how does culture affect communication essay

How Does Culture Affect Communication: Exploring the Impact, Importance & Examples

Communication is a cornerstone of our society. It helps us to build meaningful personal relationships, share ideas and create strong organizations. However, the way we communicate is influenced greatly by culture, which in turn has an undeniable impact on how efficient and effective communication is.

This article explores the importance of culture in communication and some practical examples demonstrating its profound effect. We will consider key concepts such as language styles, intercultural communication refers, barriers, and global business practices that are all pertinent facets of this topic.

By the end, readers will have a deeper understanding of how social influences shape the way we communicate.

How Does Culture Affect Communication?

Cultural differences, such as language, words, gestures, and phrases, can have a huge impact on how people communicate – like two ships passing in the night. Culture can also be a bridge between people; by understanding the culture of an other person’s culture or group, it is easier to connect and interact with each other.

Culture has an immense effect on communication – it shapes how we talk to one another, what kind of language we use, and what kinds of communication are considered appropriate. This is especially true in business settings where cultural values and norms can determine the decision-making process and the way messages are interpreted.

Frankness may be seen as normal in some cultures while frowned upon in others; this means that people from different cultures may not always understand the same message in the same way. Therefore, being mindful of cultural differences when communicating is essential for successful dialogue – like putting together pieces of a puzzle!

In conclusion, culture plays an important role when it comes to communication: from the same culture to language to beliefs, habits to customs – culture influences how we interact with each other and interpret messages. Taking these differences into account will help ensure effective communication between parties.

High and Low Context Cultures

Cross-cultural communication is a must for global harmony – but how does culture shape the way we communicate? High and low-context world cultures have distinct differences in their approach to communication. In high-context cultures, such as Japan and China, relationships are king; while in low-context countries, like the US or Germany, content is key.

The style of communication also varies between cultures: language use, words, and phrases, non-verbal cues like body language and gestures – even seating arrangements! In high-context societies, it’s all about acquiring knowledge through subtlety and indirectness, whereas, in low-context ones, it’s more about exchanging ideas directly.

Nonverbal communication can be especially tricky when navigating different cultural norms. Do you know what your facial expressions mean to someone from another country? Misunderstandings can easily arise if we don’t take into account these cultural nuances – so being aware of them is essential for effective intercultural communication and dialogue.

Culture has a profound power over how we communicate, like a sculptor chiseling away at a block of marble. Every culture has its own unique beliefs and values that shape how culture influences communication and the way people interact with each other – from social norms to decision-making processes. In some cultures, it’s polite to keep personal opinions and emotions under wraps; in others, it’s rude not to express them.

These beliefs and values also influence communication in different contexts – for instance, some cultures may require greetings before starting conversations while others don’t. And there are varying expectations for topics discussed in certain situations, such as business meetings or social gatherings.

It’s essential to recognize cultural differences when communicating with others: what is polite in one culture may be considered impolite in another! So remember this rule of thumb: respect the customs of all cultures you encounter – then your conversations will flow smoothly!

Cultural habits and customs can be compared to a powerful wave crashing onto the shore of communication. Different cultures have different ways of communicating – from body language and facial expressions to gestures. These non-verbal cues are like secret messages, conveying feelings or emotions without words. In some cultures, direct eye contact is seen as rude, while in others, it’s a sign of respect.

Habits and customs also shape how effective communication is in different contexts – like pieces on a chessboard that move around depending on the situation. For example, interrupting conversations may be acceptable in one culture but considered rude in a low-context culture in another. Additionally, expectations for directness vary between cultures too. How does culture influence communication?

Geographical factors can have a huge impact on how people and cultures communicate together. Physical distance, resources, and climate can all shape the way cultures interact. For instance, if two groups are close together, they may rely more heavily on verbal communication, while those further apart might use non-verbal cues to stay connected.

Different geographical locations also affect communication styles in other ways. Different languages may be spoken in different areas, or technology and media access could vary from place to place. Additionally, climates can influence how people communicate – for example, colder climates often lead to increased reliance on tech, while warmer ones tend to foster face-to-face communication front-to-face conversations.

In conclusion, geography plays an important role in determining how we communicate with each other – from language barriers to technological availability and even climate conditions!

What Cultural Aspects Affect Communication?

Culture can have a powerful effect on communication, like a sculptor shaping the way we understand and express ourselves. Cultural values and norms can influence our nonverbal cues – from facial expressions to body language to gestures. It can also affect how we interpret and respond to verbal and nonverbal messages. But cultural differences can create barriers to understanding, as different cultures have varying connotations for words, expectations for communication styles, and ways of expressing themselves.

When attempting to communicate effectively with people from other cultures, challenges such as language barriers or communication styles may arise. Plus, if the culture of the other person is not understood when communicating, it could lead to misunderstandings that damage trust in conversation.

That’s why it’s so important to consider cultural perspectives when communicating – interpreting information in a culture-specific way helps ensure messages are accurately conveyed and received. Cultural norms even play into how we use our hands or body language when speaking without words!

Values and Norms

Cultural values and norms can have a profound effect on how people communicate nonverbally. Different cultures have different ways of expressing themselves, such as through facial expressions, body language, and gestures. People from different cultures may interpret and respond to nonverbal communication and nonverbal communication differently, depending on their own cultural values and norms. For example, in some cultures, it is considered disrespectful to maintain eye contact with someone of higher status, while in other cultures, it is seen as a sign of respect.

Cultural values and norms can also influence how people communicate verbally. Different cultures have different expectations for communication styles and different connotations for words. For example, in some cultures, it is considered polite to be indirect when communicating, while in other cultures, it is seen as being overly polite or even disingenuous.

It is important to be aware of these cultural differences when communicating with people from different cultures in order to ensure that messages are accurately conveyed and received.

Cultural freedom is like a key that unlocks the door to honest communication. It allows people to express their thoughts and feelings without fear of judgment, encouraging openness, honesty, and mutual respect. Without it, conversations can become stifled, and trust may be lost.

Cultural freedom encourages directness in conversation, which helps ensure messages are accurately conveyed and received. This leads to more effective communication as everyone is on the same page with what’s being said. But how important is cultural freedom for successful communication?

Frankness is a cultural trait that can have a powerful impact on communication. It’s the direct and straightforward expression of thoughts and opinions without fear of judgment. Cultures that value frankness tend to be more open in their conversations, as they feel comfortable expressing themselves honestly and openly.

On the other hand, politeness is all about being respectful and courteous when talking with others. While it’s important for maintaining good relationships, too much politeness can lead to a lack of trust between people.

When communicating in different cultures, it’s essential to consider how frankness is perceived there – as what may be seen as honest in one culture could come across as rude or disrespectful in another.

Customs and traditions are a part of life, passed down from generation to generation and forming the identity of a culture. They can have an immense impact on communication between different cultures – from gestures and body language to how people interact with each other.

For instance, direct eye contact during conversations may be seen as disrespectful in some cultures while being viewed as respectful in others. Similarly, hand gestures can mean completely different things depending on where you are – a thumbs-up could be interpreted as approval or an insult!

Moreover, customs and traditions also dictate how people should greet one another; something that is considered polite in one culture might not be so in another. The use of formal languages such as honorifics, titles, and polite expressions also varies greatly between cultures.

It’s essential to understand these customs when communicating with someone from another culture if we want our messages to be accurately conveyed and received without any misunderstandings arising. Doing this will help build trust and understanding between us all!

Read also our posts about: How Communication Affects the Flow of Work in an Organization How Does Self Concept Affect Communication? Why is Feedback Needed in Interpersonal Communication How to Launch an Online Course in 2022

Tips for Effective Communication in Culture

Effective communication in a cross-cultural context is like a puzzle – it requires all the pieces to fit together. To ensure successful conversations, we must understand and appreciate cultural differences between the parties involved. Businesses must also adopt a cultural shift to make networked communication happen.

So how can we engage stakeholders and create an open and collaborative business culture? Virtual brainstorming sessions, informal company conversations during working hours, pairing different teams into virtual break-out rooms – these are just some of the approaches that can be used!

To foster open lines of communication within a company, businesses should encourage teams to exchange ideas, recognize individual contributions, respect different cultures and holidays – plus give feedback for understanding and improvement.

But what about celebrating individuals in their team? It’s important to create an inclusive environment by being aware of cultural differences, creating safe spaces for dialogue, and adapting to each other’s way of communicating. By following these tips, you’ll be well on your way toward effective communication in any cross-cultural context!

Impact, Importance & Examples

The impact of culture on communication is undeniable, and it can be a recipe for disaster if left unchecked. Cultural differences in communication styles, lack of awareness of cultural differences, and the use of language and customs that are unfamiliar to a person from a different culture can all lead to misunderstandings and conflict.

In high-context cultures and businesses, cultural diversity can have an array of effects on how people communicate with each other. Encouraging the exchange of thoughts and ideas, recognizing the significance behind words spoken, understanding context, and being aware of silence are all key components for successful business communication. When cultural differences are acknowledged and respected by companies, they open up their doors to new perspectives, which can enhance their public image as well as expand their global reach.

The big takeaway here is that when teams embrace cross-pollination, they reap better results – both in terms of effectiveness (twice as often rated by executives) but also financially (harnessing diverse ideas leads to more revenue).

Cultural sensitivity plays an important role in how companies interact with one another across cultures. Understanding beliefs, habits, and values – these things help bridge gaps between cultures so effective communication isn’t hindered by misunderstanding or miscommunication due to ignorance or prejudice. Being mindful of cultural barriers will ensure smooth sailing when communicating with people from backgrounds other than your very own culture.

To sum it up: The impact culture has on communication should not be underestimated; embracing different cultures helps foster better collaboration while understanding them prevents potential conflicts arising from miscommunication or misinterpretation due to a lack of knowledge about foreign customs or languages.

In conclusion, culture has a major influence on our interactions and communication. Our beliefs, values, habits, geography, and freedom all shape the way we communicate with one another. It is important to be conscious of cultural norms and understand how they can negatively or positively affect interpersonal communication .

This understanding of cultural differences can help businesses and employees to foster more effective communication in an international setting. To do this, companies should practice cultural sensitivity, provide the necessary education for their certain cultures, and adapt communication styles to those of different cultures.

By doing this, businesses will be better able to bridge cultural rifts, avoid miscommunication, and collaborate more successfully.

Frequently Asked Questions

How does culture affect communication examples.

Culture can greatly affect the way in which people communicate. For instance, certain cultural norms may dictate whether direct eye contact is deemed appropriate or inappropriate. Additionally, language use can differ drastically between cultures and heavily influence communication style.

It is essential to be aware of these differences in order to foster successful communication.

Why does culture influence communication?

Culture has a significant impact on the way individuals communicate, shape their communication styles, and can even determine the methods of communication used. This is because individuals are likely to be influenced by cultural elements such as values, beliefs, norms, and practices that are shared in the community.

As a result, culture plays an important role in setting the boundaries for effective communication.

What is the relationship between communication and culture?

Communication and culture are intimately connected, as communication is the method through which a culture’s cultural characteristics—customs, roles, rules, rituals, laws, and more—are created and shared.

In this way, communication plays a key role in forming and sustaining cultures.

Culture profoundly influences the way individuals communicate with one another. For example, different cultures may employ varying levels of directness or politeness in their communication styles.

Additionally, cultural norms affect word choices and the ways in which people interact with others. As such, it is essential to be mindful of how culture affects communication examples when communicating with people from various cultural backgrounds together.

I’m a student, with all due respect, I would like to ask the author about the reason behind the creation of this article. So, why did the author write the article?

read it and you will understand why.

Essay on How Does Culture Affect Communication

Students are often asked to write an essay on How Does Culture Affect Communication in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on How Does Culture Affect Communication

Introduction.

Culture shapes our life in many ways, including how we communicate. It’s like a set of unspoken rules that guide our actions. Our cultural background can influence our style of communication, the words we use, and how we understand others.

Language and Culture

The language we speak is a big part of our culture. It’s more than just words. It carries meanings and values that are important to us. For example, some cultures have many words for snow because it’s an important part of their life.

Non-Verbal Communication

Non-verbal communication, like gestures or facial expressions, is also influenced by culture. For instance, in some cultures, eye contact shows respect, while in others, it can be seen as rude.

Understanding and Misunderstandings

When people from different cultures communicate, misunderstandings can happen. This is because they might interpret words or actions differently. So, understanding other cultures can help us communicate better.

250 Words Essay on How Does Culture Affect Communication

Culture is like a big umbrella that covers the way we live, think, and communicate. It’s like a guidebook that tells us how to act or talk in different situations. So, when we talk about how culture affects communication, we’re looking at how this guidebook shapes the way we share ideas and feelings.

Language is the first thing we think of when we talk about communication. Different cultures have different languages. Even when people speak the same language, they might use different words or phrases because of their culture. For example, in the UK, people might say “lift” while in the US, people say “elevator”. So, culture influences the words we use and how we understand them.

Culture also affects non-verbal communication, which is how we talk without words. This includes things like hand gestures, eye contact, and personal space. For example, in some cultures, making direct eye contact is a sign of respect, while in others, it might be seen as rude. So, understanding a culture can help us understand these non-verbal cues.

Communication Styles

Every culture has its own style of communication. Some cultures are direct and say exactly what they mean. Others might be more indirect and use hints or suggestions. For example, in some cultures, people might say “It’s a bit cold in here” to suggest that they want the window closed. In other cultures, people might just ask directly. So, our culture shapes how we express our thoughts and needs.

In conclusion, culture is a big part of communication. It influences the language we use, the non-verbal cues we understand, and the communication style we prefer. By understanding this, we can communicate better with people from different cultures.

500 Words Essay on How Does Culture Affect Communication

Understanding culture, communication and culture.

Communication is more than just talking. It includes body language, facial expressions, and even silence. Culture plays a big role in shaping these elements. It sets the rules for what is right or wrong, polite or rude, normal or strange.

Language Differences

Culture affects the language we speak. Every culture has its own unique words, phrases, and styles of speaking. These can be very different from one culture to another. For example, in some cultures, people speak very directly. In others, people might use more indirect ways of saying things. This can cause misunderstandings if people from different cultures are not aware of these differences.

Non-verbal Communication

Understanding and respect.

Understanding and respecting other cultures is very important in communication. It helps avoid misunderstandings and conflicts. It also helps build stronger relationships. When we understand and respect other cultures, we are more likely to communicate effectively.

In conclusion, culture greatly affects communication. It shapes the way we speak, the non-verbal cues we use, and our understanding of what is polite or rude. Being aware of these cultural differences can help us communicate better with people from different cultures. It can also help us build stronger and more respectful relationships.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

7 Culture and Communication

Introduction

7.1 Foundations of Culture and Identity

Culture is a complicated word to define, as there are at least six common ways that culture is used in the United States. For the purposes of exploring the communicative aspects of culture, we will define culture as the ongoing negotiation of learned and patterned beliefs, attitudes, values, and behaviors. Unpacking the definition, we can see that culture should not be conceptualized as stable and unchanging. Culture is “negotiated.” It is also dynamic, and cultural changes can be traced and analyzed to better understand why our society is the way it is. The definition also points out that culture is learned, which accounts for the importance of socializing institutions like family, school, peers, and the media. Culture is patterned in that there are recognizable widespread similarities among people within a cultural group. There is also deviation from and resistance to those patterns by individuals and subgroups within a culture, which is why cultural patterns change over time. Last, the definition acknowledges that culture influences our beliefs about what is true and false, our attitudes (including our likes and dislikes), our values regarding what is right and wrong, and our behaviors. It is from these cultural influences that our identities are formed.

Personal, Social, and Cultural Identities

Ask yourself the question “Who am I?” We develop a sense of who we are based on what is reflected back on us from other people. Our parents, friends, teachers, and the media help shape our identities. While this happens from birth, most people in Western societies reach a stage in adolescence where maturing cognitive abilities and increased social awareness lead them to begin to reflect on who they are. This begins a lifelong process of thinking about who we are now, who we were before, and who we will become (Tatum, 2000). Our identities make up an important part of our self-concept and can be broken down into three main categories: personal, social, and cultural identities.

We must avoid the temptation to think of our identities as constant. Instead, our identities are formed through processes that started before we were born. And they will continue after we are gone. Therefore, our identities are not something we achieve or complete. Two related but distinct components of our identities are our personal and social identities (Spreckels & Kotthoff, 2009). Personal identities include the components of self that are primarily intrapersonal and connected to our life experiences. Our social identities are the components of self that are derived from involvement in social groups with which we are interpersonally committed.

For example, we may derive aspects of our social identity from our family or from a community of fans for a sports team. Social identities differ from personal identities because they are externally organized through membership. Our membership may be voluntary (Greek organization on campus) or involuntary (family) and explicit (we pay dues to our labor union) or implicit (we purchase and listen to hip-hop music). There are innumerous options for personal and social identities. While our personal identity choices express who we are, our social identities align us with particular groups. Through our social identities, we make statements about who we are and who we are not.

[table id=2 /]

Personal identities may change often as people have new experiences and develop new interests and hobbies. A current interest in online video games may give way to an interest in graphic design. Social identities do not change as often because they take more time to develop, as you must become interpersonally invested. For example, if an interest in online video games leads someone to become a member of a MMORPG, or a massively multiplayer online role-playing game community, that personal identity has led to a social identity that is now interpersonal and more entrenched.

Cultural identities are based on socially constructed categories that teach us a way of being and include expectations for social behavior or ways of acting (Yep, 1998). Since we are often a part of them since birth, cultural identities are the least changeable of the three. The ways of being and the social expectations for behavior within cultural identities do change over time, but what separates them from most social identities is their historical roots (Collier, 1996). For example, think of how ways of being and acting have changed for African Americans since the civil rights movement. Additionally, common ways of being and acting within a cultural identity group are expressed through communication. In order to be accepted as a member of a cultural group, members must be acculturated, essentially learning and using a code that other group members will be able to recognize. We are acculturated into our various cultural identities in obvious and less obvious ways. We may literally have a parent or friend tell us what it means to be a man or a woman. We may also unconsciously consume messages from popular culture that offer representations of gender.

Difference Matters

Whenever we encounter someone, we notice similarities and differences. While both are important, often the differences are highlighted. These differences contribute to communication troubles. We do not only see similarities and differences on an individual level. In fact, we also place people into in-groups and out-groups based on the similarities and differences we perceive. This is important because we then 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, 2011). In these situations, it is more likely that stereotypes and prejudice will influence our communication. Learning about difference and why they matter will help us be more competent communicators. The other side of emphasizing difference is to claim that no differences exist and that you see everyone as a human being. Rather than trying to ignore difference and see each person as a unique individual, we should know the history of how differences came to be so socially and culturally significant and how they continue to affect us today.

Culture and identity are complex. You may be wondering how some groups came to be dominant and others non-dominant. These differences are not natural, which can be seen as we unpack how various identities have changed over time in the next section. There is, however, an ideology of domination that makes it seem natural and normal that some people or groups will always have power over others (Allen, 2011). In fact, hierarchy and domination, although prevalent throughout modern human history, were likely not the norm among early humans. So one of the first reasons difference matters is that people and groups are treated unequally, and better understanding how those differences came to be can help us create a more just society. Difference also matters because demographics and patterns of interaction are changing.

An up close photograph of a columbian mother and daughter hugging and smiling.

In the United States, the population of people of color is increasing and diversifying, and visibility for people who are gay or lesbian and people with disabilities has also increased. The 2010 Census shows that the Hispanic and Latino/a populations in the United States are now the second largest group in the country, having grown 43 percent since the last census in 2000 (Saenz, 2011). By 2030, racial and ethnic minorities will account for one-third of the population (Allen, 2011). Additionally, legal and social changes have created a more open environment for sexual minorities and people with disabilities. These changes directly affect our interpersonal relationships. The workplace is one context where changing demographics has become increasingly important. Many organizations are striving to comply with changing laws by implementing policies aimed at creating equal access and opportunity. Some organizations are going further than legal compliance to try to create inclusive climates where diversity is valued because of the interpersonal and economic benefits it has the potential to produce.

We can now see that difference matters due to the inequalities that exist among cultural groups and due to changing demographics that affect our personal and social relationships. Unfortunately, many obstacles may impede our valuing of difference (Allen, 2011). Individuals with dominant identities may not validate the experiences of those in non-dominant groups because they do not experience the oppression directed at those with non-dominant identities. Further, they may find it difficult to acknowledge that not being aware of this oppression is due to privilege associated with their dominant identities. Because of this lack of recognition of oppression, members of dominant groups may minimize, dismiss, or question the experiences of non-dominant groups and view them as “complainers” or “whiners.” Recall from our earlier discussion of identity formation that people with dominant identities may stay in the unexamined or acceptance stages for a long time. Being stuck in these stages makes it much more difficult to value difference.

Members of non-dominant groups may have difficulty valuing difference due to negative experiences with the dominant group, such as not having their experiences validated. Both groups may be restrained from communicating about difference due to norms of political correctness, which may make people feel afraid to speak up because they may be perceived as insensitive or racist. All these obstacles are common and they are valid. However, as we will learn later, developing intercultural communication competence can help us gain new perspectives, become more mindful of our communication, and intervene in some of these negative cycles.

7.2 Exploring Specific Cultural Identities

We can get a better understanding of current cultural identities by unpacking how they came to be. By looking at history, we can see how cultural identities that seem to have existed forever actually came to be constructed for various political and social reasons and how they have changed over time. Communication plays a central role in this construction. As we have already discussed, our identities are relational and communicative; they are also constructed. Social constructionism is a view that argues the self is formed through our interactions with others and in relationship to social, cultural, and political contexts (Allen, 2011). In this section, we will explore how the cultural identities of race, gender, sexual orientation, and ability have been constructed in the United States and how communication relates to those identities. Other important identities could be discussed, like religion, age, nationality, and class. Although they are not given their own section, consider how those identities may intersect with the identities discussed next.

Would it surprise you to know that human beings, regardless of how they are racially classified, share 99.9 percent of their DNA? This finding by the Human Genome Project asserts that race is a social construct, not a biological one. The American Anthropological Association agrees, stating that race is the product of “historical and contemporary social, economic, educational, and political circumstances” (Allen, 2011). Therefore, we will define race as a socially constructed category based on differences in appearance that has been used to create hierarchies that privilege some and disadvantage others.

Race did not become a socially and culturally recognized marker until European colonial expansion in the 1500s. As Western Europeans traveled to parts of the world previously unknown to them and encountered people who were different from them, a hierarchy of races began to develop that placed lighter skinned Europeans above darker skinned people. At the time, newly developing fields in natural and biological sciences took interest in examining the new locales, including the plant and animal life, natural resources, and native populations. Over the next three hundred years, science that we would now undoubtedly recognize as flawed, biased, and racist legitimated notions that native populations were less evolved than white Europeans were, often calling them savages. In fact, there were scientific debates as to whether some of the native populations should be considered human or animal. Racial distinctions have been based largely on phenotypes, or physiological features such as skin color, hair texture, and body/facial features. Western “scientists” used these differences as “proof” that native populations were less evolved than the Europeans, which helped justify colonial expansion, enslavement, genocide, and exploitation on massive scales (Allen, 2011). Even though there is a consensus among experts that race is social rather than biological, we cannot deny that race still has meaning in our society and affects people as if it were “real.”

