covington, 1992; Dweck, 1999;

Nicholls, 1976, 1984; Ogbu , 1981; Stigler & Stevenson, 1992, Stevenson, H ofer, & Rand el,

2000; Stipek, 1988). Naturally, for some level of achievemen t to be regard ed as

excellent, it has to ran k high on th e achievement continuum of established measures

such as var ious school achievement tests, aptitud e tests, and other similar tools used to

determ ine local or national hon ors.


9/45

5

To be sure, high ability and excellence in the West are not limited to the school

context. In fact, there is a large body of research on ind ividuals wh o have extraordinary

achievemen ts in variou s fields of exper tise such as art, mu sic, science, and technology

as well as professions of practice such as business, education, and institutional

leadership (Gardner, 1993; Csikszentmihalyi, 1988, 1994; Gruber, 1981; Simonton, 1984,

1988). Here, in ad dition to intelligence, we encounter a great deal of attention also to

ind ividu als personality traits. Research on creativity, for example, is replete with

analyses of personal characteristics such as risk-taking, iconoclasm, high motivation,

perseverance, even ones need to be in solitud e (Barron, 1969; Ghiselin, 1963; Guilford,

1959; Stor r, 1989; Torrance, 1962).

The social environm ent in w hich high ability and excellence occur has also been

examined. Here, scholars stud y the natu re of social supp ort (micro-level) that children

receive from their homes, school, and other ad ults (Amabile, 1983; Arnold, 1995;

Csikszentm ihalyi & Rathu nd e, 1998; Gottfried, Fleming, & Gott fried, 1998; Wachs,

1992). For examp le, Csikszentmihalyi docum ents Nobel laureates in variou s fields

reporting that as children they lived in intellectually stimu lating homes where their

parents encouraged them to explore the world (Csikszentmihalyi & Rathu nd e, 1998). A

related approach is to the larger sociohistorical milieu (macro-level) that helps to shape

environments such as scientific or other intellectual paradigms, political climate, and

zeitgaist (Gardner , 1993; Holton , 1973; Kaplan, 1963; Kuhn, 1970; Li, 1997; Taylor &

Barron, 1967). Scholars generally agree that the social environm ent does play an

impor tant role in p roviding the opp ortun ity for high ability and excellence to flourish.


10/45


11/45

7

qua lify for an international prize of any sort. Throu ghou t Chinese history, there have

been num erous individu als that are regarded as equally if not more intelligent wh en

viewed from th e tradition of the West. These includ e recorded prod igies as well as

accomp lished ind ividuals, not to mention the renow ned contemp orary of Zhuge Liang,

the 6-year old Cao Pi, wh o prop osed a remarkable solution to the problem of weighing

an elephant w ithout a giant scale (by having the beast stand on a boat in order to mark

the w ater level first, then filling u p the boat w ith pebbles to the same water level, and

weighing the pebbles a sack at a time with a regu lar scale last!). Zhu ge Liangs versatile

talent was also matched by m any others such as the poet Su Dongp o who not only

stands on the pedestal of Chinese literature but w ho also invented new m ethods to

produ ce ink and created new gou rmet food, which is still widely pop ular today.

Sociohistorical contexts provided opp ortun ities for even more ind ividuals to emerge as

honored p ersonages in coun tless fields. These other p eople with sup erior intelligence

and accomp lishments may be admired by many Chinese, but they do not represent

cultural ideals of high ability and excellence as comp rehensively and singly as Zh uge

Liang d oes. To fully appreciate the ph enom enon of Zhuge Liang, the specifics of the

culture mu st be considered.

Thus, even though culture is related to sociohistorical aspects, it is not identical to

them. It may offer a un ique window for understand ing the topic un der discussion.


12/45

8

III. The Cultural Lens

Research on cultu ral differences with regard to h igh ability and excellence is

regrettably scarce. But w ithin the research on the genera l notion of ability and

achievement, one encounters pred ominately etic research p erspectives, that is, theories

and research m ethods based on Western subjects but applied d irectly to subjects in

other cultures without consideration of their own views. Attempts have been mad e, for

example, to identify among preliterate cultures indicators of childrens formal cognitive

ability from th eir daily activities (Munroe & Munroe, 1971; Nerlove, Roberts, Flein,

Yarbrough, & Habrigh t, 1976). Similarly, indigenous conceptions of intelligence have

been scru tinized in ord er to advance the argument that non-Western cultures such as

the Chinese can m easure up to th e West (Chan, 1996). Achievement motivation,

another concept from the West, has been claimed to be less present in many n on-

Western cultu res (e.g., the Latino, the Ind ian, and th e Chinese). This has been

attributed to their lack of the sense of individu al independ ence, wh ich w as once

regarded as the determinant of achievement motivation (McClelland, 1961, 1963;

Surez-Orozco & Surez-Orozco, 1995).

Adm ittedly, the etic perspective is boun d to occur because it is inevitable and

perhaps also desirable when cross-cultu ral research is to be condu cted (Munroe &

Munroe, 1979, 1997; Romney, 1994). However, this research or ientation a lone, while

possibly u ncovering some u niversal trends, may be limited in that it neglects significant

cultural d ifferences (D'And rad e 1990, 1995; Harkn ess & Super 1996; Quinn & Holland ,


13/45

9

1987; Shw eder , 1997; Shw eder & Sullivan, 1993). This wid espread etic tendency has

been challenged by anthropologists and cultural psychologists (DAndrade, 1995,

Good now 1976, 1998; Li, 2001, Serp ell, 1993; Super, 1983). These scholars argu e that in

ord er to do full just ice to cultu ral differences, it is equally imp ortan t to includ e emic

perspectives, that is, ind igenous or folk views from the m embers of the culture under

study (Sternberg, 1985b; Yang & Sternberg, 1997).

Research tapping emic und erstand ings not only addr esses validity problems that

may be associated w ith man y cross-cultural research findings, but it also shows how

they tend to be inveterate, not easily subject to a lteration d espite extensive exposure

and study of more scientific ways of thinking (Calderhead , 1996; Bru ner, 1996; Gard ner,

1991; Strau ss, Ravid , Magen, & Berliner, 1998). Because of their d eep-rooted nature,

such beliefs have been show n to gu ide reliably and systematically p eoples behavior,

includ ing the very childrearing and socialization processes that foster competence and

achievement (Bru nner, 1996; Chao, 1996; Harkness & Sup er, 1996; Strauss et al., 1993).

