Look at the people around you. Some are passive, others more aggressive. Some work best alone, others crave companionship. We easily recognize that there is great variation among the individuals who live near us. Yet, when we speak of people from elsewhere, we seem to inevitably characterize them based on their country of origin.

        Statistics specialists, when they speak of national averages, often make the same mistake.

        Newly published research shows how erroneous such overviews are. Three researchers analyzed decades of values-based surveys and found that only between 16% and 21% of the variation in cultural values could be explained by differences between countries. In other words, the vast majority of what makes us culturally distinct from one another has nothing to do with our homeland.

        To determine what factors really are associated with culture, the authors combined data from 558 prior surveys that each measured one or more of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions. These are traits, such as individualism and masculinity, that describe work-related cultural values. (They are not a measure of visible cultural traits, such as food or dress.) Though the validity of Hofstede’s dimensions has been questioned, they have the singular benefit of having been in use for decades, which allows for historical and international comparisons.

        The researchers found that both demographic factors, such as age, and environmental factors, such as long-term unemployment rates, were more correlated with cultural values than nationality. Occupation and social economic status were the most strongly correlated, suggesting that our values are more economically driven than we usually give them credit for.

        The evidence implies that people with similar jobs and incomes are more culturally alike, regardless of where they live. Vas Taras, the lead author of the study, puts it this way: “Tell me how much you make and I will make a pretty accurate prediction about your cultural values. Tell me what your nationality is and I probably will make a wrong prediction.”

        Taras says our erroneous belief that countries are cultures has caused businesses to teach their employees useless or even harmful ways of interacting with their international peers. Chinese and American lawyers might be trained to interact based on the assumption that the Chinese person is less individualistic, even though their similar social economic situations make it probable they are actually quite alike in that regard.

        The country, as the unit of authority, is often a convenient way of generalizing about a population. However, our focus on countries can mask broad variations within them. In the majority of cases we would be better off identifying people by the factors that constrain their lives, like income, rather than by the lines surrounding them on a map.

解析：A。根据题干中的experts和people from other places可定位至第一段最后一句和第二段，，其中experts对应第二段中的Statistics specialists，people from other places是对第一段最后一句中people from elsewhere的同义替换。第一段最后一句提到，当我们谈到来自其他地方的人时，似乎不可避免地会根据他们的祖国来描述他们。接着第二段又提到统计专家，说他们在谈到国家平均水平时，往往会犯同样的错误，也就是说，专家也会依赖国籍进行判断，A项符合题意，nationality对应第一段最后一句的their country of origin，故正确。

错项排除：B项利用第三段第二句中的differences进行干扰，但原文说的是16%到21%的文化价值观差异可以用国家间的差异来解释，并没有说差异被夸大，故B项排除。C项利用文中多次出现的cultures进行干扰，但misunderstand在文中无依据，故C项排除。D项利用第二段的national averages进行干扰，但原文说的是统计专家在谈到国家平均水平时，往往会犯同样的错误，并不是说他们犯的错是关注国家平均水平，故D项排除。