Given that race is one of the first things we notice about someone, it is important to know how race and communication relate (Allen, 2011). Discussing race in the United States is difficult for many reasons. One is due to uncertainty about language use. People may be frustrated by their perception that labels change too often or be afraid of using an “improper” term and being viewed as racially insensitive. It is important, however, that we not let political correctness get in the way of meaningful dialogues and learning opportunities related to difference. Learning some of the communicative history of race can make us more competent communicators and open us up to more learning experiences.

Racial classifications used by the government and our regular communication about race in the United States have changed frequently, which further points to the social construction of race. Currently, the primary racial groups in the United States are African American, Asian American, European American, Latino/a, and Native American, but a brief look at changes in how the US Census Bureau has defined race clearly shows that this hasn’t always been the case (see table 7.2). In the 1900s alone, there were twenty-six different ways that race was categorized on census forms (Allen, 2011). The way we communicate about race in our regular interactions has also changed, and many people are still hesitant to discuss race for fear of using “the wrong” vocabulary.

[table id=3 /]

The five primary racial groups noted previously can still be broken down further to specify a particular region, country, or nation. For example, Asian Americans are diverse in terms of country and language of origin and cultural practices. While the category of Asian Americans can be useful when discussing broad trends, it can also generalize among groups, which can lead to stereotypes. You may find that someone identifies as Chinese American or Korean American instead of Asian American. In this case, the label further highlights a person’s cultural lineage. We should not assume, however, that someone identifies with his or her cultural lineage, as many people have more in common with their US American peers than a culture that may be one or more generations removed.

History and personal preference also influence how we communicate about race. Culture and communication scholar Brenda Allen notes that when she was born in 1950, her birth certificate included an N for Negro. Later she referred to herself as colored because that is what people in her community referred to themselves as. During and before this time, the term black had negative connotations and would likely have offended someone. There was a movement in the 1960s to reclaim the word black, and the slogan “black is beautiful” was commonly used. Brenda Allen acknowledges the newer label of African American but notes that she still prefers black . The terms colored and Negro are no longer considered appropriate because they were commonly used during a time when black people were blatantly discriminated against. Even though that history may seem far removed to some, it is not to others. Currently, the terms African American and black are frequently used, and both are considered acceptable. The phrase people of color is acceptable for most and is used to be inclusive of other racial minorities. If you are unsure what to use, you could always observe how a person refers to himself or herself, or you could ask for his or her preference. In any case, a competent communicator defers to and respects the preference of the individual.

The label Latin American generally refers to people who live in Central American countries. Although Spain colonized much of what is now South and Central America and parts of the Caribbean, the inhabitants of these areas are now much more diverse. Depending on the region or country, some people primarily trace their lineage to the indigenous people who lived in these areas before colonization, or to a Spanish and indigenous lineage, or to other combinations that may include European, African, and/or indigenous heritage. Latina and Latino are labels that are preferable to Hispanic for many who live in the United States and trace their lineage to South and/ or Central America and/or parts of the Caribbean. Scholars who study Latina/o identity often use the label Latina/o in their writing to acknowledge women who avow that identity label (Calafell, 2007).

In verbal communication, you might say “Latina” when referring to a particular female or “Latino” when referring to a particular male of Latin American heritage. When referring to the group as a whole, you could say “Latinas and Latinos” instead of just “Latinos,” which would be more gender inclusive. While the US Census uses Hispanic, it refers primarily to people of Spanish origin, which does not account for the diversity of background of many Latinos/as. The term Hispanic also highlights the colonizer’s influence over the indigenous, which erases a history that is important to many. Additionally, there are people who claim Spanish origins and identify culturally as Hispanic but racially as white. Labels such as Puerto Rican or Mexican American, which further specify region or country of origin, may also be used. Just as with other cultural groups, if you are unsure of how to refer to someone, you can always ask for and honor someone’s preference.

The history of immigration in the United States also ties to the way that race has been constructed. The metaphor of the melting pot has been used to describe the immigration history of the United States but does not capture the experiences of many immigrant groups (Allen, 2011). Generally, immigrant groups who were white, or light skinned, and spoke English were better able to assimilate, or melt into the melting pot. However, immigrant groups that we might think of as white today were not always considered so. Irish immigrants were discriminated against and even portrayed as black in cartoons that appeared in newspapers. In some Southern states, Italian immigrants were forced to go to black schools, and it was not until 1952 that Asian immigrants were allowed to become citizens of the United States. All this history is important, because it continues to influence communication among races today.

Interracial Communication

Outline of a person with thought bubbles: How does racism influence my communication at individual and societal levels?

Race and communication are related in various ways. Racism influences our communication about race and is not an easy topic for most people to discuss. Today, people tend to view racism as overt acts such as calling someone a derogatory name or discriminating against someone in thought or action. However, there is a difference between racist acts, which we can attach to an individual, and institutional racism, which is not as easily identifiable. It is much easier for people to recognize and decry racist actions than it is to realize that racist patterns and practices go through societal institutions, which means that racism exists and does not have to be committed by any one person. As competent communicators and critical thinkers, we must challenge ourselves to be aware of how racism influences our communication at individual and societal levels.

We tend to make some of our assumptions about people’s race based on how they talk, and often these assumptions are based on stereotypes. Dominant groups tend to define what is correct or incorrect usage of a language, and since language is so closely tied to identity, labeling a group’s use of a language as incorrect or deviant challenges or negates part of their identity (Yancy, 2011). We know there is not only one way to speak English, but there have been movements to identify a standard.

This becomes problematic when we realize that “standard English” refers to a way of speaking English that is based on white, middle-class ideals that do not match up with the experiences of many. When we create a standard for English, we can label anything that deviates from that “nonstandard English.” Differences between standard English and what has been called “Black English” have gotten national attention through debates about whether or not instruction in classrooms should accommodate students who do not speak standard English. Education plays an important role in language acquisition, and class relates to access to education. In general, whether someone speaks standard English themselves or not, they tend to judge negatively people whose speech deviates from the standard.

Another national controversy has revolved around the inclusion of Spanish in common language use, such as Spanish as an option at ATMs, or other automated services, and Spanish language instruction in school for students who do not speak or are learning to speak English. As was noted earlier, the Latino/a population in the United States is growing fast, which has necessitated inclusion of Spanish in many areas of public life. This has also created a backlash, which some scholars argue is tied more to the race of the immigrants than the language they speak and a fear that white America could be engulfed by other languages and cultures (Speicher, 2002). This backlash has led to a revived movement to make English the official language of the United States.

The U.S. Constitution does not stipulate a national language, and Congress has not designated one either. While nearly thirty states have passed English-language legislation, it has mostly been symbolic, and court rulings have limited any enforceability (Zuckerman, 2010). The Linguistic Society of America points out that immigrants are very aware of the social and economic advantages of learning English and do not need to be forced. They also point out that the United States has always had many languages represented, that national unity has not rested on a single language, and that there are actually benefits to having a population that is multilingual (Linguistic Society of America, 2011). Interracial communication presents some additional verbal challenges.

Code switching involves changing from one way of speaking to another between or within interactions. Some people of color may engage in code switching when communicating with dominant group members because they fear they will be negatively judged. Adopting the language practices of the dominant group may minimize perceived differences. This code switching creates a linguistic dual consciousness in which people are able to maintain their linguistic identities with their in-group peers but can still acquire tools and gain access needed to function in dominant society (Yancy, 2011). White people may also feel anxious about communicating with people of color out of fear of being perceived as racist. In other situations, people in dominant groups may spotlight non-dominant members by asking them to comment on or educate others about their race (Allen, 2011).

When we first meet a newborn baby, we ask whether it is a boy or a girl. This question illustrates the importance of gender in organizing our social lives and our interpersonal relationships. A Canadian family became aware of the deep emotions people feel about gender and the great discomfort people feel when they cannot determine gender when they announced to the world that they were not going to tell anyone the gender of their baby, aside from the baby’s siblings. Their desire for their child, named Storm, to be able to experience early life without the boundaries and categories of gender brought criticism from many (Davis & James, 2011).

Conversely, many parents consciously or unconsciously “code” their newborns in gendered ways based on our society’s associations of pink clothing and accessories with girls and blue with boys. While it is obvious to most people that colors are not gendered, they take on new meaning when we assign gendered characteristics of masculinity and femininity to them. Just like race, gender is a socially constructed category. While it is true that there are biological differences between who we label male and female, the meaning our society places on those differences is what actually matters in our day-today lives. In addition, the biological differences are interpreted differently around the world, which further shows that although we think gender is a natural, normal, stable way of classifying things, it is actually not. There is a long history of appreciation for people who cross gender lines in Native American and South Central Asian cultures, to name just two.

You may have noticed the use the word gender instead of sex . That is because gender is an identity based on internalized cultural notions of masculinity and femininity that is constructed through communication and interaction. There are two important parts of this definition to unpack. First, we internalize notions of gender based on socializing institutions, which helps us form our gender identity. Then we attempt to construct that gendered identity through our interactions with others, which is our gender expression. Sex is based on biological characteristics, including external genitalia, internal sex organs, chromosomes, and hormones (Wood, 2005). While the biological characteristics between men and women are obviously different, the meaning that we create and attach to those characteristics makes them significant. The cultural differences in how that significance is ascribed are proof that “our way of doing things” is arbitrary. For example, cross-cultural research has found that boys and girls in most cultures show both aggressive and nurturing tendencies, but cultures vary in terms of how they encourage these characteristics between genders. In a group in Africa, young boys are responsible for taking care of babies and are encouraged to be nurturing (Wood, 2005).

Gender has been constructed over the past few centuries in political and deliberate ways that have tended to favor men in terms of power. Moreover, various academic fields joined in the quest to “prove” there are “natural” differences between men and women. While the “proof” they presented was credible to many at the time, it seems blatantly sexist and inaccurate today. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, scientists who measure skulls, also known as craniometrists, claimed that men were more intelligent than women were because they had larger brains. Leaders in the fast-growing fields of sociology and psychology argued that women were less evolved than men and had more in common with “children and savages” than an adult (white) males (Allen, 2011).

Doctors and other decision makers like politicians also used women’s menstrual cycles as evidence that they were irrational, or hysterical, and therefore could not be trusted to vote, pursue higher education, or be in a leadership position. These are just a few of the many instances of how knowledge was created by seemingly legitimate scientific disciplines that we can now clearly see served to empower men and disempower women. This system is based on the ideology of patriarchy , which is a system of social structures and practices that maintains the values, priorities, and interests of men as a group (Wood, 2005). One of the ways patriarchy is maintained is by its relative invisibility. While women have been the focus of much research on gender differences, males have been largely unexamined. Men have been treated as the “generic” human being to which others are compared. However, that ignores the fact that men have a gender, too. Masculinities studies have challenged that notion by examining how masculinities are performed.

There have been challenges to the construction of gender in recent decades. Since the 1960s, scholars and activists have challenged established notions of what it means to be a man or a woman. The women’s rights movement in the United States dates back to the 1800s, when the first women’s rights convention was held in Seneca Falls, New York, in 1848 (Wood, 2005). Although most women’s rights movements have been led by white, middle-class women, there was overlap between those involved in the abolitionist movement to end slavery and the beginnings of the women’s rights movement. Although some of the leaders of the early women’s rights movement had class and education privilege, they were still taking a risk by organizing and protesting. Black women were even more at risk, and Sojourner Truth, an emancipated slave, faced those risks often and gave a much noted extemporaneous speech at a women’s rights gathering in Akron, Ohio, in 1851, which came to be called “Ain’t I a Woman?” (Wood, 2005) Her speech highlighted the multiple layers of oppression faced by black women.

Transgender is an umbrella term for people whose sex identity and/or expression does not match the sex they were assigned by birth. Transgender people may or may not seek medical intervention like surgery or hormone treatments to help match their physiology with their gender identity. The term transgender includes other labels such as transsexual and intersex, among others. Terms like hermaphrodite and she-male are not considered appropriate. As with other groups, it is best to allow someone to self-identify first and then honor their preferred label. If you are unsure of which pronouns to use when addressing someone, you can use gender-neutral language or you can use the pronoun that matches with how they are presenting.

Gender as a cultural identity has implications for many aspects of our lives, including real-world contexts like education and work. Schools are primary grounds for socialization, and the educational experience for males and females is different in many ways from preschool through college. Although not always intentional, schools tend to recreate the hierarchies and inequalities that exist in society. Given that we live in a patriarchal society, there are communicative elements present in school that support this (Allen, 2011). For example, teachers are more likely to call on and pay attention to boys in a classroom, giving them more feedback in the form of criticism, praise, and help. This sends an implicit message that boys are more worthy of attention and valuable than girls are. Teachers are also more likely to lead girls to focus on feelings and appearance and boys to focus on competition and achievement. The focus on appearance for girls can lead to anxieties about body image.

Gender inequalities are also evident in the administrative structure of schools, which puts males in positions of authority more than females. While females make up 75 percent of the educational workforce, only 22 percent of superintendents and 8 percent of high school principals are women. Similar trends exist in colleges and universities, with women only accounting for 26 percent of full professors. These inequalities in schools correspond to larger inequalities in the general workforce. While there are more women in the workforce now than ever before, they still face a glass ceiling, which is a barrier for promotion to upper management. Many of my students have been surprised at the continuing pay gap that exists between men and women. In 2010, women earned about seventy-seven cents to every dollar earned by men (National Committee on Pay Equity, 2021). To put this into perspective, the National Committee on Pay Equity started an event called Equal Pay Day. In 2011, Equal Pay Day was on April 11. This signifies that for a woman to earn the same amount of money a man earned in a year, she would have to work more than three months extra, until April 11, to make up for the difference (National Committee on Pay Equity, 2021).

While race and gender are two of the first things we notice about others, sexuality is often something we view as personal and private. Although many people hold a view that a person’s sexuality should be kept private, this is not a reality for our society. One only needs to observe popular culture and media for a short time to see that sexuality permeates much of our public discourse.

Sexuality relates to culture and identity in important ways that extend beyond sexual orientation, just as race is more than the color of one’s skin and gender is more than one’s biological and physiological manifestations of masculinity and femininity. Sexuality is not just physical; it is social in that we communicate with others about sexuality (Allen, 2011). Sexuality is also biological in that it connects to physiological functions that carry significant social and political meaning like puberty, menstruation, and pregnancy. Sexuality connects to public health issues like sexually transmitted infections (STIs), sexual assault, sexual abuse, sexual harassment, and teen pregnancy. Sexuality is at the center of political issues like abortion, sex education, and gay and lesbian rights. While all these contribute to sexuality as a cultural identity, the focus in this section is on sexual orientation.

The most obvious way sexuality relates to identity is through sexual orientation. Sexual orientation refers to a person’s primary physical and emotional sexual attraction and activity. The terms we most often use to categorize sexual orientation are heterosexual, gay, lesbian, and bisexual. Gays, lesbians, and bisexuals are sometimes referred to as sexual minorities. While the term sexual preference has been used previously, sexual orientation is more appropriate, since preference implies a simple choice. Although someone’s preference for a restaurant or actor may change frequently, sexuality is not as simple. The term homosexual can be appropriate in some instances, but it carries with it a clinical and medicalized tone. As you will see in the timeline that follows, the medical community has a recent history of “treating homosexuality” with means that most would view as inhumane today. So many people prefer a term like gay, which was chosen and embraced by gay people, rather than homosexual, which was imposed by a then discriminatory medical system.

The gay and lesbian rights movement became widely recognizable in the United States in the 1950s and continues on today, as evidenced by prominent issues regarding sexual orientation in national news and politics. National and international groups like the Human Rights Campaign advocate for rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and queer (GLBTQ) communities. While these communities are often grouped together within one acronym (GLBTQ), they are different. Gays and lesbians constitute the most visible of the groups and receive the most attention and funding. Bisexuals are rarely visible or included in popular cultural discourses or in social and political movements. Transgender issues have received much more attention in recent years, but transgender identity connects to gender more than it does to sexuality. Last, queer is a term used to describe a group that is diverse in terms of identities but usually takes a more activist and at times radical stance that critiques sexual categories. While queer was long considered a derogatory label, and still is by some, the queer activist movement that emerged in the 1980s and early 1990s reclaimed the word and embraced it as a positive. As you can see, there is a diversity of identities among sexual minorities, just as there is variation within races and genders.

As with other cultural identities, notions of sexuality have been socially constructed in different ways throughout human history. Sexual orientation did not come into being as an identity category until the late 1800s. Before that, sexuality was viewed in more physical or spiritual senses that were largely separate from a person’s identity. The table below traces some of the developments relevant to sexuality, identity, and communication that show how this cultural identity has been constructed over the past 3,000 years.

[table id=4 /]

Photograph of a woman using a wheelchair-to-water pool lift to enter a pool. Her wheelchair is in the background.

There is resistance to classifying ability as a cultural identity, because we follow a medical model of disability that places disability as an individual and medical rather than social and cultural issue. While much of what distinguishes able-bodied and cognitively able from disabled is rooted in science, biology, and physiology, there are important sociocultural dimensions. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) defines an individual with a disability as “a person who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, a person who has a history or record of such an impairment, or a person who is perceived by others as having such an impairment” (Allen, 2011). An impairment is defined as “any temporary or permanent loss or abnormality of a body structure or function, whether physiological or psychological” (Allen, 2011).

This definition is important because it notes the social aspect of disability in that people’s life activities are limited and the relational aspect of disability in that the perception of a disability by others can lead someone to be classified as such. Ascribing an identity of disabled to a person can be problematic. If there is a mental or physical impairment, it should be diagnosed by a credentialed expert. If there is not an impairment, then the label of disabled can have negative impacts, as this label carries social and cultural significance. People are tracked into various educational programs based on their physical and cognitive abilities. In addition, there are many cases of people being mistakenly labeled disabled who were treated differently despite their protest of the ascribed label. Students who did not speak English as a first language, for example, were—and perhaps still are—sometimes put into special education classes.

Ability, just as the other cultural identities discussed, has institutionalized privileges and disadvantages associated with it. Ableism is the system of beliefs and practices that produces a physical and mental standard that is projected as normal for a human being and labels deviations from it abnormal, resulting in unequal treatment and access to resources. Ability privilege refers to the unearned advantages that are provided for people who fit the cognitive and physical norms (Allen, 2011). I once attended a workshop about ability privilege led by a man who was visually impaired. He talked about how, unlike other cultural identities that are typically stable over a lifetime, ability fluctuates for most people. We have all experienced times when we are more or less able.

Perhaps you broke your leg and had to use crutches or a wheelchair for a while. Getting sick for a prolonged period of time also lessens our abilities, but we may fully recover from any of these examples and regain our ability privilege. Whether you have experienced a short-term disability or not, the majority of us will become less physically and cognitively able as we get older.

Statistically, people with disabilities make up the largest minority group in the United States, with an estimated 20 percent of people five years or older living with some form of disability (Allen, 2011). Medical advances have allowed some people with disabilities to live longer and more active lives than before, which has led to an increase in the number of people with disabilities. This number could continue to increase, as we have thousands of veterans returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with physical disabilities or psychological impairments such as posttraumatic stress disorder.

As disability has been constructed in US history, it has intersected with other cultural identities. For example, people opposed to “political and social equality for women cited their supposed physical, intellectual, and psychological flaws, deficits, and deviations from the male norm.” They framed women as emotional, irrational, and unstable, which was used to put them into the “scientific” category of “feeblemindedness,” which led them to be institutionalized (Carlson, 2001). Arguments supporting racial inequality and tighter immigration restrictions also drew on notions of disability, framing certain racial groups as prone to mental retardation, mental illness, or uncontrollable emotions and actions. Refer to table 7.4 for a timeline of developments related to ability, identity, and communication. These thoughts led to a dark time in US history, as the eugenics movement sought to limit reproduction of people deemed as deficient.

[table id=5 /]

7.3 Intercultural Communication Competence

A white man with a wheelchair, Asian woman, and Black woman are all smiling and looking at a computer screen.

It is through intercultural communication that we come to create, understand, and transform culture and identity. Intercultural communication is communication between people with differing cultural identities. One reason we should study intercultural communication is to foster greater self-awareness (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). Our thought process regarding culture is often “other focused,” meaning that the culture of the other person or group is what stands out in our perception. However, the old adage “know thyself” is appropriate, as we become more aware of our own culture by better understanding other cultures and perspectives. Intercultural communication can allow us to step outside of our comfortable, usual frame of reference and see our culture through a different lens. Additionally, as we become more self-aware, we may also become more ethical communicators as we challenge our ethnocentrism , or our tendency to view our own culture as superior to other cultures.

Intercultural communication competence (ICC) is the ability to communicate effectively and appropriately in various cultural contexts. There are numerous components of ICC. Some key components include motivation, self- and other knowledge, and tolerance for uncertainty.

Initially, a person’s motivation for communicating with people from other cultures must be considered. Motivation refers to the root of a person’s desire to foster intercultural relationships and can be intrinsic or extrinsic (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). Put simply, if a person is not motivated to communicate with people from different cultures, then the components of ICC discussed next do not really matter. If a person has a healthy curiosity that drives him or her toward intercultural encounters in order to learn more about self and others, then there is a foundation from which to build additional competence-relevant attitudes and skills. This intrinsic motivation makes intercultural communication a voluntary, rewarding, and lifelong learning process. Motivation can also be extrinsic, meaning that the desire for intercultural communication is driven by an outside reward like money, power, or recognition. While both types of motivation can contribute to ICC, context may further enhance or impede a person’s motivation to communicate across cultures.

Members of dominant groups are often less motivated, intrinsically and extrinsically, toward intercultural communication than members of non-dominant groups, because they do not see the incentives for doing so. Having more power in communication encounters can create an unbalanced situation where the individual from the non-dominant group is expected to exhibit competence, or the ability to adapt to the communication behaviors and attitudes of the other. Even in situations where extrinsic rewards like securing an overseas business investment are at stake, it is likely that the foreign investor is much more accustomed to adapting to United States business customs and communication than vice versa. This expectation that others will adapt to our communication can be unconscious, but later ICC skills we will learn will help bring it to awareness.

The unbalanced situation I just described is a daily reality for many individuals with non-dominant identities. Their motivation toward intercultural communication may be driven by survival in terms of functioning effectively in dominant contexts. Recall the phenomenon known as code switching discussed earlier, in which individuals from non-dominant groups adapt their communication to fit in with the dominant group. In such instances, African Americans may “talk white” by conforming to what is called “standard English,” women in corporate environments may adapt masculine communication patterns, people who are gay or lesbian may self-censor and avoid discussing their same-gender partners with coworkers, and people with nonvisible disabilities may not disclose them in order to avoid judgment.

While intrinsic motivation captures an idealistic view of intercultural communication as rewarding in its own right, many contexts create extrinsic motivation. In either case, there is a risk that an individual’s motivation can still lead to incompetent communication. For example, it would be exploitative for an extrinsically motivated person to pursue intercultural communication solely for an external reward and then abandon the intercultural relationship once the reward is attained. These situations highlight the relational aspect of ICC, meaning that the motivation of all parties should be considered. Motivation alone cannot create ICC.

The most effective way to develop other-knowledge is by direct and thoughtful encounters with other cultures. However, people may not readily have these opportunities for a variety of reasons. Despite the overall diversity in the United States, many people still only interact with people who are similar to them. Even in a racially diverse educational setting, for example, people often group off with people of their own race. While a heterosexual person may have a gay or lesbian friend or relative, they likely spend most of their time with other heterosexuals. Unless you interact with people with disabilities as part of your job or have a person with a disability in your friend or family group, you likely spend most of your time interacting with able-bodied people. Living in a rural area may limit your ability to interact with a range of cultures, and most people do not travel internationally regularly. Because of this, we may have to make a determined effort to interact with other cultures or rely on educational sources like college classes, books, or documentaries. Learning another language is also a good way to learn about a culture, because you can then read the news or watch movies in the native language, which can offer insights that are lost in translation. It is important to note though that we must evaluate the credibility of the source of our knowledge, whether it is a book, person, or other source. In addition, knowledge of another language does not automatically equate to ICC.