But rath er than viewing these emic models as inad equacies or imped iments

categorically, it may be important to distinguish two typ es of emic un derstand ings. The

first is the widely noted nave theories of children abou t various d omains (e.g.,

scientific phen omena, DiSessa, 1982; Gard ner , 1991; Perkins, 1995), to which beliefs

held by illiterate ad ults (e.g., classification of objects by peop les d aily activities instead

of a scientific taxonomy, Luria, 1976) may arguably belong. These are labeled nave

because th ey ru n coun ter to tested scientific knowledge, which, as d ictated by


14/45

10

edu cational aspirations, we wou ld hop e, will be altered as children are schooled further

(Gardner, 1991, 1999).

How ever, the second type of emic und erstandings, or folk models, concern

accum ulated cultural experiences, ways of thinking, feeling, and behaving, and wisdom

(Sternberg, 1985b, this volume) into which children are, to varying degrees,

encultu ratred (LeVine, 1990). Folk mod els of this type are not well researched in

general (with perhaps the exception of parental beliefs about childrearing, Chao, 1996;

Harkn ess & Sup er, 1996; Hollos, in press). Unlike nave views abou t scientific

ph enomena, folk mod els of many areas in child d evelopm ent are likely to have varied

functions with some not so adap tive but with others highly advan tageous within

particular cultu res (e.g., US and Chinese cultu ral conceptions of learn ing, Li, 2001,

un der review). High ability and excellence may be one such area where emic models

may be crucial in illuminating h ow children develop an d achieve these abilities and

levels of excellence.

Thanks to anthropological research, folk models of intelligence have indeed been

shown to differ from culture to cultu re. Rather than the more cognitive and mental

notion and verbal skills typically emphasized in the West, African conceptions of

intelligence, for example, emp hasize wisdom, trustw orthiness, social attentiveness and

resp onsibility, (Dasen, 1984; Serp ell, 1993; Super 1983; Wober, 1974). Differen ces also

exist among various ethn ic grou ps within the US. For instan ce, Sternberg (1985b)

documented differences between implicit theories (a similar notion to folk models) of

intelligence, creativity, and w isdom versus form al notions of these concepts. Moreover,


15/45

11

Okagaki and Sternberg (1993) furth er show ed that Latinos emp hasized m ore social-

competence in viewing intelligence than their Anglo counterp arts. These exemp lary

efforts have charted new territories in research on cultural mod els of high ability and

excellence.

In wha t follows I will dr aw on existing literature and my ow n research on Chinese

cultural conceptu alization of high ability and excellence to show wh at these culture-

specific meanings might be and how they may guid e children in d eveloping th ese skills.


16/45

12

IV. Research on Ch inese Conception s of Intelligen ce and Excellence

Even though m uch research has recently been done to explain the phenomenon of

higher academic achievement am ong Chinese school children than their Western p eers

(Biggs, 1996; Stigler & Stevenson, 1992; Stevenson et a l., 2000), little research exists on

Chinese high ability and excellence beyond school performance in math an d science.

An ear lier attemp t to explore the Chinese concept of intelligence repor ted (Keats, 1982)

that Chinese view an intelligent person to be one w ho is responsible, pragm atic,

socially oriented who gets things right. He observes and mem orises but he is not an

enqu iring mind nor a critical faculty (p . 73, cited in Berry, 1984). However, a more

recent stu dy (Zhan g & Wu, 1994) collected a set of Chinese attr ibutes of intelligence

such as logical reasoning, accepting new things, creativity, independence, and even a

sense of hu mor. Most recent research examining conceptions of intelligence among

Taiwanese Chinese by Yang and Sternberg (1997) found ad ditional notions: Chinese

peop le think that an intelligent person seeks know ledge and learning while cultivating

his or her mora l character. These latter dimensions of intelligence have not been well

tapp ed in previous research on any cultural group s.

In an attempt to examine emic perspectives on Chinese views of intelligence in the

dom ain of learning (rather th an in general) and its origin, as well as Chinese views of

excellence of learning and its origin, I collected written d escriptions of these resp ective

ideas from 62 Chinese college seniors (Li, 1997, in press). By using established

prototype research methods (Horowitz, Wright, Lowenstein, & Parad, 1981; Shaver,


17/45

13

Schwartz, Kirson, & O'Connor , 1987), I tallied frequencies higher than 20% across the

subjects (see details of analysis in Li, 1997, in pr ess). Out of all the possibilities, the

following five attributes were nam ed as the core ideas abou t intelligence in learning:

personal effort (32%), inherent ability (23%), possession of know ledge (21%), thinking

ability (21%, e. g., good mind, reasons w ell), and men tal agility (20%, e. g., think and

react fast). Subjects conceptions of excellence in learning also converged on four ideas:

application of knowledge to solving p roblems (42%), high academic achievement (37%),

mastery of knowledge (32%), and creativity/ breakthrou ghs (28%).

When asked to reveal their thou ghts on wh ere ones intelligence originates, subjects

identified factors after birth (42%, e. g., home and other social environment) and a

combinat ion of inheren t ability and factors after birth (28%). But 84% of subjects

responses w ith regard to origin of excellence referred to d iligence, hard work, and

perseverance on the one hand an d u se of effective learning m ethod s (24%, e. g., read

newspapers) on the other.

Recently, my colleague and I (Li & Yue, forthcoming) are cond ucting a follow-up

study with a sam ple of 1806 Chinese children aged 10 through 17 (5th-10th grad ers from

six regions of China living both in the city and rur al areas) on how they think abou t

intelligence and excellence of learning. Based on an alysis of 80 subjects responses thus

far, we found similar them es in genera l. For examp le, with respect to intelligence, the

most frequently named conception was a w ell-functioning m ind or m ental agility (54%

of all subjects, e.g., a clear or quick m ind), followed by a high IQ level (18%), thinking

ability (17%, e.g., being reflective), app lication of know ledge to solving p roblems (16%),


18/45

14

insight, wisdom , and originality (15%), and good learning attitudes (14%, e.g., d iligence

and conscientiousness). Moreover, these conceptions did not seem to show any

developm ental trend across the age range examined. The only exception w as the

ability to und erstand things (28%), wh ere more children named this conception the

older they w ere (i.e., while no 5th grad ers mentioned it, the number of children

men tioning it increased with age: 18%, 21%, 31%, and 46% corresp ond ing to 6th , 7th , 8th

and 10th grad ers respectively).

When explaining where ones intelligence originates (causal attribution), children

also gave responses similar to ad ults. Again ones personal effort (e.g., everyd ay

hard work) ranked as the top cause (71%) followed by a combination of inherited

potential and influence after birth (43%) and social engagement in learning (19%, e.g.,

interaction with people and observ ing social activities). Very few children named

inher ited ability alone as a cause (4%). Developm entally, while person al effort

seemed to be a shared un derstand ing across the ages, the nu mber of children

expressing the combination view (of inherited p otential and influence after birth)

increased with age (18%, 30%, 45% 29%, and 64% in the above grad es respectively). In

add ition, whereas children below 7th grad e did n ot mention social engagement at all,

their peers above this grad e level recognized it similarly in frequency across the

remaining ages.

