cross cultural communication research

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 23 March 2022

Communication competencies, culture and SDGs: effective processes to cross-cultural communication

• Stella Aririguzoh 1  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  9 , Article number:  96 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

30k Accesses

26 Citations

2 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Business and management
• Cultural and media studies

Globalization has made it necessary for people from different cultures and nations to interact and work together. Effective cross-cultural communication seeks to change how messages are packaged and sent to people from diverse cultural backgrounds. Cross-cultural communication competencies make it crucial to appreciate and respect noticeable cultural differences between senders and receivers of information, especially in line with the United Nations’ (UN) recognition of culture as an agent of sustainable development. Miscommunication and misunderstanding can result from poorly encrypted messages that the receiver may not correctly interpret. A culture-literate communicator can reduce miscommunication arising from a low appreciation of cultural differences so that a clement communication environment is created and sustained. This paper looks at the United Nations’ recognition of culture and how cultural differences shape interpersonal communication. It then proposes strategies to enhance cross-cultural communication at every communication step. It advocates that for the senders and receivers of messages to improve communication efficiency, they must be culture and media literates.

Similar content being viewed by others

Language is primarily a tool for communication rather than thought

Paradoxical gender effects in meat consumption across cultures

Using games to understand the mind

Public interest.

The United Nations has recognized culture as a causal agent of sustainability and integrated it into the SDG goals. Culture reinforces the economic, social, and communal fabrics that regulate social cohesion. Communication helps to maintain social order. The message’s sender and the receiver’s culture significantly influence how they communicate and relate with other people outside their tribal communities. Globalization has compelled people from widely divergent cultural backgrounds to work together.

People unconsciously carry their cultural peculiarities and biases into their communication processes. Naturally, there have been miscommunications and misunderstandings because people judge others based on their cultural values. Our cultures influence our behaviour and expectations from other people.

Irrespective of our ethnicities, people want to communicate, understand, appreciate, and be respected by others. Culture literate communicators can help clear some of these challenges, create more tolerant communicators, and contribute to achieving global sustainable goals.

Introduction

The United Nations established 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015 to transform the world by 2030 through simultaneously promoting prosperity and protecting the earth. The global body recognizes that culture directly influences development. Thus, SDG Goal 4.7 promotes “… a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development.” Culture really matters (Seymour, 2007 ). Significantly, cultural cognition influences how people process information from different sources and suggests policies they may support or oppose (Rachlinski, 2021 ). Culture can drive sustainable development (United Nations, 2015 ; De Beukelaer and Freita, 2015 ; Kangas et al., 2017 ; Heckler, 2014 ; Dessein et al., 2015 ; and Hosagrahar, 2017 ).

UNESCO ( 2013 , p.iii ; 2017 , p.16; 2013a , p. 30) unequivocally states that “culture is a driver of development,” an “enabler of sustainable development and essential for achieving the 2030 Agenda” and as “an essential pillar for sustainable development.” These bold declarations have led to the growth of the cultural sector. The culture industry encourages economic growth through cultural tourism, handicraft production, creative industries, agriculture, food, medicine, and fisheries. Culture is learned social values, beliefs, and customs that some people accept and share collectively. It includes all the broad knowledge, beliefs, art, morals, law, customs, and other experiences and habits acquired by man as a member of a particular society. This seems to support Guiso, Paola and Luigi ( 2006 , p. 23) view of culture as “those customary beliefs and values that ethnic, religious, and social groups transmit fairly unchanged from generation to generation.” They assert that there is a causality between culture and economic outcomes. Bokova ( 2010 ) claims that “the links between culture and development are so strong that development cannot dispense with culture” and “that these links cannot be separated.” Culture includes customs and social behaviour. Causadias ( 2020 ) claims that culture is a structure that connects people, places, and practices. Ruane and Todd ( 2004 ) write that these connections are everyday matters like language, rituals, kingship, economic way of life, general lifestyle, and labour division. Field ( 2008 ) notes that even though all cultural identities are historically constructed, they still undergo changes, transformation, and mutation with time. Although Barth ( 1969 ) affirms that ethnicity is not culture, he points out that it helps define a group and its cultural stuff . The shared cultural stuff provides the basis for ethnic enclosure or exclusion.

The cultural identities of all men will never be the same because they come from distinctive social groups. Cultural identification sorts interactions into two compartments: individual or self-identification and identification with other people. Thus, Jenkins ( 2014 ) sees social identity as the interface between similarities and differences, the classification of others, and self-identification. He argues that people would not relate to each other in meaningful ways without it. People relate both as individuals and as members of society. Ethnicity is the “world of personal identity collectively ratified and publicly expressed” and “socially ratified personal identity‟ (Geertz, 1973 , p. 268, 309). However, the future of ethnicity has been questioned because culture is now seen as a commodity. Many tribal communities are packaging some aspects of their cultural inheritances to sell to other people who are not from their communities (Comaroff and Comaroff, 2009 ).

There is a relationship between culture and communication. People show others their identities through communication. Communication uses symbols, for example, words, to send messages to recipients. According to Kurylo ( 2013 ), symbols allow culture to be represented or constructed through verbal and nonverbal communication. Message receivers may come from different cultural backgrounds. They try to create meaning by interpreting the symbols used in communication. Miscommunication and misunderstanding may arise because symbols may not have the same meaning for both the sender and receiver of messages. If these are not efficiently handled, they may lead to stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. Monaghan ( 2020 ), Zhu ( 2016 ), Holmes ( 2017 ), Merkin ( 2017 ), and Samovar et al. ( 2012 ) observe that inter-cultural communication occurs between people from different cultural groups. It shows how people from different cultural backgrounds can effectively communicate by comparing, contrasting, and examining the consequences of the differences in their communication patterns. However, communicating with others from different cultural backgrounds can be full of challenges, surprises, and re-learning because languages, values, and protocols differ. Barriers, like language and noise, impede communication by distorting, blocking, or altering the meaning.

Communication patterns change from one nation to the next. It is not uncommon, for example, for an American, a Nigerian, a Japanese national, or citizens of other countries to work together on a single project in today’s multi-cultural workplace. These men and women represent different cultural heritages. Martinovski ( 2018 ) remarks that both humans and virtual agents interact in cross-cultural environments and need to correctly behave as demanded by their environment. Possibly too, they may learn how to avoid conflicts and live together. Indeed, García-Carbonell and Rising ( 2006 , p. 2) remark that “as the world becomes more integrated, bridging the gap in cultural conflicts through real communication is increasingly important to people in all realms of society.” Communication is used to co-ordinate the activities in an organization for it to achieve its goals. It is also used to signal and order those involved in the work process.

This paper argues that barriers to cross-cultural communication can be overcome or significantly reduced if the actors in the communication processes become culture literates and competent communicators.

Statement of the problem

The importance of creating and maintaining good communication in human society cannot be overemphasized. Effective communication binds and sustains the community. Cross-cultural communication problems usually arise from confusion caused by misconstruction, misperception, misunderstanding, and misvaluation of messages from different standpoints arising from differences in the cultures of the senders and receivers of messages. Divergences in cultural backgrounds result in miscommunication that negatively limits effective encrypting, transmission, reception, and information decoding. It also hinders effective feedback.

With the rapid spread of communication technologies, no community is completely isolated from the rest of the world. Present-day realities, such as new job opportunities and globalization, compel some people to move far away from their local communities and even their countries of origin to other places where the cultures are different. Globalization minimizes the importance of national borders. The world is no longer seen as a globe of many countries but as a borderless entity (Ohmae, 1999 ) and many markets (Levitt, 1983 ) in different countries with different cultures. As a matter of necessity, people from other countries must communicate.

The United Nations ( 2015 ) recognizes culture’s contribution to sustainable development and promotes local cultures in development programmes to increase local population involvement. Despite the United Nations’ lofty ideals of integrating culture into development, culture has hindered development at different levels. Interventions meant to enhance development are sometimes met with opposition from some people who feel that such programmes are against their own culture.

Gumperz ( 2001 , p. 216) argues that “all communication is intentional and grounded in inferences that depend upon the assumption of mutual good faith. Culturally specific presuppositions play a key role in inferring what is intended.” Cross-border communications reflect the kaleidoscope of the diverse colours of many cultures, meeting, clashing, and fusing. Like Adler ( 1991 , p. 64) observes, “foreigners see, interpret, and evaluate things differently, and consequently act upon them differently.” Diversities in culture shape interpersonal communication. Yet the basic communication process is the same everywhere. It is in these processes that challenges arise. Therefore, this study seeks to examine how each of these steps can be adapted to enhance cross-cultural communication, especially in today’s digitized era of collapsing cultural boundaries. Barriers to cross-cultural communication can be significantly reduced if the actors in the communication processes become culture literates and competent communicators.

Study objectives

The objectives of this study are

To examine United Nations efforts to integrate culture into sustainable development.

To suggest modifications to each communication process step to improve effective cross-cultural communication.

Literature review

Some authors have tried to link culture, communication, and sustainable goals.

The need to know about people’s culture

There are compelling reasons to learn about other people’s cultures.

Cultural literacies: Difficulties in cross-cultural communication can be reduced when senders of messages understand that the world is broader than their ethnocentric circles. It demands that senders of messages know that what they believe may not always be correct when communicating with receivers of these messages who are from different cultures. Logical reasoning will expect increased exposure to different cultures to increase understanding. When people of different groups communicate frequently, it is anticipated that they should understand each other better. This is what Hirsch ( 1987 ) labels as cultural literacy . In the ordinary course of things, common knowledge destroys mutual suspicion and misinterpretation that often generate conflicts.

To protect the earth: It is essential to point out that at “the most global level, the fate of all people, indeed the fate of the earth, depends upon negotiations among representatives of governments with different cultural assumptions and ways of communicating” (Tannen, 1985 , p. 203). If the world is to be protected, it is necessary to understand other peoples’ cultures who live and interact with us at different fronts and in this same world. The world is still our haven. Nevertheless, Vassiliou et al. ( 1972 ) find that increased exposure can increase people’s mutual negative stereotyping. Tannen ( 1985 , p. 211) remarks that stereotypes of ethnic groups partly develop from the poor impressions that people from other cultures have about the natives because they hold different meanings for both parties. Stereotyping is detrimental to cross-cultural communication, and its dismissal is necessary for any successful cross-cultural exchange.

Spin-offs from globalization: Bokova ( 2013 ) observes that globalization transforms all societies and brings culture to the front. She remarks that communities are increasingly growing diverse and yet interconnected. The spin-offs from globalization open great doors for exchanges, mutual enrichment of persons from different cultures, and pictures of new worlds.

The dynamics of cross-cultural communication

Different cultures emphasize different values. The emphasis on one value by one culture may lead to difficulties in cross-cultural communication with another person who does not see that particular value in the same light, for example, timeliness. It is crucial to note Sapir’s ( 1956 , p. 104) insistence that “every cultural pattern and every single act of social behaviour involves communication in either an explicit or implicit sense.” Even though Hofstede ( 2005 , p. 1) comments that “cultural differences are nuisance at best and often a disaster,” UNESCO ( 1998 , 1999 ) recognizes cultural diversity as an “essential factor of development” and an issue that matters. This makes cultural diversity a blessing rather than a disaster. The various shades of cultural values influence how we behave and communicate with others outside our cultural environment. Our ideals and biases also influence communication.

Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner ( 1997 ) developed a culture model with seven dimensions. They are universalism versus particularism (rules versus relationships); individualism versus communitarianism (the individual versus the group); specific versus diffuse (how far people get involved); neutral versus emotional (how people express emotions) ; achievement versus ascription (how people view status); sequential time versus synchronous time (how people manage time); and internal direction versus outer direction (how people relate to their environment). These cultural models signify how people from these areas communicate. People from different backgrounds may have difficulties communicating as their values may be significantly different. A good communicator must take note of this distinctiveness in values because they impact the communication processes. For example, a person who is particular about upholding written rules may not be interested in knowing who the culprit is before administering sanctions. But the other person interested in maintaining a good relationship with others may re-consider this approach.

Hofstede ( 1980 ) identifies five significant values that may influence cross-cultural communication:

Power distance: This is the gap between the most and the least influential members of society. People from different cultures perceive equality in various ways. The social hierarchy or status determines where individuals are placed. Status is conferred by inheritance or by personal achievement. Some cling to societal classification and its hierarchy of power. Others value and cherish the equality of all people. Yet, other cultures see other people as dependents and somehow inferior beings. A king in an African community is seen as far more powerful and important than his servants, who are expected to pay obeisance to him. Most countries in Europe are egalitarian. Arabic and Asian countries are high on the power index.

Individualism versus collectivism: This explains the extent to which members of a particular culture value being seen first, as individuals or as members of a community. As individuals, they are entirely held accountable for their errors. They are also rewarded as individuals for their exploits. However, in some cultures, the wider community is involved. Suppose a person makes an inglorious error. The whole community where that individual comes from shares in it. The same goes if he wins laurels and awards. The individual does not exist primarily for himself. African, Japanese, Indian, and most Asiatic nations follow the collective approach. A Chinese man has his Guanxi or Guanshi. This is his network of influential and significant contacts that smoothen his business and other activities (Yeung and Tung, 1996 ). He succeeds or fails based on his personal relationships. In other words, the basis of business is friendship. This is clear evidence of collectivism. Most people from America and Europe are individualistic. It must be pointed out that personal values mediate both community and individualistic spirit. Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner’s communitarianism vs. individualism appears very similar to this Hofstede’s individualism/collectivism orientation. The information receiver who values his individuality will be offended if he is seen as just a group member or if his negative performance on the job is discussed openly. The message sender who appreciates his subordinates would send personalized messages and expect their feedback.

Uncertainty avoidance: This shows the degree to which a particular culture is uncomfortable with uncertainties and ambiguities. Some cultures avoid or create worries about how much they disclose to other people. A culture with high uncertainty avoidance scores wants to avoid doubts by telling and knowing the absolute truth in everything. For them, everything should be plainly stated. When situations are not like this, they are offended, worried, and intolerant of other people or groups they feel are hiding facts by not being plain enough. Hofstede and Bond ( 1988 ) write that this trait is very peculiar to western Europeans. This means that people from countries like Greece, Turkey, and Spain are very high on uncertainty avoidance. Communication between people with high or low uncertainties may be hindered. Some people may appear rude and uncouth because of their straightforward ways of talking. Some Africans may see some Americans and people from Europe as too wide-mouthed because they feel they do not use discretion in talking. They say things they may prefer to keep silent about and hide from the public’s ears. On the other hand, some Americans may see some Africans as unnecessarily secretive. Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner’s ( 1997 ) universalism/particularism explains why some cultures insist on applying the rule of law no matter who the offender is.

Masculinity/feminity roles : Hofstede ( 2001 ) defines masculinity as society’s preference for success, heroism, assertiveness, and material rewards for success. Conversely, femininity is seen as the preference for co-operation, diffidence, caring for the weak and quality of life. The male-female contradiction affects communication. Females are expected to be meek homemakers that tend and nurture their family members. Like Sweden and Norway, cultures that favour females do not discriminate between the sexes. Japan and Nigeria have cultures that are predominantly masculine in orientation. Competitive and aggressive females are frowned at and seen as social deviants. In the other cultures where females are more favoured, a man may land in court and face public condemnation for domestic violence. Hofstede ( 1998 ) believes that how different cultures see the male/female roles influence how they treat gender, sexuality, and religion.

Long-time orientations: A particular society accepts some degree of long or short associations. Japanese culture scores high in long-term orientation values, commitments, and loyalty. They respect tradition, and therefore, changes in their society take a longer time to happen. Cultures with low long-term orientation do not value tradition much, nor do they go out of their way to nurture long-standing relationships. Literally, changes occur in rapid succession. There appears to be more attachment to the pursuit of immediate self-satisfaction and simple-minded well-being. Baumeister and Wilson ( 1996 , pp. 322–325) say that meaning comes from a sense of purpose, efficacy, value, and a sense of positive self-worth. Thus, if you communicate with somebody with a short-term orientation, you may think that he is too hasty and intemperate, while he may feel that you are too sluggish and not ready to take immediate action.

Hall ( 1983 ) introduces two other factors:

Time usage: Some cultures are monochronic, while others are polychronic. Monochronic cultures are known for doing one thing at a time. Western Europe is monochronic in time orientation, as illustrated by the familiar adage that says, “There is a time and place for everything!” Persons from this cultural background are very punctual and strictly adhere to plans. They are task-oriented. Polychronic cultures schedule multiple tasks simultaneously, even though there may be distractions and interruptions while completing them. Plans may often change at short notice. Such different time management and usage may constrict effective communication. A London business entrepreneur will find it difficult to understand why his business partner from Nigeria may be thirty minutes late for a scheduled meeting. The answer is in their perception of time. Some Nigerians observe what is referred to as African time , where punctuality is tacitly ignored.

Low and high context: This refers to how much a culture depends on direct or indirect verbal communication. According to Hall ( 1976 ), low context cultures explicitly refer to the topic of discussion. The speaker and his audience know that the words mean exactly what they say. In high context cultures, the meanings of words are drawn from the context of the communication process. The words may never mean what they say. For example, the sentence: I have heard . In the low context culture, it merely means that the listener has used his ears to listen to what the speaker is saying. In the high context culture, the listener knows more than what the speaker is saying and may be planning something unpleasant. Europeans and North Americans have low contexts. African and Asian nations have high contexts.

Vaknin ( 2005 ) brings in another value:

Exogenic and endogenic: This shows how people relate to their environment. Deeply exogenic cultures look outside themselves to make sense of life. Hence, they believe in God and His power to intervene in the affairs of men. Endogenic cultures draw on themselves when searching for the meaning of life. They think they can generate solutions to tackle the problems facing them. While the endogenic person may exert himself to find a solution to a challenge, his exogenic partner may believe that supernatural help will come from somewhere and refuses to do what is needed. Of course, this provides a problematic platform for effective communication.

The United Nations’ sustainable development goals and culture

The United Nations recognizes that culture is implicitly crucial to the achievement of the SDGs. No meaningful development can occur outside any cultural context because every person is born into a culture. To a large extent, our cultural foundations determine what we do and how we see things. Therefore, culture must be integrated into sustainable development strategies. Some specific goals’ targets acknowledge that culture drives development. Sustainable development revolves around economic, social, and environmental objectives for people. These goals are implicitly or explicitly dependent on culture because culture impacts people.

There are 17 Sustainable Development Goals. However, there are four specific ones that refer to culture are:

SDG 4 focuses on quality education

By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development

In other words, quality education is most effective if it responds to a place and the community’s cultural context and exactitudes. This target hinges on education promoting peace, non-violence, and cultural diversity as precursors to sustainable development. Encouraging respect for cultural diversity within acceptable standards facilitates cultural understanding and peace.

SDG 8 focuses on decent work and economic growth

By 2030, devise and implement policies to promote sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and products

Strengthening trade in cultural goods and services will provide growth impetus for local, national, and international markets. These will create employment opportunities for people whose work revolves around cultural goods. Cultural tourism generates revenues that improve the economy. In this sense, culture facilitates the community’s well-being and sustainability.

SDG 11 focuses on sustainable cities and communities

Target 11.4

Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritage

When our cultural heritage is carefully managed, it attracts sustainable investments in tourism. The local people living where this heritage is domiciled ensure that it is not destroyed and that they themselves will not damage the heritage areas.

SDG 12 focuses on responsible consumption and production

Develop and implement tools to monitor sustainable development impacts for sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and products

Several indigenous livelihoods and crafts are built on local knowledge and management of the ecosystem, natural resources, and local materials. If natural resources are depleted, production will be endangered. Local livelihoods that utilize low technology and energy generate less waste and keep their environment free from pollution. In other words, proper management of the ecosystem prevents biodiversity loss, reduces land degradation, and moderates adverse climate change effects. Where there are natural disasters, traditional knowledge already embedded in the people’s culture helps them become resilient.

Theoretical framework

The social construction of reality is hinged on the belief that people make sense of their social world by assembling their knowledge. Scheler ( 1960 ) labels this assemblage the Sociology of Knowledge . Berger and Luckmann ( 1966 , p.15) contend that this “knowledge is concerned with the analysis of the social construction of reality.” Social construction theory builds on peoples’ comprehension of their own life experiences. From there, people make assumptions about what they think life is or should be. Young and Collin ( 2004 ) present that social constructionism pays more attention to society than individuals. Communities determine what they feel is acceptable. What is widely accepted by a particular community may be unacceptable to other people who are not members of this group. Therefore, people see an issue as good or bad based on their group’s description. Thus, what is a reality in Society A may be seen as illegal in Society B . Berger and Luckmann ( 1966 ) claim that people create their own social and cultural worlds and vice versa. According to them, common sense or basic knowledge is sustained through social interactions. These, in turn, reinforce already existing perceptions of reality, leading to routinization and habitualization. Berger and Luckmann ( 1991 ) say that dialogue is the most important means of maintaining, modifying, and reconstructing subjective reality.

Burr ( 2006 ) writes that the four fundamental tenets of social constructionism are: a critical instance towards taken-for-granted knowledge, historical and cultural specificity; knowledge sustained by social processes; and that knowledge and social action go together. This taken-for-granted knowledge is a basic common-sense approach to daily interactions. Historical and cultural specificities look at the peculiar but past monuments that have shaped the particular society. Knowledge is created and sustained by socialization. Good knowledge improves the common good. However, whoever applies the knowledge he has acquired wrongly incurs sanctions. This is why convicted criminals are placed behind bars.

Social constructions exist because people tacitly agree to act as if they do (Pinker, 2002 ). Whatever people see as realities are actually what they have learnt, over long periods, through their interactions with their society’s socialization agents such as the family, schools and churches. Cultural realities are conveyed through a language: the vehicle for communication. Language communicates culture by telling about what is seen, spoken of, or written about. However, groups construct realities based on their cultures. The media construct realities through the production, reproduction, and distribution of messages from which their consumers give meaning to their worlds and model their behaviours.

The method of study

The discourse analysis method of study is adopted for this work. Foucault ( 1971 ) developed the ‘discursive field’ to understand the relationships between language, social institutions, subjectivity, and power. Foucault writes that discourses relate to verbalization at the most basic level. The discursive method explores the construction of meanings in human communication by offering a meaningful interpretation of messages to enhance purposeful communication. Discourse analysis examines how written, or spoken language is used in real-life situations or in the society. Language use affects the creation of meaning; and, therefore, defines the context of communication. Kamalu and Isisanwo ( 2015 ) posit that discourse analysis considers how language is used in social and cultural contexts by examining the relationship between written and spoken words. Discourse analysis aims to understand how and why people use language to achieve the desired effect. The discursive method explores the construction of meanings in human communication by offering a meaningful interpretation of messages to enhance purposeful communication. Gale ( 2010 ) says that meaning is constructed moment by moment. Garfinkel ( 1967 ) explains this construction as the common-sense actions of ordinary people based on their practical considerations and judgments of what they feel are intelligible and accountable to others. According to Keller ( 2011 ), a peoples’ sense of reality combines their routinized interactions and the meanings they attach to objects, actions, and events. It is in this understanding of the natural use of language that some barriers to effective cross-cultural communication can be reduced.

Messages may assume different meanings in different situations for other people. These meanings affect social interactions. They either encourage or discourage further human communication. As Katz ( 1959 ) has written, interpersonal relationships influence communication. To make meaning out of messages and improve human relationships, it is necessary to understand that content and context may not represent the same thing to people in different situations. Waever ( 2004 , p. 198) states that “things do not have meaning in and of themselves, they only become meaningful in discourse.” Since people’s perspectives are different, it becomes extremely difficult to form a rigid basis on specific ideas. Ideas are discussed on their merits. Discursive analysis inspects the ways individuals construct events by evaluating language usage in writing, speech, conversation, or symbolic communication (Edwards, 1997 ; Harre and Gillet, 1994 ). Language is the carrier of culture. According to Van Dijk ( 1995 , p. 12), this approach is used to study descriptive, explanatory, and practical issues in “the attempt to uncover, reveal or disclose what is implicit, hidden or otherwise not immediately obvious in relations of discursively enacted dominance or their underlying ideologies.” The media play fundamental roles in the processes of constructing or reconstructing reality. They can do these because of Aririguzoh’s ( 2004 ) observation that the press impacts the political and socio-cultural sub-systems.

Culture at the international galleries

The affairs of culture came into international prominence at the UNESCO’s World Conference on Cultural Policies held in Mexico in 1982. This conference gave a broad definition of culture to include “the whole complex of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional features that characterize a society or social group. It includes not only the arts and letters but also modes of life, the fundamental rights of the human being, value systems, traditions and beliefs” (UNESCO, 1982 , p. 1).

The United Nations World Commission on Culture and Development, led by J. Perez de Cuellar, published our Creative Diversity’s Landmark Report (UNESCO, 1995 ). This report points out the great importance of incorporating culture into development. Although the Commission recognizes cultural diversities, it sees them as the actual vehicles driving creativity and innovation. During the World Decade on Culture and Development (1988–1998), UNESCO stepped up again to campaign for greater recognition of culture’s contribution to national and international development policies. In 1998, Stockholm hosted an Inter-governmental Conference on Cultural Policies for Development. Its Action Plan on Cultural Policies for Development reaffirmed the correlation between culture and development (UNESCO, 1998 ). In 1999, UNESCO and the World Bank held the Inter-governmental Conference, Culture Counts , in Florence. Here, ‘cultural capital’ was emphasized as the tool for sustainable development and economic growth (UNESCO, 1999 ).