Developing self- and other-knowledge is an ongoing process that will continue to adapt and grow as we encounter new experiences. Mindfulness and cognitive complexity will help as we continue to build our ICC (Pusch, 2009). Mindfulness is a state of self- and other-monitoring that informs later reflection on communication interactions. As mindful communicators, we should ask questions that focus on the interactive process like “How is our communication going? What are my reactions? What are their reactions?” Being able to adapt our communication in the moment based on our answers to these questions is a skill that comes with a high level of ICC. Reflecting on the communication encounter later to see what can be learned is also a way to build ICC. We should then be able to incorporate what we learned into our communication frameworks, which requires cognitive flexibility. Cognitive flexibility refers to the ability to continually supplement and revise existing knowledge to create new categories rather than forcing new knowledge into old categories. Cognitive flexibility helps prevent our knowledge from becoming stale and also prevents the formation of stereotypes and can help us avoid prejudging an encounter or jumping to conclusions. In summary, to be better intercultural communicators, we should know much about others and ourselves and be able to reflect on and adapt our knowledge as we gain new experiences.

Motivation and knowledge can inform us as we gain new experiences, but how we feel in the moment of intercultural encounters is also important. Tolerance for uncertainty refers to an individual’s attitude about and level of comfort in uncertain situations (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). Some people perform better in uncertain situations than others, and intercultural encounters often bring up uncertainty. Whether communicating with someone of a different gender, race, or nationality, we are often wondering what we should or should not do or say. Situations of uncertainty most often become clearer as they progress, but the anxiety that an individual with a low tolerance for uncertainty feels may lead them to leave the situation or otherwise communicate in a less competent manner. Individuals with a high tolerance for uncertainty may exhibit more patience, waiting on new information to become available or seeking out information, which may then increase the understanding of the situation and lead to a more successful outcome (Pusch, 2009). Individuals who are intrinsically motivated toward intercultural communication may have a higher tolerance for uncertainty, in that their curiosity leads them to engage with others who are different because they find the self- and other-knowledge gained rewarding.

Cultivating Intercultural Communication Competence

How can ICC be built and achieved? This is a key question we will address in this section. Two main ways to build ICC are through experiential learning and reflective practices (Bednarz, 2010). We must first realize that competence is not any one thing. Part of being competent means that you can assess new situations and adapt your existing knowledge to the new contexts. What it means to be competent will vary depending on your physical location, your role (personal, professional, etc.), and your life stage, among other things. Sometimes we will know or be able to figure out what is expected of us in a given situation, but sometimes we may need to act in unexpected ways to meet the needs of a situation. Competence enables us to better cope with the unexpected, adapt to the non-routine, and connect to uncommon frameworks. ICC is less about a list of rules and more about a box of tools.

How to cultivate ICC: foster attitudes that motivate us, discover knowledge that informs us, develop skills that enable us

Discovering knowledge that informs us is another step that can build on our motivation. One tool involves learning more about our cognitive style (how we learn). Our cognitive style consists of our preferred patterns for “gathering information, constructing meaning, and organizing and applying knowledge” (Bennett, 2009). As we explore cognitive styles, we discover that there are differences in how people attend to and perceive the world, explain events, organize the world, and use rules of logic (Nisbett, 2003). Some cultures have a cognitive style that focuses more on tasks, analytic and objective thinking, details and precision, inner direction, and independence, while others focus on relationships and people over tasks and things, concrete and metaphorical thinking, and a group consciousness and harmony.

Developing ICC is a complex learning process. At the basic level of learning, we accumulate knowledge and assimilate it into our existing frameworks. However, accumulated knowledge does not necessarily help us in situations where we have to apply that knowledge. Transformative learning takes place at the highest levels and occurs when we encounter situations that challenge our accumulated knowledge and our ability to accommodate that knowledge to manage a real-world situation. The cognitive dissonance that results in these situations is often uncomfortable and can lead to a hesitance to repeat such an engagement. One tip for cultivating ICC that can help manage these challenges is to find a community of like-minded people who are also motivated to develop ICC.

Developing skills that enable us is another part of ICC. Some of the skills important to ICC are the ability to empathize, accumulate cultural information, listen, resolve conflict, and manage anxiety (Bennett, 2009). Again, you are already developing a foundation for these skills by reading this book, but you can expand those skills to intercultural settings with the motivation and knowledge already described. Contact alone does not increase intercultural skills; there must be more deliberate measures taken to capitalize fully on those encounters. While research now shows that intercultural contact does decrease prejudices, this is not enough to become interculturally competent. The ability to empathize and manage anxiety enhances prejudice reduction, and these two skills have been shown to enhance the overall impact of intercultural contact even more than acquiring cultural knowledge. There is intercultural training available for people who are interested. If you cannot access training, you may choose to research intercultural training on your own, as there are many books, articles, and manuals written on the subject.

While formal intercultural experiences like studying abroad or volunteering for the Special Olympics or a shelter for gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and queer (GLBTQ) youth can result in learning, informal experiences are also important. We may be less likely to include informal experiences in our reflection if we do not see them as legitimate. Reflection should also include “critical incidents” or what I call “a-ha! moments.” Think of reflection as a tool for metacompetence that can be useful in bringing the formal and informal together (Bednarz, 2010).

Figure 7.1: The Hispanic and Latinx population has grown 43% since 2000. Jhon David. 2018. Unsplash license . https://unsplash.com/photos/3WgkTDw7XyE

Figure 7.2: Competent communicators challenge themselves through awareness. Kindred Grey. 2022. CC BY 4.0 . Includes Think by Brandon Lim from NounProject ( NounProject license ).

Figure 7.3: Ability is a social identity that makes up the largest minority group in the U.S.. CDC. 2021. Unsplash license . https://unsplash.com/photos/68zwHPkpxpI

Figure 7.4: Intercultural communication can foster greater self-awareness and more ethical communication. Ivan Samkov. 2021. Pexels license . https://www.pexels.com/photo/coworkers-looking-at-a-laptop-in-an-office-8127690/

Figure 7.5: How to cultivate intercultural communication competence. Kindred Grey. 2022. CC BY 4.0 .

Section 7.1

Allen, B. J. (2011). Difference matters: Communicating social identity (2nd ed.) Waveland.

Collier, M. J. (1996). Communication competence problematics in ethnic friendships. Communication Monographs, 63 (4), 314-336. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759609376397

Saenz, A. (2011, March 21). Census data shows a changed American landscape. ABC News. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/census-data-reveals-changed-american-landscape/story?id=13206427

Spreckels, J., & Kotthoff, H. (2009). Communicating identity in intercultural communication. In H. Kotthoff & H. Spencer-Oatey, Handbook of intercultural communication (pp. 415-419). Mouton de Gruyter.

Tatum, B. D. (2000). The complexity of identity: ‘Who am I?’ In M. Adams, W. J. Blumfeld, R. Casteneda, H. W. Hackman, M. L. Peters, & X. Zuniga (Eds.), Readings for diversity and social justice (pp. 9-14). Routledge.

Yep, G. A. (1998). My three cultures: Navigating the multicultural identity landscape. In J. N. Martin, T. K. Nakayama & L. A. Flores (Eds.), Readings in cultural contexts (pp. 79-84). Mayfield.

Section 7.2

Table 7.2: Adapted from Brenda J. Allen, Difference Matters: Communicating Social Identity (Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, 2011), 71–72.

Table 7.3: Adapted from Brenda J. Allen, Difference Matters: Communicating Social Identity (Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, 2011), 117–25; and University of Denver Queer and Ally Commission, “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex, and Queer History,” Queer Ally Training Manual , 2008.

Table 7.4: Maggie Shreve, “The Movement for Independent Living: A Brief History,” Independent Living Research Utilization , accessed October 14, 2011, http://ilru.org/html/publications/infopaks/IL_paradigm.doc.

Carlson, L. (2001). Cognitive ableism and disability studies: Feminist reflections on the history of mental retardation. Hypatia , 16 (4), 124-146. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2001.tb00756.x

Davis, L., & James, S. D. (2011, May 30). Canadian mother raising her ‘genderless’ baby, Storm, defends her family’s decision. ABC News. https://abcnews.go.com/Health/canadian-mother-raising-genderless-baby-storm-defends-familys/story?id=52436895

National Committee on Pay Equity (2021). Worse than we thought. https://www.pay-equity.org/

Speicher, B. L. (2002). Problems with English-only policies. Management Communication Quarterly, 15(4), 619-625.

Wood, J. T. (2005). Gendered lives: Communication, gender, and culture (5th ed.) Thomas Wadsworth.

Yancy, G. (2011). The scholar who coined the term Ebonics: A conversation with Dr. Robert L. Williams.

Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 10 (1), 41–51.

Zuckerman, M. A. (2010). Constitutional clash: When English-only meets voting rights. Yale Law and Policy Review, 28 (2): 353–377. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27871299

Section 7.3

Bednarz, F. (2010). Building up intercultural competences: Challenges and learning processes. In M. G. Onorati & F. Bednarz (Eds.), Building intercultural competencies: A handbook for professionals in education, social work, and health care (pp. 39-52). Acco.

Bennett, J. M. (2009). Cultivating intercultural competence. In D. K. Deardorff (Ed.), The Sage handbook of intercultural competence (pp. 127-134). Sage.

Martin, J. N., & Nakayama, T. K. (2010). Intercultural communication in contexts (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Nisbett, R. E. (2003). The geography of thought: How Asians and westerners think differently…and why . Free Press.

Opdal, P. M. (2001). Curiosity, wonder, and education seen as perspective. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 20 (4), 331–44. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011851211125

Pusch, M. D. (2009). The interculturally competent global leader. In D. K. Deardorff (Ed.), The Sage handbook of intercultural competence (pp. 66-84). Sage.

An ongoing negotiation of learned and patterned beliefs, attitudes, values, and behaviors

Based on socially constructed categories that teach us a way of being and include expectations for social behavior or ways of acting

A view that argues the self is formed through our interactions with others and in relationship to social, cultural, and political contexts

A socially constructed category based on differences in appearance that has been used to create hierarchies that privilege some and disadvantage others

Involves changing from one way of speaking to another between or within interactions

An identity based on internalized cultural notions of masculinity and femininity that is constructed through communication and interaction

Based on biological characteristics, including external genitalia, internal sex organs, chromosomes, and hormones

Communication between people with differing cultural identities

Our tendency to view our own culture as superior to other cultures

The ability to communicate effectively and appropriately in various cultural contexts. Some key components include motivation, self-and-other knowledge, and tolerance for uncertainty.

A state of self- and other-monitoring that informs later reflection on communication interactions

Communication in the Real World Copyright © by Faculty members in the School of Communication Studies, James Madison University is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

About Stanford GSB

The Leadership
Dean’s Updates
School News & History
Commencement
Business, Government & Society
Centers & Institutes
Center for Entrepreneurial Studies
Center for Social Innovation
Stanford Seed

About the Experience

Learning at Stanford GSB
Experiential Learning
Guest Speakers
Entrepreneurship
Social Innovation
Communication
Life at Stanford GSB
Collaborative Environment
Activities & Organizations
Student Services
Housing Options
International Students

Full-Time Degree Programs

Why Stanford MBA
Academic Experience
Financial Aid
Why Stanford MSx
Research Fellows Program
See All Programs

Non-Degree & Certificate Programs

Executive Education
Stanford Executive Program
Programs for Organizations
The Difference
Online Programs
Stanford LEAD
Seed Transformation Program
Aspire Program
Seed Spark Program
Faculty Profiles
Academic Areas
Awards & Honors
Conferences

Faculty Research

Publications
Working Papers
Case Studies

Research Hub

Research Labs & Initiatives
Business Library
Data, Analytics & Research Computing
Behavioral Lab

Research Labs

Cities, Housing & Society Lab
Golub Capital Social Impact Lab

Research Initiatives

Corporate Governance Research Initiative
Corporations and Society Initiative
Policy and Innovation Initiative
Rapid Decarbonization Initiative
Stanford Latino Entrepreneurship Initiative
Value Chain Innovation Initiative
Venture Capital Initiative
Career & Success
Climate & Sustainability
Corporate Governance
Culture & Society
Finance & Investing
Government & Politics
Leadership & Management
Markets and Trade
Operations & Logistics
Opportunity & Access
Technology & AI
Opinion & Analysis
Email Newsletter

Welcome, Alumni

Communities
Digital Communities & Tools
Regional Chapters
Women’s Programs
Identity Chapters
Find Your Reunion
Career Resources
Job Search Resources
Career & Life Transitions
Programs & Webinars
Career Video Library
Alumni Education
Research Resources
Volunteering
Alumni News
Class Notes
Alumni Voices
Contact Alumni Relations
Upcoming Events

Admission Events & Information Sessions

MBA Program
MSx Program
PhD Program
Alumni Events
All Other Events

What Is Normal? How Culture Affects Communication Styles

In this episode, Michele Gelfand explains why social norms are the glue that keeps cultures together.

September 13, 2022

Why do we drive on only one side of the road? Why don’t we sing in libraries? Why wear a swimsuit?

For Professor Michele Gelfand , it all comes down to culture. As a cross-cultural psychologist, Gelfand is fascinated by social environments and their effects on human behavior, particularly, how strictly people adhere to social norms.

In this episode of Think Fast, Talk Smart , Gelfand joins host and lecturer of strategic communications Matt Abrahams to explain why some cultures are “tight” and “have strict social norms,” while others are “loose,” with “more permissibility of behavior.”

Listen & Subscribe

Think Fast, Talk Smart is a podcast produced by Stanford Graduate School of Business. Each episode provides concrete, easy-to-implement tools and techniques to help you hone and enhance your communication skills.

Full Transcript

Matt Abrahams: We’ve all heard about the importance of IQ in our interactions, and some of us have even heard about EQ, emotional intelligence, in our interactions. But have you heard of CQ: cultural intelligence? Today I am excited to explore how culture influences our communication. I’m Matt Abrahams, and I teach Strategic Communication at Stanford Graduate School of Business. Welcome to Think Fast, Talk Smart: The Podcast .

I am really excited to chat with Michele Gelfand. Michele is the John H. Scully Professor in Cross Cultural Management and a professor of organizational behavior. She uses field, experimental, computational, and neuroscience methods to understand cross-cultural organizational behavior, negotiation, conflict, and diversity. Michele is the author of Rule Makers, Rule Breakers: How Tight and Loose Cultures Wire Our World . Welcome, Michele.

Michele Gelfand: It’s great to be here, Matt.

Matt Abrahams: Thanks for being here, and a big congratulations to you on your induction to the National Academies of Science. That’s so exciting.

Michele Gelfand: So thank you.

Matt Abrahams: You are known for many things, but perhaps the idea most associated with you and your work is the idea of tight and loose cultures. I’d love to have you define what you mean by those two concepts and perhaps explain how the Muppets fit into all of this.

Michele Gelfand: Yeah, so I’m a cross-cultural psychologist. I study culture, which is really a puzzle. It’s omnipresent. It’s all around us, and affects us from the moment we wake up until the time we go to sleep. But we take it for granted. It’s like the two fish swimming around, and they pass by another fish who says: “Hey, boys. How’s the water?” And they swim past. Then they say: “What’s water?”

Matt Abrahams: Right.

Michele Gelfand: And that story indicates something really profound, which is that sometimes the most important realities around us are the most difficult to appreciate or recognize. For fish, that’s water; but for humans, that’s culture. So I try to understand the deeper cultural codes that drive our behavior. And I focus on social norms. These are basically unwritten rules for behavior that sometimes get more formalized in terms of codes and laws. And in particular, how strictly people follow social norms has been my focus.

And you know what? The idea is that all cultures have social norms. We drive on one side of the street versus both sides of the street. We don’t steal people’s food in restaurants or start singing in libraries. Most of us don’t do that because these are things that help us coordinate our behavior. They’re the glue that keeps us together.

But some cultures have strict social norms. We call them “tight cultures.” Other cultures have looser social norms, where there’s more permissibility of behavior. And so we try to really quantify how tight or loose are cultures around the world. Not just nations, but then we can zoom in and look at states in the U.S. or provinces in China. We can look even beyond that in terms of organizations, how strict or permissive, tight or loose, they are. We can even look into our own mindsets. We can classify people in terms of whether they’re an Order Muppet, like Bert, or whether they’re a Chaos Muppet, like Ernie or like Cookie Monster.

And the idea is that we all are socialized to have certain mindsets, whether tight or loose, and it’s important to understand why these codes develop. Why do they evolve in the first place? What tradeoff do they provide for people, for organizations, for nations? That’s what, really, we try to do in cross-cultural psychology is try to understand these cultural codes, quantify them, study them all around the world.

Matt Abrahams: It’s totally fascinating. I’m channeling my inner Elmo as I’m talking to you. We had Phil Zimbardo on a while ago. Phil was a mentor of mine when I was a student here at Stanford. We talked about norms and the influence of how they can impact our activities and actions, and it sounds like you’re diving very deep into that. I’m curious: Is there an advantage to having a tight or loose culture? Is one better than the other?

Michele Gelfand: Yeah, this is such a great question. We published a paper some years ago in Science where we asked people all around the world about the level of norms strength in their countries. Places like Singapore and Japan, China, Austria, Germany, they tended to lean tighter. Even though all tight cultures have loose elements and all loose cultures have tight elements, they veer tight. Cultures like Brazil, Greece, the Netherlands, the U.S., they tended to veer looser — again, even though all cultures have both elements.

And what we found is, in general, tight cultures have a lot of order. They have less crime. They have more monitoring in terms of police per capita, security cameras. They also have more synchrony. So they have people who are wearing more similar clothing or driving more similar cars, more uniformity. Even city clocks in streets have more synchrony in tight cultures.

Matt Abrahams: Wow.

Michele Gelfand: We actually measured this. We looked at: How aligned are clocks in city streets? And actually, tight cultures, they’re off by milliseconds. And in loose cultures, you’re not totally sure what time it is. The clocks are not synchronized.

Michele Gelfand: And also, tight cultures have a lot of order when it comes to self-control. So if you live in a culture where there is a lot of social order and uniformity, you learn to manage your impulses from a very early age. That has its downstream effects on things like lower debt in tight cultures, lower obesity, and lower alcoholism and drug abuse.

So tight cultures corner the market on order, and loose cultures struggle with order. They have more crime, less monitoring, less synchrony — like the “clock” example — and they have a host of self-regulation problems. Even, by the way, animals, like pets, tend to be fatter in loose cultures.

But loose cultures corner the market on openness. They have more tolerance of people from different races, religions, creeds. We actually even sent out our research assistants to do a field experiment outside in their home countries, where I dressed them up with either facial warts that I bought for them on the internet —

Matt Abrahams: Oh, okay. Like Halloween makeup?

Michele Gelfand: Yeah. We put lots of warts on their faces. In another condition, they were wearing tattoos and nose rings and purple hair. And then in a third condition, they were just wearing their normal face. And we simply had them go ask for directions in city streets or in stores in their home countries, and what we found was fascinating on this “openness” issue.

We found that when people were just wearing their normal face, there were no cultural differences in helping behavior; but when they were wearing these strange things on their face, or tattoos and nose rings, they got far more help in looser cultures. So that’s an indication of tolerance out there in the wild.

We also know that loose cultures corner the market on openness in terms of creativity, idea generation. There’s been large-scale studies of creativity where people from loose cultures are more likely to enter those contests and more likely to win. And loose cultures tend to be more adaptable. When new norms enter the population, they tend to take off more quickly.

So loose cultures corner the market on openness, and tight cultures struggle with openness. So in that sense, it’s a tradeoff. We can harness the power of social norms to shift in either direction. I think that’s really an important part of the book and our research: How do you start pivoting? When you get too tight or too loose, how do you try to maximize order and openness?

Matt Abrahams: So the dialectic of order versus openness I find really fascinating, and I’m curious: For an individual, is just recognizing it the first step to being able to adjust and adapt? I live in a loose culture, and I look at my own household, where I might have a more loose attitude than, let’s say, my wife. Are those things that can be changed over time?

Michele Gelfand: The first thing I would say is it’s important to understand one’s own self. And for that, you can go to my website at michelegelfand.com and take the tight/loose mindset quiz. This is actually based on data that we published in Science, and you can see where you score on this continuum. And I want to emphasize we can all kind of switch codes quite easily. When you go to a library, your tight mindset kind of kicks in. You kind of know: “This is a tight context. I can’t start doing all sorts of weird things.”

Michele Gelfand: Or in the classroom, for the most part. And then when we’re at a party or in public parks, we kind of become looser. So we can… It’s amazing, actually, how much we can really rapidly switch codes. With that said, we all have our own default on the tight/loose continuum based on our own cultures, our ethnicity, our race, gender, our occupations and so forth.

Matt Abrahams: Michele, before we go on, I’d love to understand a little bit about the evolution of tight and loose cultures. It has something to do with threat, doesn’t it?

Michele Gelfand: Yeah. So what we wanted to understand is: Why do tight and loose cultures evolve the way they do? And what we found was really interesting. They didn’t vary in terms of their wealth, like GDP. So there’s loose cultures that are poor and rich, and tight cultures that are poor and rich. They’re not different in terms of religion or location. But what we did find is that one reliable predictor of tight/loose is the degree to which groups or individuals or nations have experienced a lot of chronic threat.

Threat at the national level could be either from Mother Nature — think chronic national disasters or famine — but it can also be based on human threats. Think about how many potential times your nation has been invaded over the last hundred years. We selected these nations based on how much they varied on chronic threat as far back as 1500.

Cultures that have a lot of threat need stricter rules to coordinate in order to survive, and loose cultures that have experienced less threat can afford to be more permissive. Tight cultures across the board, not all but many, had much more threat. And we validated this at the state level in the U.S. Tight states — in the South, the Midwest — tend to have more threats, as well.

We can also see this with an organizational context. Organizations that lean tight are in contexts where there’s a lot of safety issues, coordination problems. I want to say again not all tight cultures have threat, and not all loose cultures are on Easy Street; but it’s really an important principle that threat does seem to cause the evolution of tightness.

Matt Abrahams: So threat really underlies a lot of that, and it might be interesting to analyze a lot of what we see in terms of the impact of threat and the history of threat within organizations, relationships, et cetera.

Now, those who listen in know that language is something I’ve always found very fascinating. I love the fact that you have looked into language, as well. And in fact, you publish a threat dictionary. Can you tell us a little bit more abou… I’ve never seen a threat dictionary before.

Michele Gelfand: That’s right. So this is a paper we just published recently. The idea is that we’re constantly being bombarded by threatening information, whether it’s on social media, in the newspaper, radio, newscasts. Hopefully not this podcast —

Matt Abrahams: Hopefully not.

Michele Gelfand: — except we’re talking a lot about threat. It’s something that is really affecting our brain circuitry, and we wanted to develop methods to track it in real time. So we partnered with some computational linguistic scholars along with psychologists, like myself, and developed a new threat dictionary.