With regard to excellence of learning, three similar (to adult notions) main

conceptions again emerged : High acad emic achievemen t (90%), mastery (in bread th

and dep th, and good judgm ent) and ap plication (includ ing creative application) of


19/45

15

know ledge (23%), and high m oral and virtuou s character (21%). Moreover, neither

high academic achievement nor high m oral and virtuou s character showed any

developm ental trend , indicating that these conceptions of excellence may be w ell

un derstood among these children of different ages. But m astery and ap plication of

know ledge while not mentioned by 5th and 6th grad ers at all, showed a steady increase

starting with the 7th grade (20%, 31%, and 76% in 7th , 8th , and 10th grade respectively).

In terms of origin of excellence, we also saw the repeated n omination of a set of

eight related ideas term ed essentials of learning a ttitude by 90% of subjects: (1) self-

resolve, (2) love for learning, (3) diligence, (4) endu rance of hard ship, (5) practice, (6)

perseverance, (7) conscientiou sness, and (8) hu mility. Among these component ideas,

diligence and endurance of hardship were m ost frequently named (48% of all entries).

These ideas did not seem to d iffer across the age groups.

The above research findings ind icate that Chinese ad ults and children see

intelligence for the most p art as a dom ain of mental functioning, with some also

viewing the ability to apply knowledge and to solve problems as a comp onent of it. In

addition, older children endorse the idea of the ability to und erstand things. How ever,

the vast majority name high academic achievement as the definition of excellence of

learning, while a nu mber of them also included mastery of knowledge and

insight/ wisdom/ creativity on the one hand and high moral character on the other.

Furthermore, these same people also attribute the origin of intelligence and excellence

mostly to ones personal effort w ith the elaborated essentials of learning attitude and

behav ioral imp lications. Finally, inher ited poten tial, albeit not singu larly but in


20/45

16

combination w ith environm ental influences after birth, is also viewed as a p art of

intelligence, but rar ely a part of excellence.

Interestingly, these findings d o not seem to correspond well to the d escriptions by

Keats (1982), especially his assertion that the in telligent Ch inese person observes and

mem orizes but he is not an enqu iring mind nor a critical faculty. One then won ders

about the notions of the ability to un derstand , app lication of knowledge, and

insight, jud gment, and w isdom found in the present stud y and remains puzzled as to

how these abilities and their man ifestations in real life are possible without an inquiring

mind and a critical faculty. Add itionally, wh ile some of our findings d o seem to

overlap w ith a few attribu tes of intelligence derived by Zh ang and Wu (1994) more

recently (e.g., logical reasoning, and accepting new things,), a sense of humor was

never present in ou r d ata.

How ever, juxtaposing these find ings on intelligence with Western imp licit views

such as those docum ented by Sternberg (1985b), one can actually see more overlap

(than the results from the above research d esigned to investigate Chinese conceptions of

intelligence). For instance, both Americans and Chinese share the menta l d imension

(e.g., thinking, IQ level, understanding), practical problem solving, and contextual

intelligence (Chinese ideas in the d imension of insight/ jud gment/ wisdom and of

social engagemen t are similar to this US category). It is therefore warran ted to

conclude that these conceptions may be the ones likely to be regarded by peop le from a t

least these two cultures as the essential dimensions of intelligence.


21/45

17

Despite these similarities, there are d imensions on both cultures lists that d o not

seem to resemble each other. For example, the US verbal ability rarely, if at all, came

up in the Chinese conceptions. Likewise, the Chinese essentials of learning attitu de, a

largely self-as-agent and affective d imension as a cause for both intelligence and

excellence, and the peculiar emp hasis on factors after birth being th e off-setting force

(for inherited p otential) in the formation of ones intelligence are absent from

Sternbergs comprehensive list. The most striking difference of all is perhaps the

presence of the Chinese high moral and virtuou s character as one of the three core

conceptions of excellence. Even though these dimensions were not part of Sternbergs

(1985b) US imp licit theor ies of intelligence, our latter find ing d id confirm one key result

in the most recent research by Yang an d Sterngberg (1997): Chinese peop le think that

an intelligent person seeks knowledge and learning to cultivate his or her moral

character.

These differences may be the more culturally specific dimensions that are also a

constituent p art of each cultures core conceptions withou t which ou r u nd erstanding of

intelligence wou ld be incomp lete. These un dou btedly need fur ther analysis. For the

pu rposes of this chap ter, I will focus on asp ects of the Chinese und erstanding of

intelligence in the next section, instead of delving into that of the US in order to

illustrate how we m ight continue the examination of cultur e regarding the topic un der

discussion.


22/45

18

V. Why Zhu ge Liang Matters to the Chin ese

As stated above, the mental dimension may be shared w idely across culture, but in

the ethos of this volum e, cultu re-specific aspects of high ability and excellence may be

best characterized as factors of extracogntion that are interwoven with th e mental. In

the case of Zhu ge Liang, it is perhaps these Chinese extracognitive values and

processes that nu rtured Zh uge Liang in the first place as well as ensured his impact

throughout Chinese history.

The find ings on seeking know ledge, cultivating ones moral character, and the

essentials of learning attitude from our research (Li, 2001; in p ress, Li & Yue,

forthcoming) as w ell as those of Yang & Sternberg (1997) reflect interrelated aspects of

both life pu rposes and developm ental processes of Chinese lives. And these are core

notions that Confucius and his admirers used to guid e their lives (Tu, 1979, Wu & Lai,

1992). Accord ingly, the high est pu rpose of life is self-perfection (therefore cultivat ing

ones moral/ virtuou s character). Hu man perfectability is envisioned as obtainable by

everyon e so long as one seeks it throu gh the process of self-cultivation. Learning or

seeking know ledge, broadly construed, is of paramount importan ce in the process of

self-perfection because it is seen as the only way self-perfection is possible (Lee, 1996,

Tu, 1979, Wu & Lai, 1992). However, since there is no end to self-perfection, learning

becomes a lifelong d edication and is to be pu rsued with all effort hu man ly possible,

thu s the essentials of attitud e toward learning (Li, 2001; in press).

This par ticular construal of life and its developmental p rocesses are und erstood in

common folk p arlance as zuoren, literally, becoming a person. Based on the analysis


23/45

19

by Tu (1979), an esteemed scholar on Confucian thought, the person here is not

merely a hum an in the biological sense but a fully encultured an d cultivated existence.