The United Nations General Assembly adopted the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document . Here, cultural diversity was explicitly admitted as a contributor to the enrichment of humankind. The United Nations General Assembly Resolutions on Culture and Development adopted in 2010 and 2011 (65/166 and 66/208) recognize culture as an “essential component of human development” and “an important factor in the fight against poverty, providing for economic growth and ownership of the development processes.” These resolutions called for the mainstreaming of culture into development policies at all levels. The UN System Task Team on the Post 2015 Development Agenda issued a report, Realizing the Future We Want for All ( 2012 , p. ii), with a direct charge that culture has a clear role to play in the “transformative change needed for a rights-based, equitable and sustainable process of global development.” Paragraph 71 of the report declares:

It is critical to promote equitable change that ensures people’s ability to choose their value systems in peace, thereby allowing for full participation and empowerment. Communities and individuals must be able to create and practice their own culture and enjoy that of others free from fear. This will require, inter alia, respect for cultural diversity, safeguarding cultural and natural heritage, fostering cultural institutions, strengthening cultural and creative industries, and promoting cultural tourism (p. 33).

In 2005, the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions member states agreed that cultural diversity “increases the range of choices and nurtures human capacities and values. Therefore, it is a mainspring for sustainable development for communities, peoples and nations” (UNESCO, 2005 , p. 1). The Convention reiterated the importance of the link between culture and development. UNESCO also steers an International Fund for Cultural Diversity to promote sustainable development and poverty reduction among the developing and least developed countries that are parties to the Convention.

UN Resolution 2347 of 2017 focuses exclusively on protecting cultural heritage and its necessity for peace and security. This Resolution brings a thorough awareness of culture’s role as a source of stability, inclusion, driver of reconciliation, and resilience. This Resolution reinforces Resolution 2199, adopted in February 2015, partly to fight against international terrorism financing and prohibit the illicit trafficking of cultural goods from Iraq and Syria.

Communication processes for overcoming difficulties in cross-cultural communication

The primary risk in cross-cultural communication is distortion, which creates misunderstanding or even misrepresentation of the conveyed information. Baumgratz ( 1990 , pp. 161–168) shares the opinion that relevant cultural dimensions of what he calls a social communication situation should be mapped out for individuals or groups who are from different nations or cultural origins but who have realized the need to contribute to the achievement of social, institutional, organizational, group, and personal aims. The tactics to overcome difficulties in cross-cultural communication lie in the communication processes. Any of the steps can become a barrier since culture influences the behaviour of both senders and receivers of messages. Barriers impede communication by distorting, blocking, or creating misunderstandings. Hence, it is necessary to create an enabling environment that will make communicating easier. Each of the communication steps can be strategized to enhance communication.

He is the source or initiator of the message. He can be a person or an organization. If the sender is a person, Malec ( 2018 ) refers to him as the carrier of intangible culture and the creator of the tangible ones. Messages are conveyed through spoken or written words. Nevertheless, messages can also be non-verbal. The encoding includes selecting words, symbols, or gestures in composing a message. The sender should encrypt, transfer meaning, or package his messages in ways that the receivers can access them. He should use symbols that the receiver would comprehend. The first thing he should do is use a language that his receiver understands. For example, it is useless to send a message written in English to another person who only understands French. Not only is the effort wasted, but it might also generate hostility. In Nigeria, Mexican soaps are freely watched. However, their producers avoided the obvious language challenge by dubbing in English voice-overs.

Words mean different things in different languages. For example, a British boss would answer yes to a question. However, his American subordinate would answer, yeah . The boss would think that he is disrespectful and impolite. Meanwhile, the American employee would be bewildered by the boss’s apparent coldness. British people use words that have different meanings from their American counterparts. For example, the word, pant , means underwear to a Briton but a pair of trousers to an American. The Englishman may still run into trouble with other nationals because his words have different meanings to these listeners. For example, the English phrase fart means a different thing among the Danish. For them, the word means speed ! The English word gift means poison in German. If an Englishman calls somebody a brat , his Russian friend will conclude that he is calling him his brother , which is what the word means in his language. Igbo children of south-eastern Nigeria call the hawk leke . But for the Yorubas in the southwest, this is the name given to a male child.

The sender, too, must know that even body language may mean different things. He should not assume that non-verbal messages mean the same in every part of the world. In Japan, nodding the head up and down means disagreement. In Nigeria, it means the opposite. Even though his own culture invariably influences the message’s sender, he should understand that his message is intended for a cross-cultural audience. He must also realize that the contents are no longer meant for ethnic communities defined by geographical locations but for an audience connected by frequent interactions that are not necessarily in the same physical place. A message sender that values esprit de corps will incorporate this into his messages by telling them that the laurel does not go to any person in particular but to the winning team. He thus encourages everybody to join in to win, not as individuals but as members of a group. If he is high on doubt avoidance, he makes his messages very direct and unambiguous and leaves no room for misinterpretation. However, a male sender who wants to assert his masculinity may wish to sound harsh. The sender who regularly attends church services may unconsciously put some words of Scripture in his messages because of his exogenic roots. The sender with monochronic orientation will send one message and expect the task to be completed as scheduled. His linear cultural background will be offended if the result is the contrary. Similarly, the sender who places a high value on rules and regulations would send messages of punishment to those who break them but reward those who keep them without minding his relationships with them. An effective sender of messages to a cross-cultural society should state his ideas clearly, offer explanations when needed, or even repeat the whole communication process if he does not get the appropriate feedback.

This is the information content the sender wants to share with his receivers. These include stories, pictures, or advertisements. He should carefully avoid lurid and offensive content. A French man may see nothing wrong in his wife wearing a very skimpy bikini and other men ogling at her at a public beach. His counterpart from Saudi Arabia will be upset if other men leer at his wife. In addition, the wife would be sanctioned for dressing improperly and appearing in public. If a person has a message to share with others from a different cultural background, he should be careful. His listeners may not isolate his statement as being distinct from his personality.

Societies with high context culture usually consider the messages they send or receive before interpreting them. Messages are hardly delivered straightforwardly. The message is in the associated meanings attached to the pictures and symbols. Thus, those outside that community find it very difficult to understand the meaning of the messages. In low-context communication, the message is the information in words. The words mean what they say. However, a corporate sender of messages, for example, the head of the Human Resources Department of a multi-cultural company interested in building team spirit, may organize informal chit-chats and get-togethers to break the proverbial ice as well as create a convivial atmosphere where people can relate. The message he is passing across is simple: let colleagues relax, relate, and work together as team members irrespective of where they come from. All of these are communicative actions.

The channel’s work is to provide a passage for the sender to guide his message to the receiver. While face-to-face communication is ideal for intimate and close group conversations, it is impossible to talk to everybody simultaneously. Different channels of passing across the same message may be used. For example, the same message may be passed through radio, adapted for television, put online, or printed in newsletters, newspapers, and magazines. The hope is that people who missed the message on one channel may see it on another somewhere else. A pronounced media culture will hasten cross-cultural communication. Many people consume media content. However, these consumers are expected to be media literates. Aririguzoh ( 2007 , p. 144) writes that:

media literacy is the systematic study of the media and their operations in our socio-political systems as well as their contributions to the development and maintenance of culture. It is the information and communication skill that is needed to make citizens more competent. It is the ability to read what the print media offer, see what the visual media present, and hear what the aural media announce. It is a response to the changing nature of information in our modern society.

Official messages should be passed through defined routes and are best written. This would close avenues of possible denials by others if the same message were passed across verbally. It could be difficult to misinterpret the contents of a written document. Written documents have archival values. As much as possible, rumours should be stamped out. A good manager should single out regular gossips in a multi-cultural organization for special attention. Equally, an effective manager heading widely dispersed employees can co-ordinate their activities using communication technologies with teleconferencing features. Aririguzoh ( 2007 , p. 45) notes, “information and communication technologies have transformed the range and speed of dispersing information and of communicating. Today, the whole world lies a click away!”

The media of communication are shaped by the culture of the people who produce them. What they carry as contents and the form they assume are defined by the culture of the sender. In low-context societies, it is common for messages to be written. In high context societies, it is common for statements to be verbal. Importantly, Aririguzoh ( 2013 , pp. 119–120) points out that “… the mass media can effectively be deployed to provide pieces of information that enhance communication, build understanding and strengthen relationships in our rapidly changing environment dictated by the current pace of globalization. The mass media assiduously homogenize tastes, styles, and points of view among many consumers of its products across the globe. They have effectively helped in fading away national distinctions and growing mass uniformity as they create, distribute and transmit the same entertainment, news, and information to millions of people in different nations.”

The receiver is the person the sender directs his message to. In a workplace, the receiver needs the message or information to do his job. The receiver decodes or tries to understand the meaning of the sender’s message by breaking it down into symbols to give the proper feedback. If the message is verbal, the receiver has to listen actively. The message receiver must understand a message based on his existing orientations shaped by his own culture. Even the messages that he picks are selected to conform to his existing preconceptions.

Oyserman et al. ( 2002 ) make an interesting discovery: that receivers from different cultures interpret the message senders’ mannerisms. For an American, a speaker talking very quickly is seen as telling the uncensored truth. In other words, the speaker who talks too slowly implicates himself as a liar! However, for the Koreans, slow speech denotes careful consideration of others. In some cultures, particularly in Asia, the receiver is responsible for effective communication. Kobayashi and Noguchi ( 2001 ) claim that he must become an expert at “understanding without words.” Miyahara ( 2004 , p. 286) emphasizes that even children literarily learn to read other people’s minds by evaluating the subtle cues in their messages and then improvising to display the expected and appropriate social behaviour and communication. Gestures involve the movements of the hands and head of the sender. The receiver clearly understands these body movements. As painted by Sapir ( 1927 , p. 556), “we respond to gestures with an extreme alertness and, one might almost say, in accordance with an elaborate and secret code that is written nowhere, known by none, and understood by all.”

Receivers who value individualism appreciate personal freedom, believe that they can make their own decisions, and respect their performance. Those who prefer communitarianism would prefer group applause and loyalty. A monochromatic receiver would start and finish a task before starting another one. He would be offended when colleagues do not meet deadlines, are late to appointments, and do not keep rigid schedules. His co-worker, who synchronizes his time, develops a flexible working schedule to work at two or more tasks.

This is the final process. Ordinarily, the sender wants a response to determine if the message he sent out has been received and understood. Acknowledging a message does not indicate a clear understanding of its contents. Feedback can be positive or negative. Positive feedback arises when the receiver interprets the message correctly and does what the sender wants. Negative feedback comes when messages are incorrectly interpreted, and the receiver does not do what the sender of the information has intended him to do. Cross-cultural communication recognizes that people come from different backgrounds. Therefore, feedback on diverse messages would be different. A sensitive communicator would be careful how he designs his messages for a heterogeneous audience so that he can elicit the desired feedback.

It must be emphasized that no culture is superior to another as each culture meets the needs of those who subscribe to it. To a large extent, our culture influences our behaviours and expectations from other people. Although there are noticeable similarities and differences, what separates one culture from another is its emphasis on specific values. As the United Nations has affirmed, there is diversity in cultures. These diversities add colour and meaning to human existence. This suggests that particular policies should be carved out to attend to specific locations and supports Satterthwaite’s ( 2014 ) proposition that local actors should be empowered to help achieve the SDGs. What the local populace in one community may appreciate may be frowned upon and even be fought against by residents in another place. As Hossain and Ali ( 2014 ) point out, individuals constitute the societies where they live and work. While Bevir ( 1996 ) describes this relationship as that of mutual dependence, he recognizes that people are influenced by their particular social structures and therefore do not go against them. Bevir believes that social systems exist for individuals.

Societies are built on shared values, norms and beliefs. These, in turn, have profound effects on individuals. Society’s culture affects individuals while the individuals create and shape the society, including initiating sustainable development. Development rests on the shoulders of men. Thus, culture influences the ways individuals behave and communicate. The effective communicator must actively recognize these elements and work them into communication practices. As Renn et al. ( 1997 , p. 218) point out, “sustainable practices can be initiated or encouraged by governmental regulation and economic incentives. A major element to promote sustainability will be, however, the exploration and organization of discursive processes between and among different actors.”

To achieve the United Nations sustainable goals, the competent communicator has to recognize that the culture of the actors in a communication process is the basic foundation for effective communication. For example, while one individual may discuss issues face-to-face and is not afraid to express his feelings candidly, another person may not be so direct. He may even involve third parties to mediate in solving a problem. Either way, their approaches are defined by their cultural backgrounds. It may be counterproductive to assume that either of these approaches is the best. This assertion is supported by the study of Stanton ( 2020 ), who explored intercultural communication between African American managers and Hispanic workers who speak English as a second language. He finds managers that follow culturally sensitive communication strategies getting more work done. Cartwright ( 2020 ) also observes that intercultural competence and recognition of cultural differences in East and Central Europe are foundation pillars for business success. This lends credence to Ruben and Gigliotti ( 2016 ) observation that communication with people from different cultures reduces the barriers associated with intercultural communication and enhances the communication process.

Irrespective of our ethnicities, people want to communicate, understand, appreciate, and be respected by others. Effective communication is the foundation of good human relationships among team members, whether their cultural backgrounds differ or not. Good feedback is achieved when both the sender and receiver of messages create common meanings. This is what discourse is all about. Messages must be meaningful, meaningfully constructed and meaningfully interpreted. Georgiou ( 2011 ) labels this the communicative competence : acknowledgement of the intercultural dimension of foreign language education and successful intercultural interactions that assume non-prejudiced attitudes, tolerance and understanding of other cultures, and cultural self-awareness of the person communicating. An efficient communicator must understand that culture shapes people, and the people then shape society. In other words, communication shapes the world. Therefore, appropriately chosen communication strategies help blend the different cultures.

According to Bokova ( 2013 ), there is “renewed aspirations for equality and respect, for tolerance and mutual understanding, especially between peoples of different cultures.” This means that if all parties respect other team members’ cultures, a clement work environment is inevitable. Cultural literacy creates more tolerant and peaceful work environments. Achieving this starts with a re-examination of the whole communication process. The crux of cross-cultural communication is developing effective ways to appreciate the culture of others involved in the acts of communication. Understanding these differences provides the context for an enhanced understanding of the values and behaviours of others. Reconciling these differences confers competitive advantages to those who communicate effectively. The media must provide the links between senders and receivers of messages in the context of their socio-cultural environments.

The United Nations appreciates the distinctiveness in cultures and has incorporated it as a significant factor in achieving sustainable development goals. This global body has produced different documents championing this. Every development takes place in an environment of culture. The heart of sustainable development is the man. The SDGs will be more meaningful and easily achievable by recognizing that actions should be both locally and culturally relevant. Cultural differences can be effectively managed if senders and receivers of messages understand that culture shapes how people communicate and, by extension, the relationship with other people who may not necessarily be from their tribal communities. Breaking down the barriers to cross-cultural communication lies in understanding these distinct differences and consciously incorporating them into the communication processes to enhance communication competencies.

Data availability

All data analysed are contained in the paper.

Adler N (1991). International dimensions of organizational behavior, 2nd edn. Pws-Kent Publishing Company

Aririguzoh S (2004) How the press impinges on the political and socio-cultural sub-systems. Nsukka J Humanit 14:137–147. http://www.unnfacultyofarts.com/download.php?download_file=UFAJH192.pdf

Aririguzoh S (2007) Media literacy and the role of English language in Nigeria. Int J Commun 6:144–160

Google Scholar  

Aririguzoh S (2013) Human integration in globalization: the communication imperative. Niger J Soc Sci 9(2):118–141

Barth F (1969) Introduction. In: Barth F (ed.) Ethnic groups and boundaries: the social organization of culture difference. Little, Brown & Company, pp. 9–30

Baumeister R, Wilson B (1996) Life stories and the four needs for meaning. Psychol Inq 7(4):322–325

Article   Google Scholar  

Baumgratz G (1990) Personlichkeitsentwicklung und Fremdsprachenerwerb. Transnationale Kommunikationsfthigkeit im Franzosischunterricht (Personality development and foreign language acquisition: transnational communication skills in French lessons). Schoningh

Berger P, Luckmann T (1966) The social construction of reality: a treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Penguin Books Ltd

Berger P, Luckmann T (1991) The social construction of reality. Penguin Books.

Bevir M (1996) The individual and society. Political Stud 44(1):102–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00759.x

Bokova I (2013) The power of culture for development. http://en.unesco.org/post2015/sites/post2015/files/The%20Power%20of%20e%20fCulturor%20Development.pdf

Bokova I (2010) 2010 International year for the rapprochement of culture: message from Irina Bokova, Director-General of UNESCO https://www.un.org/en/events/iyrc2010/message.shtml

Burr V (2006) An introduction to social constructionism. Routledge, Taylor & Francis e-Library

Cartwright CT (2020) Understanding global leadership in eastern and central Europe: the impacts of culture and intercultural competence. In: Warter I, Warter L (eds.) Understanding national culture and ethics in organisations. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 63–74

Causadias JM (2020) What is culture? Systems of people, places, and practices. Appl Dev Sci24(4):310–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2020.1789360

Comaroff J, Comaroff J (2009) Ethnicity , inc. University of Chicago Press

De Beukelaer C, Freita R (2015) Culture and sustainable development: beyond the diversity of cultural expressions. In: De Beukelaer C, Pyykkönen MI, Singh JP (eds.) Globalization, culture, and development: the UNESCO convention on cultural diversity. Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 203–221

Dessein J, Soini K, Fairclough G, Horlings L (2015) Culture in, for and as sustainable development. Conclusions of COST ACTION IS1007 investigating cultural sustainability. European Cooperation in Science and Technology, University of Jyvaskyla https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3380.7844

Edwards D (1997) Discourse and cognition. Sage

Field L (2008) Abalone tales: Collaborative explorations of sovereignty and identity in native California. Duke University Press Books

Foucault M (1971). The order of discourse. In: Young R (ed.) Untying the text: a post-structuralist reader. Routledge and Kegan Paul Limited

Gale J (2010) Discursive analysis: a research approach for studying the moment-to-moment construction of meaning in systemic practice. Hum Syst21(2):7–37

García-Carbonell A, Rising B (2006) Culture and communication. College of Management Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, pp. 23–40

Garfinkel H (1967) Studies in ethnomethodology. Prentice-Hall

Geertz C (1973) The interpretation of cultures. Basic Books

Georgiou M (2011) Intercultural competence in foreign language teaching and learning: action inquiry in a Cypriot tertiary institution. Doctoral Thesis, University of Nottingham

Guiso L, Paola S, Luigi Z (2006) Does culture affect economic outcomes?. J Econ Perspect20(2):23–48. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.20.2.23

Gumperz JJ (2001) Interactional sociolinguistics: a personal perspective. In: Schiffrin D, Tannen D, Hamilton HE (eds.) The handbook of discourse analysis. Blackwell Publishers Ltd., pp. 215–228

Hall E (1976) Beyond culture. Doubleday

Hall E (1983) The dance of life: the other dimension of time. Doubleday

Harre R, Gillet G (1994) The discursive mind. Sage

Heckler S (2014) On the importance of culture in sustainable development. In Sillitoe P (ed.) Sustainable development: an appraisal from the Gulf region. Berghahn Books, pp. 436–459

Hirsch ED (1987) Cultural literacy: what every American needs to know. Houghton Mifflin

Hofstede G (2001) Culture’s consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA

Hofstede G (1980) Culture’s consequences: international differences in work-related values. Sage

Hofstede G (1998) Masculinity and femininity: the taboo dimension of national cultures. Sage

Hofstede G (2005) Cross-cultural communication. http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Cross-cultural_communication

Hofstede G, Bond MH (1988) The Confucius connection: from cultural roots to economic growth. Organ Dyn 16(4):4–21. http://www.clearlycultural.com/geert-hofstede-culturaldimensions/masculinity/

Holmes P (2017) Intercultural communication in the global workplace, critical approaches. Critical intercultural communication theories, issues, and concepts. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783665.ieicc0051

Hosagrahar J (2017) Culture: at the heart of SDGs. The UNESCO Courier, 1 (April–June). https://en.unesco.org/courier/april-june-2017/culture-heart-sdgs

Hossain FMA, Ali MK (2014) Relation between individual and society. Open J Soc Sci 2:130–137. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2014.28019

Jenkins R (2014). Social identity. Routledge

Kamalu I, Osisanwo A (2015) Discourse analysis. In: Kamalu I, Tamunobelema I (eds.) Issues in the study of language and literature: theory and practice. Kraft Books, pp. 169–195

Kangas A, Duxbury N, De Beukelaer C (2017) Introduction: cultural policies for sustainable development. Int J Cult Policy 23(2):129–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286632.2017.1280790

Katz E (1959) Mass communications research and popular culture. Stud Public Commun 2:10–19

Keller R (2011) The sociology of knowledge approach to discourse (SKAD). Hum Stud 34(1):43–65

Kobayashi Y, Noguchi Y (2001) Consumer insight, brand insight, and implicit communication: successful communication planning cases in Japan. In Roberts M, King R (eds.) The Proceedings of the 2001 special Asia-Pacific conference of the American Academy of Advertising. pp. 29–40

Kurylo A (2013) Inter/Cultural communication: representation and construction of culture. Sage Publications, Inc.

Levitt T (1983, May) The globalization of markets. Harv Bus Rev 92–102

Malec TE (2018) Introduction to theory of culture-related spatial development. Cogent Arts Humanit 1557583. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2018.1557583

Martinovski B (2018) A model of culture-based communication. In: Faucher C (ed.) Advances in culturally-aware intelligent systems and in cross-cultural psychological studies. Intelligent Systems Reference Library, vol 134. Springer, Cham, pp. 335–350

Merkin RS (2017) Cross-cultural communication theory and research overview. In: The international encyclopedia of intercultural communication. John Wiley & Sons, pp. 1–10

Miyahara A (2004) Toward theorizing Japanese interpersonal communication competence from a non-western perspective. In: Jandt FE (Ed.) Cross-cultural communication. Sage, pp. 279–292

Monaghan L (2020) Intercultural communication: teaching nonverbal communication. In: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Monaghan L (ed.) The international encyclopedia of linguistic anthropology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. pp. 1–6

Ohmae K (1999) The borderless world. Harper Business.

Oyserman D, Coon H, Kemmelmeier M (2002) Rethinking individualism and collectivism: evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychol Bull 128:3–72

Pinker S (2002) The blank slate: the modern denial of human nature. Penguin Books

Rachlinski JJ (2021) What is cultural cognition, and why does it matter? Annu Rev Law Soc Sci17(1):277–291. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-011921-060754

Renn O, Blattel-Mink B, Kastenholz H (1997) Discursive methods in environmental decision making. Bus Strategy Environ 6:218–231

Ruane J, Todd J (2004) The roots of intense ethnic conflict may not in fact be ethnic: categories, communities and path dependence. Eur J Sociol 45(2):209–232

Ruben BD, Gigliotti RA (2016) Leadership as social influence: an expanded view of leadership communication theory and practice. J Leadersh Organ Stud 23:467–479. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051816641876

Samovar LA, Porter RE, McDaniel ER (2012) Intercultural communication: a reader. Wadsworth Cengage Learning

Sapir E (1927) The unconscious patterning of behavior in society. In: Mandelbaum D (ed.) Selected writings of Edward Sapir. University of California Press, pp. 544–559

Sapir E (1956) Selected writings in language, culture and personality. University of California Press

Satterthwaite D (2014) Guiding the goals: empowering local actors. SAIS Rev 34(2):51–61. https://doi.org/10.1353/sais.2014.0025

Scheler M (1960) Die Wissensformen und die Gesellschaft. The forms of knowledge and society. A. Francke AG

Seymour J (2007) Culture does matter. Relig Educ 102(2):105–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/00344080701285147

Stanton RA (2020) Intercultural communication between African American managers and Hispanic workers with ESL. Doctoral Dissertation, Walden University

Tannen D (1985) Cross-cultural communication. In: Adrianus van Dijk T (ed.) Handbook of discourse analysis , vol 4. Academic Press, pp. 203–215

Trompenaars F, Hampden-Turner C (1997) Riding the waves of culture. Nicolas Brealey

UNESCO (2017) UNESCO moving forward the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development https://en.unesco.org/creativity/sites/creativity/files/247785en.pdf

UNESCO (2013) Communication & development, No. 9. Regional Office for Culture in Latin America and the Caribbean, Havana, Cuba

UNESCO (2013a). Activity report 2012 – 2013 . Regional Office for culture in Latin America and the Caribbean, Havana

UNESCO (1999) Proceedings of the seminar measuring culture and development: prospects and limits of constructing cultural indicators. In: Culture counts conference organized by the World Bank and the government of Italy in co-operation with UNESCO, Florence, Italy, 4–7 October. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0011/001191/119138eo.pdf

UNESCO (1998) Action plan on cultural policies for development adopted in by the Intergovernmental Conference on Cultural Policies for Development, Stockholm, Sweden, 2 April. http://www.unesco.org/cpp/uk/declarations/cultural.pdf

UNESCO (1995) Our creative diversity: report of the world commission for culture and development. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001429/142919e.pdf

UNESCO (1982) Mexico city declaration on cultural policies. World conference on cultural policies. UNESCO, Mexico City, Paris, 26 July–6 August

UNESCO (2005) The convention on the protection and promotion of the diversity of cultural expressions https://en.unesco.org/creativity/convention

United Nations (2012) Realizing the future we want for all: report to the secretary-general. www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pdf/Post_2015_UNTTreport.pdf

United Nations (2015) Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development http://www.unesco.org/new/en/brasilia/culture/culture-and-development/culture-in-sustainable-development/

Vaknin S (2005) The classification of cultures. http://samvak.tripod.com/class.html .