It’s developed based on Big Data. We seeded out words into different platforms, like Twitter, Wikipedia, Common Crawl. And we chose words that were coalescing around each other, that were clustering together — things like “attack” and “crisis,” “destroy,” “fear,” “injury,” “outbreak,” “unrest.” These kinds of words are really tapping into the psychology of threat.

And what we wanted to do is then track threat over time, over the last hundred years, with newspaper — so all the newspapers published in the U.S. We tracked threat, whether it’s changing over time. And we found, for example, that during times of threat there were far more ethno-centric types of attitudes on other surveys against immigrants. There was more rallying around the flag, around current U.S. presidents — more conservative shifts during threat.

We found that norms tended to become tighter during times of threat in general. People became more group-y, more collectivistic. We also found during times of threat that economic activity took a big toll in terms of the stock market. It’s just a new dictionary that can help us track threat and understand its influence.

One other thing we found is that threat talk is very contagious. And so when you add a threat word or two to a tweet, it really increases its retweeting power. And this does suggest that — you know, when we have these tools, we can start tracking in our own lives: How much threat am I being exposed to? What other things does it predict, whether it’s [how… ] You always talk about threat. How does it affect how other competitors see the company, or customers? It could be used to track online radicalization.

A lot of times, people are using threat to tighten people. Elected leaders use threat and manufacture threat, fake threat, that tightens people unnecessarily. So there’s ways that we can now make this very powerful psychology more visible and more tangible and measurable in real time.

Matt Abrahams: And it can also help all of us reflect on the language that we use and maybe become more personally responsible for the way in which we use certain words.

Michele Gelfand: Yeah, that’s right. And on my website, the threat dictionary is publicly available. You can download it. You can have your own feed. What kind of threat talk do you see in your feed? It will give kind of a breakdown of the words and so forth.

Matt Abrahams: Huh. So this might be one of those things that can help break those thought bubbles that people talk about. If we can see literally the types of language that we’re receiving called out, it would be really interesting.

Michele Gelfand: Exactly.

Matt Abrahams: I find that work fascinating — the notion of a threat dictionary. It used to be my teachers would threaten that I’d have to go read the dictionary if I did something wrong. Now there’s a threat dictionary I’m excited to read. So thank you.

I know, Michele, that you are very interested and passionate about justice and diversity, equity and inclusion. What insights do you have, based on your research and other things that you’ve done, to help us better understand the issues and challenges and perhaps do better in this space?

Michele Gelfand: Yeah. The most recent work that we’re doing on this topic is really around tight/loose. The idea is that research suggests that women and minorities tend to live in tighter worlds. So that suggests that they are being evaluated more harshly or more strictly with consequences for deviance that majority, high-powered groups don’t have.

And we can see that. We’ve done some studies, for example, in banks, where we ask managers to evaluate deviant behavior by just switching the name: Jamal or Leticia or Brad or Lauren. And these are workplace deviant types of questions around coming to work late or being on the phone and so forth, other things, or even more major deviance.

And it was remarkable to see that there was no in-group effect. It wasn’t that women and minorities were evaluating each other more leniently for these behaviors. They didn’t actually differentiate who was doing the paper. But white majorities tended to let other majorities off the hook, and they were much more harsh on women and minorities.

So that suggests that we need to start thinking about the worlds we live in when it comes to accountability. We’re starting to do more work on that in everyday life through some experiential sampling — daily diary types of studies — to understand the constraints that women and minorities and people from stigmatized identities have to experience.

Matt Abrahams: It seems to me that people who are stigmatized and coming from a represented minority are under threat much more.

Michele Gelfand: Yeah. Yeah, and we’re doing a lot more work now also on social class. This is a kind of hidden dimension of diversity that we don’t study so much. We’re building on some really great work in psychology on social class that was looking at collectivism and how family-oriented people are from working class versus upper class.

But we can also look at this from a tight/loose lens, and we can see that people who are in the working class, they have a lot more threat. They have to worry about falling into hard living. They have to worry about crime in their neighborhoods. They have to worry about occupational hazards in the kind of jobs they have. They tend to lean tighter. You can think about all sorts of mismatches when you have working-class kids going to predominantly loose institutions, like colleges.

Michele Gelfand: What happens with that mismatch? We’ve been starting to study that and understanding that we need to start thinking about diversity in terms of these underlying dimensions of culture.

Matt Abrahams: Interesting. That’s fascinating: the notion of class and how it fits in. Before we end, I’d love to ask you the same three questions I ask everyone. Are you up for that?

Michele Gelfand: Yeah, sure.

Matt Abrahams: Excellent. Question No. 1: If you were to capture the best communication advice you’ve ever received as a five- to seven-word presentation slide title, what would that be?

Michele Gelfand: I think one of the things that’s really important is to know your audience. Being passionate and charismatic, kind of empowering, I think is really important, but also being super-clear and so forth. I think it’s really important to make your audience feel like they’re the only person in the room. You’re just laser-focused on that person. That requires a lot of listening skills.

Michele Gelfand: That requires, also, just pure attention.

Matt Abrahams: I just want everybody to notice that I gave a very tight restriction, and you blew away with a very open response. So many things you said are really important: knowing your audience, really helping give content that’s relevant to them. The notion of making the person feel like they’re the only person in the room is really powerful. I’m curious for Question No. 2: Who is a communicator that you admire? And why?

Michele Gelfand: Here I am being loose again. I have two…

Matt Abrahams: Two answers, all right.

Michele Gelfand: One is Harry Triandis. He was just someone who was so brilliant in his breadth of knowledge; but he was not someone who took himself so seriously — he was very humble, so much putting himself at the level of his audience. And I really admire that.

I was going to nominate Thomas Friedman, the New York Times journalist, for that, too. I have breakfast with him every so often, and we did a joint book talk when my book came out. And he’s also someone who really listens so well. He’s so passionate and so learning-oriented that he just wants to hear your perspective. He’s also brilliant and has so much knowledge. So when we meet for breakfast, we’re both just taking notes frantically. And I really admire how he operates and learns about the world through communication and listening.

Matt Abrahams: I hate to give you a constraint on this third question, but what are the first three ingredients that go into a successful communication recipe?

Michele Gelfand: Audience, passion, humility.

Matt Abrahams: Audience, passion, and humility. We’ve heard the first two before. Talk to me a little bit about humility. Why is that so important to you?

Michele Gelfand: I think that people are much more likely to listen to you and understand you when you treat them with respect and when you don’t take yourself too seriously. That helps people to feel seen and understood, and that’s going to open their minds more to what you have to say.

Matt Abrahams: Thank you — and thank you for being here today. That idea of opening minds to what you have to say, you’ve certainly done that for us in a very non-threatening way. So thank you for that. And you make something that’s so important and serious very applied. You give us very specific techniques, and I, for one, am going to relook at how I interact with others. So thank you.

Michele Gelfand: Thank you for having me.

[Music plays]

Matt Abrahams: You’ve been listening to Think Fast, Talk Smart: The Podcast , a production of Stanford Graduate School of Business. This episode was produced by Michael Riley, Jenny Luna and me, Matt Abrahams. Find more resources and join our conversation on LinkedIn by searching “Think Fast, Talk Smart.” Please download and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.

For media inquiries, visit the Newsroom .

Explore More

Hardwired for hierarchy: our relationship with power, quick thinks: how others define us, all the feels: why it pays to notice emotions in the workplace, editor’s picks.

Rule Makers, Rule Breakers Michele J. Gelfand

November 17, 2021 Why the Pandemic Slammed “Loose” Countries Like the U.S. When crises hit, cultures with less strict social norms may not respond quickly enough.

March 24, 2022 Threatening Language Can Be Contagious. This New Tool Tracks Its Spread. Researchers unveil a “threat dictionary” that measures the cultural impact of wars, pandemics, and other dangers real and imagined.

Priorities for the GSB's Future
See the Current DEI Report
Supporting Data
Research & Insights
Share Your Thoughts
Search Fund Primer
Teaching & Curriculum
Affiliated Faculty
Faculty Advisors
Louis W. Foster Resource Center
Defining Social Innovation
Impact Compass
Global Health Innovation Insights
Faculty Affiliates
Student Awards & Certificates
Changemakers
Dean Jonathan Levin
Dean Garth Saloner
Dean Robert Joss
Dean Michael Spence
Dean Robert Jaedicke
Dean Rene McPherson
Dean Arjay Miller
Dean Ernest Arbuckle
Dean Jacob Hugh Jackson
Dean Willard Hotchkiss
Faculty in Memoriam
Stanford GSB Firsts
Class of 2024 Candidates
Certificate & Award Recipients
Dean’s Remarks
Keynote Address
Teaching Approach
Analysis and Measurement of Impact
The Corporate Entrepreneur: Startup in a Grown-Up Enterprise
Data-Driven Impact
Designing Experiments for Impact
Digital Marketing
The Founder’s Right Hand
Marketing for Measurable Change
Product Management
Public Policy Lab: Financial Challenges Facing US Cities
Public Policy Lab: Homelessness in California
Lab Features
Curricular Integration
View From The Top
Formation of New Ventures
Managing Growing Enterprises
Startup Garage
Explore Beyond the Classroom
Stanford Venture Studio
Summer Program
Workshops & Events
The Five Lenses of Entrepreneurship
Leadership Labs
Executive Challenge
Arbuckle Leadership Fellows Program
Selection Process
Training Schedule
Time Commitment
Learning Expectations
Post-Training Opportunities
Who Should Apply
Introductory T-Groups
Leadership for Society Program
Certificate
2024 Awardees
2023 Awardees
2022 Awardees
2021 Awardees
2020 Awardees
2019 Awardees
2018 Awardees
Social Management Immersion Fund
Stanford Impact Founder Fellowships
Stanford Impact Leader Prizes
Social Entrepreneurship
Stanford GSB Impact Fund
Economic Development
Energy & Environment
Stanford GSB Residences
Environmental Leadership
Stanford GSB Artwork
A Closer Look
California & the Bay Area
Voices of Stanford GSB
Business & Beneficial Technology
Business & Sustainability
Business & Free Markets
Business, Government, and Society Forum
Get Involved
Second Year
Global Experiences
JD/MBA Joint Degree
MA Education/MBA Joint Degree
MD/MBA Dual Degree
MPP/MBA Joint Degree
MS Computer Science/MBA Joint Degree
MS Electrical Engineering/MBA Joint Degree
MS Environment and Resources (E-IPER)/MBA Joint Degree
Academic Calendar
Clubs & Activities
LGBTQ+ Students
Military Veterans
Minorities & People of Color
Partners & Families
Students with Disabilities
Student Support
Residential Life
Student Voices
MBA Alumni Voices
A Week in the Life
Career Support
Employment Outcomes
Cost of Attendance
Knight-Hennessy Scholars Program
Yellow Ribbon Program
BOLD Fellows Fund
Application Process
Loan Forgiveness
Contact the Financial Aid Office
Evaluation Criteria
GMAT & GRE
English Language Proficiency
Personal Information, Activities & Awards
Professional Experience
Letters of Recommendation
Optional Short Answer Questions
Application Fee
Reapplication
Deferred Enrollment
Joint & Dual Degrees
Entering Class Profile
Event Schedule
Ambassadors
New & Noteworthy
Ask a Question
See Why Stanford MSx
Is MSx Right for You?
MSx Stories
Leadership Development
How You Will Learn
Admission Events
Personal Information
GMAT, GRE & EA
English Proficiency Tests
Career Change
Career Advancement
Daycare, Schools & Camps
U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents
Requirements
Requirements: Behavioral
Requirements: Quantitative
Requirements: Macro
Requirements: Micro
Annual Evaluations
Field Examination
Research Activities
Research Papers
Dissertation
Oral Examination
Current Students
Education & CV
International Applicants
Statement of Purpose
Reapplicants
Application Fee Waiver
Deadline & Decisions
Job Market Candidates
Academic Placements
Stay in Touch
Faculty Mentors
Current Fellows
Standard Track
Fellowship & Benefits
Group Enrollment
Program Formats
Developing a Program
Diversity & Inclusion
Strategic Transformation
Program Experience
Contact Client Services
Campus Experience
Live Online Experience
Silicon Valley & Bay Area
Digital Credentials
Faculty Spotlights
Participant Spotlights
Eligibility
International Participants
Stanford Ignite
Frequently Asked Questions
Operations, Information & Technology
Organizational Behavior
Political Economy
Classical Liberalism
The Eddie Lunch
Accounting Summer Camp
California Econometrics Conference
California Quantitative Marketing PhD Conference
California School Conference
China India Insights Conference
Homo economicus, Evolving
Political Economics (2023–24)
Scaling Geologic Storage of CO2 (2023–24)
A Resilient Pacific: Building Connections, Envisioning Solutions
Adaptation and Innovation
Changing Climate
Civil Society
Climate Impact Summit
Climate Science
Corporate Carbon Disclosures
Earth’s Seafloor
Environmental Justice
Operations and Information Technology
Organizations
Sustainability Reporting and Control
Taking the Pulse of the Planet
Urban Infrastructure
Watershed Restoration
Junior Faculty Workshop on Financial Regulation and Banking
Ken Singleton Celebration
Marketing Camp
Quantitative Marketing PhD Alumni Conference
Presentations
Theory and Inference in Accounting Research
Stanford Closer Look Series
Quick Guides
Core Concepts
Journal Articles
Glossary of Terms
Faculty & Staff
Researchers & Students
Research Approach
Charitable Giving
Financial Health
Government Services
Workers & Careers
Short Course
Adaptive & Iterative Experimentation
Incentive Design
Social Sciences & Behavioral Nudges
Bandit Experiment Application
Conferences & Events
Reading Materials
Energy Entrepreneurship
Faculty & Affiliates
SOLE Report
Responsible Supply Chains
Current Study Usage
Pre-Registration Information
Participate in a Study
Founding Donors
Location Information
Participant Profile
Network Membership
Program Impact
Collaborators
Entrepreneur Profiles
Company Spotlights
Seed Transformation Network
Responsibilities
Current Coaches
How to Apply
Meet the Consultants
Meet the Interns
Intern Profiles
Collaborate
Research Library
News & Insights
Program Contacts
Databases & Datasets
Research Guides
Consultations
Research Workshops
Career Research
Research Data Services
Course Reserves
Course Research Guides
Material Loan Periods
Fines & Other Charges
Document Delivery
Interlibrary Loan
Equipment Checkout
Print & Scan
MBA & MSx Students
PhD Students
Other Stanford Students
Faculty Assistants
Research Assistants
Stanford GSB Alumni
Telling Our Story
Staff Directory
Site Registration
Alumni Directory
Alumni Email
Privacy Settings & My Profile
Success Stories
The Story of Circles
Support Women’s Circles
Stanford Women on Boards Initiative
Alumnae Spotlights
Insights & Research
Industry & Professional
Entrepreneurial Commitment Group
Recent Alumni
Half-Century Club
Fall Reunions
Spring Reunions
MBA 25th Reunion
Half-Century Club Reunion
Faculty Lectures
Ernest C. Arbuckle Award
Alison Elliott Exceptional Achievement Award
ENCORE Award
Excellence in Leadership Award
John W. Gardner Volunteer Leadership Award
Robert K. Jaedicke Faculty Award
Jack McDonald Military Service Appreciation Award
Jerry I. Porras Latino Leadership Award
Tapestry Award
Student & Alumni Events
Executive Recruiters
Interviewing
Land the Perfect Job with LinkedIn
Negotiating
Elevator Pitch
Email Best Practices
Resumes & Cover Letters
Self-Assessment
Whitney Birdwell Ball
Margaret Brooks
Bryn Panee Burkhart
Margaret Chan
Ricki Frankel
Peter Gandolfo
Cindy W. Greig
Natalie Guillen
Carly Janson
Sloan Klein
Sherri Appel Lassila
Stuart Meyer
Tanisha Parrish
Virginia Roberson
Philippe Taieb
Michael Takagawa
Terra Winston
Johanna Wise
Debbie Wolter
Rebecca Zucker
Complimentary Coaching
Changing Careers
Work-Life Integration
Career Breaks
Flexible Work
Encore Careers
Join a Board
D&B Hoovers
Data Axle (ReferenceUSA)
EBSCO Business Source
Global Newsstream
Market Share Reporter
ProQuest One Business
RKMA Market Research Handbook Series
Student Clubs
Entrepreneurial Students
Stanford GSB Trust
Alumni Community
How to Volunteer
Springboard Sessions
Consulting Projects
2020 – 2029
2010 – 2019
2000 – 2009
1990 – 1999
1980 – 1989
1970 – 1979
1960 – 1969
1950 – 1959
1940 – 1949
Service Areas
ACT History
ACT Awards Celebration
ACT Governance Structure
Building Leadership for ACT
Individual Leadership Positions
Leadership Role Overview
Purpose of the ACT Management Board
Contact ACT
Business & Nonprofit Communities
Reunion Volunteers
Ways to Give
Fiscal Year Report
Business School Fund Leadership Council
Planned Giving Options
Planned Giving Benefits
Planned Gifts and Reunions
Legacy Partners
Giving News & Stories
Giving Deadlines
Development Staff
Submit Class Notes
Class Secretaries
Board of Directors
Health Care
Sustainability
Class Takeaways
All Else Equal: Making Better Decisions
If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society
Grit & Growth
Think Fast, Talk Smart
Spring 2022
Spring 2021
Autumn 2020
Summer 2020
Winter 2020
In the Media
For Journalists
DCI Fellows
Other Auditors
Academic Calendar & Deadlines
Course Materials
Entrepreneurial Resources
Campus Drive Grove
Campus Drive Lawn
CEMEX Auditorium
King Community Court
Seawell Family Boardroom
Stanford GSB Bowl
Stanford Investors Common
Town Square
Vidalakis Courtyard
Vidalakis Dining Hall
Catering Services
Policies & Guidelines
Reservations
Contact Faculty Recruiting
Lecturer Positions
Postdoctoral Positions
Accommodations
CMC-Managed Interviews
Recruiter-Managed Interviews
Virtual Interviews
Campus & Virtual
Search for Candidates
Think Globally
Recruiting Calendar
Recruiting Policies
Full-Time Employment
Summer Employment
Entrepreneurial Summer Program
Global Management Immersion Experience
Social-Purpose Summer Internships
Process Overview
Project Types
Client Eligibility Criteria
Client Screening
ACT Leadership
Social Innovation & Nonprofit Management Resources
Develop Your Organization’s Talent
Centers & Initiatives
Student Fellowships

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

2.2: The Impact of Culture on Communication

Learning Objectives

Define culture and co-culture.
List several co-cultural groups in the United States.
Define intercultural communication
Explain the reasons for education in intercultural communication

Psychologists have used the term egocentric to describe a person who is self-focused and unable to imagine any other perspective than their own. Young children are naturally egocentric, assuming that everyone else thinks, perceives, and communicates as they do. To a certain extent, we remain egocentric even as we mature, and it can be very challenging to understand that varied perceptions, values, and beliefs exist which are equally valid as our own. However, to communicate effectively and to form satisfying personal and professional relationships, we must step away from our egotism and seek to understand the point of view, or the worldview of others. Learning about different worldviews can lead to our becoming provisional communicators.

Provisionalism is the ability to accept the diversity of perceptions and beliefs, and to operate in a manner sensitive to that diversity . Being a provisional communicator does not mean we abandon our own beliefs and values, nor does it mean we have to accept all beliefs and values as correct. Instead, provisionalism leads us to seek to understand variations in human behaviors and to understand the field of experience out of which the other person operates. Provisionalism means:

We interpret the communication and behavior based on our own life experiences, but then
We stop and consider, “How was the message intended?” or “What other factors may be motivating this communication or behavior?”

An excellent place to start understanding the communication of others is with an understanding of the impact of culture.

Culture refers to the broad set of shared beliefs and values that form a collective vision of ourselves and others . The tools we use, the goods we buy, the foods we each, and the clothing we wear are all influenced by our culture. Our language, religion, laws, rules of social conduct, folklore, cultural icons, and the beliefs, norms, collective memories, attitudes, values, and practices that form our worldview and which help us relate to the world are also culturally determined (Barrett et al., 2014). Culture is learned, and it can be so ingrained it becomes challenging to identify how it influences our thoughts and behaviors.

Let’s begin our discussion of culture with our dominant or broad culture, which is usually but not always the country or nation of our upbringing. In the United States, most citizens place a high value on self-determination, believing each individual has a fundamental right to make choices that he or she deems best for them. As long as their actions do not harm others, they feel free to follow the life path of their own choosing. If others attempt to force them to act or think in certain ways, they tend to rebel. The United States is considered an individualistic culture because of this belief in self-determination. Other core values shared by most United States are equality, freedom of speech and religion, and competition.

It is important to understand that other cultures may not value self-determination and individualism. Some countries emphasize doing what is best for the group (the family or the company, for instance). In such cultures, engaging in individual behaviors that reflect poorly on the group is a powerful social taboo. For example, in some Asian cultures, if a student performs poorly academically, it is seen as a reflection on the entire family, bringing shame to all. The pressures to succeed are based not on personal achievement but on maintaining the honor of the entire family. Contrast that to the United States, where students are generally seen as failing or succeeding, on their own merit.

Be aware that cultures do not have static sets of beliefs, values, and behavior; instead, they evolve over time. In the U.S., we have seen large cultural shifts in the past 50 years. Sexual mores have changed quite dramatically, as have our attitudes about individual rights. While in the past women were restricted to a narrow range of careers, today we assume men and women are equally able to pursue the career of their choice. Attitudes toward minorities and immigrants continue to evolve. During the past 10 years, the changes in attitudes toward sexuality and the civil rights of same-sex couples are quite striking.

Another important component of worldview is determined by an individual’s co-culture.

It is important to know that a broad culture, like the United States, India, an other countries or societies, will also have a number of smaller cultural groups, sometimes called co-cultures , operating within it. A co-culture is an identifiable group with its own unique traits operating within the larger culture. For example, Keith’s wife and her sister can talk for hours about all sorts of relationship issues with co-workers, with family members, and with friends while he finds such extensive conversations exhausting. Since female communication is normally more focused on relationship development and maintenance, such conversations are consistent with the feminine communication style. The masculine style is more focused on action and the bare details of events, who did what to whom, and not as focused on the nuances of relational dynamics. As someone who uses the masculine style, once Keith gets the basic details, he thinks he is informed and does not feel a need to dissect the smaller details of the event. Note that the masculine and feminine communication styles are not based on biology; men can use a feminine style and women can use a masculine style.

In the United States, various co-cultures exist, including those identified by

Age or generation. For example Baby Boomers, Generation X, teens, senior citizens.
Race or ethnicity. For example, Native Americans, African-Americans, Latinos, Whites.
Differing abilities, such as a person who is deaf, a wheelchair user, or a person with Down syndrome.
Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation, such as binary or LGBTQ+.
Religion, such as Buddhist, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, and so on.
Affiliation or interests, such as NASCAR fans, gamers, or even gang members.
Region of the country or city, such as urban north, deep south.
Occupation.
And many more.

Our verbal and nonverbal communication are influenced by our co-culture. Consider:

The use of specific gestures, colors, and styles of dress in inner-city gangs;
The classic Southern Accent;
The use of regional sayings, such as “you betcha,” or “whatever” in rural Minnesota;
The quiet nature of Native Americans who may prefer to listen and observe.
Use of terms such as pop , soda , or coke to refer to carbonated beverages.