In the Confucian aspiration, this person is one w ho is always in th e process of becoming

the most genu ine, sincere, and hu man e (jun zi) as he or she can be. Instead of

reaching an endpoint of ma turity, this person is, at any point of life, capable of further

matu ring and ideally strives to do so. In short, seeking zu oren (engaging oneself in the

pr ocess of self-perfection) is in fact tantamoun t to jun zi. Even thou gh th is Confucian

ideal of a person is an ancient idea, research attests to its unfailing ap peal to tod ays

Chinese (Li, in press, Li & Yue, forthcoming).

In order to p rovide a sense of what zu oren means to todays Chinese children, we

performed a preliminary analysis on the responses to our probing in the same stud y

being condu cted by Li and Yue (forthcoming). We have identified seven categories of

meanings of zuoren: (1) Pursu ing fulfillment of life, (2) self-strengthening w ithou t ever

stopp ing, (3) developing h igh moral/ virtuou s character, (4) seeking know ledge, (5)

maintaining harmon ious social relations, (6) striving for a successful career, and (7)

contributing to society.

Und er the um brella of pursu ing fulfillment of life (1st category), our subjects also

expressed id eas such as searching for happ iness, finding m eaning, and d oing things one

enjoys. Traditionally, this category is un derstood as going beyond the satisfaction w ith

meeting ones basic survival needs, to taking an interest in the larger world. This

outlook includes all areas that the w orld h as to offer such as th e arts, science, social


24/45

20

sciences, philosophy, current affairs, traveling to places, and so forth whereby one finds

a n iche to connect ones life to th e larger un iverse (Liu, 1973).

Self-strengthen ing w ithout ever stopping (ziqiang bu xi, 2nd category) is a ph rase

that Chinese p eople take from I Ching (The Book of Changes, one of the Five Classics1,

all scholars were trad itionally required to stud y) to d raw inspirations for lifelong self-

cultivation. The meaning of this phrase charts the course of life a junzi (the most

genu ine, sincere, and hu mane person one can be) shall take. Chinese have long sought

to draw streng th from the na tural universe and to regard on es existence similarly to the

unceasing process of renew al of nature. As the Book of Changes (Wang, Li, & Zhang,

1998) states: The universe is strong, renewing itself ceaselessly; a jun zi shall follow it,

self-strengthening without ever stopp ing. The Chinese embrace of this self-

strengthening p rocess is quite sensible considering that the u ltimate p urpose of ones

life is to self-perfect.

The next category (3rd category), developing high moral/ virtuou s character,

pertains to the Confucian emphasis on character building. To be sure, what constitutes

a persons moral/ virtuou s character in this context is not the same as any free-stand ing

set of universal moral rules such as those proposed by Kohlberg (1976), but a set of

values specific to Chinese culture. A person with moral/ virtuous character,

accord ingly, possesses not only the fund amental ability to discriminate r ight from

wrong; but also a broad set of virtu es. The card inal virtues--sense of propr iety, just ice,

integrity, sense of honor and sham e, loyalty, filial p iety, love and respect for ones

siblings, and trust for friends--address the basic elements of moral conduct (Mencius,


25/45

21

1970; Tu, 1979; Wu & Lai, 1992). The notion of vir tue is also extend ed to include

prud ence, frugality, diligence, a heart and mind for wanting to learn, and ones daily

word s and d eeds, such as not holding an old gru dge, going out of ones way to help

others, and so on. Self-perfection is defined in these term s and dimensions (Tu, 1979;

Wu & Lai, 1992).

As stated above, seeking knowledge (4th category) is par t and parcel of Confucian

life purp ose and p rocess (Lee, 1996, Li, 2001; in p ress; Wu & Lai, 1992). My recent stu dy

on Chinese and US learning mod els reveals large d ifferences in h ow mem bers of these

two cultu res view learning (Li, und er review). Briefly, while the US model seems to

stress a mind orientation, the Chinese mod el favors a p erson orientation. Because

seeking know ledge is so central to the lifelong personal endeavor toward self-perfection

for the Chinese, there is little wond er why Chinese adu lts and children time and again

nom inate this asp ect as an essential part of their lives (Li, 2001; in press; Li & Yue,

forthcoming; Yang & Sternberg, 1997).

As can be seen in the discussion of developing high m oral/ virtuou s character,

mu ch of the Confucian value system stresses maintaining harm onious social relations

(5th category) as a major life task. Inevitably, to pursue self-perfection also means to

develop the und erstanding an d skill required for harmonious social interactions within

ones family as well as ones larger social world. Ind ividu als who succeed in cultivating

themselves in this regard respect their parents (filial piety), adm it their weaknesses and

the need to further self-imp rove instead of pretend ing to be more than wh at they are

(hum ility), are sincere in their d ealings w ith others, hold h igh stand ards of bringing


26/45

22

honor to the collective (gratitud e for their nurtur ance) wh ile possessing th e heightened

sense of correcting th eir wrong doings (shame), and reciprocate (have em path y) with

others. These and many other areas of social relations are areas for self-imp rovem ent in

daily life (Tu, 1979; Yu & Yang, 1994).

Related to the junzi ideal is striving for a su ccessful career (6th category). Here

also lies a deep Ch inese sense of personal agency and personal accomp lishment.

Unfortunately, previous research has prod uced the widespread claim that Chinese

individu als lack the notion of self as an ind ividual and a sense of agency, du e to the so-

called collectivist orien tation of Chinese cultu re (Hu i, 1988; Hui & Triandis, 1986). This

one-sided emp hasis on collectivism may make Chinese striving for a successful career

appear to be ant ithetical to Chinese social orientat ion of selves. But ou r curren t (Li,

Yue, & Yuan, 2001) as well as p revious research (Li, 1997) tapp ing em ic views has

enabled u s to d iscover many ind igenously Chinese conceptions of self that

unequ ivocally point to oneself striving for a su ccessful career (e.g., ind ividu al effort).

Junzis do not only own their indep enden t inner voices of mora lity and virtue

(shend u), but they also exert their u tmost effort to be self-sufficient

socioeconomically. Even though as a pr inciple junzis seek to maintain their deep roots

in their social world , their sense of honor, respect, and gratitud e for the social supp ort

(that nurtu red their development) prevent them from becoming a burd en to family,

friends, commun ity, and society. This self-sufficient emp hasis is also reflected in th e

notion of self-strengthening w ithout ever stopp ing where giving up on oneself is not

a real option.


27/45

23

Finally, contributing to society is an unam biguously resound ing goal throughout

the history of Chinese people. Contributing ones know ledge and skill back to society

has been a consistent call of the Confucian jun zi, which is the ultimate pu rpose of self-

perfection. A person is not regarded as a true junzi without und erstand ing his or her

need to contribute to society what h is or her p eople gave him or her in the first place. In

light of this pu rp ose, ind ividu al efforts toward s self-per fection are not just recycled

within th e ind ividu al but are tied to the commonw ealth for all (Lee, 1996; Li, 2001; in

press; Tu, 1979; Wu & Lai, 1992; Yu & Yang, 1994).