Van Dijk TA (1995) Aims of critical discourse analysis. Jpn Discourse 1:17–27

Vassiliou V, Triandis H, Vassiliou G, McGuire H (1972) Interpersonal contact and stereotyping. In Triandis H (ed.) The analysis of subjective culture. Wiley, pp. 89–115

Waever O (2004) Discursive approaches. In: Wiener A, Diez T (eds.) European integration theory. Oxford University Press, pp. 197–215

Yeung I, Tung R (1996) Achieving business success in Confucian societies: the importance of guanxi (Connections). Organ Dyn 25(2):54–65

Young R, Collin A (2004) Introduction: constructivism and social constructionism in the career field. J Vocat Behav 64(3):373–388

Zhu H (2016) Research methods in intercultural communication: a practical guide. Routledge

Download references

Acknowledgements

I acknowledge: Dr. Emmanuel Mogaji of Greenwich University for reading and pointing out helpful corrections; Professors Innocent Chiluwa, Abiodun Gesinde, David Imhonopi and Dr Evaristus Adesina of Covenant University, who went through the manuscript, suggested corrections and encouraged me not to give upe and my daughter, Victoria-Grace Onyekachi Miracle Aririguzoh, who proofread this manuscript and brought in sunshine when the clouds were grey.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Mass Communication, Covenant University, Ota, Nigeria

Stella Aririguzoh

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stella Aririguzoh .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The author declares no competing interests.

Ethical approval

There was no ethical approval or informed consent approval sought as neither applies to this paper.

Informed consent

This article does not have human participants.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Aririguzoh, S. Communication competencies, culture and SDGs: effective processes to cross-cultural communication. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 9 , 96 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01109-4

Download citation

Received : 28 May 2021

Accepted : 14 February 2022

Published : 23 March 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01109-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Cultural competence in the nursing, dentistry, and medicine professional curricula: a qualitative review.

• Maura Klenner
• Rodrigo Mariño
• Carlos Zaror

BMC Medical Education (2022)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Communication and Culture
• Communication and Social Change
• Communication and Technology
• Communication Theory
• Critical/Cultural Studies
• Gender (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Studies)
• Health and Risk Communication
• Intergroup Communication
• International/Global Communication
• Interpersonal Communication
• Journalism Studies
• Language and Social Interaction
• Mass Communication
• Media and Communication Policy
• Organizational Communication
• Political Communication
• Rhetorical Theory
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Methods for intercultural communication research.

• John Oetzel , John Oetzel Waikato Management School, The University of Waikato
• Saumya Pant Saumya Pant Mudra Institute of Communications, Ahmedabad (MICA)
•  and  Nagesh Rao Nagesh Rao Partner, Siya Consulting
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.202
• Published online: 09 May 2016

Research on intercultural communication is conducted using primarily three different methodological approaches: social scientific, interpretive, and critical. Each of these approaches reflects different philosophical assumptions about the world and how we come to know it. Social scientific methods often involve quantitative data collection and research approaches such as surveys and experiments. From this perspective, intercultural communication is seen as patterns of interaction, and we seek to explain and understand these patterns through clear measurement and identification of key independent variables. Interpretive methods often involve qualitative data collection and research approaches such as interviews and ethnographic observation. From this perspective, intercultural communication and meaning is created through interaction, and we seek to understand these meanings by exploring the perspectives of people who participate as members of cultural communities. Critical methods often involve qualitative data collection and research approaches such as interviews and textual critique. From this perspective, intercultural communication involves inequalities that can be attributed to power and distortions created from (mis)use of this power. Critical scholars seek to unmask domination and inequality. Most scholars utilize one of these primary approaches given the consistency with their world views, theories, and research training. However, there are creative possibilities for combining these approaches that have potential for fuller understanding of intercultural communication.

• social science methods
• interpretive methods
• critical methods
• quantitative
• qualitative
• intercultural communication

Introduction

Our worldview shapes what is “interesting” to a particular audience, what is considered a problem, what problem is interesting to study, and whether the goal of studying a problem is to analyze the problem, to analyze and solve the problem, or to analyze, solve, and implement the solution. Our worldview defines if an issue is a problem or not and if we need to come up with a solution. For example, behaviors associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are seen as a problem in the United States, and there are medications to solve the problem. In India, the same set of behaviors among children is seen as what children tend to do, as normal and not as a problem.

Our worldview not only shapes what we see as an interesting problem to study but also the methodology we use to study the problem. The purpose of this article is to describe, and explore integration of, the three main methodological perspectives in studying intercultural communication issues: social scientific, interpretive, and critical. First, the ontological, epistemological, and axiological assumptions underlying each of these methodological perspectives are explored. Then, for each methodological perspective, common methods and types of data collected and some exemplars are identified. Finally, we offer traditional integration of the three approaches and also alternate methodological perspectives to study intercultural issues from a non-Western lens.

Ontology, Epistemology, and Axiology

Ontology is the study of the researcher’s orientation to reality. In the social scientific perspective, the researcher views the world objectively in that there is a world outside of us that can be systematically studied. Researchers from this perspective use a deductive approach and are keen to explain and predict phenomena. Social scientific ontology provides clarity and direction due to its rigorous questioning of plausibility and reduction of subjectivity. In contrast and as a reaction to the social scientific perspective, interpretive researchers argue that the observer and the observed are subjective and the most important lessons are in how they co-create meaning. If the social scientists take a deterministic view of human behavior, interpretivists thrive in a person’s free will. Critical theorists focus particularly on social injustices and inequalities in life. Researchers in this area explore how social structures create power inequalities and injustices. Thus, they believe that power differences are at the base of social transactions (Scotland, 2012 ). Any ontological investigation for a critical theorist will thus have to help unearth these inequities.

Epistemology looks at how we come to know a chosen phenomenon and thus how researchers study this phenomenon. Social scientists, interested in assessing objective reality (or at least reduced subjectivity), use a scientific method to collect empirical evidence. They focus particularly on causal relationships between phenomena and generally use quantitative approaches to collect data. The basis of their assessment and data collection is the premise that objects have an existence independent of the knower (Cohen et al., 2007 ). Interpretivists, who are interested in situational and contextual meaning, generally use qualitative methods to assess participants’ sense of reality. They are not exploring one truth, but the play of multiple truths simultaneously. They do so by studying individual interactions and the historical and cultural contexts in which these individuals interact. Critical researchers use a variety of qualitative methods to explore, for example, how language is used to create power imbalances or how mass media is used to avoid critical thinking. Critical scholars are particularly sensitive to the overdependence on empirical and social scientific evidence. They do so as critical investigations are premised on the fact that social/positional power determines what is considered knowledge (Cohen et al., 2007 ).

Axiology explores the values that guide a researcher’s questions, the methods used to collect and analyze data, the interpretation of the data, and the implications of the findings. Social scientists study phenomena to find the truth, which, in turn, guides specific types of action. They are focused on exploring what is referred to as the value axiom, or how much a phenomenon being studied fulfills the requirements of the concept to which it belongs (Kelleher, 2013 ). Both interpretivists and critical theorists are interested in describing what exists, how the participants in the community interpret phenomena, with critical theorists particularly interested in reducing class imbalances and other forms of oppression. Interpretivists are axiologically determined to encourage the fact that observations drawn can always be disagreed upon and reopened to interpretation. With respect to control, social scientists wish to control as many variables as possible, narrowing down the causal pattern to the variables under study. Interpretivists seek active participation in the study to understand how they view reality. Critical theorists are particularly aware of the community members’ need to take control of their own situations. With this brief overview in mind, we now explain the methodological approaches of the social scientific, interpretive, and critical perspectives; the types of data collected; some exemplars for each perspective; and some general concerns about each of the methods.

Social Science Methods

Social science research methods address questions related to both cross-cultural and intercultural communication. Much of the foundational work on intercultural communication research is based on comparisons of two or more cultures. Both forms of communication research try to enhance the comprehension of communication that are mediated by and through cultural context (Sponcil & Gitimu, 2010 ). These comparisons helped to identify how the normative and subjective aspects of culture vary across cultures and presumably provided information about what to expect when interacting with members from different cultures. This type of research is classified as cross-cultural. In contrast, intercultural communication is the exchange of messages between people from different cultural groups (Gudykunst, 2003a ). Regardless of the interest in cross-cultural or intercultural communication, the social scientific perspective seeks to understand and predict the effect of culture on communication variables and the subsequent effect of communication on various outcomes. Thus, the methods of study are similar. This section reviews the three most prominent social scientific methods providing an example of each. Additionally, the types of data generated and methodological concerns are discussed.

There are three methods used by most social scientific researchers to study cross-cultural and intercultural research: (a) survey questionnaire, (b) experimental design, and (c) content analysis. The survey questionnaire is by far the most frequently used research method (e.g., Oetzel & Ting-Toomey, 2003 ; Rao, Singhal, Ren, & Zhang, 2001 ). It is typically a self-administered and self-report instrument that is distributed to large samples in multiple cultures. Most cross-cultural comparisons utilize self-report questionnaires because of the difficulty of collecting data from large samples in multiple cultures using other methods. Finally, self-report questionnaires are relatively easy to construct. Numerous cross-culturally valid scales exist, and methodological difficulties have been clearly identified (Gudykunst, 2003b ). While not easy to overcome, methodological difficulties of survey questionnaires are manageable (see below for more detail). Survey questionnaires provide detailed description of cultural associations of communication behavior and outcomes and allow for comparisons to other cultures.

Hanasono, Chen, and Wilson’s ( 2014 ) study of perceived discrimination, social support, and coping among racial minority university students is an example of survey research. The authors surveyed 345 students, half international students and half U.S. students, about their acculturation, experiences with discrimination, support, and coping needs. They found that the level of acculturation helped to explain students’ need for support and how they coped with discrimination.

Experimental designs are highly regarded social scientific research because of the control of variables, which enables causal relationships to be examined. Culture is not a variable that lends itself well to experimental manipulation, and thus experimental designs are relatively rare in this line of research. Rather than experimental controlling culture, researchers typically use quasi-experimental designs manipulating the composition of groups or dyads to be intra- or intercultural (e.g., Cai, Wilson, & Drake, 2000 ; Oetzel, 1998 ). These experiments collect a combination of self-report information (e.g., cultural and individual variables) as well as videotaped interaction. Additionally, some researchers have used experimental conditions on survey questionnaires (e.g., Han & Cai, 2010 ). These studies utilize stimulus variables (e.g., contextual features) that ask participants to respond to specific situations.

Brinson and Stohl’s ( 2012 ) study of media framing on attitudes toward Muslims, civil liberties, and counterterrorism policies is an example of experimental design. They used a Solomon four-group design involving 371 U.S. adults to compare the media framing of “domestic homegrown” and “international” terrorism of the London bombings in 2005 . The authors used video segments from actual broadcasts on July 7, 2005 , and edited them together to create an approximately 10-minute video for each of the two conditions. The authors found that media frames of homegrown terrorism produced greater fear than the international framing. Fear resulted in greater support for restricting civil liberties of Muslims and, under certain conditions, general negative feelings toward Muslims.

A third method used in social scientific research is content analysis of media sources. This method is utilized to identify patterns prevalent in the media (e.g., Dixon & Azocar, 2006 ; Klein & Shiffman, 2006 ). Additionally, some researchers survey participants for their reactions about media patterns. Content analysis, while time consuming, is convenient and inexpensive since the only access needed is a recording or transcript of the artifact of study. It involves the use of a coding scheme to provide an “objective” description of the media and thus insights into cultural values and behaviors. The categorizations are then compared across cultures. When these categorizations are compared, it is done on the basis of frames, which are defined as a “schema of interpretation, collection of anecdotes, and stereotypes” (Cissel, 2014 , p. 67). Once these frames are determined, the way in which individuals deal with their realities within and across cultures can be studied.

An example of such content analysis was the study of the coverage of the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan in two Belgian newspapers: Le Soir and De Standard (Perko et al., 2011 ). The time period of the study was from March 11, 2011, to May 11, 2011 . Every article was coded by two independent coders. The authors had begun their study with a question as to how the framing of the question of nuclear power would appear in the two Belgian newspapers. They arrived at the conclusion that the reporting was mostly neutral. Further, since the Fukushima nuclear accident was in a country quite remote, the articles did not frame the issue as an example of a possible threat to their own country from nuclear power plants.

Data Analysis and Methodological Concerns

Data from these three methods are quantified to allow for statistical analysis. All forms of data must be reduced to categories that are independent from one another (exhaustive and exclusive categories). These can include frequency counts of behaviors, sequence of behaviors, and self-report information on numerical scales. Data are then analyzed with statistical software to determine associations between cultural (independent) and communication (dependent) variables (outcomes are dependent variables with culture and/or communication as independent). The nature of analysis depends on the numerical measurement of the variables, but frequent tests include t -tests, analysis of variance, correlation, and regression. Additionally, complex modeling of dependent variables can be undertaken using, for example, structural equation modeling and hierarchical linear modeling. The key concern with the statistical tests is accounting for variance in the dependent variables. The more variance explained means the “more important” a cultural factor is for communication behavior. Because of the vast number of factors that explain human behavior, intercultural researchers believe that as little as 5–10% of variance explained is meaningful.

There are four concerns for data analysis in social scientific research: (a) reliability, (b) measurement validity, (c) internal validity, and (d) external validity. Reliability is reproducibility. For the aforementioned methods, two types of reliability are relevant. First, internal consistency of measures is usually measured with Cronbach’s alpha. Second, when completing content or interaction analysis, intercoder reliability (agreement between two or more coders) is important and measured with Cohen’s K or Scott’s pi (or the like). Reliability means a researcher has consistent measures, whereas validity focuses on accurate information.

Validity is a combination of measurement, internal, and external validity (depending on the goals in the study). Measurement validity focuses on the accuracy with which a scale (or coding scheme) is measuring what is supposed to be measured. Internal validity is the strength to which a researcher can conclude that the independent variable is associated with the dependent variable as hypothesized. Internal validity is established by eliminating rival explanations for statistical associations through statistical or experimental control of confounding (or nuisance) variables. External validity is the degree to which a study’s results can be generalized to the larger populations from which a sample was drawn. In intercultural research, researchers are more concerned with measurement and internal validity than external validity.

While these general methodological concerns are true for all social science research, there are also unique concerns with cross-cultural/intercultural communication research (Gudykunst, 2003b ; Levine, Park, & Kim, 2007 ). Gudykunst ( 2003b ) outlined a number of concerns with cross-cultural research, but chief among the methodological issues is establishing equivalence. In order to make cross-cultural comparisons (and have valid measures for intercultural research), researchers need to ensure that the constructs and measures are equivalent on five levels. First, constructs must be functionally equivalent; that is, the construct must work the same way in the cultures under study. Second, constructs must be conceptually equivalent; that is, the construct must have the same meaning within the cognitive system of the members of cultures being examined. Third, linguistic equivalence for constructs refers having language that is equivalent. Linguistic equivalence is often established through translating and backtranslating of measures. Fourth, metric equivalence is established by ensuring that participants in different cultures do not respond to numerical scales in different ways (e.g., one cultural group may not use the extreme scores in a scale). Finally, researchers need to take care and establish that there is sample equivalence in the two cultural groups. The samples need to be comparable (e.g., similar age, gender, education, etc.). Fletcher and colleagues ( 2014 ) explore the steps needed to statistically ensure equivalence in measurement across multiple cultures. Establishing equivalence on these issues helps to eliminate rival explanations and further ensures that differences found are due to cultural differences. In addition to such methodological rigor, scholars from other orientations argue that it is also imperative for the researcher to be reflexive and aware of theoretical and methodological centeredness that can come from such systematic rigor (Asante, Miike, & Yin, 2008 ).

Interpretive Methods

Interpretive scholars are interested in unearthing multiple simultaneous truths, believe in a person’s free will, acknowledge that the known and the knower cannot be separated, and believe that interpretation is based on one’s persuasive abilities. Striving for meaning, interpretive scholars generally use a variety of qualitative methods to study specific intercultural phenomena. As a result of this, interpretivists examine theoretical limits by comparing results from multiple forms of research about the same phenomenon (Szabo, 2007 ). For this article, we focus on ethnography of communication and interpretive interviews as these are two common approaches. We then discuss the general methodological issues in collecting and analyzing interpretive data.

Ethnography of communication (EOC) is a method to study the relationship between language and culture through extensive field experience. The concept of the ethnography of communication was developed by Dell Hymes (Hall, 2002 ). It can be defined as the discovery and explication of the rules for contextually appropriate behavior in a community or group or what the individual needs to know to be a functional member of the community. EOC applies ethnographic methods to understand the communication patterns of a speech community (Philipsen, 1975 ). A speech community is a group of speakers who share common speech codes and use these codes based on a specific situation. From the presence or absence of certain speech codes, one can interpret the culture of a community with its shared values, beliefs, and attitudes. In his classic study, Philipsen ( 1975 ) explored the communication patterns of white males in a predominantly blue-collar neighborhood called “Teamsterville” in South Chicago. Philipsen lived in the community for several years and worked and interacted as a member of the community while also conducting his research. Results from this study explained when talk was appropriate, at what levels, and when action was more appropriate than talk. When two men were of similar backgrounds, of more or less equal status, and were close friends, they could talk to each other. There was less talk when the relationship was asymmetrical (e.g., father–son and husband–wife). The least amount of talk occurred when a “Teamsterville” was responding to an insult or trying to assert his power over someone. It is in these instances that action was more appropriate than words. If a man did talk during this interaction, he was seen as not masculine enough. Another interesting study was conducted by Radford et al. ( 2011 ). The study focused on applying EOC to the case of virtual reference context. Here, the researchers focused on the interactions that constitute the context in which the participants make verbal statements and coordinate them with other statements in order to closely analyze the relational barriers and relational facilitators. The interactions spanned a 23-month time period ( July 2004–May 2006 ), and the transcripts of 746 live chats of this period were studied. The researchers were able to conclude from their study that when professional librarians chatted, they were more formal, less free with accepted online abbreviations, whereas students were more comfortable with using abbreviations and other turns of phrases. One of the conclusions the researchers drew was that if the librarians used more informal language they would appear more friendly and approachable.

Interpretive interviews are a second common approach. The purpose of the interpretive interview is to uncover insider meanings and understandings from the perspective of the participants (Denzin, 2001 ). According to Denzin ( 2001 ), the characteristic of interpretive interviews is that they allow us to understand the society in which we live, which is referred to as an interview society. Typically, these interviews are one-on-one and face-to-face interviews designed to elicit in-depth information. The interviews can focus on narratives, topics, perspectives, and opinions and often are conducted in a semi-structured manner (although unstructured interviews are sometimes conducted). One of the reasons why the semi-structured and/or narrative form is used is to allow for deeper and embedded meanings that might elude a more inquiry-based approach. An example of interpretive interviews is Baig, Ting-Toomey, and Dorjee’s ( 2014 ) study of meaning construction of the South Asian Indian term izzat (face) in intergenerational contexts. The authors interviewed six younger (aged 31–40) and six older (aged 55–72) South Asian Indian American women about face concerns in their intergenerational family communication situations. The authors found that family izzat is of primary importance in these contexts and that the motif of respect is central to the meaning of izzat . They also identified differences in the younger and older facework strategies.

The primary focus of analyzing interpretive research data is rather nicely summarized by Carbaugh ( 2007 ):

It is important to emphasize the interpretive task before the analyst: while engaging in a communication practice, an analyst seeks to understand what range of meanings is active in that practice, when it is getting done. The analyst sets out to interpret this practice, what is being presumed by participants for it to be what it is, that is, to understand the meta-cultural commentary imminent in it. What all does this practice have to say? (p. 174)

Thus, the interpretive scholar analyzes data in order to describe and interpret.

Carbaugh ( 2007 ) identified two concerns in analyzing interpretive data—the framework used to analyze the semantic content of cultural discourse and the vocabulary used to formulate these contents. A researcher’s analysis of the content of the communication exchange also includes a meta-analysis of the subject, the object, the context, the history, and the stories revolving around the exchange. Carbaugh ( 2007 ) noted that “these cultural meanings—about personhood, relationships, action, emotion, and dwelling, respectively—are formulated in cultural discourse analyses as radiants of cultural meaning” (p. 174). These radiants of cultural meanings focus on personhood and identity, relating and relationships, meanings about acting, action and practice, meanings about emotions and feelings, and meanings about place or context.

Reliability and validity are explicated differently in interpretive research compared to social science research. If social scientific scholars are interested in consistency for reliability, interpretive scholars see reliability as the quality of the information obtained; does the data give us a richer, clearer understanding of the phenomena (Golafshani, 2003 )? Lincoln and Guba ( 1985 ) used the term “dependability” in place of reliability to assess the quality of a research project. For validity, it is important to assess the quality based on the specific paradigm used to conduct the qualitative research. Further, while many scholars argue that validity is not a critical concept for interpretive research, Lincoln and Guba ( 1985 ) explained that the “trustworthiness” of the data is similar to validity in social science research. Do the community of scholars conducting interpretive research view the data as meaningful, useful, and following the research protocols appropriately?

After having considered these general considerations, we now consider three specific data analysis approaches using in interpretive intercultural communication research including grounded theory, constant comparative analysis, and thematic analysis. Other data analytic approaches for data analysis include narrative analysis, conversational analysis, EOC, and interpretive phenomenological analysis. Grounded theory is a continuum of practices that are inductive and iterative aimed at recognizing categories and concepts in texts in order to integrate them to formal theoretical models (Corbin & Strauss, 2008 ). They begin with the observations, experiences, and stories, and through a process of coding, analysts identify a theoretical model to fit the data. Another important approach that interpretive scholars use is that of constant comparative analysis (CCA). CCA has often been used as a part of grounded theory, but it is now being used separately to analyze cross-cultural and intercultural communication. CCA is used to balance the etic perspective (participant as outsider) with the emic perspective (participant as insider) to ensure balance between cultural readings and theoretical frameworks. CCA ensures that all data in the relevant set are compared with all other data in the same set to make sure that no data are dismissed on thematic grounds (O’Connor et al., 2008 ). Further, CCA tries to accommodate the most relevant theories though they may appear disparate. A final prominent approach is thematic analysis. Thematic analysis is a flexible and yet rigorous approach of identifying and analyzing patterns or themes of meaning from data. Braun and Clarke ( 2006 ) identify a six-step process for conducting thematic analysis.

Critical Methods

From the critical perspective, relationships between cultural groups are often characterized by dominance and resistance. Communication between groups is based on certain understanding of culture and ethnicity that is fixed, reified, and essentialized and is informed by certain cultural assumptions that tend to be rooted in Euro-American traditions and worldviews (Asante et al., 2008 ). Hermans and Kempen ( 1998 ) argued that dominant approaches to knowledge favor static conceptualizations of culture. It is the creation of these static categories in which the Western understanding of the rest of the world dominates the intercultural relations that results in the reification of culturally homogeneous “ethnic” and racial groups. Consequently, this orientation undermines ways in which the self is understood in different cultures.

Critical and feminist scholars have consistently raised questions about power imbalance between researchers and researched in the field, suggesting that if researchers fail to explore how their personal, professional, and structural positions frame social scientific investigations, researchers may inevitably reproduce dominant gender, race, and class biases (Fairclough, 1995 ; Lazar, 2005 ). This section illustrates postcolonial ethnography and critical discourse analysis as approaches for intercultural discovery from the critical lens. Additionally, we introduce the role of self-reflexivity and consciousness-raising in the context of methodological concerns from the critical perspective.

A variety of approaches to critical issues exist such as critical race theory, decolonizing and indigenous methodologies, engaged methodologies, and performative methodologies (Willink, Gutierrez-Perez, Shukri, & Stein, 2014 ). In this article, we explore two prominent methods to illustrate some of the key elements to critical approaches given that we cannot cover all of them: postcolonial ethnography and critical discourse analysis.

Postcolonial ethnography seeks to disrupt and restructure established academic practices and modes of knowledge development and dissemination (Pathak, 2010 ). It attempt to do this by pointing out that gender roles, academic institutions, racial binaries, and other power structures are not apolitical. Postcolonial ethnography seeks to question the reification and valorization of supposed objective, scientific, and disembodied knowledge formations. Instead they seek to find alternate and embodied knowledge forms that accommodate the subjective and the personal.

While postcolonial and third world feminist scholars point to myriad ways in which relations of domination infuse ethnography, they also offer some guidance for negotiating power inherent in the practice of fieldwork (Spivak, 1999 ). This guidance takes the form of feminist geopolitics, which involves not only questioning hegemonic structures and dominant power structures but also offering alternatives to those structures (Koopman, 2011 ). Postcolonial scholars argue that the practice of ethnography among marginalized groups is historically tainted by ethnocentric biases in traditional ethnographic practice and research (Collins, 1990 ). Further, as philosopher Sandra Harding ( 1998 ) emphasized, ethnocentricism is structured into the institutional and academic practices so as to produce relationships oppressive to indigenous cultures in the so-called first world as well as third world countries.