In your academic and work life, you will communicate with people from many different cultures and co-cultures. These variations in lifestyle, communication behaviors, values, beliefs, art, food, and such provide a rich quilt of human experience, and for the individual who can accept and appreciate these differences, it is an invigorating experience to move among them.

Intercultural Communication

Intercultural communication occurs when two or more individuals who are from different cultures or co-cultures interact. Conducting business with someone from another country is one example of intercultural communication. Communication with someone from a different age group, ethnicity, or gender can also be considered intercultural communication. In other words, intercultural communication is human communication.

Initially, a person’s motivation for communicating with people from other cultures must be considered. Motivation refers to the root of a person’s desire to foster intercultural relationships and can be intrinsic or extrinsic (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). Put simply, if a person isn’t motivated to communicate with people from different cultures, then the components of ICC discussed next don’t really matter. If a person has a healthy curiosity that drives him or her toward intercultural encounters in order to learn more about self and others, then there is a foundation from which to build additional competence-relevant attitudes and skills. This intrinsic motivation makes intercultural communication a voluntary, rewarding, and lifelong learning process. Motivation can also be extrinsic, meaning that an outside reward like money, power, or recognition drives the desire for intercultural communication. While both types of motivation can contribute to ICC, context may further enhance or impede a person’s motivation to communicate across cultures.

Members of dominant groups are often less motivated, intrinsically and extrinsically, toward intercultural communication than members of nondominant groups because they don’t see the incentives for doing so. Having more power in communication encounters can create an unbalanced situation where the individual from the nondominant group is expected to exhibit competence or the ability to adapt to the communication behaviors and attitudes of the other. Even in situations where extrinsic rewards like securing an overseas business investment are at stake, it is likely that the foreign investor is much more accustomed to adapting to United States business customs and communication than vice versa. This expectation that others will adapt to our communication can be unconscious, but later ICC skills we will learn will help bring it to awareness.

The unbalanced situation I just described is a daily reality for many individuals with non-dominant identities. Their motivation toward intercultural communication may be driven by survival in terms of functioning effectively in dominant contexts. Recall the phenomenon known as code-switching discussed earlier, in which individuals from nondominant groups adapt their communication to fit in with the dominant group. In such instances, African Americans may “talk White” by conforming to what is called “standard English,” women in corporate environments may adapt masculine communication patterns, people who are gay or lesbian may self-censor and avoid discussing their same-gender partners with coworkers, and people with nonvisible disabilities may not disclose them in order to avoid judgment.

Knowledge supplements motivation and is an important part of building ICC. Knowledge includes self- and other-awareness, mindfulness, and cognitive flexibility. Building knowledge of our own cultures, identities, and communication patterns takes more than passive experience (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). We learn who we are through our interactions with others. Developing cultural self-awareness often requires us to get out of our comfort zones. Listening to people who are different from us is a key component of developing self-knowledge. This may be uncomfortable because we may realize that people think of our identities differently than we thought. For example, when I lived in Sweden, my Swedish roommates often discussed how they were wary of befriending students from the United States. They perceived U.S. Americans to be shallow because they were friendly and exciting while they were in Sweden but didn’t remain friends once they left. Although I was initially upset by their assessment, I came to see the truth in it. Swedes are generally more reserved than U.S. Americans and take longer to form close friendships. The comparatively extroverted nature of the Americans led some of the Swedes to overestimate the depth of their relationship, which ultimately hurt them when the Americans didn’t stay in touch. This made me more aware of how my communication was perceived, enhancing my self-knowledge. I also learned more about the communication behaviors of the Swedes, which contributed to my other-knowledge.

The most effective way to develop other-knowledge is by direct and thoughtful encounters with other cultures. However, people may not readily have these opportunities for a variety of reasons. Despite the overall diversity in the United States, many people still only interact with people who are similar to them. Even in a racially diverse educational setting, for example, people often group off with people of their own race. While a heterosexual person may have a gay or lesbian friend or relative, they likely spend most of their time with other heterosexuals. Unless you interact with people with disabilities as part of your job or have a person with a disability in your friend or family group, you likely spend most of your time interacting with able-bodied people. Living in a rural area may limit your ability to interact with a range of cultures, and most people do not travel internationally regularly. Because of this, we may have to make a determined effort to interact with other cultures or rely on educational sources like college classes, books, or documentaries. Learning another language is also a good way to learn about a culture because you can then read the news or watch movies in your native language, which can offer insights that are lost in translation. It is important to note, though, that we must evaluate the credibility of the source of our knowledge, whether it is a book, person, or other source. Also, knowledge of another language does not automatically equate to ICC.

Developing self- and other-knowledge is an ongoing process that will continue to adapt and grow as we encounter new experiences. Mindfulness and cognitive complexity will help as we continue to build our ICC (Pusch, 2009). Mindfulness is a state of self- and other-monitoring that informs later reflection on communication interactions. As mindful communicators, we should ask questions that focus on the interactive process, like “How is our communication going? What are my reactions? What are their reactions?” Being able to adapt our communication in the moment based on our answers to these questions is a skill that comes with a high level of ICC. Reflecting on the communication encounter later to see what can be learned is also a way to build ICC. We should then be able to incorporate what we learned into our communication frameworks, which requires cognitive flexibility. Cognitive flexibility refers to the ability to continually supplement and revise existing knowledge to create new categories rather than forcing new knowledge into old categories. Cognitive flexibility helps prevent our knowledge from becoming stale and also prevents the formation of stereotypes, and can help us avoid prejudging an encounter or jumping to conclusions. In summary, to be better intercultural communicators, we should know much about others and ourselves and be able to reflect on and adapt our knowledge as we gain new experiences.

Motivation and knowledge can inform us as we gain new experiences, but how we feel in the moment of intercultural encounters is also important. Tolerance for uncertainty refers to an individual’s attitude about and level of comfort in uncertain situations (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). Some people perform better in uncertain situations than others, and intercultural encounters often bring up uncertainty. Whether communicating with someone of a different gender, race, or nationality, we are often wondering what we should or shouldn’t do or say. Situations of uncertainty most often become clearer as they progress, but the anxiety that an individual with a low tolerance for uncertainty feels may lead them to leave the situation or otherwise communicate in a less competent manner. Individuals with a high tolerance for uncertainty may exhibit more patience, waiting on new information to become available or seeking out information, which may then increase the understanding of the situation and lead to a more successful outcome (Pusch, 2009). Individuals who are intrinsically motivated toward intercultural communication may have a higher tolerance for uncertainty in that their curiosity leads them to engage with others who are different because they find the self- and other-knowledge gained rewarding.

Cultivating Intercultural Communication Competence

How can ICC be built and achieved? This is a key question we will address in this section. Two main ways to build ICC are through experiential learning and reflective practices (Bednarz, 2010). We must first realize that competence isn’t any one thing. Part of being competent means that you can assess new situations and adapt your existing knowledge to new contexts. What it means to be competent will vary depending on your physical location, your role (personal, professional, etc.), and your life stage, among other things. Sometimes we will know or be able to figure out what is expected of us in a given situation, but sometimes we may need to act in unexpected ways to meet the needs of a situation. Competence enables us to better cope with the unexpected, adapt to the nonroutine, and connect to uncommon frameworks. I have always told my students that ICC is less about a list of rules and more about a box of tools.

Three ways to cultivate ICC are to foster attitudes that motivate us, discover knowledge that informs us, and develop skills that enable us (Bennett, 2009). To foster attitudes that motivate us, we must develop a sense of wonder about culture. This sense of wonder can lead to feeling overwhelmed, humbled, or awed (Opdal, 2001). This sense of wonder may correlate to a high tolerance for uncertainty, which can help us turn potentially frustrating experiences we have into teachable moments. I’ve had many such moments in my intercultural encounters at home and abroad. One such moment came the first time I tried to cook a frozen pizza in the oven in the shared kitchen of my apartment in Sweden. The information on the packaging was written in Swedish, but like many college students, I had a wealth of experience cooking frozen pizzas to draw from. As I went to set the oven dial to preheat, I noticed it was strange that the oven didn’t go up to my usual 425–450 degrees. Not to be deterred, I cranked the dial up as far as it would go, waited a few minutes, put my pizza in, and walked down the hall to my room to wait for about fifteen minutes until the pizza was done. The smell of smoke drew me from my room before the fifteen minutes were up, and I walked into a corridor filled with smoke and the smell of burnt pizza. I pulled the pizza out and was puzzled for a few minutes while I tried to figure out why the pizza burned so quickly when one of my corridor-mates gently pointed out that the oven temperatures in Sweden are listed in Celsius, not Fahrenheit! Despite almost burning the kitchen down, I learned a valuable lesson about assuming my map for temperatures and frozen pizzas was the same as everyone else’s.

Discovering knowledge that informs us is another step that can build on our motivation. One tool involves learning more about our cognitive style or how we learn. Our cognitive style consists of our preferred patterns for “gathering information, constructing meaning, and organizing and applying knowledge” (Bennett, 2009). As we explore cognitive styles, we discover that there are differences in how people attend to and perceive the world, explain events, organize the world, and use rules of logic (Nisbett, 2003). Some cultures have a cognitive style that focuses more on tasks, analytic and objective thinking, details and precision, inner direction, and independence, while others focus on relationships and people over tasks and things, concrete and metaphorical thinking, and group consciousness and harmony.

Developing ICC is a complex learning process. At the basic level of learning, we accumulate knowledge and assimilate it into our existing frameworks. But accumulated knowledge doesn’t necessarily help us in situations where we have to apply that knowledge. Transformative learning takes place at the highest levels and occurs when we encounter situations that challenge our accumulated knowledge and our ability to accommodate that knowledge to manage a real-world situation. The cognitive dissonance that results in these situations is often uncomfortable and can lead to hesitance to repeat such an engagement. One tip for cultivating ICC that can help manage these challenges is to find a community of like-minded people who are also motivated to develop ICC. In my graduate program, I lived in the international dormitory in order to experience the cultural diversity that I had enjoyed so much studying abroad a few years earlier. I was surrounded by international students and U.S. American students who were more or less interested in cultural diversity. This ended up being a tremendous learning experience, and I worked on research about identity and communication between international and American students.

Developing skills that enable us is another part of ICC. Some of the skills important to ICC are the ability to empathize, accumulate cultural information, listen, resolve conflict, and manage anxiety (Bennett, 2009). Again, you are already developing a foundation for these skills by reading this book, but you can expand those skills to intercultural settings with the motivation and knowledge already described. Contact alone does not increase intercultural skills; there must be more deliberate measures taken to capitalize on those encounters fully. While research now shows that intercultural contact does decrease prejudices, this is not enough to become interculturally competent. The ability to empathize and manage anxiety enhances prejudice reduction, and these two skills have been shown to enhance the overall impact of intercultural contact even more than acquiring cultural knowledge. There is intercultural training available for people who are interested. If you can’t access training, you may choose to research intercultural training on your own, as there are many books, articles, and manuals written on the subject.

Reflective practices can also help us process through rewards and challenges associated with developing ICC. As we open ourselves to new experiences, we are likely to have both positive and negative reactions. It can be very useful to take note of negative or defensive reactions you have. This can help you identify certain triggers that may create barriers to effective intercultural interaction. Noting positive experiences can also help you identify triggers for learning that you could seek out or recreate to enhance the positive (Bednarz, 2010). A more complex method of reflection is called intersectional reflexivity . Intersectional reflexivity is a reflective practice by which we acknowledge intersecting identities, both privileged and disadvantaged, and implicate ourselves in social hierarchies and inequalities (Jones, 2010). This method brings in the concepts of dominant and nondominant groups and the privileges/disadvantages dialectic we discussed earlier.

While formal intercultural experiences like studying abroad or volunteering for the Special Olympics or a shelter for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) youth can result in learning, informal experiences are also important. We may be less likely to include informal experiences in our reflection if we don’t see them as legitimate. Reflection should also include “critical incidents” or what I call “a-ha! moments.” Think of reflection as a tool for metacompetence that can be useful in bringing the formal and informal together (Bednarz, 2010).

Key Terms & Concepts

cognitive flexibility
intercultural communication
intersectional reflexivity
mindfulness
provincialism

Barrett, M., Byram, M., Lázár, I., Mompoint-Gaillard, P., & Philippou, S. (2014). Developing Intercultural Competence Through Education (Pestalozzi Series No. 3) . Council of Europe Publishing.

Bednarz, F. (2010). Building up intercultural competencies: Challenges and learning processes. In M. G. Onorati & F. Bednarz (Eds.), Building intercultural competencies: A handbook for professionals in education, social work, and health care (p. 39). Acco.

Bennett, J. M. (2009). Cultivating intercultural competence. In D. A. Deardorff (Ed.). The Sage handbook of intercultural competence (pp. 127-134). Sage.

Jones, R. G., Jr. (2010). Putting privilege into practice through “intersectional reflexivity”: Ruminations, interventions, and possibilities. Reflections: Narratives of Professional Helping, 16 (1), 122.

Martin, J. N., & Nakayama, T. K. (2010). Intercultural communication in contexts (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Nisbett, R. E. (2003). The geography of thought: How Asians and Westerners think differently … and why . Free Press.

Opdal, P. M. (2001). Curiosity, wonder, and education seen as perspective. Studies in Philosophy and education, 20 , 331-344.

Licensing and Attribution: Content in this section is an combination of

2.1: The Impact of Culture on Behavior in Competent Communication (2nd edition) by Lisa Coleman, Thomas King, & William Turner. It is licensed under a CC BY-NC-SA license.

Chapter 1 in Intercultural Communication by Sharon Ahrndt. It is licensed under a CC BY-NC-SA license.

Share This Book

Essay Samples
College Essay
Writing Tools
Writing guide

Creative samples from the experts

↑ Return to Essay Samples

Compare & Contrast Essay: How Culture Affects Communication

Culture directly affects the way individuals communicate with each other. When you cross the divide between east and west, you’ll surely notice a difference in communication. In eastern cultures, where collectivism reigns, you will meet with nonverbal and indirect communication, which can sometimes be frustrating for westerners. On the flipside, eastern cultures might be affronted by individualistic western culture, which breeds a more direct and concrete line of communication. We will examine how the perception of saving face, social power and direct versus indirect communication diverges between eastern and western cultures.

Saving face is not unique to any culture; preserving one’s image is universal and humanly ingrained. However, the east and the west view “face” differently, thus they go about saving face in a different manner. In the west, one must first make a face for oneself, and a person does so by setting him/herself apart from the pack, whether through personal achievement, status, wealth, etc. Once face is made, maintaining it might involve remaining relevant or unique, which often lies in asserting individual opinion and doing so vocally. Saving face in an eastern collectivist society is quite the opposite. One does not wish to stand out, be aggressive or assert opinion, as this, on the contrary, often damages face. Instead, eastern culture promotes group harmony, avoiding conflict at all costs. If a person loses face in an eastern culture, it’s nearly impossible to get it back.

The egalitarian culture of the west versus the hierarchy in eastern cultures creates a chasm where social power is concerned. Again, this has much to do with saving face. In a western company, to assert oneself as a new employee shows ambition, which is considered a good character trait by western standards. However, if a new or younger employee in an eastern company was to come across as outspoken or ambitious, he/she would appear disobedient and even, perhaps, disloyal to upper management and, thus, would lose face. This is due to the concentration of power being much more top-heavy in eastern cultures.

These disparities between the east and the west create great differences in communication, the east being nonverbal and indirect, and the west being direct and concrete. A western person will not often speak in riddles of which the listener must guess the meaning. Instead, a westerner speaks exactly what he means, and this directness can often be perceived by the east as ill-mannered. Honesty, openness and pointed speech are the keystones of western communication. In the east, the meaning of the spoken word might be in direct contrast with a person’s actions. Meaning is fudged in communication, so as to preserve the relationship. Being direct – for instance, giving someone a direct “no” – is seen as harsh; hence, speaking so directly would lose one face.

Eastern and western cultures’ views on the perception of saving face, social power and directness versus indirectness create this divergence in communication. However, it is important to note that differences do not mean it’s impossible for two different cultures to communicate. Though it may be more difficult, a simple adjustment of cultural sensitivity will make conversation run smooth.

Follow Us on Social Media

Get more free essays

Send via email

Most useful resources for students:.

Free Essays Download
Writing Tools List
Proofreading Services
Universities Rating

Contributors Bio

Find more useful services for students

Free plagiarism check, professional editing, online tutoring, free grammar check.

Along with Stanford news and stories, show me:

Student information
Faculty/Staff information

We want to provide announcements, events, leadership messages and resources that are relevant to you. Your selection is stored in a browser cookie which you can remove at any time using “Clear all personalization” below.

Speaking, writing and reading are integral to everyday life, where language is the primary tool for expression and communication. Studying how people use language – what words and phrases they unconsciously choose and combine – can help us better understand ourselves and why we behave the way we do.

Linguistics scholars seek to determine what is unique and universal about the language we use, how it is acquired and the ways it changes over time. They consider language as a cultural, social and psychological phenomenon.

“Understanding why and how languages differ tells about the range of what is human,” said Dan Jurafsky , the Jackson Eli Reynolds Professor in Humanities and chair of the Department of Linguistics in the School of Humanities and Sciences at Stanford . “Discovering what’s universal about languages can help us understand the core of our humanity.”

The stories below represent some of the ways linguists have investigated many aspects of language, including its semantics and syntax, phonetics and phonology, and its social, psychological and computational aspects.

Understanding stereotypes

Stanford linguists and psychologists study how language is interpreted by people. Even the slightest differences in language use can correspond with biased beliefs of the speakers, according to research.

One study showed that a relatively harmless sentence, such as “girls are as good as boys at math,” can subtly perpetuate sexist stereotypes. Because of the statement’s grammatical structure, it implies that being good at math is more common or natural for boys than girls, the researchers said.

Language can play a big role in how we and others perceive the world, and linguists work to discover what words and phrases can influence us, unknowingly.

How well-meaning statements can spread stereotypes unintentionally

New Stanford research shows that sentences that frame one gender as the standard for the other can unintentionally perpetuate biases.

Algorithms reveal changes in stereotypes

New Stanford research shows that, over the past century, linguistic changes in gender and ethnic stereotypes correlated with major social movements and demographic changes in the U.S. Census data.

Exploring what an interruption is in conversation

Stanford doctoral candidate Katherine Hilton found that people perceive interruptions in conversation differently, and those perceptions differ depending on the listener’s own conversational style as well as gender.

Cops speak less respectfully to black community members

Professors Jennifer Eberhardt and Dan Jurafsky, along with other Stanford researchers, detected racial disparities in police officers’ speech after analyzing more than 100 hours of body camera footage from Oakland Police.

How other languages inform our own

People speak roughly 7,000 languages worldwide. Although there is a lot in common among languages, each one is unique, both in its structure and in the way it reflects the culture of the people who speak it.

Jurafsky said it’s important to study languages other than our own and how they develop over time because it can help scholars understand what lies at the foundation of humans’ unique way of communicating with one another.

“All this research can help us discover what it means to be human,” Jurafsky said.

Stanford PhD student documents indigenous language of Papua New Guinea

Fifth-year PhD student Kate Lindsey recently returned to the United States after a year of documenting an obscure language indigenous to the South Pacific nation.

Students explore Esperanto across Europe

In a research project spanning eight countries, two Stanford students search for Esperanto, a constructed language, against the backdrop of European populism.

Chris Manning: How computers are learning to understand language

A computer scientist discusses the evolution of computational linguistics and where it’s headed next.

Stanford research explores novel perspectives on the evolution of Spanish

Using digital tools and literature to explore the evolution of the Spanish language, Stanford researcher Cuauhtémoc García-García reveals a new historical perspective on linguistic changes in Latin America and Spain.

Language as a lens into behavior

Linguists analyze how certain speech patterns correspond to particular behaviors, including how language can impact people’s buying decisions or influence their social media use.

For example, in one research paper, a group of Stanford researchers examined the differences in how Republicans and Democrats express themselves online to better understand how a polarization of beliefs can occur on social media.

“We live in a very polarized time,” Jurafsky said. “Understanding what different groups of people say and why is the first step in determining how we can help bring people together.”

Analyzing the tweets of Republicans and Democrats

New research by Dora Demszky and colleagues examined how Republicans and Democrats express themselves online in an attempt to understand how polarization of beliefs occurs on social media.

Examining bilingual behavior of children at Texas preschool

A Stanford senior studied a group of bilingual children at a Spanish immersion preschool in Texas to understand how they distinguished between their two languages.

Predicting sales of online products from advertising language

Stanford linguist Dan Jurafsky and colleagues have found that products in Japan sell better if their advertising includes polite language and words that invoke cultural traditions or authority.

Language can help the elderly cope with the challenges of aging, says Stanford professor

By examining conversations of elderly Japanese women, linguist Yoshiko Matsumoto uncovers language techniques that help people move past traumatic events and regain a sense of normalcy.

Social Communication: The Role of Culture Words: 886
The Impact of Culture on Communication Words: 3025
Aspects of the Contemporary American Communication Culture Words: 1008
The Culture of Communication and Interaction Words: 755
Culture and Its Impact on Communication Words: 1106
Importance of Verbal and Non-Verbal Communication in Intercultural Communication Words: 1157
Intercultural Communication: Dimensions of Bengali Culture Words: 597
Nonverbal Intellectual Communication: Cultural Space and Privacy Words: 347
How Cultural Norms in Indian Culture Influence Communication? Words: 503
Verbal and Non-Verbal Cross-Cultural Communication Words: 1218
Intercultural Communication: Autoethnographic Reflection Words: 1384
Intercultural Communication Competence Words: 1428

Impact of Culture on Communication

The impact of culture on communication, orientation assessment, relevant resources.

Communication is an integral component of interaction, and without proper communication, people cannot express their feelings, intentions, ideas, and thoughts effectively. There are different factors that affect communication between groups or individuals. As such, cultural difference is one of the key factors that affect communication (DeVito, 2019). Different people across the globe have different cultural backgrounds and practices that influence how they relate and relay information to one another.

Culture can be described as the traits, strong beliefs, norms, traditions, and values that a certain group of people holds to be true and acceptable. Therefore, culture can be passed from one generation to another. Inside particular cultures, there may be further subdivisions or subcultures depending on various factors like religion, ethnic composition, and social status. According to DeVito (2019), people who belong to a similar culture often have a common way of thinking, communicating their feelings, thoughts, and ideas verbally and non-verbally. Since culture is diverse, the dissimilarities can affect the level of an individual’s confidence in communication when interacting with other cultures. Therefore, people should understand their cultural differences to be able to communicate effectively.

Cultural sensitivity is the ability to recognize other cultures and respect them while interacting with people from diverse cultural practices. There are various cultural sensitivity strategies that can be adopted while interacting with other cultures. Thus, some of the strategies that I would use to portray cultural sensitivity when working in the human service include seeking consent before touching or hugging the client to show respect for personal privacy regardless of the gender or age of the person. I would also adopt the strategy of using inclusive language rather than being personal in order to show respect. Additionally, before referring to a person in a specific, I would ask an individual to tell me their preferred pronoun so as to embrace the aspect of gender sensitivity. Besides, since different cultures may have different pronunciations, I would ask for the correct pronunciation whenever I am not sure. I will also take corrections positively and avoid being defensive as I endeavor to learn more about diverse cultures.

While assessing my other orientation as a measure of self-awareness, I would say that I portray a high level of people-centered behavior. I always think about my environment and the people who surround me by being more considerate of their feelings, views, and opinions before I think of myself. For instance, at school, I help my colleagues out in comprehending assignments rather than just focusing on myself.