It is surp rising how similar these pu rposes and processes are to the age-old

articulation of a jun zis life course as stated clearly in the Book of Great Learning2:

cultivate oneself, organize ones family, ord er the affairs of the state, and bring

stability and peace to the world (Wu & Lai, 1992). Accord ingly, the Confucian ideal

image of a person starts out with him or her developing asp irations, learning, working

hard , doing all he or she needs to do in order to self-cultivate. The next task is to

und erstand and obtain the most fundam ental human relationships, those found in each

individu als family, between hu sband and wife, between parents and children, between

siblings, and between th e core members of the family and their extend ed relatives.

Having accomp lished these two tasks, one is to be entrusted to serve ones comm unity.

As a final goal, the person is to take on the greatest task of serving hu manity as a wh ole.

It is believed in Confucian p ersuasion that those who lack self-cultivation m ay have

great d ifficulties in developing satisfying relationships within their families. Those who

fail to maintain h armon ious social relationships are also un likely to have the moral


28/45

24

strength and ded ication to serve people in the larger comm un ity. In the end , those who

are d eficient in all of these major life areas cann ot stand u p to th e task of serving

hu man ity as a whole despite their superior mental skills and charming p ersonalities.

Even though the specific wordings differ, the essential gist of the Confucian zuoren

resonates in the beliefs of todays Chinese children, suggesting th at these goals are very

mu ch alive and are likely to be actively pursued by them.

The Confucian junzi has been an inspirational guidepost for Chinese peop le

throu ghou t history, perhap s because it offers something p rofound in the face of the

limitations of hu man existence. Since it encourages them to search for mean ings

beyond their individu al and small social world s (family) into the larger world via the

pr ocess of lifelong self-per fection, ind ividu al lives may be fulfilled, thu s allowing

peop le to experience a sense of psychological and sp iritual extension. Therefore, it is

not too far-fetched to suggest tha t the u ltimate ap peal of the Confucian junzi and

zuoren may reside in the d elicate symbiosis between a sense of self as an agent and a

deep social connection; together they may serve to p rolong ones physical and

psychological existence (Tu, 1979; Wu & Lai, 1992).

Although these are deep ly held aspirations of Chinese people, their attainm ent is by

no means autom atic. In fact, as Chinese history shows, very few ind ividuals have been

deemed to have reached all of these goals. And those few ind ividuals, including

Confucius himself, are u nd oubted ly esteemed as d isplaying excellence of the highest

order and are thus u pheld as models called sages for younger generations to learn

about and to emulate.


29/45

25

It is against this backgroun d that Zhuge Liang, or the idealized image of him, must

be seen. His image is one that first and foremost represents the full realization and

embod iment of these Chinese life goals and processes. He w as indeed an exemp lar in

every life task as envisioned by Chinese sages. To highlight the part icular balance

between h is superior intelligence and creativity and his exemp lary moral courage, one

of Zhuge Liangs feats is worth r etelling: Upon learning that a general from h is enemy

kingdom know n for his indecisiveness was app roaching a town w hich Zhu ge Liang

was guard ing with only a few m en, Zhuge Liang suddenly came up w ith a strategy for

repu lsing the enemy. He ordered to have the town d eserted, leaving the town gate

wid ely open w ith only a few old men pretend ing to clean the streets. He himself sat

atop the town w all playing a calm tune on his harp . When the general with his army

arrived, he indeed became suspicious of the tranquillity of the town . Instead of

charging into the town, he retreated. This strategy for repu lsing ones enemy became

know n as the empty town strategy and became a legend because Zhuge Liang u sed

his brilliant m ind to find a creative solution to an imp ossible situation. He su cceeded in

saving the town withou t losing a single man . But there was no d oubt that he also pu t

the lives of his people and m en above his own life and displayed m oral courage as well

as a high sense of du ty.

Zhu ge Liang represents the best p ossible combination of the cognitive and the

extracognitive, turn ing the once imagined Chinese ideal into a reality. This reality,

once born, not only reaffirms th e value of self-perfection, but it also sets a specific

model for w hat th e actual process of self-perfection looks like. This existence


30/45

26

un dou btedly illuminates wh at the Confucian junzi and zu oren together with ones

mental power can be. Perhaps, this is how Ch inese culture retains its vitality as a whole

and how its people continue to strive forward desp ite frequent social, political,

economical, and other incomprehensible challenges through out its history.

VI. Conclusion

In this chapter I have reviewed literature on intelligence and excellence and argued,

as have many cultural psychologists, that the etic perspectives alone m ay fall short of

explaining the n ature of human h igh ability and excellence. Emic perspectives are

equally imp ortant for any emp irical research and theory on this topic. Without a dou bt,

the u niversa l factors such as the biological existence of the brain , the basic fun ctions of

the hu man mind , personality traits, and th e general social context need to be examined.

But culture also has an ind ispensable role to play in shaping the conceptions and the

developm ent of high ability and excellence, and therefore its role must be investigated

as well. To illustrate how we m ay be better informed about the role of culture, I

presented som e new d ata from my own research as well as drew on related find ings

from oth er studies on indigenously Chinese conceptions about intelligence, ability, and

excellence. I conclud ed that, in the case of Chinese cultu re, the existence of high ability

and excellence cannot be sufficiently und erstood w ithout considering the fund amental

life purp oses and processes of the cultu re (Lee, 1996; Li, in p ress; Yu & Yang, 1994).

As a general imp lication from the above analysis, I hope to suggest th at ind ividuals

in p articular cultures who d evelop high ability and achieve excellence are, far from


31/45

27

pop ular belief, not isolated ph enomena or resu lts of mere ind ividu al brilliance and

processes. Like the magical Zhuge Liang, these great ind ividuals do not arise above

their culture but are deeply embed ded in the cultural values and processes that

nu rtured them and allowed them to flourish in the first place. Their accomp lishments,

if deemed essential to their culture, will continu e to nur ture and shape you nger

generations.

Despite a grow ing consensus regard ing emic perspectives, there is, regrettably, still

a dear th of empirical investigations on cultural differences in this area. To begin

thinking abou t how we m ight fill this gap, I will ventu re to d iscuss a few d irections.

