Directorate of Research
Defense Concepts Series
September 2006
Measuring Ethnocentricity
CADS Staff1
Analyzing foreign sources is perhaps one of the most difficult challenges facing intelligence
professionals today. The phenomenon and practice of ethnocentrism is often discussed in the
context of understanding and assessing foreign groups and their levels of hostility. This brief
discussion of the concept of ethnocentricity also features an open question on possible
measurements.
Ethnocentrism has been defined as “an exaggerated tendency to think the characteristics of one's
own group or race superior to those of other groups or races.” (Drever 1952: 86) The tendency to
evaluate and judge other groups by the standards and values of one’s own culture or ethnic
group, ethnocentrism has been compared to egocentrism—a phase in a child’s development
before it can take the viewpoint of others. (Faucheux 1976: 309) While ethnocentrism operates
on a conscious level, Johnston argues, it is difficult to recognize it in one’s self and thus equally
difficult to counteract. (Johnston 2005) Indeed, ethnocentrism exhibits reflexivity; counterintuitive, it requires more involved thinking to disentangle the effect of reflexion. Understanding
the entanglement of self and how its projections influence perception of others requires: 1) a
“good” model of self, 2) a methodology to track such a model during the reasoning process and
3) a “fair” reasoning process in which self and others are treated equally.
The following simple formulae are proposed in order to present these ideas about ethnocentrism.
Consider an actor x observing and evaluating an actor (or group of actors) y and assume reality T.
Assume further that reality according to x frames of reference (e.g., standards, beliefs and values)
is given as Tx. Ethnocentric thinking x assumes the following:
T = Tx ………...…………………………… (Centricity of self)
Tx ≠ Ty……….…………………. (Differentiation from others)
Ty = Tyx ………………………….... (Self-projection of others)
The first assumption means that reality is equal to the image of reality as projected by x using his
frames of reference. The second assumption means that reality according to actor x and his frame
of reference differs from that of actor y. According to the third assumption, reality according to
actor y equals that projected by and assumed by x.
Non-ethnocentric thinking, however, assumes the following:
1
Special acknowledgment Ammar Qusaibaty for providing the basic formalism of this report
and to Ben Power.
Copyright © 2006 Center for Advanced Defense Studies. All rights reserved.
10 G St, NE, Suite 610 :: Washington, DC 20002 :: 202 289 3332 :: www.c4ads.org
Directorate of Research
Defense Concepts Series
September 2006
Ty ≠ T ≠ Tx ………………..………….………(Non-centricity of self)
Ty ≠ Tyx ……………..……………..……. (Deviation of self-projection)
T = T + Tx + Ty …………………… (Multiplicity in frames of reference)
The first assumption means that reality differs from those images of reality constructed by actors
x and y. The second relates to the deviation of the self-projection of others from their images of
reality. The third assumption indicates that reality is comprised of multiple perceptions, possibly
of equal importance.
The first step in countering ethnocentrism is to recognize that T ≠ Tx, which means that one’s
perception and understanding of reality may not be accurate according to one’s fundamental
standards, beliefs or values. The second step is to consider Ty instead of Tyx for the analyzing
agent x. In other words, reality with respect to actor y, Ty, is not to that projected by x, Tyx. The
role of acculturation for actor x is to get closer to Ty assumed by an actor y, that is from a
different group. If Ty is not accessible and cannot be reached by a variety of techniques and only
Tyx is available, then all conclusions assuming Tyx should be made modulo Tx, where “modulo”
indicates an equivalence relation defined in the pure mathematical sense. In this case, one
assumes that Ty is congruent to Tyx modulo Tx, which can be written as: Ty = Tyx mod Tx. In the
third step of countering ethnocentrism, one assumes that reality is partially and possibly equally
constructed by the self and others. These formulae do not capture the temporal aspects of
describing projection and reasoning. More detailed discussion that considers temporality is
subject to future work.
In order to distinguish between the phenomenon of ethnocentrism and its instances,
ethnocentricity is proposed as a term that expresses these instances.