My greatest strength is my high listening skills. When communicating with others, I give them the chance to talk as I listen. I have overtime worked on my listening skills in order to help others whenever I can find solutions to their problems. I keenly take into consideration non-verbal cues that other people use in order to understand their feelings better. I also do my own research to understand the various cultures and the does and don’ts of the culture to ensure that I don’t become offensive when communicating with other people from diverse cultures.

From the personal communication strengths, I can describe my strengths from various perspectives. For instance, my strength in listening puts me in a position of understanding others, be it in school or outside school. This enables me to view life from other perspectives. While listening, I do not listen to respond, but rather, I try to understand and then act upon comprehending. I believe that my strengths have helped me in providing solutions that are tailored toward people’s needs instead of acting without a clear understanding.

The areas that I would like to improve on include judging others after listening to them. Additionally, I would also like to get better when it comes to maintaining eye contact and paying attention to non-verbal expressions that people show while communicating. I will tirelessly work on my public speaking skills to improve my confidence.

Subsequently, an other-orientation attitude also enhances human service and interpersonal communication. For this reason, other-orientation can enable professionals in human service to make their clients more candid and happier during communication. Putting emphasis on other people’s perceptions improves communication and inspires confidence among clients, colleagues, or customers. Anderson (2017) asserts that having a strong other orientation can help professionals in human services to influence proficiency and strong personality. Therefore, possessing other-orientation approaches like recognizing the opinions and ideas of customers and allowing individuals to communicate their ideas liberally helps in enhancing interpersonal communication.

Serving clients entail several factors, such as culture and self-awareness, which are key to interactive communication. Cultural intelligence is critical in the day-to-day interaction with clients. This calls for acknowledging that people come from diverse cultures, respecting the cultures, and having good interpersonal communication that respects the cultural differences. Also, it means having self-awareness, knowing one’s strengths and weaknesses, and then understanding how to use the strengths while communicating with others. Culture and self-awareness are not only critical when relating with others but also in decision-making.

Overall, through culture and self-awareness, professionals can acquire verbal and non-verbal communication skills to be applied during interaction with clients. Professionals also need to adopt verbal skills like simplicity strategy to make clients understand the complex words in their area of profession. Moreover, they should be aware of cultural differences and understand that words may have different meanings in various cultures. Finally, professionals need to use non-verbal cues, including facial expressions like smiling to convey joy and interest as well as nodding to affirm an action.

Anderson-Lain, K. (2017). Cultural Identity Forum: Enacting the Self-awareness Imperative in Intercultural Communication. Communication Teacher , 31 (3), 131-136. Web.

DeVito, J. A. (2019). The Interpersonal Communication Book. Instructor , 1 , 18. Web.

Cite this paper

Chicago (N-B)
Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2022, August 13). Impact of Culture on Communication. https://studycorgi.com/impact-of-culture-on-communication/

"Impact of Culture on Communication." StudyCorgi , 13 Aug. 2022, studycorgi.com/impact-of-culture-on-communication/.

StudyCorgi . (2022) 'Impact of Culture on Communication'. 13 August.

1. StudyCorgi . "Impact of Culture on Communication." August 13, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/impact-of-culture-on-communication/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Impact of Culture on Communication." August 13, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/impact-of-culture-on-communication/.

StudyCorgi . 2022. "Impact of Culture on Communication." August 13, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/impact-of-culture-on-communication/.

This paper, “Impact of Culture on Communication”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: December 5, 2022 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

In order to continue enjoying our site, we ask that you confirm your identity as a human. Thank you very much for your cooperation.

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

8.3 Intercultural Communication

Learning objectives.

Define intercultural communication.
List and summarize the six dialectics of intercultural communication.
Discuss how intercultural communication affects interpersonal relationships.

As was noted earlier, difference matters, and studying intercultural communication can help us better negotiate our changing world. Changing economies and technologies intersect with culture in meaningful ways (Martin & Nakayama). As was noted earlier, technology has created for some a global village where vast distances are now much shorter due to new technology that make travel and communication more accessible and convenient (McLuhan, 1967). However, as the following “Getting Plugged In” box indicates, there is also a digital divide , which refers to the unequal access to technology and related skills that exists in much of the world. People in most fields will be more successful if they are prepared to work in a globalized world. Obviously, the global market sets up the need to have intercultural competence for employees who travel between locations of a multinational corporation. Perhaps less obvious may be the need for teachers to work with students who do not speak English as their first language and for police officers, lawyers, managers, and medical personnel to be able to work with people who have various cultural identities.

“Getting Plugged In”

The Digital Divide

Many people who are now college age struggle to imagine a time without cell phones and the Internet. As “digital natives” it is probably also surprising to realize the number of people who do not have access to certain technologies. The digital divide was a term that initially referred to gaps in access to computers. The term expanded to include access to the Internet since it exploded onto the technology scene and is now connected to virtually all computing (van Deursen & van Dijk, 2010). Approximately two billion people around the world now access the Internet regularly, and those who don’t face several disadvantages (Smith, 2011). Discussions of the digital divide are now turning more specifically to high-speed Internet access, and the discussion is moving beyond the physical access divide to include the skills divide, the economic opportunity divide, and the democratic divide. This divide doesn’t just exist in developing countries; it has become an increasing concern in the United States. This is relevant to cultural identities because there are already inequalities in terms of access to technology based on age, race, and class (Sylvester & McGlynn, 2010). Scholars argue that these continued gaps will only serve to exacerbate existing cultural and social inequalities. From an international perspective, the United States is falling behind other countries in terms of access to high-speed Internet. South Korea, Japan, Sweden, and Germany now all have faster average connection speeds than the United States (Smith, 2011). And Finland in 2010 became the first country in the world to declare that all its citizens have a legal right to broadband Internet access (ben-Aaron, 2010). People in rural areas in the United States are especially disconnected from broadband service, with about 11 million rural Americans unable to get the service at home. As so much of our daily lives go online, it puts those who aren’t connected at a disadvantage. From paying bills online, to interacting with government services, to applying for jobs, to taking online college classes, to researching and participating in political and social causes, the Internet connects to education, money, and politics.

What do you think of Finland’s inclusion of broadband access as a legal right? Is this something that should be done in other countries? Why or why not?
How does the digital divide affect the notion of the global village?
How might limited access to technology negatively affect various nondominant groups?

Intercultural Communication: A Dialectical Approach

Intercultural communication is complicated, messy, and at times contradictory. Therefore it is not always easy to conceptualize or study. Taking a dialectical approach allows us to capture the dynamism of intercultural communication. A dialectic is a relationship between two opposing concepts that constantly push and pull one another (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). To put it another way, thinking dialectically helps us realize that our experiences often occur in between two different phenomena. This perspective is especially useful for interpersonal and intercultural communication, because when we think dialectically, we think relationally. This means we look at the relationship between aspects of intercultural communication rather than viewing them in isolation. Intercultural communication occurs as a dynamic in-betweenness that, while connected to the individuals in an encounter, goes beyond the individuals, creating something unique. Holding a dialectical perspective may be challenging for some Westerners, as it asks us to hold two contradictory ideas simultaneously, which goes against much of what we are taught in our formal education. Thinking dialectically helps us see the complexity in culture and identity because it doesn’t allow for dichotomies. Dichotomies are dualistic ways of thinking that highlight opposites, reducing the ability to see gradations that exist in between concepts. Dichotomies such as good/evil, wrong/right, objective/subjective, male/female, in-group/out-group, black/white, and so on form the basis of much of our thoughts on ethics, culture, and general philosophy, but this isn’t the only way of thinking (Marin & Nakayama, 1999). Many Eastern cultures acknowledge that the world isn’t dualistic. Rather, they accept as part of their reality that things that seem opposite are actually interdependent and complement each other. I argue that a dialectical approach is useful in studying intercultural communication because it gets us out of our comfortable and familiar ways of thinking. Since so much of understanding culture and identity is understanding ourselves, having an unfamiliar lens through which to view culture can offer us insights that our familiar lenses will not. Specifically, we can better understand intercultural communication by examining six dialectics (see Figure 8.1 “Dialectics of Intercultural Communication” ) (Martin & Nakayama, 1999).

Figure 8.1 Dialectics of Intercultural Communication

Source: Adapted from Judith N. Martin and Thomas K. Nakayama, “Thinking Dialectically about Culture and Communication,” Communication Theory 9, no. 1 (1999): 1–25.

The cultural-individual dialectic captures the interplay between patterned behaviors learned from a cultural group and individual behaviors that may be variations on or counter to those of the larger culture. This dialectic is useful because it helps us account for exceptions to cultural norms. For example, earlier we learned that the United States is said to be a low-context culture, which means that we value verbal communication as our primary, meaning-rich form of communication. Conversely, Japan is said to be a high-context culture, which means they often look for nonverbal clues like tone, silence, or what is not said for meaning. However, you can find people in the United States who intentionally put much meaning into how they say things, perhaps because they are not as comfortable speaking directly what’s on their mind. We often do this in situations where we may hurt someone’s feelings or damage a relationship. Does that mean we come from a high-context culture? Does the Japanese man who speaks more than is socially acceptable come from a low-context culture? The answer to both questions is no. Neither the behaviors of a small percentage of individuals nor occasional situational choices constitute a cultural pattern.

The personal-contextual dialectic highlights the connection between our personal patterns of and preferences for communicating and how various contexts influence the personal. In some cases, our communication patterns and preferences will stay the same across many contexts. In other cases, a context shift may lead us to alter our communication and adapt. For example, an American businesswoman may prefer to communicate with her employees in an informal and laid-back manner. When she is promoted to manage a department in her company’s office in Malaysia, she may again prefer to communicate with her new Malaysian employees the same way she did with those in the United States. In the United States, we know that there are some accepted norms that communication in work contexts is more formal than in personal contexts. However, we also know that individual managers often adapt these expectations to suit their own personal tastes. This type of managerial discretion would likely not go over as well in Malaysia where there is a greater emphasis put on power distance (Hofstede, 1991). So while the American manager may not know to adapt to the new context unless she has a high degree of intercultural communication competence, Malaysian managers would realize that this is an instance where the context likely influences communication more than personal preferences.

The differences-similarities dialectic allows us to examine how we are simultaneously similar to and different from others. As was noted earlier, it’s easy to fall into a view of intercultural communication as “other oriented” and set up dichotomies between “us” and “them.” When we overfocus on differences, we can end up polarizing groups that actually have things in common. When we overfocus on similarities, we essentialize , or reduce/overlook important variations within a group. This tendency is evident in most of the popular, and some of the academic, conversations regarding “gender differences.” The book Men Are from Mars and Women Are from Venus makes it seem like men and women aren’t even species that hail from the same planet. The media is quick to include a blurb from a research study indicating again how men and women are “wired” to communicate differently. However, the overwhelming majority of current research on gender and communication finds that while there are differences between how men and women communicate, there are far more similarities (Allen, 2011). Even the language we use to describe the genders sets up dichotomies. That’s why I suggest that my students use the term other gender instead of the commonly used opposite sex . I have a mom, a sister, and plenty of female friends, and I don’t feel like any of them are the opposite of me. Perhaps a better title for a book would be Women and Men Are Both from Earth .

The static-dynamic dialectic suggests that culture and communication change over time yet often appear to be and are experienced as stable. Although it is true that our cultural beliefs and practices are rooted in the past, we have already discussed how cultural categories that most of us assume to be stable, like race and gender, have changed dramatically in just the past fifty years. Some cultural values remain relatively consistent over time, which allows us to make some generalizations about a culture. For example, cultures have different orientations to time. The Chinese have a longer-term orientation to time than do Europeans (Lustig & Koester, 2006). This is evidenced in something that dates back as far as astrology. The Chinese zodiac is done annually (The Year of the Monkey, etc.), while European astrology was organized by month (Taurus, etc.). While this cultural orientation to time has been around for generations, as China becomes more Westernized in terms of technology, business, and commerce, it could also adopt some views on time that are more short term.

The history/past-present/future dialectic reminds us to understand that while current cultural conditions are important and that our actions now will inevitably affect our future, those conditions are not without a history. We always view history through the lens of the present. Perhaps no example is more entrenched in our past and avoided in our present as the history of slavery in the United States. Where I grew up in the Southern United States, race was something that came up frequently. The high school I attended was 30 percent minorities (mostly African American) and also had a noticeable number of white teens (mostly male) who proudly displayed Confederate flags on their clothing or vehicles.

There has been controversy over whether the Confederate flag is a symbol of hatred or a historical symbol that acknowledges the time of the Civil War.

Jim Surkamp – Confederate Rebel Flag – CC BY-NC 2.0.

I remember an instance in a history class where we were discussing slavery and the subject of repatriation, or compensation for descendants of slaves, came up. A white male student in the class proclaimed, “I’ve never owned slaves. Why should I have to care about this now?” While his statement about not owning slaves is valid, it doesn’t acknowledge that effects of slavery still linger today and that the repercussions of such a long and unjust period of our history don’t disappear over the course of a few generations.

The privileges-disadvantages dialectic captures the complex interrelation of unearned, systemic advantages and disadvantages that operate among our various identities. As was discussed earlier, our society consists of dominant and nondominant groups. Our cultures and identities have certain privileges and/or disadvantages. To understand this dialectic, we must view culture and identity through a lens of intersectionality , which asks us to acknowledge that we each have multiple cultures and identities that intersect with each other. Because our identities are complex, no one is completely privileged and no one is completely disadvantaged. For example, while we may think of a white, heterosexual male as being very privileged, he may also have a disability that leaves him without the able-bodied privilege that a Latina woman has. This is often a difficult dialectic for my students to understand, because they are quick to point out exceptions that they think challenge this notion. For example, many people like to point out Oprah Winfrey as a powerful African American woman. While she is definitely now quite privileged despite her disadvantaged identities, her trajectory isn’t the norm. When we view privilege and disadvantage at the cultural level, we cannot let individual exceptions distract from the systemic and institutionalized ways in which some people in our society are disadvantaged while others are privileged.

As these dialectics reiterate, culture and communication are complex systems that intersect with and diverge from many contexts. A better understanding of all these dialectics helps us be more critical thinkers and competent communicators in a changing world.

“Getting Critical”

Immigration, Laws, and Religion

France, like the United States, has a constitutional separation between church and state. As many countries in Europe, including France, Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden, have experienced influxes of immigrants, many of them Muslim, there have been growing tensions among immigration, laws, and religion. In 2011, France passed a law banning the wearing of a niqab (pronounced knee-cobb ), which is an Islamic facial covering worn by some women that only exposes the eyes. This law was aimed at “assimilating its Muslim population” of more than five million people and “defending French values and women’s rights” (De La Baume & Goodman, 2011). Women found wearing the veil can now be cited and fined $150 euros. Although the law went into effect in April of 2011, the first fines were issued in late September of 2011. Hind Ahmas, a woman who was fined, says she welcomes the punishment because she wants to challenge the law in the European Court of Human Rights. She also stated that she respects French laws but cannot abide by this one. Her choice to wear the veil has been met with more than a fine. She recounts how she has been denied access to banks and other public buildings and was verbally harassed by a woman on the street and then punched in the face by the woman’s husband. Another Muslim woman named Kenza Drider, who can be seen in Video Clip 8.2, announced that she will run for the presidency of France in order to challenge the law. The bill that contained the law was broadly supported by politicians and the public in France, and similar laws are already in place in Belgium and are being proposed in Italy, Austria, the Netherlands, and Switzerland (Fraser, 2011).

Some people who support the law argue that part of integrating into Western society is showing your face. Do you agree or disagree? Why?
Part of the argument for the law is to aid in the assimilation of Muslim immigrants into French society. What are some positives and negatives of this type of assimilation?
Identify which of the previously discussed dialectics can be seen in this case. How do these dialectics capture the tensions involved?

Video Clip 8.2

Veiled Woman Eyes French Presidency

(click to see video)

Intercultural Communication and Relationships

Intercultural relationships are formed between people with different cultural identities and include friends, romantic partners, family, and coworkers. Intercultural relationships have benefits and drawbacks. Some of the benefits include increasing cultural knowledge, challenging previously held stereotypes, and learning new skills (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). For example, I learned about the Vietnamese New Year celebration Tet from a friend I made in graduate school. This same friend also taught me how to make some delicious Vietnamese foods that I continue to cook today. I likely would not have gained this cultural knowledge or skill without the benefits of my intercultural friendship. Intercultural relationships also present challenges, however.

The dialectics discussed earlier affect our intercultural relationships. The similarities-differences dialectic in particular may present challenges to relationship formation (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). While differences between people’s cultural identities may be obvious, it takes some effort to uncover commonalities that can form the basis of a relationship. Perceived differences in general also create anxiety and uncertainty that is not as present in intracultural relationships. Once some similarities are found, the tension within the dialectic begins to balance out and uncertainty and anxiety lessen. Negative stereotypes may also hinder progress toward relational development, especially if the individuals are not open to adjusting their preexisting beliefs. Intercultural relationships may also take more work to nurture and maintain. The benefit of increased cultural awareness is often achieved, because the relational partners explain their cultures to each other. This type of explaining requires time, effort, and patience and may be an extra burden that some are not willing to carry. Last, engaging in intercultural relationships can lead to questioning or even backlash from one’s own group. I experienced this type of backlash from my white classmates in middle school who teased me for hanging out with the African American kids on my bus. While these challenges range from mild inconveniences to more serious repercussions, they are important to be aware of. As noted earlier, intercultural relationships can take many forms. The focus of this section is on friendships and romantic relationships, but much of the following discussion can be extended to other relationship types.

Intercultural Friendships

Even within the United States, views of friendship vary based on cultural identities. Research on friendship has shown that Latinos/as value relational support and positive feedback, Asian Americans emphasize exchanges of ideas like offering feedback or asking for guidance, African Americans value respect and mutual acceptance, and European Americans value recognition of each other as individuals (Coller, 1996). Despite the differences in emphasis, research also shows that the overall definition of a close friend is similar across cultures. A close friend is thought of as someone who is helpful and nonjudgmental, who you enjoy spending time with but can also be independent, and who shares similar interests and personality traits (Lee, 2006).

Intercultural friendship formation may face challenges that other friendships do not. Prior intercultural experience and overcoming language barriers increase the likelihood of intercultural friendship formation (Sias et al., 2008). In some cases, previous intercultural experience, like studying abroad in college or living in a diverse place, may motivate someone to pursue intercultural friendships once they are no longer in that context. When friendships cross nationality, it may be necessary to invest more time in common understanding, due to language barriers. With sufficient motivation and language skills, communication exchanges through self-disclosure can then further relational formation. Research has shown that individuals from different countries in intercultural friendships differ in terms of the topics and depth of self-disclosure, but that as the friendship progresses, self-disclosure increases in depth and breadth (Chen & Nakazawa, 2009). Further, as people overcome initial challenges to initiating an intercultural friendship and move toward mutual self-disclosure, the relationship becomes more intimate, which helps friends work through and move beyond their cultural differences to focus on maintaining their relationship. In this sense, intercultural friendships can be just as strong and enduring as other friendships (Lee, 2006).

The potential for broadening one’s perspective and learning more about cultural identities is not always balanced, however. In some instances, members of a dominant culture may be more interested in sharing their culture with their intercultural friend than they are in learning about their friend’s culture, which illustrates how context and power influence friendships (Lee, 2006). A research study found a similar power dynamic, as European Americans in intercultural friendships stated they were open to exploring everyone’s culture but also communicated that culture wasn’t a big part of their intercultural friendships, as they just saw their friends as people. As the researcher states, “These types of responses may demonstrate that it is easiest for the group with the most socioeconomic and socio-cultural power to ignore the rules, assume they have the power as individuals to change the rules, or assume that no rules exist, since others are adapting to them rather than vice versa” (Collier, 1996). Again, intercultural friendships illustrate the complexity of culture and the importance of remaining mindful of your communication and the contexts in which it occurs.

Culture and Romantic Relationships

Romantic relationships are influenced by society and culture, and still today some people face discrimination based on who they love. Specifically, sexual orientation and race affect societal views of romantic relationships. Although the United States, as a whole, is becoming more accepting of gay and lesbian relationships, there is still a climate of prejudice and discrimination that individuals in same-gender romantic relationships must face. Despite some physical and virtual meeting places for gay and lesbian people, there are challenges for meeting and starting romantic relationships that are not experienced for most heterosexual people (Peplau & Spalding, 2000).

As we’ve already discussed, romantic relationships are likely to begin due to merely being exposed to another person at work, through a friend, and so on. But some gay and lesbian people may feel pressured into or just feel more comfortable not disclosing or displaying their sexual orientation at work or perhaps even to some family and friends, which closes off important social networks through which most romantic relationships begin. This pressure to refrain from disclosing one’s gay or lesbian sexual orientation in the workplace is not unfounded, as it is still legal in twenty-nine states (as of November 2012) to fire someone for being gay or lesbian (Human Rights Campaign, 2012). There are also some challenges faced by gay and lesbian partners regarding relationship termination. Gay and lesbian couples do not have the same legal and societal resources to manage their relationships as heterosexual couples; for example, gay and lesbian relationships are not legally recognized in most states, it is more difficult for a gay or lesbian couple to jointly own property or share custody of children than heterosexual couples, and there is little public funding for relationship counseling or couples therapy for gay and lesbian couples.

While this lack of barriers may make it easier for gay and lesbian partners to break out of an unhappy or unhealthy relationship, it could also lead couples to termination who may have been helped by the sociolegal support systems available to heterosexuals (Peplau & Spalding, 2000).

Despite these challenges, relationships between gay and lesbian people are similar in other ways to those between heterosexuals. Gay, lesbian, and heterosexual people seek similar qualities in a potential mate, and once relationships are established, all these groups experience similar degrees of relational satisfaction (Peplau & Spalding, 2000). Despite the myth that one person plays the man and one plays the woman in a relationship, gay and lesbian partners do not have set preferences in terms of gender role. In fact, research shows that while women in heterosexual relationships tend to do more of the housework, gay and lesbian couples were more likely to divide tasks so that each person has an equal share of responsibility (Peplau & Spalding, 2000). A gay or lesbian couple doesn’t necessarily constitute an intercultural relationship, but as we have already discussed, sexuality is an important part of an individual’s identity and connects to larger social and cultural systems. Keeping in mind that identity and culture are complex, we can see that gay and lesbian relationships can also be intercultural if the partners are of different racial or ethnic backgrounds.

While interracial relationships have occurred throughout history, there have been more historical taboos in the United States regarding relationships between African Americans and white people than other racial groups. Antimiscegenation laws were common in states and made it illegal for people of different racial/ethnic groups to marry. It wasn’t until 1967 that the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Loving versus Virginia , declaring these laws to be unconstitutional (Pratt, 1995). It wasn’t until 1998 and 2000, however, that South Carolina and Alabama removed such language from their state constitutions (Lovingday.org, 2011). The organization and website lovingday.org commemorates the landmark case and works to end racial prejudice through education.

Even after these changes, there were more Asian-white and Latino/a-white relationships than there were African American–white relationships (Gaines Jr. & Brennan, 2011). Having already discussed the importance of similarity in attraction to mates, it’s important to note that partners in an interracial relationship, although culturally different, tend to be similar in occupation and income. This can likely be explained by the situational influences on our relationship formation we discussed earlier—namely, that work tends to be a starting ground for many of our relationships, and we usually work with people who have similar backgrounds to us.