First, I would argue that em ic meanings shall remain essential in any research on

cultural differences. As research in an thropology, cultural psychology, and in some

circles of mainstream psychology has show n, members of different cultures n ot only

think differently abou t intelligence and excellence, their concept ions are often intr icate

and complex (Azuma & Kashiwagi, 1987; Okagaki & Sternberg, 1993; Serpell, 1993;

Super, 1983; Yang & Sternberg, 1997; Wober, 1974). Moreover, these folk models have

also been shown to influence peop les actual behavior (Strau ss et al., 1998). Our own

studies also confirm this general finding (Li, 2001; in p ress; und er review; Li & Yue,

forthcoming). If our goal is to explain intelligent behavior and excellence and to foster

such op timal outcomes of developm ent (Csikszentmihalyi & Rathund e; 1998), we also

need to include the actual context in which such behaviors occur. Unequivocally,

culture is an essential part of the context.


32/45

28

Second , while investigating a single culture has unquestionable value, comp arative

perspectives are also need ed. Many researchers (e.g., Markus & Kitayama, 1991;

Shw eder, Mahap atra , & Miller, 1990; Yang & Sternberg, 1997) have demon strated the

advantage of these perspectives in that th ey generate more informative research resu lts.

My own research examined Chinese conceptions first, but w ithout analyzing the da ta

against Western find ings. Und er comp arative scrutiny, man y more ideas and p rocesses

have em erged, better illum inating the similarities and d ifferences between the tw o

cultures.

Third , intelligence and excellence have trad itionally been stud ied m ore as d omain-

general phenom ena that can be applied to all human activities and areas of hu man

endeavor. Research of this orientation has prod uced and will continue to produ ce

impor tant knowledge. How ever, recent advan cement in research also points to the

imp ortan ce of dom ain-specific high ability and excellence (Li, 1997, Gardner, 1993;

Csikszen tmihalyi, 1994; Feldm an & Goldsmith, 1991; Gru ber, 1981; Winner , 1996). A

balance of the two somew hat op posing research orientations may be more beneficial. It

is difficult to maintain, for example, that general, integrated mental capacity an d

functioning are not w orthy of research. Moreover, our own as well as others research

on cultural views has shown that p eople do share beliefs and ideas about the general

notion of intelligence and excellence (Li & Yue, forthcoming, Sternberg, 1985b).

Consider the notions of versatility of talent and the encycloped ic m ind that exist in

both the West and other cultures such as China. These shared notions are indicative of

the w ide recognition an d app reciation of an integrative view of intelligence and


33/45

29

excellence by peop le from different cultures. Still, the above notw ithstanding, there is

no r eason why specific values and processes associated w ith common dom ains (science,

art, literature) as well as cultu rally specific domains (e.g., Guatemalan weaving,

Greenfield, 1984, and martial arts in the East) shou ld n ot also yield un ique insight into

hu man high ability and excellence.

Finally, the area that is probably most u ncharted is the development of high ability

and excellence. From existing research, it appears that cultures the w orld over

recognize and value individu als with these qualities however they m ay be defined in

their own cultural contexts. It also app ears to be the case that cultures make an effort to

foster these qualities in their young. Therefore, it is crucial to examine how such

abilities and qu alities are developed from childh ood to ad ulthood or from the novice-

state to expertise within various d omains regard less of age. In light of this volumes

focal theoretical frame, research has ind eed m uch to gain from investigating the

extracognitive aspects in term s of developm ent.

With these and oth er possible directions, we can better hop e to narrow the gap of

know ledge in this area, to foster deeper understand ing and ap preciation among

cultures, and u ltimately to help our young to realize their potential in full, perh aps

becoming the Zhu ge Liang of their ow n culture.


34/45

30

Not es

1. The other four are The Book of Song, The Book of History, The Book of Rites, and

The Spr ing and Au tum n Annals. The authors of these books have been subject to

historical debates for centur ies. Many scholars agree that these ancient classics were

not written by single but num erous authors through out Chinese history. See Wu &

Lai, 1992 for an introd uction and comp lete translation of these books into m odern

Chinese.

2. This is one of four books that are also part of the traditionally required read ings for

Chinese scholars: The Great Learning, The Doctrine of the Mean, The Analects of

Confucius, and Mencius. Like the Five Classics, the au thors of the books were most

likely not single ind ividuals but m any w ho participated in w riting, editing, and

compiling them throughout Chinese history (Wu & Lai, 1992).


35/45

31

References

Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativ ity. New York: Springer Verlag

Arnold, K.D. (1995). Lives of prom ises: What becomes of high school valed ictorians.

San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Barron, F. (1969). Creative person and p rocess. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston .

Bempechat, J., & Drago-Severson , E. (1999). Cross-nation al differences in academ ic

achievement: Beyond etic conceptions of childrens und erstanding. Review of

Edu cational Research 69, 287-314.

Berry, J. W. (1984). Toward a un iversal psychology of cognitive comp etence.

International Journal of Psychology, 19, 335-361.

Biggs, J. B. (1996). Western m isperceptions of the Confucian-heritage learning cultu re.

In D. A. Watkins & J. B. Biggs (Eds.), The Chinese learner (p p. 45-67). Hong Kong:

Comp arat ive Education Research Centre (CERC) & The Au stralian Cou ncil for

Educational Research Ltd . (ACER).

Bronfenbrenn er, U. (1979). The ecology of hu man developm ent. Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press.

Chan , J. (1996). Chinese intelligence. In M. H. Bond (Ed.), The hand book of Chinese

psychology (pp. 93-108). Hon g Kong: Oxford University Press.

Chao, R. K. (1996). Chinese and Europ ean American mothers views abou t the role of

parent ing in childrens school success. Jour nal of Cross-Cultu ral Psychology, 27,

403-423.


36/45

32

Cooper, C., & Denner, J. (1998). Theories linking cultu re and psychology: Universal

and commun ity-specific processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 559-584.

Covington, M. V. (1992). Making the grad e. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Csikszentm ihalyi, M. (1988). Society, cultu re, and p erson: A system view of creativity.

In R. Sternberg (ed.), The natu re of creativity (pp. 325-340). New York: Cambridge

University Press.

Csikszentm ihalyi, M. (1994). The dom ain of creativity. In D. H. Feldman, M.

Csikszentm ihalyi, & H. Gard ner (eds.), Chan ging the world (pp . 135-158). CT,

Westport: Praeger.

Csikszentm ihalyi, M., & Rathund e, K. (1998). The developm ent of the person : An

experiential persp ective on the ontogenesis of psychological complexity. In R. M.

Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of child p sychology. Vol 1: Theoretical models of hu man

developm ent (5th ed., pp . 635-684). New York: Wiley.

Dasen, P. R. (1984). The cross-cultural study of intelligence: Piaget and the Baoul.

International Journal of Psychology, 19, 407-434.

D'And rad e, R. (1990). Some propositions abou t the relations between culture and

hu man cognition. In J. W. Stigler, R. A. Schwed er & G. Herd t (Eds.), Cultural

psychology: Essays on comparative hum an development (pp . 66-129). New York:

Cambridge University Press.