Definition of Ethnocentricity
Ethnocentricity is defined as a mental state associated with the ethnocentric processing of
information, whereby a thinking agent x makes the following assumptions about reality T and
actors y from other ethnic groups or cultures:
T = Tx ………...…………………………… (Centricity of self)
Tx ≠ Ty……….…………………. (Differentiation from others)
Ty = Tyx ………………………….... (Self projection of others)
Measuring Ethnocentricity
In the context of increased interaction between different levels of communication—individual,
societal, national, regional, international, global—daily activities require an important degree of
both real and virtual interaction. Solely interacting with one’s own “in-group” members is no
Copyright © 2006 Center for Advanced Defense Studies. All rights reserved.
10 G St, NE, Suite 610 :: Washington, DC 20002 :: 202 289 3332 :: www.c4ads.org
Directorate of Research
Defense Concepts Series
September 2006
longer possible in the globalized world. (Endicott, Bock & Narvaez 2003) In order to adapt to
these constantly changing social environments, the human mind categorizes new stimuli into
schemas. The concept of schemas, or mental heuristics, has been a central concern of scientists
and philosophers for centuries; and was of particular concern to Immanuel Kant. (1965 (1781))
(Teo & Febrarro 2003)
The use of schematic structures or heuristic organizational thinking is not inherently flawed, but
rather represents a natural shortcut to categorizing and processing new stimuli. Research on
schemas concludes that interpersonal schemas provide a framework for analyzing new
information situations based on past experiences, social beliefs, cultural values and assumptions.
(Endicott, Bock & Narvaez 2003) Data elements associated with a particular schema are
interconnected. A stimulus may thus trigger the neural recovery of a plethora of information
linked together and at times unrelated to the initial stimulus. The use of these shortcuts often
takes the form of ethnocentric bias, which can potentially cause negative repercussions, as it is a
largely unconscious, rapid mental device. (Teo & Febrarro 2004; Endicott, Bock & Narvaez
2003)
Recent scientific research has emerged and provided new insight on the topic of ethnocentric
data processing enabled by new research technology, specifically brain-imaging. In terms of
inter-racial group dynamics, the amygdala has been shown to be the area of the brain initially
activated by exposure to out-of-group individuals. (Cahill et al. 1996, Hamann et al. 1999, Hart
et al. 2000) As the amygdala is part of the brain’s emotion-processing limbic system known for
the “fight-or-flight” instinct, initial research concluded that there was little prospect for
“learning” to counter racial biases. (Wheeler & Fiske, 2004) Highly impulsive, the amygdala
cannot regulate its own activity as it is one of the oldest areas of the brain, a relic of the ancestral
proto-human form.
Through research using functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) on ethnocentric data
processing, a more nuanced view of the brain’s activity areas involved in schematic structures
has unfolded. Recent studies indicate that while the impulsive amygdala may be the brain’s
initial area of activity when presented with new racial/ethnic stimuli, this area is well regulated
by the prefrontal cortex and anterior cingulate. (Cunningham, Johnston & Raye 2004; Wheeler &
Fiske 2004) Although the amygdala is the emotional center, the prefrontal cortex and anterior
cingulate are responsible for higher-order thinking and thus moderate and regulate amygdalic
activity. The aforementioned studies have given merit to the theories of neo-Kohlbergian moral
development and to Bennett’s intercultural development, which proposes that exposure to
different cultural situations may provide for cognitive flexibility. (Endicott, Bock & Narvaez
2003)
Instead of two categories of individuals—ethnocentric and ethno-relative—a broad spectrum of
cultural sensitivity is thus thought to exist. Individuals with multiple frameworks of reference
can draw upon a variety of diverse experiences in problem solving. With more flexibility, they
Copyright © 2006 Center for Advanced Defense Studies. All rights reserved.
10 G St, NE, Suite 610 :: Washington, DC 20002 :: 202 289 3332 :: www.c4ads.org
Directorate of Research
Defense Concepts Series
September 2006
are less likely to be privy to the pitfalls of ethnocentric predisposition. Even more promising are
the implications of Wheeler and Fiske’s study (2004), which demonstrates the effect of
controllable processing goals on the response to stimuli. Subjects were able to change the social
context in which they viewed the stimulus image (here a black or white face), thus isolating
individual stimuli rather than relying on categorical (schematic) processing. Although the
activation of the amygdala is largely unconscious, the counteracting response in the prefrontal
cortex is a controllable phenomenon that can affect the behavioral and cognitive outcomes of a
particular stimulus.