There has been much research on interracial couples that counters the popular notion that partners may be less satisfied in their relationships due to cultural differences. In fact, relational satisfaction isn’t significantly different for interracial partners, although the challenges they may face in finding acceptance from other people could lead to stressors that are not as strong for intracultural partners (Gaines Jr. & Brennan, 2011). Although partners in interracial relationships certainly face challenges, there are positives. For example, some mention that they’ve experienced personal growth by learning about their partner’s cultural background, which helps them gain alternative perspectives. Specifically, white people in interracial relationships have cited an awareness of and empathy for racism that still exists, which they may not have been aware of before (Gaines Jr. & Liu, 2000).

The Supreme Court ruled in the 1967 Loving v. Virginia case that states could not enforce laws banning interracial marriages.

Bahai.us – CC BY-NC 2.0.

Key Takeaways

Studying intercultural communication, communication between people with differing cultural identities, can help us gain more self-awareness and be better able to communicate in a world with changing demographics and technologies.
A dialectical approach to studying intercultural communication is useful because it allows us to think about culture and identity in complex ways, avoiding dichotomies and acknowledging the tensions that must be negotiated.
Intercultural relationships face some challenges in negotiating the dialectic between similarities and differences but can also produce rewards in terms of fostering self- and other awareness.
Why is the phrase “Know thyself” relevant to the study of intercultural communication?
Apply at least one of the six dialectics to a recent intercultural interaction that you had. How does this dialectic help you understand or analyze the situation?
Do some research on your state’s laws by answering the following questions: Did your state have antimiscegenation laws? If so, when were they repealed? Does your state legally recognize gay and lesbian relationships? If so, how?

Allen, B. J., Difference Matters: Communicating Social Identity , 2nd ed. (Long Grove, IL: Waveland, 2011), 55.

ben-Aaron, D., “Bringing Broadband to Finland’s Bookdocks,” Bloomberg Businessweek , July 19, 2010, 42.

Chen, Y. and Masato Nakazawa, “Influences of Culture on Self-Disclosure as Relationally Situated in Intercultural and Interracial Friendships from a Social Penetration Perspective,” Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 38, no. 2 (2009): 94. doi:10.1080/17475750903395408.

Coller, M. J., “Communication Competence Problematics in Ethnic Friendships,” Communication Monographs 63, no. 4 (1996): 324–25.

De La Baume, M. and J. David Goodman, “First Fines over Wearing Veils in France,” The New York Times ( The Lede: Blogging the News ), September 22, 2011, accessed October 10, 2011, http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/22/first-fines-over -wearing-full-veils-in-france .

Fraser, C., “The Women Defying France’s Fall-Face Veil Ban,” BBC News , September 22, 2011, accessed October 10, 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15023308 .

Gaines Jr. S. O., and Kelly A. Brennan, “Establishing and Maintaining Satisfaction in Multicultural Relationships,” in Close Romantic Relationships: Maintenance and Enhancement , eds. John Harvey and Amy Wenzel (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2011), 239.

Stanley O. Gaines Jr., S. O., and James H. Liu, “Multicultural/Multiracial Relationships,” in Close Relationships: A Sourcebook , eds. Clyde Hendrick and Susan S. Hendrick (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2000), 105.

Hofstede, G., Cultures and Organizations: Softwares of the Mind (London: McGraw-Hill, 1991), 26.

Human Rights Campaign, “Pass ENDA NOW”, accessed November 5, 2012, http://www.hrc.org/campaigns/employment-non-discrimination-act .

Lee, P., “Bridging Cultures: Understanding the Construction of Relational Identity in Intercultural Friendships,” Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 35, no. 1 (2006): 11. doi:10.1080/17475740600739156.

Loving Day, “The Last Laws to Go,” Lovingday.org , accessed October 11, 2011, http://lovingday.org/last-laws-to-go .

Lustig, M. W., and Jolene Koester, Intercultural Competence: Interpersonal Communication across Cultures , 2nd ed. (Boston, MA: Pearson, 2006), 128–29.

Martin, J. N., and Thomas K. Nakayama, Intercultural Communication in Contexts , 5th ed. (Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, 2010), 4.

Martin, J. N., and Thomas K. Nakayama, “Thinking Dialectically about Culture and Communication,” Communication Theory 9, no. 1 (1999): 14.

McLuhan, M., The Medium Is the Message (New York: Bantam Books, 1967).

Peplau, L. A. and Leah R. Spalding, “The Close Relationships of Lesbians, Gay Men, and Bisexuals,” in Close Relationships: A Sourcebook , eds. Clyde Hendrick and Susan S. Hendrick (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2000), 113.

Pratt, R. A., “Crossing the Color Line: A Historical Assessment and Personal Narrative of Loving v. Virginia ,” Howard Law Journal 41, no. 2 (1995): 229–36.

Sias, P. M., Jolanta A. Drzewiecka, Mary Meares, Rhiannon Bent, Yoko Konomi, Maria Ortega, and Colene White, “Intercultural Friendship Development,” Communication Reports 21, no. 1 (2008): 9. doi:10.1080/08934210701643750.

Smith, P., “The Digital Divide,” New York Times Upfront , May 9, 2011, 6.

Sylvester, D. E., and Adam J. McGlynn, “The Digital Divide, Political Participation, and Place,” Social Science Computer Review 28, no. 1 (2010): 64–65. doi:10.1177/0894439309335148.

van Deursen, A. and Jan van Dijk, “Internet Skills and the Digital Divide,” New Media and Society 13, no. 6 (2010): 893. doi:10.1177/1461444810386774.

Communication in the Real World Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Language Teaching
Language Learning

EXPLORING THE IMPACT OF CULTURE ON LANGUAGE LEARNING: HOW UNDERSTANDING CULTURAL CONTEXT AND VALUES CAN DEEPEN LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

September 2023

Tashkent State Transport University

Discover the world's research

25+ million members
160+ million publication pages
2.3+ billion citations
Novita Kusumadewi

Achmad Tohe
Indra Kurniawan

Nobuko Adachi
Zdenek Salzmann

N.G. Fulcher
Fred Davidson
K D Harrison
S Ting-Toomey
Recruit researchers
Join for free
Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

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

Religion, culture, and communication.

Stephen M. Croucher , Stephen M. Croucher School of Communication, Journalism, and Marketing, Massey Business School, Massey University
Cheng Zeng , Cheng Zeng Department of Communication, University of Jyväskylä
Diyako Rahmani Diyako Rahmani Department of Communication, University of Jyväskylä
and Mélodine Sommier Mélodine Sommier School of History, Culture, and Communication, Eramus University
https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.166
Published online: 25 January 2017

Religion is an essential element of the human condition. Hundreds of studies have examined how religious beliefs mold an individual’s sociology and psychology. In particular, research has explored how an individual’s religion (religious beliefs, religious denomination, strength of religious devotion, etc.) is linked to their cultural beliefs and background. While some researchers have asserted that religion is an essential part of an individual’s culture, other researchers have focused more on how religion is a culture in itself. The key difference is how researchers conceptualize and operationalize both of these terms. Moreover, the influence of communication in how individuals and communities understand, conceptualize, and pass on religious and cultural beliefs and practices is integral to understanding exactly what religion and culture are.

It is through exploring the relationships among religion, culture, and communication that we can best understand how they shape the world in which we live and have shaped the communication discipline itself. Furthermore, as we grapple with these relationships and terms, we can look to the future and realize that the study of religion, culture, and communication is vast and open to expansion. Researchers are beginning to explore the influence of mediation on religion and culture, how our globalized world affects the communication of religions and cultures, and how interreligious communication is misunderstood; and researchers are recognizing the need to extend studies into non-Christian religious cultures.

communication
intercultural communication

Intricate Relationships among Religion, Communication, and Culture

Compiling an entry on the relationships among religion, culture, and communication is not an easy task. There is not one accepted definition for any of these three terms, and research suggests that the connections among these concepts are complex, to say the least. Thus, this article attempts to synthesize the various approaches to these three terms and integrate them. In such an endeavor, it is impossible to discuss all philosophical and paradigmatic debates or include all disciplines.

It is difficult to define religion from one perspective and with one encompassing definition. “Religion” is often defined as the belief in or the worship of a god or gods. Geertz ( 1973 ) defined a religion as

(1) a system which acts to (2) establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by (3) formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and (4) clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that (5) the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic. (p. 90)

It is essential to recognize that religion cannot be understood apart from the world in which it takes place (Marx & Engels, 1975 ). To better understand how religion relates to and affects culture and communication, we should first explore key definitions, philosophies, and perspectives that have informed how we currently look at religion. In particular, the influences of Karl Marx, Max Weber, Emile Durkheim, and Georg Simmel are discussed to further understand the complexity of religion.

Karl Marx ( 1818–1883 ) saw religion as descriptive and evaluative. First, from a descriptive point of view, Marx believed that social and economic situations shape how we form and regard religions and what is religious. For Marx, the fact that people tend to turn to religion more when they are facing economic hardships or that the same religious denomination is practiced differently in different communities would seem perfectly logical. Second, Marx saw religion as a form of alienation (Marx & Engels, 1975 ). For Marx, the notion that the Catholic Church, for example, had the ability or right to excommunicate an individual, and thus essentially exclude them from the spiritual community, was a classic example of exploitation and domination. Such alienation and exploitation was later echoed in the works of Friedrich Nietzsche ( 1844–1900 ), who viewed organized religion as society and culture controlling man (Nietzsche, 1996 ).

Building on Marxist thinking, Weber ( 1864–1920 ) stressed the multicausality of religion. Weber ( 1963 ) emphasized three arguments regarding religion and society: (1) how a religion relates to a society is contingent (it varies); (2) the relationship between religion and society can only be examined in its cultural and historical context; and (3) the relationship between society and religion is slowly eroding. Weber’s arguments can be applied to Catholicism in Europe. Until the Protestant Reformation of the 15th and 16th centuries, Catholicism was the dominant religious ideology on the European continent. However, since the Reformation, Europe has increasingly become more Protestant and less Catholic. To fully grasp why many Europeans gravitate toward Protestantism and not Catholicism, we must consider the historical and cultural reasons: the Reformation, economics, immigration, politics, etc., that have all led to the majority of Europeans identifying as Protestant (Davie, 2008 ). Finally, even though the majority of Europeans identify as Protestant, secularism (separation of church and state) is becoming more prominent in Europe. In nations like France, laws are in place that officially separate the church and state, while in Northern Europe, church attendance is low, and many Europeans who identify as Protestant have very low religiosity (strength of religious devotion), focusing instead on being secularly religious individuals. From a Weberian point of view, the links among religion, history, and culture in Europe explain the decline of Catholicism, the rise of Protestantism, and now the rise of secularism.

Emile Durkheim ( 1858–1917 ) focused more on how religion performs a necessary function; it brings people and society together. Durkheim ( 1976 ) thus defined a religion as

a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say, things which are set apart and forbidden—beliefs and practices which unite into one single moral community called a Church, all those who adhere to them. (p. 47)

From this perspective, religion and culture are inseparable, as beliefs and practices are uniquely cultural. For example, religious rituals (one type of practice) unite believers in a religion and separate nonbelievers. The act of communion, or the sharing of the Eucharist by partaking in consecrated bread and wine, is practiced by most Christian denominations. However, the frequency of communion differs extensively, and the ritual is practiced differently based on historical and theological differences among denominations.

Georg Simmel ( 1858–1918 ) focused more on the fluidity and permanence of religion and religious life. Simmel ( 1950 ) believed that religious and cultural beliefs develop from one another. Moreover, he asserted that religiosity is an essential element to understand when examining religious institutions and religion. While individuals may claim to be part of a religious group, Simmel asserted that it was important to consider just how religious the individuals were. In much of Europe, religiosity is low: Germany 34%, Sweden 19%, Denmark 42%, the United Kingdom 30%, the Czech Republic 23%, and The Netherlands 26%, while religiosity is relatively higher in the United States (56%), which is now considered the most religious industrialized nation in the world ( Telegraph Online , 2015 ). The decline of religiosity in parts of Europe and its rise in the U.S. is linked to various cultural, historical, and communicative developments that will be further discussed.

Combining Simmel’s ( 1950 ) notion of religion with Geertz’s ( 1973 ) concept of religion and a more basic definition (belief in or the worship of a god or gods through rituals), it is clear that the relationship between religion and culture is integral and symbiotic. As Clark and Hoover ( 1997 ) noted, “culture and religion are inseparable” and “religion is an important consideration in theories of culture and society” (p. 17).

Outside of the Western/Christian perception of religion, Buddhist scholars such as Nagarajuna present a relativist framework to understand concepts like time and causality. This framework is distinct from the more Western way of thinking, in that notions of present, past, and future are perceived to be chronologically distorted, and the relationship between cause and effect is paradoxical (Wimal, 2007 ). Nagarajuna’s philosophy provides Buddhism with a relativist, non-solid dependent, and non-static understanding of reality (Kohl, 2007 ). Mulla Sadra’s philosophy explored the metaphysical relationship between the created universe and its singular creator. In his philosophy, existence takes precedence over essence, and any existing object reflects a part of the creator. Therefore, every devoted person is obliged to know themselves as the first step to knowing the creator, which is the ultimate reason for existence. This Eastern perception of religion is similar to that of Nagarajuna and Buddhism, as they both include the paradoxical elements that are not easily explained by the rationality of Western philosophy. For example, the god, as Mulla Sadra defines it, is beyond definition, description, and delamination, yet it is absolutely simple and unique (Burrell, 2013 ).

How researchers define and study culture varies extensively. For example, Hall ( 1989 ) defined culture as “a series of situational models for behavior and thought” (p. 13). Geertz ( 1973 ), building on the work of Kluckhohn ( 1949 ), defined culture in terms of 11 different aspects:

(1) the total way of life of a people; (2) the social legacy the individual acquires from his group; (3) a way of thinking, feeling, and believing; (4) an abstraction from behavior; (5) a theory on the part of the anthropologist about the way in which a group of people in fact behave; (6) a storehouse of pooled learning; (7) a set of standardized orientations to recurrent problems; (8) learned behavior; (9) a mechanism for the normative regulation of behavior; (10) a set of techniques for adjusting both to the external environment and to other men; (11) a precipitate of history. (Geertz, 1973 , p. 5)

Research on culture is divided between an essentialist camp and a constructivist camp. The essentialist view regards culture as a concrete and fixed system of symbols and meanings (Holiday, 1999 ). An essentialist approach is most prevalent in linguistic studies, in which national culture is closely linked to national language. Regarding culture as a fluid concept, constructionist views of culture focus on how it is performed and negotiated by individuals (Piller, 2011 ). In this sense, “culture” is a verb rather than a noun. In principle, a non-essentialist approach rejects predefined national cultures and uses culture as a tool to interpret social behavior in certain contexts.

Different approaches to culture influence significantly how it is incorporated into communication studies. Cultural communication views communication as a resource for individuals to produce and regulate culture (Philipsen, 2002 ). Constructivists tend to perceive culture as a part of the communication process (Applegate & Sypher, 1988 ). Cross-cultural communication typically uses culture as a national boundary. Hofstede ( 1991 ) is probably the most popular scholar in this line of research. Culture is thus treated as a theoretical construct to explain communication variations across cultures. This is also evident in intercultural communication studies, which focus on misunderstandings between individuals from different cultures.

Religion, Community, and Culture

There is an interplay among religion, community, and culture. Community is essentially formed by a group of people who share common activities or beliefs based on their mutual affect, loyalty, and personal concerns. Participation in religious institutions is one of the most dominant community engagements worldwide. Religious institutions are widely known for creating a sense of community by offering various material and social supports for individual followers. In addition, the role that religious organizations play in communal conflicts is also crucial. As religion deals with the ultimate matters of life, the differences among different religious beliefs are virtually impossible to settle. Although a direct causal relationship between religion and violence is not well supported, religion is, nevertheless, commonly accepted as a potential escalating factor in conflicts. Currently, religious conflicts are on the rise, and they are typically more violent, long-lasting, and difficult to resolve. In such cases, local religious organizations, places facilitating collective actions in the community, are extremely vital, as they can either preach peace or stir up hatred and violence. The peace impact of local religious institutions has been largely witnessed in India and Indonesia where conflicts are solved at the local level before developing into communal violence (De Juan, Pierskalla, & Vüllers, 2015 ).

While religion affects cultures (Beckford & Demerath, 2007 ), it itself is also affected by culture, as religion is an essential layer of culture. For example, the growth of individualism in the latter half of the 20th century has been coincident with the decline in the authority of Judeo-Christian institutions and the emergence of “parachurches” and more personal forms of prayer (Hoover & Lundby, 1997 ). However, this decline in the authority of the religious institutions in modernized society has not reduced the important role of religion and spirituality as one of the main sources of calm when facing painful experiences such as death, suffering, and loss.

When cultural specifications, such as individualism and collectivism, have been attributed to religion, the proposed definitions and functions of religion overlap with definitions of culture. For example, researchers often combine religious identification (Jewish, Christian, Muslim, etc.) with cultural dimensions (Hofstede, 1991 ) like individualism/collectivism to understand and compare cultural differences. Such combinations for comparison and analytical purposes demonstrate how religion and religious identification in particular are often relegated to a micro-level variable, when in fact the true relationship between an individual’s religion and culture is inseparable.

Religion as Part of Culture in Communication Studies

Religion as a part of culture has been linked to numerous communication traits and behaviors. Specifically, religion has been linked with media use and preferences (e.g., Stout & Buddenbaum, 1996 ), health/medical decisions and communication about health-related issues (Croucher & Harris, 2012 ), interpersonal communication (e.g., Croucher, Faulkner, Oommen, & Long, 2012b ), organizational behaviors (e.g., Garner & Wargo, 2009 ), and intercultural communication traits and behaviors (e.g., Croucher, Braziunaite, & Oommen, 2012a ). In media and religion scholarship, researchers have shown how religion as a cultural variable has powerful effects on media use, preferences, and gratifications. The research linking media and religion is vast (Stout & Buddenbaum, 1996 ). This body of research has shown how “religious worldviews are created and sustained in ongoing social processes in which information is shared” (Stout & Buddenbaum, 1996 , pp. 7–8). For example, religious Christians are more likely to read newspapers, while religious individuals are less likely to have a favorable opinion of the internet (Croucher & Harris, 2012 ), and religious individuals (who typically attend religious services and are thus integrated into a religious community) are more likely to read media produced by the religious community (Davie, 2008 ).

Research into health/medical decisions and communication about health-related issues is also robust. Research shows how religion, specifically religiosity, promotes healthier living and better decision-making regarding health and wellbeing (Harris & Worley, 2012 ). For example, a religious (or spiritual) approach to cancer treatment can be more effective than a secular approach (Croucher & Harris, 2012 ), religious attendance promotes healthier living, and people with HIV/AIDS often turn to religion for comfort as well. These studies suggest the significance of religion in health communication and in our health.

Research specifically examining the links between religion and interpersonal communication is not as vast as the research into media, health, and religion. However, this slowly growing body of research has explored areas such as rituals, self-disclosure (Croucher et al., 2012b ), and family dynamics (Davie, 2008 ), to name a few.

The role of religion in organizations is well studied. Overall, researchers have shown how religious identification and religiosity influence an individual’s organizational behavior. For example, research has shown that an individual’s religious identification affects levels of organizational dissent (Croucher et al., 2012a ). Garner and Wargo ( 2009 ) further showed that organizational dissent functions differently in churches than in nonreligious organizations. Kennedy and Lawton ( 1998 ) explored the relationships between religious beliefs and perceptions about business/corporate ethics and found that individuals with stronger religious beliefs have stricter ethical beliefs.

Researchers are increasingly looking at the relationships between religion and intercultural communication. Researchers have explored how religion affects numerous communication traits and behaviors and have shown how religious communities perceive and enact religious beliefs. Antony ( 2010 ), for example, analyzed the bindi in India and how the interplay between religion and culture affects people’s acceptance of it. Karniel and Lavie-Dinur ( 2011 ) showed how religion and culture influence how Palestinian Arabs are represented on Israeli television. Collectively, the intercultural work examining religion demonstrates the increasing importance of the intersection between religion and culture in communication studies.

Collectively, communication studies discourse about religion has focused on how religion is an integral part of an individual’s culture. Croucher et al. ( 2016 ), in a content analysis of communication journal coverage of religion and spirituality from 2002 to 2012 , argued that the discourse largely focuses on religion as a cultural variable by identifying religious groups as variables for comparative analysis, exploring “religious” or “spiritual” as adjectives to describe entities (religious organizations), and analyzing the relationships between religious groups in different contexts. Croucher and Harris ( 2012 ) asserted that the discourse about religion, culture, and communication is still in its infancy, though it continues to grow at a steady pace.

Future Lines of Inquiry

Research into the links among religion, culture, and communication has shown the vast complexities of these terms. With this in mind, there are various directions for future research/exploration that researchers could take to expand and benefit our practical understanding of these concepts and how they relate to one another. Work should continue to define these terms with a particular emphasis on mediation, closely consider these terms in a global context, focus on how intergroup dynamics influence this relationship, and expand research into non-Christian religious cultures.

Additional definitional work still needs to be done to clarify exactly what is meant by “religion,” “culture,” and “communication.” Our understanding of these terms and relationships can be further enhanced by analyzing how forms of mass communication mediate each other. Martin-Barbero ( 1993 ) asserted that there should be a shift from media to mediations as multiple opposing forces meet in communication. He defined mediation as “the articulations between communication practices and social movements and the articulation of different tempos of development with the plurality of cultural matrices” (p. 187). Religions have relied on mediations through various media to communicate their messages (oral stories, print media, radio, television, internet, etc.). These media share religious messages, shape the messages and religious communities, and are constantly changing. What we find is that, as media sophistication develops, a culture’s understandings of mediated messages changes (Martin-Barbero, 1993 ). Thus, the very meanings of religion, culture, and communication are transitioning as societies morph into more digitally mediated societies. Research should continue to explore the effects of digital mediation on our conceptualizations of religion, culture, and communication.

Closely linked to mediation is the need to continue extending our focus on the influence of globalization on religion, culture, and communication. It is essential to study the relationships among culture, religion, and communication in the context of globalization. In addition to trading goods and services, people are increasingly sharing ideas, values, and beliefs in the modern world. Thus, globalization not only leads to technological and socioeconomic changes, but also shapes individuals’ ways of communicating and their perceptions and beliefs about religion and culture. While religion represents an old way of life, globalization challenges traditional meaning systems and is often perceived as a threat to religion. For instance, Marx and Weber both asserted that modernization was incompatible with tradition. But, in contrast, globalization could facilitate religious freedom by spreading the idea of freedom worldwide. Thus, future work needs to consider the influence of globalization to fully grasp the interrelationships among religion, culture, and communication in the world.

A review of the present definitions of religion in communication research reveals that communication scholars approach religion as a holistic, total, and unique institution or notion, studied from the viewpoint of different communication fields such as health, intercultural, interpersonal, organizational communication, and so on. However, this approach to communication undermines the function of a religion as a culture and also does not consider the possible differences between religious cultures. For example, religious cultures differ in their levels of individualism and collectivism. There are also differences in how religious cultures interact to compete for more followers and territory (Klock, Novoa, & Mogaddam, 2010 ). Thus, localization is one area of further research for religion communication studies. This line of study best fits in the domain of intergroup communication. Such an approach will provide researchers with the opportunity to think about the roles that interreligious communication can play in areas such as peacemaking processes (Klock et al., 2010 ).