D'And rad e, R. (1995). The developm ent of cognitive anthrop ology. New York:



37/45

33

DiSessa, A. (1982). Unlearn ing Aristotelian ph ysics: A study of know ledge-based

learn ing. Cogn itive science, 6(1), 37-76.

Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.

Feldman, D. H., & Goldsm ith, L. T. (1991). Nature's gambit: Child prod igies and the

developm ent of hu man p otential, New York: Teachers College Press.

Gard ner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books.

Gardn er, H. (1991). The un schooled mind: How children think and how schools

shou ld teach. New York: Basic Books.

Gardn er, H. (1993). Creating minds: An anatom y of creativity seen through th e lives

of Freud , Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham, and Gand hi. New York:

Basic Books.

Gardn er, H. (1999). The disciplined mind : What all stud ents shou ld und erstand. New

York : Simon & Schuster .

Ghiselin, B. (1963). The creative process and its relation to the id entification of creative

talen t. In C. W. Taylor, & F. Barron (eds.). Scientific creativ ity: Its and

developm ent (pp . 355-365). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Goodnow , J. J. (1976). The natu re of intelligent behavior: Questions raised by cross-

cultu ral stu dies. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence (pp . 169-188). New

York: Earlbaum.

Good now, J. J. (1998). Contexts of achievement . In S. G. Paris, & H. M. Wellman (Eds.),

Global prospects for edu cation: Developm ent, culture, and schooling. Washington,

D. C.: APA.


38/45

34

Gottfried, A. E., Fleming, J. S., & Gottfr ied, A. W. (1998). Role of cognit ive stimulating

home environment in childrens academ ic intrinsic motivation: A longitudinal

stu dy. Child Development , 69, 1448-1460.

Greenfield, P. M. (1984). A theory of the teacher in the learn ing activities of everyd ay

life. In B. Rogoff and J. Lave (Eds.), Everyd ay cognition: Its developmen t in social

context (pp . 117-138. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Un iversity Press.

Gruber, H. (1981). Darw in on man (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Guilford, J. P. (1959). There faces of intellect. American Psychologist , 14, 469-479.

Harkness, S., & Super, C. M. (Eds.). (1996). Parents cultu ral belief system s: Their

origins, expressions, and consequ ences. New York: Guilford Press.

Hernstein, R. & Mu rray, C. (1994). The bell curve. Chicago: Free Press.

Hollos, M. (in press). The cultural constru ction of childhood : Chan ging conceptions

among the Pare of Tanzania. Childhood .

Holton, G. (1973). Themat ic origins of scientific thou ght. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press.

Horow itz, L. M., Wright, J. C., Lowenstein, E., & Parad , H. W. (1981). The prototyp e as

a construct in abnormal psychology: I. A method for deriving prototypes. Journ al

of Abnorm al Psychology, 90, 568-574.

Hui, C. H. (1988). Measurement of ind ividu alism-collectivism. Journal of Research in

Personality, 22, 17-36.

Hui, C. H., & Triand is, H. (1986). Individu alism and collectivism: A stud y of cross-

cultural researchers. Journal of Cross-Cultu ral Psychology, 17, 225-248.


39/45

35

Irvine, S. H., & Berry, J. W. (1987). Human abilities in cultu ral context. New York:


Kaplan, N . (1963). The relation of creativity to sociological variables in research

organization s. In C. W. Taylor , & F. Barron (eds.), Scientific creativ ity: Its

recognition and developm ent (pp . 195-205). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Keats, D. (1982). Cultu ral bases of concepts of intelligence: A Chinese versus

Australian comp arison. In Proceedings of Second Asian Workshop on Child an d

Adolescent Developm ent. Bangkok: Behavioral Science Research Institu te (pp . 67-

75).

Kohlberg, L. (1976). The psychology of moral developm ent: The nature and validity of

moral stages. In T. Lickorn (Ed.), Moral developm ent and moral behavior (pp . 170-

205). New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston .

Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of

Chicago Press.

Lee, W. O. (1996). The cultu ral context for Chinese learners: Conceptions of learning in

the Con fucian Trad ition. In D. A. Watkins & J. B. Biggs (Eds.), The Chinese learner

(pp . 45-67). Hong Kong: Comp arat ive Education Research Centre (CERC) & The

Australian Cou ncil for Edu cational Research Ltd . (ACER).

LeVine, R. A. (1990). Enculturation: A biosocial perspective on the develop men t of

self. In D. Cicchet ti & M. Beegh ly (Eds.), The self in tran sition: Infancy to childh ood

(pp . 99-117). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

LeVine, R. (1999). An agend a for psychological anthrop ology. Ethos, 27, 15-24.


40/45

36

Li, J. (1997). Creativity in horizonta l and vertical domains. Creativity Research

Jou rnal, 10, 107-132.

Li, J. (2001). Chinese conceptualization of learn ing. Ethos.

Li, J. (in press). A cultural model of learning: Chinese heart and mind for wan ting to

learn. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology.

Li, J. (und er review). US and Ch inese cultural models of learning. Journal of

Educational Psychology

Li, J., & Yue, X.-D. (forthcom ing). Learning concept ions, desires, actions among

Chinese school children.

Li, J., Yue, X.-D, & Yuan, S. (2001). Ind ividual self and social self in learn ing am ong

Chinese adolescents. Paper p resented at SRCD, Minneap olis, MN.

Liu, Z. (1973). Shi dao [Principles of teacherhood]. Taipei, Taiwan: Chu ng Hw a Book

Company.

Luria, A. R. (1976). Cognitive development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Lynn, R. (1987). The intelligence of the Mongoloids: A psychoactive, evolut ionary and

neu rological theory. Personality and Individu al Differences, 8, 813-844.

Markus, H. J., & Kitayam a, S. (1991). Cultu re and the self: Implications for cognition,

emotion and motivation . Psychological Review, 98(2), 224-253.

McClelland , D. C. (1961). The achieving society. New York: Van Nostrand .

McClelland , D. C. (1963). Motivational pattern in Southeast Asia with special reference

to the Chinese case. Journal of Social Issues, 19(1), 6-19.

Mencius. (1970). Mencius. (D. C. Lao, Trans.). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.


41/45

37

Munroe, R. H., & Munroe, R. L. (1971). Effect of environm ental experience on spatial

ability in an East African society. Journal of Social Psychology, 83, 15-22.

Munroe, R. L., & Munroe, R. H. (1997). A comparative anth ropological perspective. In

J. W. Berry, Y. H. Poortinga , & J. Pand ey (Eds.), Hand book of cross-cultu ral

psychology: Vol. 1. Theory and meth od (pp. 171-214). Needh am Heights, MA:

Allyn & Bacon.