The ramifications of this body of research are vast, but the potential implications for the
intelligence gathering and analysis process are particularly significant with respect to
ethnocentricity. Johnston’s (2005) recent in-depth study of the US intelligence community
attempted to raise awareness of rampant ethnocentrism in intelligence analysis. He cites the 1989
Tiananmen Square massacre in China as an archetypal case study where the intelligence
operative did not receive adequate cultural and linguistics training, which resulted in an incorrect
assessment of the situation as it unfolded. Rather than examine the events within the broader
cultural-historical context of Chinese society, the operative assumed that his own experiences as
an American would hold true in China, albeit only slightly modified. Johnston proposes that only
through a cultural diversity strategy can one hope to reform the tendency of the intelligence
community to be inherently biased and ethnocentric-minded.
A possible related open question asks whether ethnocentricity may be measured or detected
based on the neurological research previously discussed. The first challenge in answering this
problem lies in designing insightful experiments, in addition to the obvious need to develop a
more rigorous understanding of ethnicity. A thorough review is necessary to assess the
limitations of coherently addressing ethnocentricity.
Globalization has significantly altered the expression of interpersonal interactions by augmenting
the use of electronics as a communications medium. As global communities are brought closer
together through information and communication technology developments, the importance of
removing ethnocentric biases becomes increasingly critical. On a parallel trend, the increased
efficiency and intensity of international travel and communications provide a framework for
increased cultural diversity.
Sources
Drever, J. 1952. A dictionary of psychology. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin.
Faucheux, C. 1976. “Cross-cultural research in experimental social psychology” European
Journal of Social Psychology 6: 269-339.
Kant, Immanuel. 1965 (1781). “Critique of Pure Reason”, trans. N. Kemp Smith, New York,
NY: St. Martin’s.
Copyright © 2006 Center for Advanced Defense Studies. All rights reserved.
10 G St, NE, Suite 610 :: Washington, DC 20002 :: 202 289 3332 :: www.c4ads.org
Directorate of Research
Defense Concepts Series
September 2006
Cahill, L., Haier, R.J., Fallon, J., Alkire, M.T., Tang, C., Keator, D., Wu, J. and J. L. McGaugh.
1996. “Amygdala activity at encoding correlated with long-term, free recall of emotional
information.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 93: 8016–8021.
Cunningham, W.A., Johnston, M.K. and C.L. Raye. 2004. “Separable Neural Components in the
Processing of Black and White Faces.” Psychological Science 15: 806-813.
Endicott, L., Bock, T. and D. Narvaez. 2003. “Moral reasoning, intercultural development, and
multicultural experiences: relations and cognitive underpinnings.” International Journal
of Intercultural Relations 27: 403-419.
Fangmeier, T., Knauff, M., Ruff, C. and V. Sloutsky. 2006. “fMRI Evidence for a Three-Stage
Model of Deductive Reasoning.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 18.3: 320-334.
Hahne, A., Mueller, A. and H. Clahsen. 2006. “Morphological Processing in a Second
Language: Behavioral and Event-Related Brain Potential Evidence for Storage
and Decomposition.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 18.1: 121-134.
Hamann, S.B., Ely, T.D., Grafton, S.T., & Kilts, C.D. 1999. “Amygdala activity related to
enhanced memory for pleasant and aversive stimuli.” Nature Neuroscience 2: 289–293.
Hart, A.J., Whalen, P.J., Shine, L.M., McInerney, S.C., Fischer, H., and S. L. Rauch. 2000.
“Differential response in the human amygdala to racial outgroup vs ingroup face stimuli.”
NeuroReport 11, 2351–2355.
Johnston, R. 2005. Analytic Culture in the U.S. Intelligence Community. Washington, DC:
Center for the Study of Intelligence.
Magne, C., Schon, D. and M. Besson. 2006. “Musician Children Detect Pitch Violations in
Both Music and Language Better than Nonmusician Children: Behavioral and
Electrophysiological Approaches.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 18.2: 199211.
Teo, T. and A. Febbraro. 2003. “Ethnocentrism as a Form of Intuition in Psychology.” Theory
and Psychology 13: 673-694.
Wheeler, M.E. and S.T. Fiske. 2004. “Controlling Racial Prejudice: Social-Cognitive Goals
Affect Amygdala and Stereotype Activation.” Psychological Science 16: 56-63.
Copyright © 2006 Center for Advanced Defense Studies. All rights reserved.
10 G St, NE, Suite 610 :: Washington, DC 20002 :: 202 289 3332 :: www.c4ads.org