An example of postcolonial inquiry is that of an ethnographic encounter (Irani et al., 2010 ). As a part of this inquiry, the company that the researchers studied, Ddesign, had to develop prototypical home water purification filters (Irani et al., 2010 ). The site of their study was various villages in India where they were supposed to study the feasibility of home water purifiers among the economically deprived households of the villages. The researchers later were told that when Ddesign first started their study, they had notions of privations in the lives of the householders. During their study, they found that the reality was quite different from their preconceptions. They realized that the definitions of privations that the company personnel had were not applicable to the people or to their living conditions. In fact, the researchers were told by the company personnel that the villagers had a very different worldview from that of the personnel. Thus, the researchers and the company personnel realized that one group’s notions of well-being and happiness were not necessarily applicable to another group no matter how universal those notions might be.

A second approach is critical discourse analysis (CDA). The creative combining of different approaches of lived experience, texts or discourses, and the social and political structures of power has resulted in popularity of cultural studies as a critical site for different modes of enquiry. According to Fairclough ( 1995 ), “many analysts are becoming increasingly hesitant in their use of basic theoretical concepts such as power, ideology, class, and even truth/falsity” (p. 15). In recent social scientific research, there has been a turn toward language or, more specifically, toward discourse. According to the feminist critical scholar Michelle M. Lazar ( 2005 ), discourse is a “site of struggle, where forces of social (re)production and contestation are played out” (p. 4). Critical discourse analysis is known for its overtly political stance and deals with all forms of social inequality and injustice. It includes the study of processes premised on the acts and discursive interactions of individuals and groups on which both the local and international contexts bring to bear their limits in the production of legislation, news making, and other such products of discursive interactions (van Dijk, 2008 ).

An example of critical discourse analysis in intercultural communication research is Chen, Simmons, and Kang’s ( 2015 ) study of identity construction of college students. The authors contextualize their study in an era of “postracial” utopia resulting during the Obama administration. They coin the term “Multicultural/multiracial Obama-ism (MMO)” to reflect this era and the prominent frame of colorblindness and multiculturalism prominent in media discourse. They examined 65 student essays about three cultural identities that stood out in a particular context. They analyzed the essays using CDA and found three frames that support this construction of postracial utopia: meritocracy, identity as self-chosen, and equality of opportunity despite privilege. They critique these frames and identify implications for teaching about intercultural communication and identity in the classroom.

Key methodological issues in the critical approach are the role of reflexivity, consciousness-raising, and limitations/possibilities of the reflective approach. A sociology-of-knowledge approach to critical scholarship reveals the role of reflexivity as a source of insight (Cook & Fonow, 1984 ). Reflexivity means the tendency of critical scholars to reflect upon, examine critically, and explore analytically the nature of the research process. To some extent, this tendency toward reflection is part of a tradition of attention to what Kaplan ( 1964 ) referred to as “logic-in-use” or the actual occurrences that arise in the inquiry, idealized and unreconstructed. Feminist and critical epistemology carries this tradition of reflection further by using it to gain insight into the assumptions about gender and intercultural relations underlying the conduct of inquiry. This is often accomplished by a thoroughgoing review of the research setting and its participants, including an exploration of the investigator’s reactions to doing the research.

One of the ways in which reflexivity is employed involves the concept of consciousness-raising, a process of self-awareness familiar to those involved with the women’s movement. Underlying much of the reflexivity found in feminist scholarship is the notion found in the earlier work of scholars such as W. E. B. DuBois ( 1969 ) and Paulo Freire ( 1970 ) that consciousness of oppression can lead to a creative insight that is generated by experiencing contradictions. Under ideal circumstances, transformation occurs, during which something hidden is revealed about the formerly taken-for-granted aspects of intercultural relations.

Consciousness-raising is employed in various ways by the critical scholar. The first way is through attention to the consciousness-raising effects of research on the researcher. Consciousness-raising is also involved in discussions of ways in which the research process influences subjects of the inquiry. Some authors view the research act as an explicit attempt to reduce the distance between the researcher and subjects (Collins, 1990 ). These approaches have provided critical and feminist researchers with a way to tap collective consciousness as a source of data and have provided participants in the research process with a way to confirm the experiences that have often been denied as real in the past. The applications of critical consciousness-raising and reflexivity can be seen in discourses surrounding terrorism and counterterrorism. This application can be seen in the study by Schmid ( 2013 ) about radicalization, deradicalization, and counter-radicalization. Schmid has observed that the usual causes such as poverty, social inequality, oppression, and neglect by the West have not been empirically tested satisfactorily, yet they are believed to be the primary causes of radicalization. The study provides three levels of analysis that can be used to understand how “radicals” are born and how that complex construction can be interrogated: the micro level, dealing with the individual level in terms of identity and self-reflection; the meso level, which deals with the socio-political milieu surrounding the individual; and the macro level, which refers to the larger society and governance that affect the individual. Further, these three levels of analysis can also be used to see how the continuum from radical to political undesirable and terrorist can be studied.

Finally, there are limitations and possibilities of reflective practice. Critical researchers use self-reflection about power as a tool to deepen ethnographic analysis and to highlight the dilemmas in fieldwork. The call for reflective practice has also been informed by critiques of postcolonial theorists who argue for self-reflexive understanding of the epistemological investments that shape the politics of method (Mohanty, 1991 ). Cultural studies scholars have also questioned the call to reflective practice, arguing that taken to the extreme, “constant reflexivity” can make “social interaction extremely cumbersome” (Hurtado, 1996 , p. 29). In contrast, the call to “accountability” is said to offer a more collective approach than the “individual self assessment of one’s perspective” that the term “reflexivity implies” (Hurtado, 1996 , p. 29). However, from point of ethnographic practice, it is seldom clear to whom one should be “accountable,” and therefore the term reflective practice seems to be appropriate.

Reflective practice indicates both individual self-assessment and collective assessment of research strategies. Hurtado ( 1996 ) emphasized that a “reflexive mechanism for understanding how we are all involved in the dirty process of racializing and gendering others, limiting who they are and who they can become” (p. 124) is a necessary strategy to help dismantle domination. Such reflective strategies can also help ethnographers bring to the surface “their own privilege and possible bias” as well as “addressing the difference between different constituencies” (Hurtado, 1996 , p. 160) within the communities they study.

Integrating Social Science, Interpretive, and Critical Research Methods

Each set of methods presented in this chapter has strengths and limitations. They address specific purposes that collectively are all important for the field of intercultural communication. Moreover, integrating the research methods provides richer insights than using any method by itself. However, these integrations still may have limitations in exploring non-Western contexts. Thus, this section explores integrations of the methods and alternative methods for intercultural inquiry.

Integrations of Methods

The integration of research methods involves using different types of methods at different phases (Cresswell & Plano Clark, 2011 ). In this manner, the methods are used one after another (or concurrently) depending on the research question associated with the larger research program. Four phasic designs are most prevalent: a) qualitative/interpretive methods used to create a quantitative (social science measure); b) qualitative (interpretive and critical) methods used to embellish quantitative findings (Big Quant, Little Qual); c) quantitative methods used to embellish qualitative findings (Big Qual, Little Quant); and d) social science, interpretive, critical methods used conjointly. Space limitations prohibit us from providing examples of all of these approaches, so we detail two of them.

Zhang and colleagues (Zhang & Oetzel, 2006 ; Zhang, Oetzel, Gao, Wilcox, & Takai, 2007 ) provide an example of how to create a cross-culturally valid measure of a construct. Their purpose was to measure teacher immediacy. Teacher immediacy is the psychology closeness that is communicated from a teacher to a student. There exist different measures of immediacy, but Zhang and Oetzel ( 2006 ) argued that prior Western measures were not applicable in Chinese classrooms (i.e., they did not have conceptual equivalence). To address this issue, they first conducted open-ended interviews with Chinese students to identify themes associated with the meanings of immediacy. This phase of the research involved interpretive research methods as they put primacy on emic meanings. In the second phase, they used the emic meanings to create an operational measure of three dimensions of teacher immediacy (instructional, relational, and personal). This measure was administered to college students, and the data were analyzed with confirmatory factor analysis. The results dimensions were found to be internally consistent and had construct validity as they correlated with existing scales in expected directions. Zhang et al. ( 2007 ) then continued the development of the scale by administering the scale to college students in four national cultures: China, Japan, Germany, and the United States. With these data, the authors used confirmatory factor analysis to see if the three-dimensional model of teacher immediacy held up in each culture. They found cross-cultural support for the model and also the construct validity of the scales. Thus, their thorough testing from the interpretive phase to the social scientific phase led to the development of a teacher immediacy scale that has valid dimensions in at least four national cultures.

An example of integrating critical, social scientific, and interpretive methods into the same research program can be seen in the work on whiteness ideology (Nakayama & Martin, 1999 ). The project culminated in an edited book that included chapters using the various research methods. Whiteness ideology is the worldview that certain groups have privilege over others. It is labeled whiteness because whites tend to be the privileged groups in most societies. This research group’s work primarily focused on ethnic groups in the United States, but some international contexts were examined and other scholars have since examined international contexts we well (e.g., Collier, 2005 ). One part of the project examined the labels that white people in the United States prefer through a survey (Martin, Krizek, Nakayama, & Bradford, 1999 ). Another part of the project involved two of the team members’ integrated interpretive and critical methods to understand how whiteness is used as strategic rhetoric (Nakayama & Krizek, 1999 ). The volume included other scholars writing from different perspectives as well, and the editors attempted to bring together these various perspectives into a “coherent” picture about whiteness ideology. These scholars asked different questions and used different methods to investigate the same phenomena. Collectively, the research program told a richer and fuller story than any single study could have told. This example illustrates how different research methods can be used concurrently to advance understanding about intercultural phenomena.

Alternative Approaches to Studying Intercultural Communication

Intercultural research using the social scientific, interpretive, and critical methods have offered remarkable insights on a variety of intercultural phenomena. Each of these traditional approaches, however, uses a Euro-Western lens that is predominantly textocentric, privileging text, writing, and the lettered word in comparison to oral stories and visuals (Conquergood, 2002 ; Kim, 2002 ). We offer here two participatory approaches that, in some sense, hand over the power of the data to the participants. From these approaches, the ontology, epistemology, and axiology of the participants are more important than those of the researchers. Singhal, Harter, Chitnis, and Sharma ( 2007 ) explained that participation-based methodology allows for lateral communication between participants, creates a space for dialogue, focuses on the people’s needs, enables collective empowerment, and offers cultural-specific content. In contrast, they note that nonparticipatory methods allow top-down vertical communication, generally focus on individual behavior change, consider the donors’ and researchers’ goals of greater importance than community needs, and offer cultural-general information. This section discusses three participatory approaches: theater, photography, and community-based participatory research.

Participatory Theater

Based on the dialogic theorizing of Brazilian educator Paulo Freire ( 1970 ) and its application by Augusto Boal in his performative intervention, “Theater of the Oppressed” ( 1995 ), participatory theater can offer researchers an epistemology different from other research methods that rely on data from interviews and focus groups. This approach provides different kinds of data, discursive narratives that can be used to highlight some of the significant generative themes of the research participants.

The Theater of the Oppressed was developed in an effort to transform theater from the “monologue” of traditional performance into a “dialogue” between audience and stage. Boal ( 1995 ) experimented with many kinds of interactive theater. His explorations were based on the assumption that dialogue is the common, healthy dynamic between all humans and when a dialogue becomes a monologue, oppression ensues. Participatory theater is a research tool that produces generative and local knowledge, starting with the use of the body, the container of memory, emotions, and culture (Kaptani & Yuval-Davis, 2008 ). Theater has the ability to provide a useful connection to specific places as well as people. The encounter between the researcher and the researched in the theater space is outside the redundancy of everyday life. As a result, the researcher can see herself and her interactions between and with the researched in a way that is more distant than in everyday life, thus possibly making it easier to become reflexive.

Boal ( 1995 ) developed various forms of theater workshops and performances which aimed to meet the needs of all people for interaction, dialogue, critical thinking, action, and fun. For example, Forum Theater constitutes a series of workshops in which the participants are transformed from a passive audience into the double roles of actors and active audience. They construct dramatic scenes involving conflictual oppressive situations in small groups and show them to the other participants, who intervene by taking the place of the protagonists and suggesting better strategies for achieving their goals. One of the popular research tools used in Forum Theater is role-playing. Role-playing serves as a vehicle for analyzing power, stimulating public debate, and searching for solutions. Participants explore the complexity of the human condition and situate this knowledge in its cultural moment. The aim of the forum is not to find an ideal solution but to invent new ways of confronting problems. A second key tool is discussion. Following each intervention, audience members discuss the solution offered. A skilled facilitator encourages an in-depth discussion with the participants to generate ideas that will help to address issues under investigation.

Participatory Photography

Similarly, Paolo Friere is a pioneer in participatory photography. In 1973 , Freire and his team asked people living in a slum in Lima, Peru, to visualize “exploitation” by taking photographs (Singhal et al., 2007 ). One child took a photograph of a nail on a wall. While the photograph did not resonate with adults, many of the children strongly supported it. When asked to explain, it was learned that many of the boys in the neighborhood were shoeshine boys in the city. Since the shoeshine box was heavy and they could not carry it to the city, they rented a nail on the wall in one of the city shops. These shop owners charged the boys more than half of each day’s earnings as rent. The children expressed that the photo of the nail was the strongest symbol of exploitation. Friere and his team then used this photo to generate a discussion about exploitation and how the community members wished to address it.

Participatory photography, otherwise known as “photo voice” or “shooting back,” gives power to the participants, through photographs, to shape their own stories (Wang, 1999 ). Participatory photography has been used in a variety of contexts (slums, hospitals, schools, villages, etc.) and in different parts of the world (Singhal et al., 2007 ). For example, Briski and Kauffman ( 2004 ), in their Oscar-winning film, Born into Brothels: Calcutta’s Red Light Kids , taught the children of commercial sex workers how to take photographs. These children, then, took photos to depict their harsh reality. These powerful images became the foundation of this moving film. Another example is the work of Loignon et al. ( 2014 ) in Canada about the relation between impoverishment and lack of access to primary health care. The researchers recruited four family medicine residents and two medical supervisors to pursue their study. There were eight participants who came from economically underprivileged backgrounds trained in photographic techniques and photo voice philosophy. The researchers were able to realize the importance of primary health care professionals developing greater interpersonal and social acuity. They also realized that their patients were co-participants in the processes of diagnosis, prognosis, and medication. Finally, the researchers were also able to realize that they would be able to develop a greater competency by actually investing a part of their training time in the socioeconomic milieu of the patients they are to serve.

The implications of using participatory photography are significant. This method works best when the participants are given general directions and allowed to play with ideas. It is important for the participants to share their visual stories with the researchers. It is, however, critical for fellow participants in a community to share their stories with each other. The challenge of using photography is that it is, by nature, an intrusive process (Singhal et al., 2007 ). With terminology like “aim,” “shoot,” and “capture,” there can be a colonizing mentality in photography. It is particularly important that the participants be sensitive and reflective about how they take photographs of people and objects. While this may be difficult to accomplish across cultures, it is important to seek the permission of the participants before taking their photographs.

Community-Based Participatory Research

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is a collaborative process where researchers and community members work together at all stages of the research process to address issues that are of importance to the community (Wallerstein et al., 2008 ). Rather than a top-down approach to health and social issues, CBPR focuses on a collaborative and bottom-up approach to identifying and defining problems and developing and implementing solutions (i.e., research “with” rather than “for” or “on”). CPBR is a preferred approach for researchers working with indigenous communities, other communities of color, or other communities facing disparities, which experience similar issues of mistrust for past research issues and social/health inequities. CBPR has goals of developing culturally centered research and interventions, building trust and synergy among partners, building the capacity of all members of the research team, changing power relations among communities and outside entities, developing sustainable change, and improving the social and health conditions of the community (Wallerstein et al., 2008 ).

CBPR is not a method, rather a philosophy of research. CBPR projects can include social scientific, interpretive, and critical approaches and often involve mixed methods. The specific methods meet the needs of the community and the research problem being addressed. The methods should follow key principles of CBPR, including: a) the project fits local/cultural beliefs, norms, and practices; b) the project emphasizes what is important in the community; c) the project builds on strengths in the community; d) the project balances research and social action; and e) the project disseminates findings to all partners and involves all partners in the dissemination process (Israel et al., 2008 ).

An example of CBPR is a project in Mysore, South India, addressing stigma and discrimination among men who have sex with men (MSM), many of whom were sex workers (Lorway et al., 2013 ). The project involved a collaboration of researchers and a sex workers collective in a long-term systematic process of knowledge production and action. The research approach involved training 10 community members as researchers who conducted interviews with MSM to understand their experiences. There were 70 in-depth interviews conducted in four days. Data analysis was completed with thematic analysis. The results provided a rallying point against stigma as the community cultivated its understanding of this concept and they mobilized to increase access to sexual health services.

The purpose of this article was to explore multidisciplinary methodological approaches to intercultural communication research. If our worldview shapes our reality, what we study and how we study phenomena is greatly influenced by our cultural frameworks. We described the traditional approaches to studying intercultural communication, namely, social scientific, interpretive, and critical perspectives. We identified the key ontological, epistemological, and axiological assumptions of each of these perspectives, offered an exemplar for each kind of perspective, types of data collected, and the methodological concerns in each framework. We then explained traditional ways to integrate the social scientific, interpretive, and critical perspectives, offered examples, and explicated the strengths of such integrations. We finally offered three alternative methodological approaches (participatory theater, participatory photography, and community-based participatory research) where the participants shape the scope of the study, interpret the meaning of the data, and offer practical implications for the study.

Historiography

The early history of intercultural communication, including some discussion of research methods, has been covered well by Leeds-Hurwitz ( 1990 ) and Moon ( 1996 ). Leeds-Hurwitz reviewed the early foundation of intercultural communication, which can be traced to the work of Edward T. Hall in the Foreign Service Institute in the 1950s and 1960s. The focus in the earlier years was on descriptive linguistic analysis of micro communication practices (e.g., proxemics, kinesics, and verbal practices) of multiple cultures. These early roots of intercultural communication were influenced by anthropological study of culture (i.e., ethnography).

The 1970s saw the development of the field of intercultural communication, with a focus on culture as race, gender, nationality, and socioeconomic status (Moon, 1996 ). The research at this time also reflected the social issues of the 1970s. Methods of research were diverse but predominantly included social scientific and interpretive methods.

The late 1970s and the 1980s saw a change where the focus of culture became nationality and a large emphasis was placed on cross-cultural comparisons. There was a pursuit to develop and apply Western theories to non-Western contexts. Methodologically, the 1980s was dominated by social scientific approaches.

The 1990s brought some backlash against social scientific approaches from interpretive scholars. There was also a rise of critical scholarship which critiqued the social scientific research methods. A number of critical approaches were identified and were especially used to develop theoretical approaches for understanding intercultural communications.

The 2000s brought more balance and integration of the research approaches. The Journal of International and Intercultural Communication was founded in 2008 . The three editors of this journal to date (Tom Nakayama, Shiv Ganesh, and Rona Halualani) issued editorial statements about the scope of the journal respecting and including diverse methodological approaches.