Neisser, U. et al. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unkn owns. American Psychologist,

51, 77-101.

Nerlove, S.B., J. M. Roberts, R. E. Klein, C. Yarbrou gh, and J. P. Habicht. (1974).

Natu ral ind icators of cognitive ability. Ethos, 2, 265-295.

Nicholls, J. G. (1976). Effort is virtu e, but it's better to have ability: Evaluative resp onse

to p erceptions of effort and ability. Journal of Research in Personality, 10, 306-315.

Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conception s of ability, subjective

exper ience, task choice, and perform ance. Psychological Review, 91(3), 328-346.

Ogbu , J. U. (1981). Origins of hu man competence: A cultu ral ecological perspective.

Child Develop ment, 52, 413-429.

Okagaki, L., & Stern berg, R. J. (1993). Parental beliefs and childrens school

performan ce. Child Developm ent, 64, 36-56.

Olson, D. R. (1994). The world on paper: The conceptu al and cognitive implications of

wr iting and reading. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Perkins, D. (1981). The mind 's best work. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Perkins, D. N. (1995). Smart schools. New York: Free Press.


42/45

38

Pinker, S. (1997). How the mind works. New York: Norton .

Quinn, N., & Holland, D. (1987). Introd uction. In Cultu ral models in D. Holland & N.

Quinn (Eds.), Langu age and th ought (pp . 3-40). New York: Cambridge University

Press.

Romney, A. K. (1994). Cultu ral knowledge and cognitive structure. In M. M. Surez-

Orozco, G. Spindler, & L. Spindler (Eds.), The m aking of psychological anth rop ology

II (pp . 254-283). Fort Worth, TX: Harcou rt Brace.

Rushton, J. P. (1989). Evolutionary biology and heritable traits: With reference to

Orienta l-White-Black differences. Paper presented at the Annu al Meeting of the

American Association for the Advancement of Science. San Francisco.

Serpell, R. (1993). The significance of schooling: Life journeys in an African society.

New York: Cambridge University Press.

Shaver, P., Schwartz, J., Kirson, D., & O'Conn or, (1987). Emotion kn owledge: Furth er

exploration of a prototype approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

52, 1061-1086.

Shweder, R. (1997). The surp rise of ethnograp hy. Ethos, 25, 152-163.

Shw eder , R. A., & Sullivan, M. A. (1993). Cultu ral psychology: Who need s it? Ann ual

Review of Psychology, 44, 497-523.

Shw eder , R. A., Mahapatra , M., Miller, J. G. (1990). Cultu re and m oral develop men t.

In J. Stigler, R. A. Schweder , & G. Herd t (Eds.), Cultu ral psychology: Essays on

comp arative hum an d evelopm ent (pp. 130-204). New York: Cambridge University

Press.


43/45

39

Simonton, D. K. (1984). Genuis, creativity, and leadership. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University.

Simonton, D. K. (1988). Creativity, lead ersh ip, and chance. In R. J. Sternberg (ed.), The

nature of creativity (pp . 386-426). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Spearman, C. E. (1927). The abilities of man. New York: Macmillan.

Sternberg, Robert J. (1985a). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of hu man intelligence.

New York: Cambridge University Press.

Sternberg, R. J. (1985b). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity, and w isdom .

Journal of Person ality an d Social Psychology, 49, 607-627.

Stevenson, H. W., & Stigler, J. W. (1992). The learn ing gap . New York: Simon &

Schuster.

Stevenson, H. W., Hofer, B. K., & Rand el, B. (2000). Mathem atics achievem ent and

attitudes about math ematics in China and the West. Journ al of Psychology in

Chinese Societies, 1, 1-16.

Stipek, D. J. (1988). Motivation to learn: From theory to practice. Englewood Cliffs,

NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Storr, A. (1989). Solitude: A return to the self. New York: Ballantine.

Strauss, S., Ravid , D., Magen, N., & Berliner, D. (1998). Relations betw een teachers

subject m atter know ledge, teaching experience and their mental mod els of childrens

minds and learning. Teaching an d Teacher Education, 14, 579-595.


44/45

40

Surez-Orozco, C., & Surez-Orozco, M. (1995). Trans-formations: Immigration,

family life, and achievement motivation am ong Latino adolescents. Stanford, CA:

Stanford University Press.

Sup er, C. M. (1983). Cultu ral variation in the meaning and u ses of childrens

intelligence. In J. B. Deregow ski, S. Dziu raw iec, and R. C. Annis (Eds.), Expiscations

in cross-cultural psychology (pp . 199-212). Lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger .

Taylor, C. W., & Barron, F. (Eds.). (1967). Scientific creativ ity: Its recogn ition and

developm ent. New York: Wiley & Sons.

Terman , L. M. (1925). Genetic studies of genius. Stanford, CA: Stanford University

Press.

Torrance, E. P. (1962). Guid ing creative talen t. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pren tice Hall.

Tu, W. M. (1979). Hum anity and self-cultivat ion: Essays in Confucian thought.

Berkeley, CA: Asian Humanities Press.

Vernon, P. E. (1969). Intelligence and cultural environment. London: Metheun.

Wachs, T. D. (1992). The nature of nu rtu re. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Wan g, Q., Li, L.-J., & Zhang, W.-G. (1998). Interpreta tion of the Book of Change in

mod ern Chinese. Sanqi Press. Xian, China.

Winner, E. (1996). Gifted children: Myths and realities. New York: Basic Books.

Wober, M. (1974). Towards an un derstanding of the Kigand a concept of intelligence.

In J. W. Berry an d P. R. Dasen (Eds.), Culture and cognition: Readings in cross-

cultural psychology (pp . 261-80). Lond on: Methu en.


45/45

Wu , S.-P., & Lai, C.-Y. (1992). Complete text of the Four Books and Five Classics in

modern Chinese. Beijing, China: International Cultu re Press.

Yang S.-Y., Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Taiwanese Chinese peop les conception s of

intelligen ce. Intelligence, 25, 21-36.

Yu, A. B., & Yang K. S. (1994). The nature of achievement m otivation in collectivist

societies. In U. Kim, H. C. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S. C., Choi, & G. Yoon (Eds.),

Individu alism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications (pp. 239-250).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Yue, X.-D. (2000). Who are the most creative peop le in Chinese history and at present

times: A comp arative study am ong university stud ents in Beijing, Guan gzhou ,

Hon g Kong, and Taipei and its imp lications for edu cation. Unpublished pap er.

Zhang, H., & Wu, Z. (1994). Peop les conceptions of intelligence: A stud y of Beijing

resid ents conceptions of intelligence [in Chinese]. The Science of Psychology, 17,

65-69, 81.

jin li 2001_high abilities and excellence, a cultural perspective

Documents