Further Reading

• Bhawuk, D. P. S. (2008). Science of culture and culture of science: Worldview and choice of conceptual models and methodology. The Social Engineer , 11 (2), 26–43.
• Biggerstaff, D. L. , & Thompson, A. R. (2008). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: A qualitative methodology of choice in healthcare research. Qualitative Research in Psychology , 5 , 175–177.
• Communication Methods & Measures. 2007–. Journal devoted to communication research methods; not exclusive to intercultural communication.
• Fram, S. M. (2013). The constant comparative analysis method outside of grounded theory. The Qualitative Report , 18 (1), 4–8.
• Israel, B. A. , Eng, E. , Schulz, A. J. , & Parker, E. (Eds.). (2013). Methods in community-based participatory research for health (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Lindlof, T. R. , & Taylor, B. C. (2011). Qualitative communication research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Minkler, M. , & Wallerstein, N. (Eds.). (2008). Community-based participatory research for health: From process to outcomes . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Otten, M. , & Geppert, J. (2010). Mapping the landscape of qualitative research on intercultural communication: A hitchhiker’s guide to the methodological galaxy. Forum: Qualitative Social Research , 10 (1), Article 52.
• Tuhiwai-Smith, L. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples . London: Zed Books.
• Wagstaff, C. , Jeong, H. , Nolan, M. , Wilson, T. , Tweedlie, J. , Phillips, E. , & Holland, F. (2014). The accordian and the deep bowl of spaghetti: Eight researchers’ experiences of using IPA as a methodology. The Qualitative Report , 19 (47), 1–4.
• Asante, M. K. , Miike, Y. , & Jing, Y. (2008). Introduction. Issues and challenges in intercultural communcation scholarship. In M. K. Asante , Y. Miike , & Y. Jing (Eds.), The global intercultural communication reader (pp. 1–8). New York: Routledge.
• Baig, N. , Ting-Toomey, S. , & Dorjee, T. (2014). Intergenerational narratives on face: A South Asian Indian American perspective. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication , 7 , 127–147.
• Boal, A. (1995). Theater of the oppressed . New York: Theater Communications Group.
• Braun, V. , & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology , 3 , 77–101.
• Brinson, M. E. , & Stohl, M. (2012). Media framing of terrorism: Implications for public opinion, civil liberties, and counterterrorism policies. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication , 5 , 270–290.
• Briski, Z. (Prod. & Dir.), & Kauffman, R. (Prod. & Dir.) (2004). Born into Brothels: Calcutta’s Red Light Kids [Motion Picture]. India: THINKFilm
• Cai, D. A. , Wilson, S. R. , & Drake, L. E. (2000). Culture in the context of intercultural Negotiation: Individualism-collectivism and paths to integrative agreements. Human Communication Research , 26 , 591–617.
• Carbaugh, D. (2007). Cultural discourse analysis: Five communication practices and intercultural encounters. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research , 36 (3), 67–182.
• Cissel, M. (2014). Media framing: A comparative content analysis on mainstream and alternative news coverage of Occupy Wall Street. The Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications , 3 (1), 68–72.
• Chen, Y-W. , Simmons, N. , & Kang, D. (2015). My family isn’t racist—however …”: Multiracial/multicultural Obama-ism as an ideological barrier to teaching intercultural communication. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication , 8 , 167–186.
• Cohen, L. , Manion, L. , & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). London: Routledge.
• Collier, M. J. (2005). Theorizing cultural identifications: Critical updates and continuing Evolution. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Theorizing about intercultural communication (pp. 235–256). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Collins, P. H. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment . Boston: Unwin Hyman.
• Conquergood, L. (2002). Lethal theatre: Performance, punishment, and the death penalty . Theatre Journal , 54 (3), 339–367.
• Cook, J. A. , & Fonow, M. M. (1984). Am I my sister’s gatekeeper? Cautionary tales from the academic hierarchy. Humanity and Society , 8 , 442–452.
• Corbin, J. , & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques to developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Cresswell, J. W. , & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Denzin, N. K. (2001). The reflexive interview and a performative social science. Qualitative Research, 1(1) , 28–34.
• Dixon, T. L. , & Azocar, C. L. (2006). The representation of juvenile offenders by race on Los Angeles area television news. The Howard Journal of Communications , 17 , 143–161.
• DuBois, W. E. B. (1969). The souls of black folks. New York: New American Library.
• Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Longman.
• Fletcher, C. V. , Nakazawa, M. , Chen, Y. , Oetzel, J. G. , Ting-Toomey, S. , Chang , & Zhang, Q. (2014). Establishing cross-cultural measurement equivalence of scales associated with face-negotiation theory: A critical issue in cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication , 7 , 148–169.
• Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed . New York: Continuum.
• Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report , 8 , 597–607.
• Gudykunst, W. B. (2003a). Forward. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Cross-cultural and Intercultural Communication (pp. vii–ix). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Gudykunst, W. B. (2003b). Issues in cross-cultural research. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Cross-cultural and intercultural communication . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Hall, J. K. (2002). Teaching and researching language and culture . London: Pearson Education.
• Han, B. , & Cai, D. A. (2010). Face goals in apology: A cross-cultural comparison of Chinese and U.S. Americans. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication , 20 , 101–123.
• Hanasono, L. K. , Chen, L. , & Wilson, S. R. (2014). Identifying communities in need: Examining the impact of acculturation on perceived discrimination, social support, and coping amongst racial minority members in the United States. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication , 7 , 216–237.
• Harding, S. (1998). Is science multicultural? Postcolonialsim, feminism, and epistemologies . Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
• Hermans, H. J. M. , & Kempen, H. J. G. (1998). Moving cultures: The perilous problem of cultural dichotomies in a globalizing society. American Psychologist , 53 , 1111–1120.
• Hurtado, A. (1996). The color of privilege: Three blasphemies on race and feminism . Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
• Irani, L. , Vertesi, J. , Dourish, P. , Philip, K. , & Grinter, R. E. (2010). Postcolonial computing: A lens on design and development. Proceedings of the ISGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI’10, 1311–1320.
• Israel, B. A. , Schulz, A. J. , Parker, E. A. , Becker, A. B. , & Guzman, J. R. (2008). Critical issues in developing and following CBPR principles. In M. Minkler & N. Wallerstein (Eds.), Community-based participatory research for health: From process to outcomes (2nd ed., pp. 47–66). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Kaplan, Abraham (1964). The conduct of inquiry: Methodology for behavioral science . San Francisco: Chandler.
• Kaptani, E. , & Yuval-Davis, N. (2008). Participatory theatre as a research methodology . Sociological Research On Line , 13 , 2.
• Kim, M. S. (2002). Multicultural perspectives on human communication: Implications for theory and practice . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Kelleher, W. J. (2013). Formal axiology and the philosophy of social science; esp., political science . Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2343339 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2343339
• Klein, H. , & Shiffman, K. (2006). Race-related content of animated cartoons. The Howard Journal of Communications , 17 , 163–182.
• Koopman, S. (2011). Alter-geopolitics: Other securities are happening. Geoforum , 3 , 274–284.
• Lazar, M. M. (2005). Politicizing gender in discourse: Feminist critical discourse analysis as political perspective and praxis. In M. M. Lazar (Ed.), Feminist critical discourse analysis: Gender, power and ideology in discourse (pp. 1–27). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Leeds-Hurwitz, W. (1990). Notes in the history of intercultural communication: The Foreign Service Institute and the mandate for intercultural training. Quarterly Journal of Speech , 76 , 262–281.
• Levine, T. R. , Park, H. S. , & Kim, R. K. (2007). Some conceptual and theoretical challenges for cross-cultural communication research in the 21st century. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research , 36 , 205–221.
• Lincoln, Y. S. , & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry . Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
• Loignon, C. , Boudreault-Fournier, A. , Truchon, K. , Labrousse, Y. , & Fortin, B. (2014). Medical residents reflect on their prejudices toward poverty: A photovoice training project .
• Lorway, R. , Thompson, L. H. , Lazarus, L. , du Plessis, E. , Pasha, P. , Mary, P. F. , et al. (2013). Going beyond the clinic: Confronting stigma and discrimination among men who have sex with men in Mysore through community-based participatory research. Critical Public Health , 24 (1), 1–15.
• Martin, J. N. , Krizek, R. L. , Nakayama, T. K. , & Bradford, L. (1999). What do white people want to be called? A study of self-labels for white Americans. In T. K. Nakayama & J. N. Martin (Eds.), Whiteness: The communication of social identity (pp. 27–50). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Mohanty, C. T. (1991). Cartographies of struggle: Third world women and the politics of feminism. In C. T. Mohanty , A. Russo , & L. Torres (Eds.), Third world women and the politics of feminism (pp. 1–50). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
• Moon, D. G. (1996). Concepts of culture. Implications for intercultural communication research. Communication Quarterly , 44 , 70–84.
• Nakayama, T. K. , & Krizek, R. L. (1999). Whiteness as strategic rhetoric. In T. K. Nakayama & J. N. Martin (Eds.), Whiteness: The communication of social identity (pp. 87–106). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Nakayama, T. K. , & Martin, J. N. (Eds.). (1999). Whiteness: The communication of social identity . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• O’Connor, M. K. , Netting, F. E. , & Thomas, M. L. (2008). Grounded theory: Managing the challenge for those facing institutional review board oversight. Qualitative Inquiry , 14 (1), 11–15.
• Oetzel, J. G. (1998). Culturally homogeneous and heterogeneous groups: Explaining communication processes through individualism-collectivism and self-construal. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 22 , 135–161.
• Oetzel, J. G. (1998). Explaining individual communication processes in homogeneous and heterogeneous groups through individualism-collectivism and self-construal. Human Communication Research , 25 , 202–224.
• Oetzel, J. G. , & Ting-Toomey, S. (2003). Face concerns in interpersonal conflict: A cross-cultural empirical test of the face-negotiation theory. Communication Research , 30 , 599–624.
• Pathak, A. (2010). Opening my voice, claiming my space: Theorizing the possibilities of postcolonial approaches to autoethnography. Journal of Research Practice , 6 (1), 4–11.
• Perko, T. , Turcanu, C. , Geenen, D. , Mamani, N. , & Rooy, Van L. (2011). Media content analysis of the Fukushima accident in two Belgian newspapers . Report: Belgian Nuclear Research Centre. Available: http://publications.sckcen.be/dspace/bitstream/10038/7502/1/blg_mediaanalysisfukushimabelgianmedia.pdf
• Philipsen, G. (1975). Speaking “like a man” in Teamsterville: Culture patterns of role enactment in an urban neighborhood. Quarterly Journal of Speech , 61 , 13–22.
• Radford, M. L. , Radford, P. G. , Connaway L. S. , & DeAngelis, J. A. (2011). On virtual face-work: An ethnography of communication approach to a live chat. Library Quarterly , 81 , 431–453.
• Rao, N. , Singhal, A. , Ren, L. , & Zhang, J. (2001). Is the Chinese self-construal in transition? Asian Journal of Communication , 11 , 68–95.
• Schmid, A. P. (2013). Radicalisation, de-radicalisation, counter-radicalisation: A conceptual discussion and literature review . International Centre for Counter-Terrorism. Available: http://www.icct.nl/download/file/ICCT-Schmid-Radicalisation-De-Radicalisation-Counter-Radicalisation-March-2013_2.pdf
• Scotland, J. (2012). Exploring the philosophical underpinnings of research: Relating ontology and epistemology to the methodology and methods of the scientific, interpretive, and critical research paradigms. English Language Teaching , 5 (9), 9–16.
• Singhal, A. , Harter, L. , Chitnis, K. , & Sharma, D. (2007). Participatory photography as theory, method, and praxis: Analyzing an entertainment-education project in India. Critical Arts , 21 , 212–227.
• Spivak, G. C. (1999). A critique of postcolonial reason: Toward a history of the vanishing present . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Sponcil, M. , & Gitimu, P. (2010). Use of social media by college students: Relationship to communication and self-concept. Journal of Technological Research , 4 , 1–13.
• Straub, J. , & Weidemann, D. (2006). Psychology, culture, and the pursuit of meaning: An introduction. In J. Straub , D. Weidemann , C. Kölbl , & B. Zielke (Eds.), Pursuit of meaning. Advances in cultural and cross-cultural psychology (pp. 11–20). Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.
• Szabo, E. (2007). Participative management and culture. A qualitative and integrative study in five European countries . Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
• Van Dijk, T. (2008). Discourse in context: A sociocognitive approach. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
• Wallerstein, N. , Oetzel, J. , Duran, B. , Belone, L. , Tafoya, G. , & Rae, R. (2008). CBPR: What predicts outcomes? In M. Minkler & N. Wallerstein (Eds.), Community-based participary research for health: From process to outcomes (2nd ed., pp. 371–392). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Wang, C. (1999). Photo voice: A participatory action research strategy applied to women’s health. Journal of Women’s Health , 8 , 185–192.
• Willink, K. , Gutierrez-Perez, R. , Shukri, S. , & Stein, L. (2014). Navigating with the stars: Critical qualitative methodological constellations for critical intercultural communication research. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication , 7 , 289–316.
• Zhang, Q. , & Oetzel, J. G. (2006). Constructing and validating a teacher immediacy scale from a Chinese perspective. Communication Education , 55 , 218–241.
• Zhang, Q. , Oetzel, J. G. , Gao, X. , Wilcox, R. , & Takai, J. (2007). Teacher immediacy scales: Testing for validity across cultures. Communication Education , 56 , 228–248.

Related Articles

• Intercultural Competence
• Intercultural Friendships
• Globalizing and Changing Culture
• Bella Figura: Understanding Italian Communication in Local and Transatlantic Contexts

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Communication. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 26 June 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [185.66.14.133]
• 185.66.14.133

Character limit 500 /500

MINI REVIEW article

Cross-cultural communication on social media: review from the perspective of cultural psychology and neuroscience.

• 1 School of International Economics and Management, Beijing Technology and Business University, Beijing, China
• 2 School of Economics, Beijing Technology and Business University, Beijing, China
• 3 Institute of the Americas, University College London, London, United Kingdom

Introduction: In recent years, with the popularity of many social media platforms worldwide, the role of “virtual social network platforms” in the field of cross-cultural communication has become increasingly important. Scholars in psychology and neuroscience, and cross-disciplines, are attracted to research on the motivation, mechanisms, and effects of communication on social media across cultures.

Methods and Analysis: This paper collects the co-citation of keywords in “cultural psychology,” “cross-culture communication,” “neuroscience,” and “social media” from the database of web of science and analyzes the hotspots of the literature in word cloud.

Results: Based on our inclusion criteria, 85 relevant studies were extracted from a database of 842 papers. There were 44 articles on cultural communication on social media, of which 26 were from the perspective of psychology and five from the perspective of neuroscience. There are 27 articles that focus on the integration of psychology and neuroscience, but only a few are related to cross-cultural communication on social media.

Conclusion: Scholars have mainly studied the reasons and implications of cultural communication on social media from the perspectives of cultural psychology and neuroscience separately. Keywords “culture” and “social media” generate more links in the hot map, and a large number of keywords of cultural psychology and neuroscience also gather in the hot map, which reflects the trend of integration in academic research. While cultural characteristics have changed with the development of new media and virtual communities, more research is needed to integrate the disciplines of culture, psychology, and neuroscience.

Introduction

Cross-cultural communication refers to communication and interaction among different cultures, involving information dissemination and interpersonal communication as well as the flow, sharing, infiltration, and transfer of various cultural elements in the world ( Carey, 2009 ; Del Giudice et al., 2016 ). With more than half of the world’s population using social media, such as Facebook, Twitter, and WeChat, communication across culture has become smoother and more frequently ( Boamah, 2018 ; Chin et al., 2021 ). Subsequently, cultural exchanges, collisions, conflicts, and integration among various nationalities, races, and countries on these platforms have become obvious, and related research articles by scholars in different disciplines have increased ( Papa et al., 2020 ). In traditional cross-cultural research, experts often divide different cultures based on their boundaries, such as countries, races, languages, and so on. However, with the development of digitalization, new cultural relationships have been formed both within and outside geopolitical boundaries, and new understanding and theories are needed to explain the motivation, process, and implications of cross-cultural communications in the digital era ( Chin et al., 2020 ). Research in this field is an emerging area, and scholars are studying from different perspectives ( Xu et al., 2016 ; Santoro et al., 2021 ). Cultural psychology and neuroscience are two main base theories, and they show a trend of integration, such as cultural neuroscience and cultural neuropsychology. In this case, it is important to highlight the important achievements of this field and identify potential research gaps to provide potential directions for further research. This review aims to provide an overview of cross-cultural communication research from the perspective of cultural psychology and neuroscience and identify the integrating trend and potential directions.

Method and Source

We used the Web of Science (WoS) database to select relevant articles published between January 2010 and December 2021. The following inclusion criteria were used:

1. The document types should be articles rather than proceedings papers or book reviews. And the articles should be included in the Web of Science Core Collection.

2. When searching for articles, the topic should include at least two keywords: “cultural psychology,” “neuroscience,” “social media.”

3. Articles must be published after 2010 to ensure the content of the literature is forward.

4. This study should investigate the integration of cultural psychology and neuroscience or explore cultural issues in social media from the perspective of cultural psychology or neuroscience. The content could be cultural conflict and integration on social platforms, explanations of cultural conflict and integration on social platforms, or integration of neuroscience and cultural psychology.

Based on the above inclusion criteria, 85 relevant studies were searched, analyzed, and evaluated. These documents were identified according to the procedure illustrated in Figure 1 . The following combinations of keywords were used: (cultural psychology AND social media), (neuroscience AND social media), (cultural psychology AND neuroscience), [social media AND (cross-cultural communication OR cultural conflict OR cultural integration)], and (neuroscience, cultural psychology, and cross-cultural). The number of studies was further reduced by limiting the document type and time range. Consequently, we obtained an initial pool of 544 articles. To ensure the relevance of the literature in the initial pool, we reviewed the titles and abstracts of these articles. Articles targeting pure neuroscience and information technology were excluded and 72 articles were retained. We selected 65 articles after reviewing the full text. For most papers excluded from the initial pool, cultural issues on social media were not the main topic but digital media or culture itself. The most typical example of irrelevant articles was that culture or cultural psychology was only briefly mentioned in the abstracts. Moreover, 20 additional relevant articles were identified via full-text review of citations and first author searches. Using the above steps, 85 articles were selected for the literature review.

Figure 1 . Schematic representation of literature search and selection procedure.

Overview of Selected Articles

Here, frequency refers to the percentage of occurrences of an item in the total number of studies. The keywords “acculturation,” “cultural evolution” occurred frequently together with “social media,” “culture,” and “neuroscience.” This is as expected because psychologists and economists have long known that human decision-making is influenced by the behavior of others and that public information could improve acculturation and lead to cultural evolution. The popularity of social media clearly gives public information an opportunity to spread widely, which has caused an increase in research on the cross-cultural communication of social media. In the last decade, the link between cultural issues and social media research has grown. This is reflected in the knowledge graph ( Figure 2 ). Keywords “culture” and “social media” generate lots of links with “social media” and “mass media,” which is shown in blue node groups and white node groups. “Social media” and “cultural globalization,” “biculturalism,” “acculturation” also form node convergences. The integration of neuroscience and cultural psychology is also represented in Figure 2 as an orange node group. These integration trends can also be verified in the time dimension. As time passes, keyword frequencies have changed from a single component of “social media” or “culture” to a multi-component of “social media,” “culture,” “acculturation,” “neuroscience,” “cultural evolution.” The frequency of all keywords is presented through the overall word cloud.

Figure 2 . Keywords knowledge graph.

We identified three different research topics from the 85 selected articles: cross-cultural communication on social platforms, explanation of cultural conflict and integration on social platforms, and the integration of neuroscience and cultural psychology. Existing literature has analyzed and studied the interaction between cross-cultural users, enterprises, and countries on social media. For instance, some scholars have found that social media play a significant role in negotiating and managing the identity of transient migrants relating to the home and host culture during the acculturation process ( Cleveland, 2016 ; Yau et al., 2019 ). Social media usage by expatriates also promotes cultural identity and creativity ( Hu et al., 2020 ). In addition to the discussion of existing phenomena, many articles have discussed the causes of social media cultural transmission. A new research field, cultural neuroscience, indicates the integration of neuroscience and cultural psychology. These issues are reviewed in the following sections.

There were 44 articles on cultural communication on social media, which accounted for 51.76% of the 85 selected papers. Among these, there were 26 studies on cultural communication on social media from the perspective of psychology, five articles from the perspective of neurology, four articles about enterprises using social media for cross-cultural operations, and nine articles about how governments use social media for cross-cultural communication. Although there are 27 articles that discuss the trend of integration of psychology and neuroscience, few use integrated methods to analyze the behavior of cross-cultural communication.

From Perspective of Cultural Psychology

Cultural psychology researchers have focused on why information is shared. Some scholars have divided the reasons into individual and network levels ( Wang et al., 2021 ). Studies have explored information sharing within a specific domain, such as health information and news dissemination ( Hodgson, 2018 ; Li et al., 2018 ; Wang and Chin, 2020 ). Cultural psychology provides a rich explanation for the factors that influence cultural communication. Cultural background affects the process of cultural communication, such as self-construal, which the host country may alter it ( Huang and Park, 2013 ; Thomas et al., 2019 ). This may influence communication behaviors, such as people’s intention to use social media applications, attitudes toward social capital, social media commerce, and sharing behavior itself ( Chu and Choi, 2010 ; Han and Kim, 2018 ; Li et al., 2018 ).

Factors other than culture cannot be ignored: public broadcast firms and fans promote communication, controversial comments may draw more attention, the sociality of the social media capsule expands the scope of information communication, and how news is portrayed has changed ( Meza and Park, 2014 ; Jin and Yoon, 2016 ; Hodgson, 2018 ). Demographic factors, such as sex and age, are not ineffective ( Xu et al., 2015 ). The experiential aspects have also been noted ( Wang et al., 2021 ). Scholars have also noted the importance of cultural intelligence ( Hu et al., 2017 ).

The topic that researchers are most interested in is the relationship between society and individuals. Many studies have focused on the influence of collectivist and individualist cultures, such as social media users’ activity differences, attentional tendencies, and self-concept ( Chu and Choi, 2010 ; Thomas et al., 2019 ). There are some other interesting topics, such as the relationship among multicultural experiences, cultural intelligence, and creativity, the evaluation of the validity of the two measures, the changing status of crucial elements in the social system, and the government effect in risk communication ( Hu et al., 2017 ; Ji and Bates, 2020 ). Extending to the practical level, mobile device application usability and social media commerce were evaluated ( Hoehle et al., 2015 ; Han and Kim, 2018 ).

At the methodological level, researchers have bridged the gap between reality and online behaviors, and the feasibility of social media dataset analysis has been proven ( Huang and Park, 2013 ; Thomas et al., 2019 ). Some new concepts have been examined and some models have been developed ( Hoehle et al., 2015 ; Li et al., 2018 ). The most common method is to quantify questionnaire information ( Chu and Choi, 2010 ; Hu et al., 2017 ; Han and Kim, 2018 ; Li et al., 2018 ; Wang et al., 2021 ). The online survey accounted for a large proportion of respondents. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) is used to evaluate other measures ( Ji and Bates, 2020 ). Researchers are particularly interested in the metric approach ( Meza and Park, 2014 ). Some combine other methods, such as profile and social network analyses ( Xu et al., 2015 ). Scholars have used qualitative research to obtain detailed feedback from respondents ( Jin and Yoon, 2016 ; Hodgson, 2018 ). Content analysis was also used ( Yang and Xu, 2018 ).

From Perspective of Neuroscience

Neuroscientific explanations focus on understanding the mechanisms of cultural conflict and integration. Neuroscience researchers are concerned about the effects of the brain on cultural communication and the possible consequences of cultural communication on human behavior and rely on the study of the brain as a tool. Neuroscience can be used to study how people behave in reality. Given the similarity between offline and online behaviors, neuroscience can study online behaviors and link them to cultural communication ( Meshi et al., 2015 ). Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies, both inside and outside the laboratory, have become the subject of neuroscience studies. One example of long-term studies outside the laboratory is the study of natural Facebook behavior that was recorded for weeks ( Montag et al., 2017 ).

Motivation research is a well-documented topic. The reason for using social media, motivation to share information, and neural factors related to sharing behavior have been discussed ( Fischer et al., 2018 ). Many scholars have connected motivation with social life based on the inseparable relationship between online behaviors and social life. Some academics hope to provide predictions of real life, such as forecasting marketing results, while some warned of the risks, in which tremendous attention has been paid to the situation of adolescents ( Motoki et al., 2020 ). They are susceptible to acceptance and rejection ( Crone and Konijn, 2018 ). Behavioral addiction and peer influence in the context of risky behaviors also lead to public concern ( Meshi et al., 2015 ; Sherman et al., 2018 ).

On a practical level, neuroscience studies have made predictions possible through the findings of activity in brain regions linked to mentalizing ( Motoki et al., 2020 ). Judgments of social behavior are also warranted, and peer endorsement is a consideration ( Sherman et al., 2018 ). Thus, the dangers of cultural communication can be alleviated.

At the methodological level, the feasibility of linking directly recorded variables to neuroscientific data has been proven, which provides a methodological basis for further studies linking neuroscience and cultural communication ( Montag et al., 2017 ). Neuroscience researchers have shown a preference for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) methods, which include functional and structural MRI scans ( Montag et al., 2017 ; Sherman et al., 2018 ). Although some scholars have pointed out the shortcomings of MRI research and attempted to use the electroencephalographic (EEG) method, most scholars still use MRI and combine it with other methods, such as neuroimaging ( Motoki et al., 2020 ). Despite the similarities in the methods used, there were differences in the scanned areas. Some researchers scan multiple regions, such as the ventral striatum ( VS ) and ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPFC), while others focus on analyzing the content of a single region, such as the nucleus accumbens (NAcc; Baek et al., 2017 ). Related characteristics have been discussed, such as theta amplitudes that affect information sharing ( Fischer et al., 2018 ). Some inquire whether the different properties of brain regions can lead to different results ( Montag et al., 2017 ).

Integration of Neuroscience and Cultural Psychology

Of the 85 papers we selected, 27 discussed the integrated development of psychology and neuroscience, and the number of articles in this discipline increased. Cultural psychology has made remarkable progress in identifying various cultural traits that can influence human psychology and behavior on social media. Cultural neuroscience as a cross-subject of the rise in recent years, through the integration of psychology, anthropology, genetics, neuroscience, and other disciplines, explains the interaction of culture and the human brain, and how they jointly affect the neural mechanism of cognitive function. At an early stage, scholars presented the interactive dynamic evolutionary relationship between the brain and culture from multiple perspectives ( Moffittet et al., 2006 ). However, with technological improvements in brain imaging, it is possible to solve and explore interactions between the human brain, psychology, and cultural networks using an empirical approach.

Cultural characteristics have dramatically changed during the last half-century with the development of new media and new virtual ways of communication ( Kotik-Friedgut and Ardila, 2019 ). Existing research has shown that the neural resources of the brain are always adapted to the ever-increasing complexity and scale of social interaction to ensure that individuals are not marginalized by society ( Dunbar and Shultz, 2007 ). The interaction between biological evolution and cultural inheritance is a process full of unknowns and variables. Therefore, research on the relationships between culture, psychology, and neuroscience will progress together.

At the methodological level, communication on social media by users from different backgrounds provides a new research environment and massive data for cross-disciplinary research. Big data on social media and AI technology can analyze not only the reactions, emotions, and expressions of an individual but also the relevant information of an ethnic group or a cultural group. A number of neurological and psychological studies are beginning to leverage AI and social media data, and the two disciplines are intertwined with each other ( Pang, 2020 ; Wang et al., 2021 ). This quantitative analysis also helps enterprises and government departments to understand and affect cultural conflicts and integration ( Bond and Goldstein, 2015 ).

Different Schools of Thoughts

Social media provides platforms for communication and facilitates communication across cultures; however, the specific content exchanged is considered from the perspective of cultural proximity. Although some scholars think that social media can significantly promote mutual acceptance and understanding across cultures, others have realized that digital platforms actually strengthen the recognition and identity of their respective cultures ( Hopkins, 2009 ). To study the motivations, results, and implications of cross-cultural communication in virtual communities and conduct an empirical analysis, psychologists and neuroscientists provide their grounds and explanations.

Current Research Gaps

Although there are many articles discussing the trend of integration of psychology and neuroscience, few of them use integrated methods to analyze the behavior and implications of cross-cultural communication, mainly on cultural evolution and social effects. There are both practical and theoretical needs to be addressed to promote deep integration. For example, both private and public departments urgently need to learn scientific strategies to avoid cultural conflicts and promote integration. Further, a systematic and legal theory is also needed for scholars to conduct research in the sensitive field, which may be related to privacy protection and related issues.

Potential Future Development

For the research object, the classification of culture in emerging research is general, while with the development of big data methods on social media, cross-cultural communication among more detailed groups will be a potential direction. For the research framework, although cultural neuroscience is already a multidisciplinary topic, the ternary interaction among the brain, psychology, and culture in a virtual community will be very important. For the research method, brain imaging technology-related data and social media data may cause issues, such as privacy protection, personal security, informed consent, and individual autonomy. These legal and ethical issues require special attention in the development process of future research.

Cross-cultural communication research in the digital era not only needs to respond to urgent practical needs to provide scientific strategies to solve cultural differences and cultural conflicts, but also to promote the emergence of more vigorous theoretical frameworks and methods. Existing articles have mainly studied the reasons and implications of cultural communication on social media from the perspectives of cultural psychology and neuroscience separately. The CiteSpace-based hot topic map also shows the clustering trend of keywords related to cultural psychology and neuroscience, reflecting the intersection of the two fields. At the same time, there are many links between the two keyword nodes of “culture” and “social media,” which indicates that there is no lack of studies on cultural communication on social media from the perspective of cultural psychology. While cultural characteristics have changed with the development of new media and big data and related technologies have improved significantly, more research is needed to integrate the disciplines of culture, psychology, and neuroscience both in theory and methods.

Author Contributions

All authors listed have made a substantial, direct, and intellectual contribution to the work and approved it for publication.

This paper was funded by the Beijing Social Science Fund, China (Project No. 21JCC060).

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Baek, E. C., Scholz, C., O’Donnell, M. B., and Falk, E. B. (2017). The value of sharing information: a neural account of information transmission. Psychol. Sci. 28, 851–861. doi: 10.1177/0956797617695073

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Boamah, E. (2018). Information culture of Ghanaian immigrants living in New Zealand. Libr. Rev. 67, 585–606. doi: 10.1108/GKMC-07-2018-0065

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Bond, P., and Goldstein, I. (2015). Government intervention and information aggregation by prices. J. Finance 70, 2777–2812. doi: 10.1111/jofi.12303

Carey, J. W. (2009). Communication as Culture: Essays on Media and Society. Routledge.

Google Scholar

Chin, T., Meng, J., Wang, S., Shi, Y., and Zhang, J. (2021). Cross-cultural metacognition as a prior for humanitarian knowledge: when cultures collide in global health emergencies, J. Knowl. Manag. doi: 10.1108/JKM-10-2020-0787 [Epub ahead-of-print]

Chin, T., Wang, S., and Rowley, C. (2020). Polychronic knowledge creation in cross-border business models: a sea-like heuristic metaphor. J. Knowl. Manag. doi: 10.1108/JKM-04-2020-0244 [Epub ahead-of-print]

Chu, S.-C., and Choi, S. M. (2010). Social capital and self-presentation on social networking sites: a comparative study of Chinese and American young generations. Chin. J. Commun. 3, 402–420. doi: 10.1080/17544750.2010.516575

Cleveland, D. J. (2016). Brand personality and organization-public relationships: impacting dimensions by choosing a temperament for communication.

Crone, E. A. M., and Konijn, E. A. (2018). Media use and brain development during adolescence. Nat. Commun. 9:588. doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-03126-x

Del Giudice, M., Nicotra, M., Romano, M., and Schillaci, C. E. (2016). Entrepreneurial performance of principal investigators and country culture: relations and influences. J. Technol. Transfer. 42, 320–337.

Dunbar, R. I., and Shultz, S. (2007). Evolution in the social brain. Science 317, 1344–1347. doi: 10.1126/science.1145463

Fischer, N. L., Peres, R., and Fiorani, M. (2018). Frontal alpha asymmetry and theta oscillations associated with information sharing intention. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 12:166. doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2018.00166

Han, M. C., and Kim, Y. (2018). How culture and friends affect acceptance of social media commerce and purchase intentions: a comparative study of consumers in the U.S. and China. J. Int. Consum. Mark. 30, 326–335. doi: 10.1080/08961530.2018.1466226

Hodgson, P. (2018). “Global learners’ behavior on news in social media platforms through a MOOC,” in New Media for Educational Change. Educational Communications and Technology Yearbook. eds. L. Deng, W. Ma, and C. Fong (Singapore: Springer), 141–148.

Hoehle, H., Zhang, X., and Venkatesh, V. (2015). An espoused cultural perspective to understand continued intention to use mobile applications: a four-country study of mobile social media application usability. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 24, 337–359. doi: 10.1057/ejis.2014.43

Hopkins, L. (2009). Media and migration: a review of the field. Australia and New Zealand Communication Association.

Hu, S., Jibao, G., Liu, H., and Huang, Q. (2017). The moderating role of social media usage in the relationship among multicultural experiences, cultural intelligence, and individual creativity. Inf. Technol. People 30, 265–281. doi: 10.1108/ITP-04-2016-0099

Hu, S., Liu, H., Zhang, S., and Wang, G. (2020). Proactive personality and cross-cultural adjustment: roles of social media usage and cultural intelligence. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 74, 42–57. doi: 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2019.10.002

Huang, C.-M., and Park, D. (2013). Cultural influences on Facebook photographs. Int. J. Psychol. 48, 334–343. doi: 10.1080/00207594.2011.649285

Ji, Y., and Bates, B. R. (2020). Measuring intercultural/international outgroup favoritism: comparing two measures of cultural cringe. Asian J. Commun. 30, 141–154. doi: 10.1080/01292986.2020.1738511

Jin, D. Y., and Yoon, K. (2016). The social mediascape of transnational Korean pop culture: Hallyu 2.0 as spreadable media practice. New Media Soc. 18, 1277–1292. doi: 10.1177/1461444814554895

Kotik-Friedgut, B., and Ardila, A. (2019). A.r. luria’s cultural neuropsychology in the 21st century. Cult. Psychol. 26, 274–286. doi: 10.1177/1354067X19861053

Li, Y., Wang, X., Lin, X., and Hajli, M. (2018). Seeking and sharing health information on social media: a net valence model and cross-cultural comparison. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 126, 28–40. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.07.021

Meshi, D., Tamir, D. I., and Heekeren, H. R. (2015). The emerging neuroscience of social media. Trends Cogn. Sci. 19, 771–782. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2015.09.004

Meza, V. X., and Park, H. W. (2014). Globalization of cultural products: a webometric analysis of Kpop in Spanish-speaking countries. Qual. Quant. 49, 1345–1360. doi: 10.1007/s11135-014-0047-2

Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., and Rutter, M. (2006). Measured gene-environment interactions in psychopathology: concepts, research strategies, and implications for research, intervention, and public understanding of genetics. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 1, 5–27. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00002.x

Montag, C., Markowetz, A., Blaszkiewicz, K., Andone, I., Lachmann, B., Sariyska, R., et al. (2017). Facebook usage on smartphones and gray matter volume of the nucleus Accumbens. Behav. Brain Res. 329, 221–228. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2017.04.035

Motoki, K., Suzuki, S., Kawashima, R., and Sugiura, M. (2020). A combination of self-reported data and social-related neural measures forecasts viral marketing success on social media. J. Interact. Mark. 52, 99–117. doi: 10.1016/j.intmar.2020.06.003

Pang, H. (2020). Is active social media involvement associated with cross-culture adaption and academic integration among boundary-crossing students? Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 79, 71–81.

Papa, A., Chierici, R., Ballestra, L. V., Meissner, D., and Orhan, M. A. (2020). Harvesting reflective knowledge exchange for inbound open innovation in complex collaborative networks: an empirical verification in Europe. J. Knowl. Manag. doi: 10.1108/JKM-04-2020-0300 [Epub ahead of print]

Santoro, G., Mazzoleni, A., Quaglia, R., and Solima, L. (2021). Does age matter? The impact of SMEs age on the relationship between knowledge sourcing strategy and internationalization. J. Bus. Res. 128, 779–787. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.05.021

Sherman, L. E., Greenfield, P. M., Hernandez, L. M., and Dapretto, M. (2018). Peer influence via Instagram: effects on brain and behavior in adolescence and young adulthood. Child Dev. 89, 37–47. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12838

Thomas, J., Al-Shehhi, A., Al-Ameri, M., and Grey, I. (2019). We tweet Arabic; I tweet English: self-concept, language and social media. Heliyon 5:E02087. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02087

Wang, S., and Chin, T. (2020). A stratified system of knowledge and knowledge icebergs in cross-cultural business models: synthesizing ontological and epistemological views. J. Int. Manag. 26:100780. doi: 10.1016/j.intman.2020.100780

Wang, X., Riaz, M., Haider, S., Alam, K., Sherani,, and Yang, M. (2021). Information sharing on social media by multicultural individuals: experiential, motivational, and network factors. J. Glob. Inf. Manag. 29, 1–24. doi: 10.4018/JGIM.20211101.oa22

Xu, W. W., Park, J. Y., and Park, H. W. (2015). The networked cultural diffusion of Korean wave. Online Inf. Rev. 39, 43–60. doi: 10.1108/OIR-07-2014-0160

Xu, W. W., Park, J.-y., and Park, H. W. (2016). Longitudinal dynamics of the cultural diffusion of Kpop on YouTube. Qual. Quant. 51, 1859–1875. doi: 10.1007/s11135-016-0371-9

Yang, W., and Xu, Q. (2018). “A comparative study of the use of media by Chinese and American governments in risk communication — the use of social media.” 2018 International Joint Conference on Information, Media and Engineering (ICIME).

Yau, A., Marder, B., and O’Donohoe, S. (2019). The role of social media in negotiating identity during the process of acculturation. Inf. Technol. People. [Epub ahead-of-print].

Keywords: cross-culture communication, social media, cultural psychology, neuroscience, cultural neuropsychology, social neuroscience

Citation: Yuna D, Xiaokun L, Jianing L and Lu H (2022) Cross-Cultural Communication on Social Media: Review From the Perspective of Cultural Psychology and Neuroscience. Front. Psychol . 13:858900. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.858900

Received: 20 January 2022; Accepted: 14 February 2022; Published: 08 March 2022.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2022 Yuna, Xiaokun, Jianing and Lu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Han Lu, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Research: How Cultural Differences Can Impact Global Teams

• Vasyl Taras,
• Dan Caprar,
• Alfredo Jiménez,
• Fabian Froese

And what managers can do to help their international teams succeed.

Diversity can be both a benefit and a challenge to virtual teams, especially those which are global. The authors unpack their recent research on how diversity works in remote teams, concluding that benefits and drawbacks can be explained by how teams manage the two facets of diversity: personal and contextual. They find that contextual diversity is key to aiding creativity, decision-making, and problem-solving, while personal diversity does not. In their study, teams with higher contextual diversity produced higher-quality consulting reports, and their solutions were more creative and innovative. When it comes to the quality of work, teams that were higher on contextual diversity performed better. Therefore, the potential challenges caused by personal diversity should be anticipated and managed, but the benefits of contextual diversity are likely to outweigh such challenges.

A recent survey of employees from 90 countries found that 89 percent of white-collar workers “at least occasionally” complete projects in global virtual teams (GVTs), where team members are dispersed around the planet and rely on online tools for communication. This is not surprising. In a globalized — not to mention socially distanced — world, online collaboration is indispensable for bringing people together.

• VT Vasyl Taras is an associate professor and the Director of the Master’s or Science in International Business program at the University of North Carolina, Greensboro, USA. He is an associate editor of the Journal of International Management and the International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management, and a founder of the X-Culture, an international business competition.
• DB Dan Baack is an expert in international marketing. Dan’s work focuses on how the processing of information or cultural models influences international business. He recently published the 2nd edition of his textbook, International Marketing, with Sage Publications. Beyond academic success, he is an active consultant and expert witness. He has testified at the state and federal level regarding marketing ethics.
• DC Dan Caprar is an Associate Professor at the University of Sydney Business School. His research, teaching, and consulting are focused on culture, identity, and leadership. Before completing his MBA and PhD as a Fulbright Scholar at the University of Iowa (USA), Dan worked in a range of consulting and managerial roles in business, NGOs, and government organizations in Romania, the UK, and the US.
• AJ Alfredo Jiménez is Associate Professor at KEDGE Business School (France). His research interests include internationalization, political risk, corruption, culture, and global virtual teams. He is a senior editor at the European Journal of International Management.
• FF Fabian Froese is Chair Professor of Human Resource Management and Asian Business at the University of Göttingen, Germany, and Editor-in-Chief of Asian Business & Management. He obtained a doctorate in International Management from the University of St. Gallen, Switzerland, and another doctorate in Sociology from Waseda University, Japan. His research interests lie in international human resource management and cross-cultural management.

Partner Center

• A-Z Publications

Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior

Volume 5, 2018, review article, cross-cultural interaction: what we know and what we need to know.

• Nancy J. Adler 1 , and Zeynep Aycan 2
• View Affiliations Hide Affiliations Affiliations: 1 Desautels Faculty of Management, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 1G5; email: [email protected] 2 Department of Psychology, Koç University, Istanbul, Turkey 34460; email: [email protected]
• Vol. 5:307-333 (Volume publication date January 2018) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104528
• © Annual Reviews

Pervasive forms of worldwide communication now connect us instantly and constantly, and yet we all too often fail to understand each other. Rather than benefiting from our globally interconnected reality, the world continues to fall back on divisiveness, a widening schism exacerbated by some of the most pronounced divisions in history along lines of wealth, culture, religion, ideology, class, gender, and race. Cross-cultural dynamics are rife within multinational organizations and among people who regularly work with people from other cultures. This article reviews what we know from our scholarship on cross-cultural interaction among expatriates, negotiators, and teams that work in international contexts. Perhaps more important, this article outlines what we need to learn—and to unlearn—to be able to see diversity as an asset in helping individuals, organizations, and society to succeed rather than continuing to understand it primarily as a source of problems.

Article metrics loading...

Full text loading...

Literature Cited

• Adair WL , Brett JM . 2005 . The negotiation dance: time, culture, and behavioral sequences in negotiation. Organ. Sci. 16 : 33– 51 [Google Scholar]
• Adair WL , Okumura T , Brett JM . 2001 . Negotiation behavior when cultures collide: the United States and Japan. J. Appl. Psychol. 86 : 371– 85 [Google Scholar]
• Adair WL , Taylor MS , Tinsley CH . 2009 . Starting out on the right foot: negotiation schemas when cultures collide. Negot. Confl. Manag. Res. 2 : 138– 63 [Google Scholar]
• Adam H , Shirako A . 2013 . Not all anger is created equal: the impact of the expresser's culture on the social effects of anger in negotiations. J. Appl. Psychol. 98 : 785– 98 [Google Scholar]
• Adler NJ . 1979 . Women as androgynous managers: a conceptualization of the potential for American women in international management. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 3 : 407– 35 [Google Scholar]
• Adler NJ . 1980 . Cultural synergy: the management of cross-cultural organizations. Trends and Issues in OD: Current Theory and Practice WW Burke, LD Goodstein 163– 84 San Diego, CA: Univ. Assoc. [Google Scholar]
• Adler NJ . 1981 . Cultural synergy: designing a culturally synergistic organization. Bridge 6 : 32– 34 [Google Scholar]
• Adler NJ . 1984a . Expecting international success: female managers overseas. Columbia J. World Bus. 19 : 79– 85 [Google Scholar]
• Adler NJ . 1984b . Women do not want international careers: and other myths about international management. Organ. Dyn. 13 : 66– 79 [Google Scholar]
• Adler NJ . 1984c . Women in international management: Where are they. ? Calif. Manag. Rev. 26 : 78– 89 [Google Scholar]
• Adler NJ . 1986a . Cultural synergy: managing the impact of cultural diversity. The 1986 Annual: Developing Human Resources LD Goodstein, W Pfeiffer 229– 38 San Diego, CA: Univ. Assoc. [Google Scholar]
• Adler NJ . 1986b . International Dimensions of Organizational Behavior Boston: Kent Publ. [Google Scholar]
• Adler NJ . 1987 . Pacific basin managers: a Gaijin, not a woman. Hum. Resour. Manag. 26 : 169– 92 [Google Scholar]
• Adler NJ . 1993 . An international perspective on the barriers to the advancement of women managers. Appl. Psychol. Int. Rev. 42 : 289– 300 [Google Scholar]
• Adler NJ . 1994 . Competitive frontiers: women managing across borders. J. Manag. Dev. 13 : 24– 41 [Google Scholar]
• Adler NJ , Ghadar F . 1990 . Strategic human resource management: a global perspective. Human Resource Management in International Comparison R Pieper 235– 60 Berlin: deGruyter [Google Scholar]
• Adler NJ , Ghadar F . 1993 . A strategic phase approach to international human resource management. International Management Research: Looking to the Future D Wong-Rieger, F Rieger 55– 77 Berlin: deGruyter [Google Scholar]
• Adler NJ , Graham JL . 2017 . Cross-cultural interaction: the international comparison fallacy. Language in International Business: Developing a Field, JIBS Collections Series MY Brannen, T Mughan 33– 58 London: Palgrave Macmillan [Google Scholar]
• Adler NJ , Gundersen A . 2008 . International Dimensions of Organizational Behavior Mason, OH: Thomson/South-Western [Google Scholar]
• Adler NJ , Osland JS . 2016 . Women leading globally: what we know, thought we knew, and need to know about leadership in the 21st century. Adv. Glob. Leadersh. 9 : 15– 54 [Google Scholar]
• Akkermans D , Harzing A-W , van Witteloostuijn A . 2010 . Cultural accommodation and language priming. Manag. Int. Rev. 50 : 559– 83 [Google Scholar]
• Arman G , Aycan Z . 2013 . Host country nationals' attitudes toward expatriates: development of a measure. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 24 : 2927– 47 [Google Scholar]
• Aycan Z . 2008 . Leadership in cultural context. Handbook of Cross-Cultural Management P Smith, M Peterson, DT Thomas 219– 39 London: Sage [Google Scholar]
• Bell MP , Harrison DA . 1996 . Using intra-national diversity for international assignments: a model of bicultural competence and expatriate adjustment. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 6 : 47– 74 [Google Scholar]
• Benet-Martínez V , Leu J , Lee F , Morris MW . 2002 . Negotiating biculturalism: cultural frame switching in biculturals with oppositional versus compatible cultural identities. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 33 : 492– 516 [Google Scholar]
• Berry JW . 1997 . Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Appl. Psychol. 46 : 5– 34 [Google Scholar]
• Berry JW , Poortinga YH , Segall MH , Dasen PR . 1992 . Cross-Cultural Psychology: Research and Applications Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Bhaskar-Shrinivas P , Harrison DA , Shaffer MA , Luk DM . 2005 . Input-based and time-based models of international adjustment: meta-analytic evidence and theoretical extensions. Acad. Manag. J. 48 : 257– 81 [Google Scholar]
• Bond MH , Leung K , Au A , Tong K , De Carrasquel SR . et al. 2004 . Culture-level dimensions of social axioms and their correlates across 41 cultures. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 35 : 548– 70 [Google Scholar]
• Boyacigiller NA , Kleinberg MJ , Phillips ME , Sackmann SA . 1996 . Conceptualizing culture. Handbook for International Management Research BJ Punnett, O Shenkar 157– 208 New York: Blackwell Publ. [Google Scholar]
• Brannen MY , Thomas DC . 2010 . Bicultural individuals in organizations. Int. J. Cross Cult. Manag. 10 : 5– 16 [Google Scholar]
• Brett JM , Okumura T . 1998 . Inter and intracultural negotiation: U.S. and Japanese negotiators. Acad. Manag. J. 41 : 495– 510 [Google Scholar]
• Brookfield Glob. Relocat. Serv. 2016 . Global Mobility Trends Survey: Breakthrough to the Future of Global Talent Mobility Woodridge, IL: Brookfield Glob. Relocat. Serv. [Google Scholar]
• Byrne DE . 1971 . The Attraction Paradigm 11 New York: Academic [Google Scholar]
• Cai DA , Wilson SR , Drake LE . 2000 . Culture in the context of intercultural negotiation: individualism-collectivism and paths to integrative agreements. Hum. Commun. Res. 26 : 591– 617 [Google Scholar]
• Caligiuri PM . 1997 . Assessing expatriate success: beyond just being there. New Approaches to Employee Management Z Aycan 117– 40 Greenwich, CT: JAI Press [Google Scholar]
• Camiah N , Hollinshead G . 2003 . Assessing the potential for effective cross-cultural working between “new” Russian managers and western expatriates. J. World Bus. 38 : 245– 61 [Google Scholar]
• Carraher SM , Sullivan SE , Crocitto MM . 2008 . Mentoring across global boundaries: an empirical examination of home- and host-country mentors on expatriate career outcomes. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 39 : 1310– 26 [Google Scholar]
• Chao GT , Moon H . 2005 . The cultural mosaic: a metatheory for understanding the complexity of culture. J. Appl. Psychol. 90 : 1128– 40 [Google Scholar]
• Chen CC , Choi J , Chi SC . 2002 . Making justice sense of local-expatriate compensation disparity: mitigation by local referents, ideological explanations, and interpersonal sensitivity in China-foreign joint ventures. Acad. Manag. J. 45 : 807– 17 [Google Scholar]
• Chen CC , Kraemer J , Gathii J . 2011 . Understanding locals' compensation fairness vis-à-vis foreign expatriates: the role of perceived equity. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 22 : 3582– 600 [Google Scholar]
• Cox T . 1994 . Cultural Diversity in Organizations: Theory, Research and Practice Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publ. [Google Scholar]
• Cunningham WA , Nezlek JB , Banaji MR . 2004 . Implicit and explicit ethnocentrism: revisiting the ideologies of prejudice. Pers. Soc. Psychol. B 30 : 1332– 46 [Google Scholar]
• De Dreu K . 2004 . Motivation in negotiation: a social psychological analysis. The Handbook of Negotiation and Culture MJ Gelfand, JM Brett 114– 38 Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Doucet L , Jehn KA . 1997 . Analyzing harsh words in a sensitive setting: American expatriates in communist China. J. Organ. Behav. 18 : 559– 82 [Google Scholar]
• Drake LE . 2001 . The culture-negotiation link: integrative and distributive bargaining through an intercultural communication lens. Hum. Commun. Res. 27 : 317– 49 [Google Scholar]
• Earley PC , Gibson CB . 2002 . Multinational Work Teams: A New Perspective Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Assoc. [Google Scholar]
• Earley PC , Mosakowski E . 2000 . Creating hybrid team cultures: an empirical test of transnational team functioning. Acad. Manag. J. 43 : 26– 49 [Google Scholar]
• Elron E . 1997 . Top management teams within multinational corporations: effects of cultural heterogeneity. Leadersh. Q. 8 : 393– 412 [Google Scholar]
• Ely RJ , Thomas DA . 2001 . Cultural diversity at work: the effects of diversity perspectives on work group processes and outcomes. Adm. Sci. Q. 46 : 229– 73 [Google Scholar]
• Erez M , Lisak A , Harush R , Glikson E , Nouri R . et al. 2013 . Going global: developing management students' cultural intelligence and global identity in culturally diverse virtual teams. Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ. 12 : 330– 55 [Google Scholar]
• Fischer R . 2009 . Where is culture in cross cultural research?. Int. J. Cross Cult. Manag. 9 : 25– 49 [Google Scholar]
• Florkowski GW , Fogel DS . 1999 . Expatriate adjustment and commitment: the role of host-unit treatment. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 10 : 783– 807 [Google Scholar]
• Francis NPJ . 1991 . When in Rome? The effects of cultural adaptation on intercultural business negotiations. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 22 : 403– 28 [Google Scholar]
• Gardner WL , Gabriel S , Lee AY . 1999 . “I” value freedom, but “we” value relationships: self-construal priming mirrors cultural differences in judgment. Psychol. Sci. 10 : 321– 26 [Google Scholar]
• Gelfand MJ . 2008 . Culture and negotiation. Human Behavior in Military Contexts JJ Blascovich 85– 105 Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press [Google Scholar]
• Gelfand MJ , Aycan Z , Erez M , Leung K . 2017 . Cross-cultural industrial organizational psychology and organizational behavior: a hundred-year journey. J. Appl. Psychol. 102 : 514– 29 [Google Scholar]
• Gelfand MJ , Brett JM . 2004 . The Handbook of Negotiation and Culture Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Gelfand MJ , Christakopoulou S . 1999 . Culture and negotiator cognition: judgment accuracy and negotiation processes in individualistic and collectivistic cultures. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 79 : 248– 69 [Google Scholar]
• Gelfand MJ , Erez M , Aycan Z . 2007 . Cross-cultural organizational behavior. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 58 : 479– 514 [Google Scholar]
• Gelfand MJ , Nishii LH , Raver JL . 2006 . On the nature and importance of cultural tightness-looseness. J. Appl. Psychol. 91 : 1225– 44 [Google Scholar]
• Gelfand MJ , Raver JL , Nishii L , Leslie LM , Lun J . et al. 2011 . Differences between tight and loose cultures: a 33-nation study. Science 332 : 1100– 4 [Google Scholar]
• Gelfand MJ , Realo A . 1999 . Individualism-collectivism and accountability in intergroup negotiations. J. Appl. Psychol. 845 : 721– 36 [Google Scholar]
• Gibson CB , Gibbs JL . 2006 . Unpacking the concept of virtuality: the effects of geographic dispersion, electronic dependence, dynamic structure, and national diversity on team innovation. Adm. Sci. Q. 51 : 451– 95 [Google Scholar]
• Gibson CB , Huang L , Kirkman BL , Shapiro DL . 2014 . Where global and virtual meet: the value of examining the intersection of these elements in twenty-first-century teams. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 1 : 217– 44 [Google Scholar]
• Glikson E , Erez M . 2013 . Emotion display norms in virtual teams. J. Pers. Psychol. 12 : 22– 32 [Google Scholar]
• Greer LL , Homan AC , De Hoogh AHB , Den Hartog DN . 2012 . Tainted visions: the effect of visionary leader behaviors and leader categorization tendencies on the financial performance of ethnically diverse teams. J. Appl. Psychol. 97 : 203– 13 [Google Scholar]
• Gudykunst B . 1995 . Anxiety/uncertainty management AUM theory: current status. Intercultural Communication Theory RL Wiseman 428– 38 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
• Hechanova R , Beehr TA , Christiansen ND . 2003 . Antecedents and consequences of employees' adjustment to overseas assignment: a meta-analytic review. Appl. Psychol. 52 : 213– 36 [Google Scholar]
• Hofstede G . 1980 . Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values Beverly Hills, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
• Holden N . 2002 . Cross-Cultural Management: A Knowledge Management Perspective Harlow, UK: Financ. Times Prentice Hall [Google Scholar]
• Hong Y-Y , Morris MW , Chiu C-Y , Benet-Martínez V . 2000 . Multicultural minds: a dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition. Am. Psychol. 55 : 709– 20 [Google Scholar]
• House RJ , Hanges PJ , Javidan M , Dorfman PW , Gupta V . 2004 . Culture, Leadership, and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
• Imai L , Gelfand MJ . 2010 . The culturally intelligent negotiator: the impact of cultural intelligence CQ on negotiation sequences and outcomes. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 112 : 83– 98 [Google Scholar]
• Jackson SE , Joshi A . 2004 . Diversity in social context: a multi-attribute, multilevel analysis of team diversity and sales performance. J. Organ. Behav. 25 : 675– 702 [Google Scholar]
• Jackson TN . 2011 . From cultural values to cross‐cultural interfaces: Hofstede goes to Africa. J. Organ. Change Manag. 24 : 532– 58 [Google Scholar]
• Jassawalla A , Truglia C , Garvey J . 2004 . Cross-cultural conflict and expatriate manager adjustment: an exploratory study. Manag. Decis. 42 : 837– 49 [Google Scholar]
• Javidan M , House RJ , Dorfman PW , Hanges PJ , De Luque MS . 2006 . Conceptualizing and measuring cultures and their consequences: a comparative review of GLOBE's and Hofstede's approaches. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 37 : 897– 914 [Google Scholar]
• Johnson EC , Kristof-Brown AL , Van Vianen AEM , De Pater IE , Klein MR . 2003 . Expatriate social ties: personality antecedents and consequences for adjustment. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 11 : 277– 88 [Google Scholar]
• Kepir-Sinangil H , Ones DS . 1997 . Empirical investigations of the host country perspective in expatriate management. New Approaches to Employee Management Z Aycan 158– 92 Greenwich, CT: JAI Press [Google Scholar]
• Kim KI , Park HJ , Suzuki N . 1990 . Reward allocations in the United States, Japan, and Korea: a comparison of individualistic and collectivistic cultures. Acad. Manag. J. 33 : 188– 98 [Google Scholar]
• Kopelman S , Hardin AE , Myers CG , Tost LP . 2016 . Cooperation in multicultural negotiations: how the cultures of people with low and high power interact. J. Appl. Psychol. 101 : 721– 30 [Google Scholar]
• Kroeber AL , Kluckhohn C . 1952 . Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions Cambridge, MA: Peabody Mus. [Google Scholar]
• Kumar R . 2004 . Culture and emotions in intercultural negotiations: an overview. The Handbook of Negotiation and Culture MJ Gelfand, JM Brett 95– 113 Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Lau DC , Murnighan K . 1998 . Demography diversity and faultlines: the compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Acad. Manag. Rev. 23 : 325– 40 [Google Scholar]
• Lee J . 2005 . Effects of leadership and leader‐member exchange on commitment. Leadersh. Organ. Develop. J. 26 : 655– 72 [Google Scholar]
• Lee K , Yang G , Graham J . 2006 . Tension and trust in international business negotiations: American executives negotiating with Chinese executives. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 37 : 623– 41 [Google Scholar]
• Leung K , Bond MH . 2004 . Social axioms: a model for social beliefs in multicultural perspective. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 36 : 119– 97 [Google Scholar]
• Leung K , Bond MH , de Carrasquel SR , Munoz C , Hernandez M . et al. 2002 . Social axioms: the search for universal dimensions of general beliefs about how the world functions. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 33 : 286– 302 [Google Scholar]
• Leung K , Morris MW . 2015 . Values, schemas, and norms in the culture-behavior nexus: a situated dynamics framework. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 46 : 1028– 50 [Google Scholar]
• Leung K , Wang Z , Hon AHY . 2011 . Moderating effects on the compensation gap between locals and expatriates in China: a multi-level analysis. J. Int. Manag. 17 : 54– 67 [Google Scholar]
• Li L , Kleiner B . 2001 . Expatriate-local relationship and organisational effectiveness: a study of multinational companies in China. Manag. Res. News 24 : 49– 56 [Google Scholar]
• Lisak A , Erez M . 2015 . Leadership emergence in multicultural teams: the power of global characteristics. J. World Bus. 50 : 3– 14 [Google Scholar]
• Liu LA , Chua CH , Stahl GK . 2010 . Quality of communication experience: definition, measurement, and implications for intercultural negotiations. J. Appl. Psychol. 95 : 469– 87 [Google Scholar]
• Liu LA , Friedman R , Barry B , Gelfand MJ , Zhang Z . 2012 . The dynamics of consensus building in intracultural and intercultural negotiations. Adm. Sci. Q. 57 : 269– 304 [Google Scholar]
• Liu X , Shaffer MA . 2005 . An investigation of expatriate adjustment and performance: a social capital perspective. Int. J. Cross Cult. Manag. 5 : 235– 54 [Google Scholar]
• Lueke SB , Svyantek DJ . 2000 . Organizational socialization in the host country: the missing link in reducing expatriate turnover. Int. J. Organ. Anal. 8 : 380– 400 [Google Scholar]
• Luiz JM . 2015 . The impact of ethno-linguistic fractionalization on cultural measures: dynamics, endogeneity and modernization. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 46 : 1080– 98 [Google Scholar]
• Mansfield ED , Mutz DC . 2009 . Support for free trade: self-interest, sociotropic politics, and out-group anxiety. Int. Organ. 63 : 425– 57 [Google Scholar]
• Markus HR , Conner A . 2013 . Clash! How to Thrive in a Multicultural World New York: Hudson Street Press [Google Scholar]
• Markus HR , Kitayama S . 1991 . Culture and self: implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychol. Rev. 98 : 224– 53 [Google Scholar]
• Maznevski M , Chudoba K . 2000 . Bridging space over time: global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organ. Sci. 11 : 473– 92 [Google Scholar]
• Metcalf LE , Bird A , Shankarmahesh M , Aycan Z , Larimo J , Valdelamar DD . 2006 . Cultural tendencies in negotiation: a comparison of Finland, India, Mexico, Turkey, and the United States. J. World Bus. 41 : 382– 94 [Google Scholar]
• Meyer KE . 2017 . International business in an era of anti-globalization. Multinatl. Bus. Rev. 25 : 78– 90 [Google Scholar]
• Milliken FJ , Martins LL . 1996 . Searching for common threads: understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Acad. Manag. Rev. 21 : 402– 33 [Google Scholar]
• Nouri R , Erez M , Rockstuhl T , Ang S , Leshem-Calif L . et al. 2013 . Taking the bite out of culture: the impact of task structure and task type on overcoming impediments to cross-cultural team performance. J. Organ. Behav. 34 : 739– 63 [Google Scholar]
• Osland JS . 1995 . The Adventure of Working Abroad: Hero Tales from the Global Frontier San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publ. [Google Scholar]
• Osland JS , Bird A . 2000 . Beyond sophisticated stereotyping: cultural sensemaking in context. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 14 : 65– 77 [Google Scholar]
• Piketty T . 2014 . Capital in the Twenty-First Century Boston: Harvard Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Piketty T , Saez E . 2014 . Inequality in the long run. Science 344 : 838– 43 [Google Scholar]
• Pornpitakpan C . 1999 . The effects of cultural adaptation on business relationships: Americans selling to Japanese and Thais. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 30 : 317– 37 [Google Scholar]
• Portes A . 1998 . Social capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 24 : 1– 24 [Google Scholar]
• Przytuła S , Rozkwitalska M , Chmielecki M , Sułkowski Ł , Basinska BA . 2014 . Cross-cultural interactions between expatriates and local managers in the light of Positive Organizational Behaviour. Soc. Sci. 4 : 14– 24 [Google Scholar]
• Rao A , Schmidt SM . 1998 . A behavioral perspective on negotiating international alliances. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 29 : 665– 93 [Google Scholar]
• Roberson Q , Ryan AM , Ragins BR . 2017 . The evolution and future of diversity at work. J. Appl. Psychol. 102 : 483– 99 [Google Scholar]
• Rodrik D . 2017 . Populism and the economics of globalization Work. Pap. JFK Sch. Gov., Harvard Univ. [Google Scholar]
• Ronen S , Shenkar O . 2013 . Mapping world cultures: cluster formation, sources and implications. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 44 : 867– 97 [Google Scholar]
• Rudman LA , Fairchild K . 2004 . Reactions to counterstereotypic behavior: the role of backlash in cultural stereotype maintenance. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 872 : 157– 76 [Google Scholar]
• Schwartz SH . 1994 . Beyond individualism/collectivism: new cultural dimensions of values. Individualism and Collectivism: Theory, Method and Application U Kim, HC Triandis, C Kagitcibasi, S Choi, G Yoon 85– 119 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publ. [Google Scholar]
• Selmer J . 1996 . Expatriate or local bosses? HCN subordinates' preferences in leadership behaviour. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 7 : 165– 78 [Google Scholar]
• Selmer J . 1997 . Differences in leadership behavior between expatriate and local bosses as perceived by their host country national subordinates. Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J. 18 : 13– 22 [Google Scholar]
• Shaffer MA , Harrison DA , Gilley KM . 1999 . Dimensions, determinants, and differences in the expatriate adjustment process. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 30 : 557– 81 [Google Scholar]
• Shay JP , Baack S . 2006 . An empirical investigation of the relationships between modes and degree of expatriate adjustment and multiple measures of performance. Int. J. Cross Cult. Manag. 6 : 275– 94 [Google Scholar]
• Shore B . 1996 . Culture in Mind: Cognition, Culture, and the Problem of Meaning New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Smith PB . 2008 . Indigenous aspects of management. Handbook of Cross-Cultural Management Research PB Smith, MF Peterson, DC Thomas 319– 33 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publ. [Google Scholar]
• Smith PB , Peterson MF . 1988 . Leadership, Organization and Culture: An Event Management Model London: Sage Publ. [Google Scholar]
• Smith PB , Peterson MF , Schwartz SH . 2002 . Cultural values, sources of guidance, and their relevance to managerial behavior: a 47-nation study. J. Cross. Cult. Psychol. 33 : 188– 208 [Google Scholar]
• Snell SA , Snow CC , Davison SC , Hambrick DC . 1998 . Designing and supporting transnational teams: the human resource agenda. Hum. Res. Manag. 37 : 147– 58 [Google Scholar]
• Stahl GK , Maznevski ML , Voigt A , Jonsen K . 2010 . Unraveling the effects of cultural diversity in teams: a meta-analysis of research on multicultural work groups. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 41 : 690– 709 [Google Scholar]
• Stahl GK , Tung RL . 2015 . Towards a more balanced treatment of culture in international business studies: the need for positive cross-cultural scholarship. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 46 : 391– 414 [Google Scholar]
• Suutari V , Brewster C . 1998 . The adaptation of expatriates in Europe. Pers. Rev. 27 : 89– 103 [Google Scholar]
• Suutari V , Raharjo K , Riikkila T . 2002 . The challenge of cross-cultural leadership interaction: Finnish expatriates in Indonesia. Career Dev. Int. 7 : 415– 29 [Google Scholar]
• Syed J , Hazboun NG , Murray PA . 2014 . What locals want: Jordanian employees' views on expatriate managers. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 25 : 212– 33 [Google Scholar]
• Tajfel H . 1978 . Differentiation Between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations London: Academic [Google Scholar]
• Tajfel H . 1982 . Social Identity and Intergroup Relations Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Takeuchi R . 2010 . A critical review of expatriate adjustment research through a multiple stakeholder view: progress, emerging trends, and prospects. J. Manag. 36 : 1040– 64 [Google Scholar]
• Taras V , Gonzalez-Perez MA . 2015 . The Palgrave Handbook of Experiential Learning in International Business New York: Palgrave [Google Scholar]
• Taras V , Kirkman BL , Steel P . 2010 . Examining the impact of culture's consequences: a three-decade, multilevel, meta-analytic review of Hofstede's cultural value dimensions. J. Appl. Psychol. 95 : 405– 39 [Google Scholar]
• Taras V , Steel P , Kirkman BL . 2016 . Does country equate with culture? Beyond geography in the search for cultural boundaries. Manag. Int. Rev. 56 : 455– 87 [Google Scholar]
• Thomas DC , Liao Y , Aycan Z , Cerdin J-L , Pekerti AA . et al. 2015 . Cultural intelligence: a theory-based, short form measure. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 46 : 1099– 118 [Google Scholar]
• Thomas DC , Ravlin EC , Wallace A . 1996 . Effect of cultural diversity in work groups. Research in the Sociology of Organizations M Erez, SB Bacharach 1– 33 Greenwich, CT: JAI Press [Google Scholar]
• Tinsley CH , Taylor MS , Adair WL . 2012 . Culture and international negotiation failure. Saving Negotiations from Failure GO Faure, F Cede 185– 200 Vienna: Int. Inst. Appl. Syst. Anal. Press [Google Scholar]
• Toh SM , DeNisi AS . 2003 . Host country national reactions to expatriate pay policies: a model and implications. Acad. Manag. Rev. 28 : 606– 21 [Google Scholar]
• Toh SM , DeNisi AS . 2005 . A local perspective to expatriate success. Acad. Manag. Exec. 19 : 132– 46 [Google Scholar]
• Toh SM , DeNisi AS . 2007 . Host country nationals as socializing agents: a social identity approach. J. Organ. Behav. 28 : 281– 301 [Google Scholar]
• Tung RL , Verbeke A . 2010 . Beyond Hofstede and GLOBE: improving the quality of cross-cultural research. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 41 : 1259– 74 [Google Scholar]
• Turner JC . 1985 . Social categorization and the self-concept: a social cognitive theory of group behaviour. Advances in Group Processes EJ Lawler 77– 122 Greenwich, CT: JAI Press [Google Scholar]
• Turner JC , Hogg MA , Oakes PJ , Reicher SD , Wetherell MS . 1987 . Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell [Google Scholar]
• van Bakel M , Gerritsen M , van Oudenhoven JP . 2011 . Impact of a local host on the success of an international assignment. Thunderbird Int. Bus. Rev. 53 : 391– 402 [Google Scholar]
• van Bakel M , Gerritsen M , van Oudenhoven JP . 2014 . Impact of a local host on the intercultural competence of expatriates. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 25 : 2050– 67 [Google Scholar]
• van Bakel M , van Oudenhoven JP , Gerritsen M . 2015 . Developing a high quality intercultural relationship: expatriates and their local host. J. Glob. Mobil. Home Expatr. Manag. Res. 3 : 25– 45 [Google Scholar]
• van Bakel M , van Oudenhoven JP , Gerritsen M . 2017 . Expatriate contact with a local host: an intervention to increase social support. Hum. Resour. Dev. Int. 20 : 215– 35 [Google Scholar]
• Varma A , Aycan Z , Budhwar P , Pichler S , Uygur U , Paluch R . 2016 . Host country nationals' support to expatriates: an investigation in Turkey. Eur. J. Int. Manag. 10 : 605– 23 [Google Scholar]
• Varma A , Toh SM , Budhwar P . 2006 . A new perspective on the female expatriate experience: the role of host country national categorization. J. World Bus. 41 : 112– 20 [Google Scholar]
• Venaik S , Midgley DF . 2015 . Mindscapes across landscapes: archetypes of transnational and subnational culture. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 46 : 1051– 79 [Google Scholar]
• Vromans P , van Engen M , Mol S . 2013 . Presumed cultural similarity paradox. J. Glob. Mobil. Home Expatr. Manag. Res. 1 : 219– 38 [Google Scholar]
• Wang X , Kanungo RN . 2004 . Nationality, social network and psychological well-being: expatriates in China. Int. J. Hum. Res. Manag. 15 : 775– 93 [Google Scholar]
• Watson WE , Kumar K , Michaelson LK . 1993 . Cultural diversity's impact on interaction process and performance: comparing homogeneous and diverse task groups. Acad. Manag. J. 36 : 590– 602 [Google Scholar]
• Waxin MF . 2004 . Expatriates' interaction adjustment: the direct and moderator effects of culture of origin. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 28 : 61– 79 [Google Scholar]
• Weiss SE . 1990 . The long path to the IBN-Mexico agreement: an analysis of the microcomputer investment negotiations, 1983–1985. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 21 : 565– 96 [Google Scholar]
• Zellmer-Bruhn ME , Gibson C . 2014 . How does culture matter? A contextual view of intercultural interaction in groups. Culture and Group Processes M Yuki, M Brewer 342– 402 New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

• Article Type: Review Article

Most Read This Month

Most cited most cited rss feed, conservation of resources in the organizational context: the reality of resources and their consequences, self-determination theory in work organizations: the state of a science, burnout and work engagement: the jd–r approach, psychological safety: the history, renaissance, and future of an interpersonal construct, employee voice and silence, psychological capital: an evidence-based positive approach, how technology is changing work and organizations, research on workplace creativity: a review and redirection, the psychology of entrepreneurship, abusive supervision.

Last updated 20/06/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .

Login Alert

• > Performing Qualitative Cross-Cultural Research
• > Cross-cultural communication and language issues

Book contents

• Frontmatter
• About the author
• About the book
• 1 Performing qualitative cross-cultural research: an introduction
• 2 Moral and ethical perspectives
• 3 The research participants: accessing and reciprocity
• 4 Cultural sensitivity: a responsible researcher
• 5 Insider/Outsider perspectives and placing issues
• 6 Cross-cultural communication and language issues
• 7 Personal and collective testimony
• 8 Local knowledge, local power and collective action
• 9 Writing and disseminating in cross-cultural research
• In closing …

6 - Cross-cultural communication and language issues

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

I lack language you say

No. I lack language.

The language to clarify

my resistance to the literate …

Different languages construct different ways of seeing social life, which poses methodological and epistemological challenges for the researcher.

Language and communication are central to qualitative research. Language is a fundamental tool through which qualitative researchers seek to understand human behaviour, social processes and the cultural meanings that inscribe human behaviour.

In this chapter, I shall point to the importance of language and communication in cross-cultural research. Often, researchers and the participants are from different linguistic backgrounds. But language, as Monique Hennink (2008: 22) contends, ‘represents data in qualitative research and communication’. It is ‘the process through which data are generated between a researcher and study participant’. Often, in carrying out cross-cultural research, the researchers are linguistically and culturally distant from their research participants (Hennink 2008). Differences in the language spoken and the meanings that are conveyed can create problems, and this has implications for the research findings. It is also an ethical issue, as misunderstanding may occur and this may result in the misinterpretation of the research findings (Irvine et al . 2008).

In this chapter, I shall first discuss issues pertaining to language. I then look at bicultural researchers and the need to provide training and support for them in cross-cultural research.

Access options

Save book to kindle.

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle .

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service .

• Cross-cultural communication and language issues
• Pranee Liamputtong , La Trobe University, Victoria
• Book: Performing Qualitative Cross-Cultural Research
• Online publication: 05 June 2012
• Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812705.008

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox .

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive .

What is Cross-Cultural Communication?

Cite this chapter.

• Brian J. Hurn 3 &
• Barry Tomalin 4  

4360 Accesses

1 Citations

This first chapter looks at the influence of other disciplines on cultural studies. It examines different definitions of ‘culture’ and ‘communication’ and looks at key areas of cultural diversity in visible behaviour and underlying values. It analyses strategies for optimizing successful communication with people of other cultures and overcoming the barriers to cross-cultural communication.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Unable to display preview.  Download preview PDF.

Boas, F. (1938) General Anthropology (Boston, MA: Heath).

Google Scholar  

Boroditsky, L. (2002) ‘Linguistic Relativity’, in Galley Article 0056 (Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology).

Chomsky, N. (1975) Reflections on Language (New York: Pantheon).

Hall, T. and Hall, M.R. (1990) Understanding Cultural Differences (Maine: Intercultural Press).

Hofstede, G. (1994) Cultures and Organisations: Software of the Mind. Intercultural Cooperation and its Importance to Survival (London: HarperCollins).

Lewis, R. (2002) The Cultural Imperative (London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing).

Lewis, R. (2004) When Cultures Collide (London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing).

Oberg, K. (1960) ‘Culture Shock: Adjustment to New Cultural Environments’, Practical Anthropology 7: 177–82.

Pinker, S. (1994) The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Languages (Harmondsworth: Penguin).

Book   Google Scholar  

Sapir, E. (1966) Culture, Language and Personality (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).

Tomalin, B. and Nicks, M. (2010) The World’s Business Cultures and How to Unlock Them (London: Thorogood Publishing).

Trompenaars, F. (1993) Riding the Waves of Culture (London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing).

Trompenaars, F. (2000) Riding the Waves of Culture , 2nd edn (London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing).

Whorf, B. (1956) Language, Thought and Reality (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).

Further reading

Axtell, R. (1993) Do’s and Taboos Around the World, A Guide to International Behaviour (New York: John Wiley & Sons).

Bragg, M. (2003) The Adventure of English (London: Hodder & Stoughton).

Crystal, D. (2003) How Language Works (London: Penguin).

Harrison, B. (ed.) (1990) Culture and the Language Classroom (Oxford: Modern English Publications).

Mehrabian, A. (1981) Silent Messages: Implicit Communication of Emotions and Attitudes (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth).

Morris, D. (1977) Manwatching: A Field Guide to Human Behaviour (London: Jonathan Cape).

Morris, D. (1979) Gestures: Their Origins and Distribution (London: Book Club Associates).

Pease, A. and Pease, B. (2004) The Definitive Book of Body Language (London: Orion Books).

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2000) Culturally Speaking: Managing Rapport through Talk Across Cultures (London: Continuum).

Trompenaars, F. and Hampden-Turner, C. (2000) Building Cross-Cultural Competence (London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing).

Whorf, B. (1998) Science and Linguistics — Basic Concepts of Communication: Selected Readings (Maine: Intercultural Press).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

London Academy of Diplomacy, University of East Anglia, UK

Brian J. Hurn ( Visiting Lecturer )

International House, London, UK

Barry Tomalin ( Visiting Lecturer, Director of Cultural Training )

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2013 Brian J. Hurn and Barry Tomalin

About this chapter

Hurn, B.J., Tomalin, B. (2013). What is Cross-Cultural Communication?. In: Cross-Cultural Communication. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230391147_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230391147_1

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, London

Print ISBN : 978-1-349-35148-0

Online ISBN : 978-0-230-39114-7

eBook Packages : Palgrave Business & Management Collection Business and Management (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

31 Cross-Cultural Communication

What is culture.

Learning Objectives

Upon completing this chapter, you should be able to:

• distinguish between surface and deep culture in the context of the iceberg model,
• describe how cross-cultural communication is shaped by cultural diversity,
• explain how the encoding and decoding process takes shape in cross-cultural communication,
• describe circumstances that require effective cross-cultural communication, and
• describe approaches to enhance interpersonal communication in cross-cultural contexts.

We may be tempted to think of intercultural communication as interaction between two people from different countries. While two distinct national passports communicate a key part of our identity non-verbally, what happens when two people from two different parts of the same country communicate? Indeed, intercultural communication happens between subgroups of the same country. Whether it be the distinctions between high and low Germanic dialects, the differences in perspective between an Eastern Canadian and a Western Canadian, or the rural-versus-urban dynamic, our geographic, linguistic, educational, sociological, and psychological traits influence our communication.

Culture is part of the very fabric of our thought, and we cannot separate ourselves from it, even as we leave home and begin to define ourselves in new ways through work and achievements. Every business or organization has a culture, and within what may be considered a global culture, there are many subcultures or co-cultures. For example, consider the difference between the sales and accounting departments in a corporation. We can quickly see two distinct groups with their own symbols, vocabulary, and values. Within each group there may also be smaller groups, and each member of each department comes from a distinct background that in itself influences behaviour and interaction.

Suppose we have a group of students who are all similar in age and educational level. Do gender and the societal expectations of roles influence interaction? Of course! There will be differences on multiple levels. Among these students not only do the boys and girls communicate in distinct ways, but there will also be differences among the boys as well as differences among the girls. Even within a group of sisters, common characteristics exist, but they will still have differences, and all these differences contribute to intercultural communication. Our upbringing shapes us. It influences our worldview, what we value, and how we interact with each other. We create culture, and it defines us.

Culture involves beliefs, attitudes, values, and traditions that are shared by a group of people. More than just the clothes we wear, the movies we watch, or the video games we play, all representations of our environment are part of our culture. Culture also involves the psychological aspects and behaviours that are expected of members of our group. For example, if we are raised in a culture where males speak while females are expected to remain silent, the context of the communication interaction governs behaviour. From the choice of words (message), to how we communicate (in person, or by e-mail), to how we acknowledge understanding with a nod or a glance (non-verbal feedback), to the internal and external interference, all aspects of communication are influenced by culture.

Culture consists of the shared beliefs, values, and assumptions of a group of people who learn from one another and teach to others that their behaviours, attitudes, and perspectives are the correct ways to think, act, and feel.

It is helpful to think about culture in the following five ways:

• Culture is learned.
• Culture is shared.
• Culture is dynamic.
• Culture is systemic.
• Culture is symbolic.

The iceberg, a commonly used metaphor to describe culture, is great for illustrating the tangible and the intangible. When talking about culture, most people focus on the “tip of the iceberg,” which is visible but makes up just 10 percent of the object. The rest of the iceberg, 90 percent of it, is below the waterline. Many business leaders, when addressing intercultural situations, pick up on the things they can see—things on the “tip of the iceberg.” Things like food, clothing, and language difference are easily and immediately obvious, but focusing only on these can mean missing or overlooking deeper cultural aspects such as thought patterns, values, and beliefs that are under the surface. Solutions to any interpersonal miscommunication that results become temporary bandages covering deeply rooted conflicts.

Cultural Membership

How do you become a member of a culture, and how do you know when you are full member? So much of communication relies on shared understanding, that is, shared meanings of words, symbols, gestures, and other communication elements. When we have a shared understanding, communication comes easily, but when we assign different meanings to these elements, we experience communication challenges.

What shared understandings do people from the same culture have? Researchers who study cultures around the world have identified certain characteristics that define a culture. These characteristics are expressed in different ways, but they tend to be present in nearly all cultures:

• rites of initiation
• common history and traditions
• values and principles
• purpose and mission
• symbols, boundaries, and status indicators

Terms to Know

Although they are often used interchangeably, it is important to note the distinctions among multicultural, cross-cultural, and intercultural communication.

Multiculturalism is a rather surface approach to the coexistence and tolerance of different cultures. It takes the perspective of “us and the others” and typically focuses on those tip-of-the-iceberg features of culture, thus highlighting and accepting some differences but maintaining a “safe” distance. If you have a multicultural day at work, for example, it usually will feature some food, dance, dress, or maybe learning about how to say a few words or greetings in a sampling of cultures.

Cross-cultural approaches typically go a bit deeper, the goal being to be more diplomatic or sensitive. They account for some interaction and recognition of difference through trade and cooperation, which builds some limited understanding—such as, for instance, bowing instead of shaking hands, or giving small but meaningful gifts. Even using tools like Hofstede, as you’ll learn about in this chapter, gives us some overarching ideas about helpful things we can learn when we compare those deeper cultural elements across cultures. Sadly, they are not always nuanced comparisons; a common drawback of cross-cultural comparisons is that we can wade into stereotyping and ethnocentric attitudes—judging other cultures by our own cultural standards—if we aren’t mindful.

Lastly, when we look at intercultural approaches, we are well beneath the surface of the iceberg, intentionally making efforts to better understand other cultures as well as ourselves. An intercultural approach is not easy, often messy, but when you get it right, it is usually far more rewarding than the other two approaches. The intercultural approach is difficult and effective for the same reasons; it acknowledges complexity and aims to work through it to a positive, inclusive, and equitable outcome.

Whenever we encounter someone, we notice similarities and differences. While both are important, it is often the differences that contribute to communication troubles. We don’t see similarities and differences only on an individual level. In fact, we also place people into in-groups and out-groups based on the similarities and differences we perceive. Recall what you read about social identity and discrimination in the last chapter—the division of people into in-groups and out-groups is where your social identity can result in prejudice or discrimination if you are not cautious about how you frame this.

We tend to react to someone we perceive as a member of an out-group based on the characteristics we attach to the group rather than the individual (Allen, 2010). In these situations, it is more likely that stereotypes and prejudice will influence our communication. This division of people into opposing groups has been the source of great conflict around the world, as with, for example, the division between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland; between Croats, Serbs, and Bosnian Muslims in the former Yugoslavia; and between males and females during women’s suffrage. Divisions like these can still cause conflict on an individual level. Learning about difference and why it matters will help us be more competent communicators and help to prevent conflict.

Theories of Cross-Cultural Communication

Social psychologist Geert Hofstede (Hofstede, 1982, 2001, 2005) is one of the most well known researchers in cross-cultural communication and management. His website offers useful tools and explanations about a range of cultural dimensions that can be used to compare various dominant national cultures. Hofstede’s theory places cultural dimensions on a continuum that range from high to low and really only make sense when the elements are compared to another culture. Hofstede’s dimensions include the following:

• Power Distance: High-power distance means a culture accepts and expects a great deal of hierarchy; low-power distance means the president and janitor could be on the same level.
• Individualism: High individualism means that a culture tends to put individual needs ahead of group or collective needs.
• Uncertainty Avoidance: High uncertainty avoidance means a culture tends to go to some lengths to be able to predict and control the future. Low uncertainty avoidance means the culture is more relaxed about the future, which sometimes shows in being willing to take risks.
• Masculinity: High masculinity relates to a society valuing traits that were traditionally considered masculine, such as competition, aggressiveness, and achievement. A low masculinity score demonstrates traits that were traditionally considered feminine, such as cooperation, caring, and quality of life.
• Long-term orientation: High long-term orientation means a culture tends to take a long-term, sometimes multigenerational view when making decisions about the present and the future. Low long-term orientation is often demonstrated in cultures that want quick results and that tend to spend instead of save.
• Indulgence: High indulgence means cultures that are OK with people indulging their desires and impulses. Low indulgence or restraint-based cultures value people who control or suppress desires and impulses.

As mentioned previously, these tools can provide wonderful general insight into making sense of understanding differences and similarities across key below-the-surface cross-cultural elements. However, when you are working with people, they may or may not conform to what’s listed in the tools. For example, if you are Canadian but grew up in a tight-knit Amish community, your value system may be far more collective than individualist. Or if you are Aboriginal, your long-term orientation may be far higher than that of mainstream Canada. It’s also important to be mindful that in a Canadian workplace, someone who is non-white or wears clothes or religious symbols based on their ethnicity may be far more “mainstream” under the surface. The only way you know for sure is to communicate interpersonally by using active listening, keeping an open mind, and avoiding jumping to conclusions.

Trompenaars

Fons Trompenaars is another researcher who came up with a different set of cross-cultural measures. A more detailed explanation of his seven dimensions of culture can be found at this website (The Seven Dimensions of Culture, n.d.), but we provide a brief overview below:

• Universalism vs. Particularism: the extent that a culture is more prone to apply rules and laws as a way of ensuring fairness, in contrast to a culture that looks at the specifics of context and looks at who is involved, to ensure fairness. The former puts the task first; the latter puts the relationship first.
• Individualism vs. Communitarianism: the extent that people prioritize individual interests versus the community’s interest.
• Specific vs. Diffuse: the extent that a culture prioritizes a head-down, task-focused approach to doing work, versus an inclusive, overlapping relationship between life and work.
• Neutral vs. Emotional: the extent that a culture works to avoid showing emotion versus a culture that values a display or expression of emotions.
• Achievement vs. Ascription: the degree to which a culture values earned achievement in what you do versus ascribed qualities related to who you are based on elements like title, lineage, or position.
• Sequential Time vs. Synchronous Time: the degree to which a culture prefers doing things one at time in an orderly fashion versus preferring a more flexible approach to time with the ability to do many things at once.
• Internal Direction vs. Outer Direction: the degree to which members of a culture believe they have control over themselves and their environment versus being more conscious of how they need to conform to the external environment.

Like Hofstede’s work, Trompenaars’s dimensions help us understand some of those beneath-the-surface-of-the-iceberg elements of culture. It’s equally important to understand our own cultures as it is to look at others, always being mindful that our cultures, as well as others, are made up of individuals.

Ting-Toomey

Stella Ting-Toomey’s face negotiation theory builds on some of the cross-cultural concepts you’ve already learned, such as, for example, individual versus collective cultures. When discussing face negotiation theory, face means your identity, your image, how you look or come off to yourself and others (communicationtheory.org, n.d.). The theory says that this concern for “face” is something that is common across every culture, but various cultures—especially Eastern versus Western cultures—approach this concern in different ways. Individualist cultures, for example tend to be more concerned with preserving their own face, while collective cultures tend to focus more on preserving others’ faces. Loss of face leads to feelings of embarrassment or identity erosion, whereas gaining or maintaining face can mean improved status, relations, and general positivity. Actions to preserve or reduce face is called facework. Power distance is another concept you’ve already learned that is important to this this theory. Most collective cultures tend to have more hierarchy or a higher power distance when compared to individualist cultures. This means that maintaining the face of others at a higher level than yours is an important part of life. This is contrasted with individualist cultures, where society expects you to express yourself, make your opinion known, and look out for number one. This distinction becomes really important in interpersonal communication between people whose cultural backgrounds have different approaches to facework; it usually leads to conflict. Based on this dynamic, the following conflict styles typically occur:

• Domination: dominating or controlling the conflict (individualist approach)
• Avoiding: dodging the conflict altogether (collectivist approach)
• Obliging: yielding to the other person (collectivist approach)
• Compromising: a give-and-take negotiated approach to solving the conflict (individualist approach)
• Integrating: a collaborative negotiated approach to solving the conflict (individualist approach)

Another important facet of this theory involves high-context versus low-context cultures. High-context cultures are replete with implied meanings beyond the words on the surface and even body language that may not be obvious to people unfamiliar with the context. Low-context cultures are typically more direct and tend to use words to attempt to convey precise meaning. For example, an agreement in a high-context culture might be verbal because the parties know each other’s families, histories, and social position. This knowledge is sufficient for the agreement to be enforced. No one actually has to say, “I know where you live. If you don’t hold up your end of the bargain, …” because the shared understanding is implied and highly contextual. A low-context culture usually requires highly detailed, written agreements that are signed by both parties, sometimes mediated through specialists like lawyers, as a way to enforce the agreement. This is low context because the written agreement spells out all the details so that not much is left to the imagination or “context.”

Verbal and Non-Verbal Differences

Cultures have different ways of verbally expressing themselves. For example, consider the people of the United Kingdom. Though English is spoken throughout the UK, the accents can be vastly different from one city or county to the next. If you were in conversation with people from each of the four countries that make up the UK—England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, you would find that each person pronounces words differently. Even though they all speak English, each has their own accent, slang terms, speaking volume, metaphors, and other differences. You would even find this within the countries themselves. A person who grew up in the south of England has a different accent than someone from the north, for example. This can mean that it is challenging for people to understand one another clearly, even when they are from the same country!

While we may not have such distinctive differences in verbal delivery within Canada, we do have two official languages, as well as many other languages in use within our borders. This inevitably means that you’ll communicate with people who have different accents than you do, or those who use words and phrases that you don’t recognize. For example, if you’re Canadian, you’re probably familiar with slang terms like toque (a knitted hat), double-double (as in, a coffee with two creams and two sugars—preferably from Tim Hortons), parkade (parking garage), and toonie (a two-dollar coin), but your friends from other countries might respond with quizzical looks when you use these words in conversation!

When communicating with someone who has a different native language or accent than you do, avoid using slang terms and be conscious about speaking clearly. Slow down, and choose your words carefully. Ask questions to clarify anything that you don’t understand, and close the conversation by checking that everything is clear to the other person.

Cultures also have different non-verbal ways of delivering and interpreting information. For example, some cultures may treat personal space differently than do people in North America, where we generally tend to stay as far away from one another as possible. For example, if you get on an empty bus or subway car and the next person who comes on sits in the seat right next to you, you might feel discomfort, suspicion, or even fear. In a different part of the world this behaviour might be considered perfectly normal. Consequently, when people from cultures with different approaches to space spend time in North America, they can feel puzzled at why people aim for so much distance. They may tend to stand closer to other people or feel perfectly comfortable in crowds, for example.

This tendency can also come across in the level of acceptable physical contact. For example, kissing someone on the cheek as a greeting is typical in France and Spain—and could even be a method of greeting in a job interview. In North America, however, we typically use a handshake during a formal occasion and apologize if we accidentally touch a stranger’s shoulder as we brush past. In contrast, Japanese culture uses a non-contact form of greeting—the bow—to demonstrate respect and honour.

Meaning and Mistranslation

Culturally influenced differences in language and meaning can lead to some interesting encounters, ranging from awkward to informative to disastrous. In terms of awkwardness, you have likely heard stories of companies that failed to exhibit communication competence in their naming and/or advertising of products in another language. For example, in Taiwan, Pepsi used the slogan “Come Alive With Pepsi,” only to find out later that, when translated, it meant, “Pepsi brings your ancestors back from the dead” (Kwintessential, 2012). Similarly, American Motors introduced a new car called the Matador to the Puerto Rican market, only to learn that Matador means “killer,” which wasn’t very comforting to potential buyers.

At a more informative level, the words we use to give positive reinforcement are culturally relative. In Canada and the United Kingdom, for example, parents commonly reinforce their child’s behaviour by saying, “Good girl” or “Good boy.” There isn’t an equivalent for such a phrase in other European languages, so the usage in only these two countries has been traced back to the puritan influence on beliefs about good and bad behaviour (Wierzbicka, 2004).

One of the most publicized and deadliest cross-cultural business mistakes occurred in India in 1984. Union Carbide, an American company, controlled a plant used to make pesticides. The company underestimated the amount of cross-cultural training that would be needed to allow the local workers, many of whom were not familiar with the technology or language/jargon used in the instructions for plant operations, to do their jobs. This lack of competent communication led to a gas leak that killed more than 2,000 people and, over time, led to more than 500,000 injuries (Varma, 2012).

Language and Culture

Through living and working in five different countries, one of the authors notes that when you learn a language, you learn a culture. In fact, a language can tell you a lot about a culture if you look closely. Here’s one example:

A native English speaker landed in South Korea and tried to learn the basics of saying hello in the Korean language. Well, it turned out that it wasn’t as simple as saying hello! It depended on whom you are saying hello to. The Korean language has many levels and honorifics that dictate not only what you say but also how you say it and to whom. So, even a mere hello is not straightforward; the words change. For example, if you are saying hello to someone younger or in a lower position, you will use (anyeong); but for a peer at the same level, you will use a different term (anyeoung ha seyo); and a different one still for an elder, superior, or dignitary (anyeong ha shim nikka). As a result, the English speaker learned that in Korea people often ask personal questions upon meeting—questions such as, How old are you? Are you married? What do you do for a living? At first, she thought people were very nosy. Then she realized that it was not so much curiosity driving the questions but, rather, the need to understand how to speak to you in the appropriate way.

In Hofstede’s terms, this adherence to hierarchy or accepted “levels” in society speak to the notion of moving from her home country (Canada) with a comparatively low power distance to a country with a higher power distance. These contrasting norms show that what’s considered normal in a culture is also typically reflected to some degree in the language.

What are the implications of this for interpersonal communication? What are the implications of this for body language (bowing) in the South Korean context? What are the ways to be respectful or formal in your verbal and non-verbal language?

Comparing and Contrasting

How can you prepare to work with people from cultures different than your own? Start by doing your homework. Let’s assume that you have a group of Japanese colleagues visiting your office next week. How could you prepare for their visit? If you’re not already familiar with the history and culture of Japan, this is a good time to do some reading or a little bit of research online. If you can find a few English-language publications from Japan (such as newspapers and magazines), you may wish to read through them to become familiar with current events and gain some insight into the written communication style used.

Preparing this way will help you to avoid mentioning sensitive topics and to show correct etiquette to your guests. For example, Japanese culture values modesty, politeness, and punctuality, so with this information, you can make sure you are early for appointments and do not monopolize conversations by talking about yourself and your achievements. You should also find out what faux pas to avoid. For example, in company of Japanese people, it is customary to pour others’ drinks (another person at the table will pour yours). Also, make sure you do not put your chopsticks vertically in a bowl of rice, as this is considered rude. If you have not used chopsticks before and you expect to eat Japanese food with your colleagues, it would be a nice gesture to make an effort to learn. Similarly, learning a few words of the language (e.g., hello, nice to meet you, thank you, and goodbye) will show your guests that you are interested in their culture and are willing to make the effort to communicate.

If you have a colleague who has travelled to Japan or has spent time in the company of Japanese colleagues before, ask them about their experience so that you can prepare. What mistakes should you avoid? How should you address and greet your colleagues? Knowing the answers to these questions will make you feel more confident when the time comes. But most of all, remember that a little goes a long way. Your guests will appreciate your efforts to make them feel welcome and comfortable. People are, for the most part, kind and understanding, so if you make some mistakes along the way, don’t worry too much. Most people are keen to share their culture with others, so your guests will be happy to explain various practices to you.

You might find that, in your line of work, you are expected to travel internationally. When you visit a country that is different from your own, you might experience culture shock. Defined as “the feeling of disorientation experienced by someone when they are suddenly subjected to an unfamiliar culture, way of life, or set of attitudes” (OxfordDictionaries.com, 2015), it can disorient us and make us feel uncertain when we are in an unfamiliar cultural climate. Have you ever visited a new country and felt overwhelmed by the volume of sensory information coming at you? From new sights and smells to a new language and unfamiliarity with the location, the onset of culture shock is not entirely surprising. To mitigate this, it helps to read as much as you can about the new culture before your visit. Learn some of the language and customs, watch media programs from that culture to familiarize yourself, and do what you can to prepare. But remember not to hold the information you gather too closely. In doing so, you risk going in with stereotypes. As shown in the figure above, going in with an open attitude and choosing to respond to difficulties with active listening and non-judgmental observation typically leads to building rapport, understanding, and positive outcomes over time.

Culture Shock

Experiencing culture shock does not require you to leave Canada. Moving from a rural to an urban centre (or vice versa), from an English-speaking to a French-speaking area, or moving to or from an ethnic enclave can challenge your notion of what it is to be a Canadian.

In one example, one of the authors participated in a language-based homestay in rural Quebec the summer before her first year of university. Prior to this, she had attended an urban high school in Toronto where the majority of her classmates were non-white and into urban music. When she went to take the train and saw that all the other kids were white, listening to alternative music, and playing hackey sack, she began to worry.

When she met her house mother upon arrival, the house mom looked displeased. Out of four students to stay in her home, two were non-white. The students discovered quickly that the house dad was a hunter, evident by the glass cabinet full of shotguns and the mounted moose heads on the wall. To add to all these changes, the students were forbidden to speak English as a way to help make the most of the French language immersion program. About two weeks into the program, the student from Toronto, a black girl, overheard the house mom talking with her roommate, a white girl from London, Ontario. She said, “You know, I was really concerned when I saw that we had a black and an Asian student, because we never had any people like that in our house before, so I didn’t know what to expect. But now, you know especially with your roommate from Toronto, I can see that they’re just like normal people!”

The urban to rural transition was stark, the language immersion was a challenge, and the culture of the other students as well as that of the host family was also a big change. With so many changes happening, one outcome that is consistent with what we know about one aspect of culture shock, is that most of the students on this immersion program reported sleeping way longer hours than usual. It’s but one way for your mind and body to cope with the rigours of culture shock!

Despite all the challenges, however, the benefit for the author was a 30 percent improvement in French language skills—skills that later came in handy during bilingual jobs, trips to France, and the ability to communicate with the global French-speaking community.

A Changing Worldview

One helpful way to develop your intercultural communication competence is to develop sensitivity to intercultural communication issues and best practices. From everything we have learned so far, it may feel complex and overwhelming. The Intercultural Development Continuum is a theory created by Mitchell Hammer (2012) that helps demystify the process of moving from monocultural approaches to intercultural approaches. There are five steps in this transition, and we will give a brief overview of each one below.

See if you can deduce the main points of the overview before expanding the selection.

The first two steps out of five reflect monocultural mindsets, which are ethnocentric. As you recall, ethnocentrism means evaluating other cultures according to preconceptions originating in the standards and customs of one’s own culture (OxfordDictionaries.com, 2015).

People who belong to dominant cultural groups in a given society or people who have had very little exposure to other cultures may be more likely to have a worldview that’s more monocultural according to Hammer (2009). But how does this cause problems in interpersonal communication? For one, being blind to the cultural differences of the person you want to communicate with (denial) increases the likelihood that you will encode a message that they won’t decode the way you anticipate, or vice versa.

For example, let’s say culture A considers the head a special and sacred part of the body that others should never touch, certainly not strangers or mere acquaintances. But let’s say in your culture people sometimes pat each other on the head as a sign of respect and caring. So you pat your culture A colleague on the head, and this act sets off a huge conflict.

It would take a great deal of careful communication to sort out such a misunderstanding, but if each party keeps judging the other by their own cultural standards, it’s likely that additional misunderstanding, conflict, and poor communication will transpire.

Using this example, polarization can come into play because now there’s a basis of experience for selective perception of the other culture. Culture A might say that your culture is disrespectful, lacks proper morals, and values, and it might support these claims with anecdotal evidence of people from your culture patting one another on the sacred head!

Meanwhile, your culture will say that culture A is bad-tempered, unintelligent, and angry by nature and that there would be no point in even trying to respect or explain things them.

It’s a simple example, but over time and history, situations like this have mounted and thus led to violence, even war and genocide.

According to Hammer (2009) the majority of people who have taken the IDI inventory, a 50-question questionnaire to determine where they are on the monocultural–intercultural continuum, fall in the category of minimization, which is neither monocultural nor intercultural. It’s the middle-of-the-road category that on one hand recognizes cultural difference but on the other hand simultaneously downplays it. While not as extreme as the first two situations, interpersonal communication with someone of a different culture can also be difficult here because of the same encoding/decoding issues that can lead to inaccurate perceptions. On the positive side, the recognition of cultural differences provides a foundation on which to build and a point from which to move toward acceptance, which is an intercultural mindset.

There are fewer people in the acceptance category than there are in the minimization category, and only a small percentage of people fall into the adaptation category. This means most of us have our work cut out for us if we recognize the value—considering our increasingly global societies and economies—of developing an intercultural mindset as a way to improve our interpersonal communication skill.

In this chapter on cross-cultural communication you learned about culture and how it can complicate interpersonal communication. Culture is learned, shared, dynamic, systemic, and symbolic. You uncovered the distinction between multicultural, cross-cultural, and intercultural approaches and discovered several new terms such as diplomatic, ethnocentric, and in-/out-groups.

From there you went on to examine the work three different cross-cultural theorists including Hofstede, Trompenaars, and Ting-Toomey. After reviewing verbal and non-verbal differences, you went on to compare and contrast by doing your homework on what it might be like to communicate interpersonally with members of another culture and taking a deeper look into culture shock.

Finally, you learned about the stages on the intercultural development continuum that move from an ethnocentric, monocultural worldview to a more intercultural worldview.

The ability to communicate well between cultures is an increasingly sought-after skill that takes time, practice, reflection, and a great deal of work and patience. This chapter has introduced you to several concepts and tools that can put you on the path to further developing your interpersonal skills to give you an edge and better insight in cross-cultural situations.

Key Takeaways and Check In

Learning highlights

• The iceberg model helps to show us that a few easily visible elements of culture are above the surface but that below the surface lie the invisible and numerous elements that make up culture.
• Ethnocentrism is an important word to know; it indicates a mindset that your own culture is superior while others are inferior.
• Whether a culture values individualism or the collective community is a recurring dimension in many cross-cultural communication theories, including those developed by Hofstede, Trompenaars, and Ting-Toomey.
• Language can tell you a great deal about a culture.
• The intercultural development model helps demystify the change from monocultural mindsets to intercultural mindsets.

Further Reading, Links, and Attribution

Further reading and links.

• A student’s reflection on experiencing culture shock .
• Stella Ting-Toomey discusses face negotiation theory in this YouTube video.

Allen, B. (2010). Difference matters: Communicating social identity. Waveland Press.

culture shock. (n.d.). In Oxford Dictionaries. Retrieved from http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/culture-shock

ethnocentric. (n.d.). In Oxford Dictionaries. Retrieved from http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/ethnocentric .

Face-Negotiation Theory. (n.d.). Communication Theory. Retrieved from http://communicationtheory.org/face-negotiation-theory/ .

Hammer, M.R. (2009). The Intercultural Development Inventory. In M. A. Moodian (Ed.). Contemporary Leadership and Intercultural Competence . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hofstede, G. (1982). Culture’s consequences (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hofstede, G. (2005). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (Revised and expanded 2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Lindner, M. (2013). Edward T. Hall’s Cultural Iceberg. Prezi presentation retrieved from https://prezi.com/y4biykjasxhw/edward-t-halls-cultural-iceberg/?utm_source=prezi-view&utm_medium=ending-bar&utm_content=Title-link&utm_campaign=ending-bar-tryout .

Results of Poor Cross Cultural Awareness . (n.d.) Kwintessential Ltd. Retrieved from   http://www.kwintessential.co.uk/cultural-services/articles/results-of-poor-cross-cultural-awareness.html .

The Seven Dimensions of Culture: Understanding and managing cultural differences. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/seven-dimensions.htm .

Varma, S. (2010, June 20). Arbitrary? 92% of All Injuries Termed Minor . The Times of India. Retrieved from http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-06-20/india/28309628_1_injuries-gases-cases .

Wierzbicka, A. (2004). The English expressions good boy and good girl and cultural models of child rearing. Culture & Psychology, 10 (3), 251‒278.

Attribution Statement (Cross-Cultural Communication)

This chapter is a remix containing content from a variety of sources published under a variety of open licenses, including the following:

Chapter Content

• Original content contributed by the Olds College OER Development Team, of Olds College to Professional Communications Open Curriculum under a CC-BY 4.0 license
• Content created by Anonymous for Understanding Culture; in Cultural Intelligence for Leaders, previously shared at http://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/cultural-intelligence-for-leaders/s04-understanding-culture.html under a CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 license
• Derivative work of content created by Anonymous for Intercultural and International Group Communication; in An Introduction to Group Communication, previously shared at http://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/an-introduction-to-group-communication/s07-intercultural-and-internationa.html under a CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 license
• Content created by Anonymous for Language, Society, and Culture; in A Primer on Communication Studies, previously shared at http://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/a-primer-on-communication-studies/s03-04-language-society-and-culture.html under a CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 license

Check Your Understandings

• Original assessment items contributed by the Olds College OER Development Team, of Olds College to Professional Communications Open Curriculum under a CC-BY 4.0 license
• Assessment items created by Boundless, for Boundless Managing Diversity Quiz, previously shared at https://www.boundless.com/quizzes/managing-diversity-quiz-2584/ under a CC BY-SA 4.0 license
• Assessment items adapted from The Saylor Foundation for the saylor.org course Comm 311: Intercultural Communication, previously shared at http://saylordotorg.github.io/LegacyExams/COMM/COMM311/COMM311-FinalExam-Answers.html under a CC BY 3.0 US license

Cross-Cultural Communication Copyright © by Olds College. All Rights Reserved.

Share This Book