Academic discourse about religion has focused largely on Christian denominations. In a content analysis of communication journal discourse on religion and spirituality, Croucher et al. ( 2016 ) found that the terms “Christian” or “Christianity” appeared in 9.56% of all articles, and combined with other Christian denominations (Catholicism, Evangelism, Baptist, Protestantism, and Mormonism, for example), appeared in 18.41% of all articles. Other religious cultures (denominations) made up a relatively small part of the overall academic discourse: Islam appeared in 6.8%, Judaism in 4.27%, and Hinduism in only 0.96%. Despite the presence of various faiths in the data, the dominance of Christianity and its various denominations is incontestable. Having religions unevenly represented in the academic discourse is problematic. This highly unbalanced representation presents a biased picture of religious practices. It also represents one faith as being the dominant faith and others as being minority religions in all contexts.

Ultimately, the present overview, with its focus on religion, culture, and communication points to the undeniable connections among these concepts. Religion and culture are essential elements of humanity, and it is through communication, that these elements of humanity are mediated. Whether exploring these terms in health, interpersonal, intercultural, intergroup, mass, or other communication contexts, it is evident that understanding the intersection(s) among religion, culture, and communication offers vast opportunities for researchers and practitioners.

Communication: The Culture Affect

Save to my list

Remove from my list

Communication: The Culture Affect. (2016, Sep 17). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/communication-the-culture-affect-essay

"Communication: The Culture Affect." StudyMoose , 17 Sep 2016, https://studymoose.com/communication-the-culture-affect-essay

StudyMoose. (2016). Communication: The Culture Affect . [Online]. Available at: https://studymoose.com/communication-the-culture-affect-essay [Accessed: 21 Jul. 2024]

"Communication: The Culture Affect." StudyMoose, Sep 17, 2016. Accessed July 21, 2024. https://studymoose.com/communication-the-culture-affect-essay

"Communication: The Culture Affect," StudyMoose , 17-Sep-2016. [Online]. Available: https://studymoose.com/communication-the-culture-affect-essay. [Accessed: 21-Jul-2024]

StudyMoose. (2016). Communication: The Culture Affect . [Online]. Available at: https://studymoose.com/communication-the-culture-affect-essay [Accessed: 21-Jul-2024]

How Does Culture Affect Meaning and Communication? Pages: 6 (1569 words)
Factors that can Affect Interaction and Communication Pages: 3 (874 words)
A factors that may affect communication Pages: 4 (933 words)
Use of Technology Can Negatively Affect Our Communication Skills Pages: 2 (523 words)
How Emotions Affect Our Communication Skills? Pages: 4 (904 words)
Affect of Culture and Religion on Curriculum Pages: 11 (3165 words)
How "Farewell My Concubine" And Leslie Cheung Affect Chinese Gender Culture? Pages: 7 (1971 words)
Individualism: Culture Influence Affect on Personality Development Pages: 6 (1630 words)
How Society and Culture Affect Friendship? Pages: 2 (344 words)
How does culture affect diagnosis? Pages: 3 (839 words)

👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!

Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.

Cultural Differences’ Impact on Communication Essay

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

Culture is the specialized and intergenerational collection of one group’s ideas, beliefs, and customs. In our increasingly globalized society, it is important to be conscious of cultural differences in order to negotiate effectively. According to research, there are seven major cultural distinctions that have the biggest impact on communication (DeVito, 2016). Four of them are included in the TV show Outsourced , a sitcom that caricatures the cultural differences between Americans and Indians. Firstly, individualist or collectivist orientation decides whether the individual’s or group’s goals are given greater importance. For example, in Outsourced , a cultural misunderstanding occurs because an American character does not comprehend the Indian tradition of arranged marriage wherein the family’s choice of spouse is more important than the individual’s. Secondly, high-context cultures emphasize personal relationships and oral agreements, while low-context cultures value verbalized, explicit explanations (DeVito, 2016). Indian culture is more high-context than American culture, so the Outsourced employees use indirect communication to preserve face and do not openly criticize the manager. In one of the episodes, the main character hosts a sexual harassment seminar, and an employee expresses her discomfort through the company hot-line instead of confronting him directly.

Thirdly, power in high-power-distance cultures is concentrated in the hands of the few, and it is distributed more evenly in low-power-distance ones. Since India fits into the former category, there is a rigid hierarchal rule in the Outsourced office, and they are surprised by the manager’s active and hands-on approach. Fourthly, long-term orientation prioritizes future rewards, but short-term orientation focuses more on the past and present. It can be inferred that Indian culture is more short-term oriented since one of the employees prefers flirting with the clients rather than increasing revenue. Acknowledging cultural differences is important so the workplace misunderstandings that are spoofed in Outsourced can be avoided.

I have unknowingly encountered many cultural differences both in the classroom and at work. An argument once occurred between my classmate and me because our respective cultures had different distributions of power. She was from Russia, and she was angry with a professor who had unexpectedly moved her exam date a day forward with less than twelve hours’ warning. Since she had less time to prepare than expected, she was forced to pull an all-nighter and cram for the exam. I advised her to confront the professor about the injustice of not giving her at least a week’s warning and to complain to the administration if he refused to move the exam back to its original date. However, she said complaining would be useless, and it would be easier to acquiesce to the professor’s decision. At the time I believed her hesitation was due to her individual shyness, and I criticized her for it. However, after reading DeVito’s chapter on cultural differences, I understand that she came from a culture with a greater power distance between students and teachers (DeVito, 2016). In Russia, where students are expected to be modest and respectful, it would be unacceptable to challenge a superior such as a professor.

People generally tend to overestimate individual agency and disregard cultural differences. I believe this is because we are generally unaware of the fact that our beliefs are the product of our cultural orientation and are not universally applicable. There have definitely been instances when I was frustrated by my classmates or co-workers and criticized them as individuals, even though now I understand that there was simply a cultural gap between us. These situations highlight the importance of developing intercultural competence in the workplace since misunderstandings can be easily avoided with proper training and education.

As our economy grows more globalized and American society becomes more diverse, there is an increasing need for intercultural competence in the workplace. Organizations should implement a variety of initiatives, such as trainings and workshops, to create awareness of intercultural competence as an integral soft skill in the modern socio-economic climate. Tailored sessions should be held for teams who have an international clientele (Bodis, 2020). Individual coaching should be offered to employees that exhibit stereotyped and ethnocentric thinking. Additionally, companies can promote cross-cultural dialogue through photo exhibitions, film screenings, and excursions to cultural institutions such as museums. Furthermore, diagnostic assessments of intercultural sensitivity and competence should be undertaken regularly and on an organization-wide scale. A comprehensive approach that includes training, tailored sessions, individual coaching, cultural outings, and regular diagnostic assessments is required to develop intercultural competence.

There are several reasons organizations should prioritize the development of intercultural competence. Firstly, it forces employees to confront ethnic, racial, and national stereotypes to avoid their undue influence on the perception of co-workers or clients. People from different backgrounds should be regarded as unique, multi-faceted individuals rather than members of a specific group. Secondly, intercultural competence reduces ethnocentrism, the tendency to judge the customs of another culture by the standards of your own. Ethnocentrism leads to judgment, condescension, and should be eradicated since it hinders effective communication by assuming a position of superiority. Thirdly, a “system of symbols” encompasses the meaning of words and nonverbal cues that need to be shared by both interlocutors in order to communicate effectively (DeVito, 2016). Since it varies by culture, intercultural competence would enable employees to adapt to different systems. Confronting stereotypes, reducing ethnocentrism, and adjusting to new systems of symbols are a few of the many reasons organizations need to improve intercultural competence.

Bodis, A. (2020). Integrating intercultural competence in course curricula in a tailored way. English Australia Journal, 36 (1), 26-38.

DeVito, J. A. (2016). The interpersonal communication book (14th ed). Pearson.

The Saudi Arabian vs. Australian Cultures Analysis
Mexican vs. American Cultural Differences in Business
Relationship Between Ethnocentrism and Intercultural Communication
The Role of Ethnocentrism in Intercultural Communication
Confronting Complexity in Society
Aspects of Cultural Misperception
Culture Shock as a Natural Phenomenon
Limitations in Intercultural Communication
The Western Cultural Narratives
Italian and African-American Cultures Compared
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, January 6). Cultural Differences' Impact on Communication. https://ivypanda.com/essays/cultural-differences-impact-on-communication/

"Cultural Differences' Impact on Communication." IvyPanda , 6 Jan. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/cultural-differences-impact-on-communication/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Cultural Differences' Impact on Communication'. 6 January.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Cultural Differences' Impact on Communication." January 6, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/cultural-differences-impact-on-communication/.

1. IvyPanda . "Cultural Differences' Impact on Communication." January 6, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/cultural-differences-impact-on-communication/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Cultural Differences' Impact on Communication." January 6, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/cultural-differences-impact-on-communication/.

How Cultural, Cognitive, and Narrative Biases Affect Us

Naming media biases, and our own, can help us maintain a cool head..

Updated July 17, 2024 | Reviewed by Lybi Ma

Adobe stock image by GoodIdeas, licensed by Ravi Chandra

We all have biases, we can minimize or even overcome them by being aware of them. There is a spectrum of bias from unconscious (implicit and cultural) assumptions to overt and consciously manipulative ideologies. When projected by mass media, these might land on and inflame our tendencies towards confirmation bias and cognitive rigidity, as opposed to encouraging cognitive flexibility and growth. As a psychiatrist, I favor humanitarian, inclusive, compassionate, and egalitarian ways of framing issues, as well as reason-based, thoughtful inquiries and comparisons. It’s an emotional labor to deal with stimuli that don’t favor, broaden, and build upon these preferences—and many of us are having to do a lot of emotional labor these days.

Like most Americans, I’m often frustrated by what I see in the media. Only 34 percent of Americans trust the media to report the news “fully, accurately, and fairly” according to a 2022 Gallup poll, down from about 70 percent in the early 1970s. Trust is particularly low among Republicans and Independents, but it is unclear whether that reflects their own cultural biases, the views of the media they tune into, or an actual liberal bias in the media. Youth trust social media almost as much as legacy media, per Pew.

Many of us don’t fully trust the mainstream media, and that may be in part because we feel they are biased. By naming potential media biases, we can demand that they do better and choose sources that better inform us and hopefully help us counter our own biases to amplify the building blocks of mental and social health: cognition , empathy, and relatedness. Given my preferences named above, I think the worst biases are those that work against these building blocks in favor of anti-intellectualism, self-centeredness, and division—hype, hysteria, and hate. To note, some political candidates lean into hype, hysteria, and hate as well, for all the same reasons the media does.

Examples of biases (and there is overlap between these categories):

Editorial selection. Only certain facts and stories are chosen to support the desired narrative, while counterfactuals and alternative stories are devalued and eliminated. For example, the polarized extremes are often highlighted at the expense of the broad agreement of centrists. Studies have indicated that there is broad agreement on immigration reforms and gun regulation, for example, but this doesn’t get the attention it deserves.
Attention economy. The media wants our eyeballs and clicks. Sober reporting on policy proposals, achievements, and failures might be seen as wonky and boring ; editorial teams might strive to engage us on an emotional level.
Media as the Fourth Estate. Rather than limiting their purview to informing the public and key decision-makers, and holding power to account, media can be seen as trying to magnify their authority.
Visual bias. Photos and images are chosen to enhance an aspect of the story.
Masquerading as “neutrality.” Sometimes two points of view are presented without kicking the tires, or salient issues are avoided entirely out of service to the value of “neutrality.” What might be different if the emphasis was on fairness, thoroughness, and asking hard questions to bolster the public’s reasoning capacity and attention to substance?
Spin , slant, and outright lies – facts are spun and slanted to support a narrative; unsubstantiated claims and opinions are promoted as truth.
Appeal to emotions rather than reason. For example, amplifying anxieties, fears, and the “survival brain” responses of readers, without balancing emotions with reason to cultivate the “ wise mind.” This also can involve ad hominem attacks and flawed logic. Certain words are used to prime responses (“illegal aliens” versus “undocumented migrants.”)
Cultural bias. A study by Perina and Wai found that the vast majority of writers and editors at the New York Times and Wall Street Journal came from elite schools with high average SAT and ACT scores. The authors proposed that this meant the individuals were “cognitively elite” and not simply “culturally elite.” It’s possible and even quite likely that culture – shared backgrounds, experiences, identities, relationships, assumptions, values, and interests – might motivate and inform these journalists rather than supposed “cognitive ability” alone. There’s also an implicit bias that a particular kind of cognition, reflected in test scores, reflects a higher capacity to think about issues.
Institutional bias. Noam Chomsky famously theorized about the “manufacture of consent” in mainstream media, particularly consent around cultural imperatives such as war and wealth. Thus, institutional biases can bend attention and influence populations towards these cultural goals , either consciously or unconsciously, and limit discussion on countervailing arguments.
Journalistic mind reading . Journalists might speculate on motivations, but they are not trained to make character analyses and informed predictions of future behavior; they have rarely involved experts. Is this due to a stigmatization of mental health and thus mental health expertise? Or possibly, journalists have been affected by the American Psychiatric Association’s imprimatur against professional opinions on public figures. Also, as noted above, the media may want to amplify its authority at the expense of mental health expertise.

Author's Note: A more politically-themed version of this article appears at East Wind eZine, an Asian American online publication. See MOSF 19.6: Media Biases 2024: Hysteria, Hype, and Hate .

Brenan M. Americans' Trust In Media Remains Near Record Low . Gallup News, October 18, 2022

Liedke J, Gottfried J. U.S. adults under 30 now trust information from social media almost as much as from national news outlets. Pew Research Center, October 27, 2022

Wai, Jonathan & Perina, Kaja. (2018). Expertise in Journalism: Factors Shaping a Cognitive and Culturally Elite Profession. Journal of Expertise 2018. Vol. x(x)

Wintonick, P. Achbar, M. (Director). (1993). Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media. Zeitgeist Films. Available on Kanopy.

Ravi Chandra, M.D., D.F.A.P.A., is a San Francisco-based psychiatrist and writer.

Find a Therapist
Find a Treatment Center
Find a Psychiatrist
Find a Support Group
Find Online Therapy
United States
Brooklyn, NY
Chicago, IL
Houston, TX
Los Angeles, CA
New York, NY
Portland, OR
San Diego, CA
San Francisco, CA
Seattle, WA
Washington, DC
Asperger's
Bipolar Disorder
Chronic Pain
Eating Disorders
Passive Aggression
Personality
Goal Setting
Positive Psychology
Stopping Smoking
Low Sexual Desire
Relationships
Child Development
Self Tests NEW
Therapy Center
Diagnosis Dictionary
Types of Therapy

Sticking up for yourself is no easy task. But there are concrete skills you can use to hone your assertiveness and advocate for yourself.

Emotional Intelligence
Gaslighting
Affective Forecasting
Neuroscience

CNN values your feedback

Fear & Greed Index

Latest Market News

What is CrowdStrike, the company linked to the global outage?

The global computer outage affecting airports, banks and other businesses on Friday appears to stem at least partly from a software update issued by major US cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike, experts told CNN.

CrowdStrike told customers early Friday that the outages were caused by “a defect found in a single content update of its software on Microsoft Windows operating systems, according to a post on X from CEO George Kurtz.

Kurtz later apologized to customers Friday, and said the company is “deeply sorry for the inconvenience and disruption,” he posted on X .

He reiterated that the outage was not caused by a security breach or a cyberattack and maintained that CrowdStrike’s customers were “fully protected.”

“We are working with all impacted customers to ensure that systems are back up and they can deliver the services their customers are counting on,” Kurtz said, reiterating that the cause of the outage was not malicious.

The company’s engineers took action to address the problem, according to an advisory viewed by CNN, which told customers to reboot their computers and perform other actions if they were still having technical issues. The issue is specific to Falcon, one of CrowdStrike’s main software products, and is not impacting Mac or Linux operating systems, according to the advisory. Crowdstrike says Falcon is designed to protect files saved in the cloud.

CrowdStrike’s cybersecurity software — used by numerous Fortune 500 companies, including major global banks, healthcare and energy companies — detects and blocks hacking threats. Like other cybersecurity products, the software requires deep-level access to a computer’s operating system to scan for those threats. In this case, computers running Microsoft Windows appear to be crashing because of the faulty way a software code update issued by CrowdStrike is interacting with the Windows system.

The company said the outage was not caused by a security incident or a cyberattack. Kurtz, in his post, said the issue was identified and isolated, and engineers deployed an update to fix the problem.

CrowdStrike’s ( CRWD ) stock fell 9% in midafternoon trading.

What is CrowdStrike known for?

The massive cybersecurity company does business around the world through software sales and investigations of major hacks.

The company also helps run cybersecurity investigations for the US government. For example, CrowdStrike has tracked North Korean hackers for more than a decade, the company says . It also was tasked with tracking the hacking groups that carried out the 2014 hack on Sony Pictures.

But CrowdStrike is perhaps best known for investigating the Russian hack of Democratic National Committee computers during the 2016 US election. It has been at the center of false conspiracy theories since 2016, most notably after a White House transcript revealed former President Donald Trump mentioned Crowdstrike in his July 2016 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that led to his first impeachment.

CrowdStrike was the first to publicly sound the alarm about Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and CrowdStrike’s assessment was later confirmed by US intelligence agencies.

This story has been updated with additional context

CNN’s Donie O’Sullivan contributed to this report

CNN Business Videos

Show all

'.concat(e,"

'.concat(i,"

Chaos and Confusion: Tech Outage Causes Disruptions Worldwide

Airlines, hospitals and people’s computers were affected after CrowdStrike, a cybersecurity company, sent out a flawed software update.

Share full article

A view from above of a crowded airport with long lines of people.

By Adam Satariano , Paul Mozur , Kate Conger and Sheera Frenkel

July 19, 2024

Airlines grounded flights. Operators of 911 lines could not respond to emergencies. Hospitals canceled surgeries. Retailers closed for the day. And the actions all traced back to a batch of bad computer code.

A flawed software update sent out by a little-known cybersecurity company caused chaos and disruption around the world on Friday. The company, CrowdStrike , based in Austin, Texas, makes software used by multinational corporations, government agencies and scores of other organizations to protect against hackers and online intruders.

But when CrowdStrike sent its update on Thursday to its customers that run Microsoft Windows software, computers began to crash.

The fallout, which was immediate and inescapable, highlighted the brittleness of global technology infrastructure. The world has become reliant on Microsoft and a handful of cybersecurity firms like CrowdStrike. So when a single flawed piece of software is released over the internet, it can almost instantly damage countless companies and organizations that depend on the technology as part of everyday business.

“This is a very, very uncomfortable illustration of the fragility of the world’s core internet infrastructure,” said Ciaran Martin, the former chief executive of Britain’s National Cyber Security Center and a professor at the Blavatnik School of Government at Oxford University.

A cyberattack did not cause the widespread outage, but the effects on Friday showed how devastating the damage can be when a main artery of the global technology system is disrupted. It raised broader questions about CrowdStrike’s testing processes and what repercussions such software firms should face when flaws in their code cause major disruptions.

How a Software Update Crashed Computers Around the World

Here’s a visual explanation for how a faulty software update crippled machines.

How the airline cancellations rippled around the world (and across time zones)

Share of canceled flights at 25 airports on Friday

50% of flights

Ai r po r t

Bengalu r u K empeg o wda

Dhaka Shahjalal

Minneapolis-Saint P aul

Stuttga r t

Melbou r ne

Be r lin B r anden b urg

London City

Amsterdam Schiphol

Chicago O'Hare

Raleigh−Durham

B r adl e y

Cha r lotte

Reagan National

Philadelphia

1:20 a.m. ET

CrowdStrike’s stock price so far this year

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

Want all of The Times? Subscribe .

IMAGES

how culture affects communication essay sample
How Does Culture Affect Meaning and Communication? Free Essay Example
How cultural and global issues affect communicationsss
Impact of Communication on Cultural Diversity Essay Example
Essay on How Does Culture Affect Communication
PPT

VIDEO

Kingdom culture l The paths we choose pt.2
How does culture affect motherhood?
Mass Communication 5 Lines Essay in English || Essay Writing
Importance of communication
How Does Culture Affect Spanking?
Does Culture Affect Mental Health?

COMMENTS

The Impact of Culture on Communication
Introduction. Culture is a unique way of organizing and developing human life, presented in the form of material and spiritual values. This concept distinguishes the way of life of a person from the way of life of any other living being. It is no secret that culture has a reasonably close, deep, and robust connection with communication and the ...
How Does Culture Affect Communication: Exploring The Impact, Importance
In conclusion, culture plays an important role when it comes to communication: from the same culture to language to beliefs, habits to customs - culture influences how we interact with each other and interpret messages. Taking these differences into account will help ensure effective communication between parties.
Impact of Culture on Communication Reflective Essay
The culture has a significant influence on the communication process. The cultural differences can create conflicts and misunderstanding between parties involved in the communication process (Monippally, 2001, p.45). Culture' has often been defined in simplistic terms as life-style of people of a community.
100 Words Essay on How Does Culture Affect Communication
Culture also affects non-verbal communication, which is how we talk without words. This includes things like hand gestures, eye contact, and personal space. For example, in some cultures, making direct eye contact is a sign of respect, while in others, it might be seen as rude. So, understanding a culture can help us understand these non-verbal ...
Culture and Communication
Culture and Communication. Introduction. Humans have always been diverse in their cultural beliefs and practices. But as new technologies have led to the perception that our world has shrunk, and demographic and political changes have brought attention to cultural differences, people communicate across cultures more now than ever before.
What Is Normal? How Culture Affects Communication Styles
For Professor Michele Gelfand, it all comes down to culture. As a cross-cultural psychologist, Gelfand is fascinated by social environments and their effects on human behavior, particularly, how strictly people adhere to social norms. In this episode of Think Fast, Talk Smart, Gelfand joins host and lecturer of strategic communications Matt ...
2.2: The Impact of Culture on Communication
In other words, intercultural communication is human communication. Intercultural communication competence (ICC) is the ability to communicate effectively and appropriately in various cultural contexts. There are numerous components of ICC. Some key components include motivation, self- and other knowledge, and tolerance for uncertainty.
3.2: How Culture Affects Communication
Culture is transmitted primarily through verbal and nonverbal communication and written and oral traditions. Ethics is the value system that drives us to communicate the truth. As communicators and public speakers it is imperative to state correct information. Speakers with integrity and a conscience are ethical communicators.
The Impact of Popular Culture on Communication
practical insights on how popular culture impacts communication. Popular Culture is ever-present and all pervasive. Its icons have been the gods of our times and its rhetoric our prayers. This is no new phenomenon, but in recent decades the influence of popular culture has been magnified due to the intense impact of visual modes of communication.
Compare & Contrast Essay: How Culture Affects Communication
Compare & Contrast Essay: How Culture Affects Communication. Culture directly affects the way individuals communicate with each other. When you cross the divide between east and west, you'll surely notice a difference in communication. In eastern cultures, where collectivism reigns, you will meet with nonverbal and indirect communication ...
The power of language: How words shape people, culture
Studying how people use language - what words and phrases they unconsciously choose and combine - can help us better understand ourselves and why we behave the way we do. Linguistics scholars ...
Impact of Culture on Communication
The Impact of Culture on Communication. Communication is an integral component of interaction, and without proper communication, people cannot express their feelings, intentions, ideas, and thoughts effectively. There are different factors that affect communication between groups or individuals. As such, cultural difference is one of the key ...
Culture and Communication
On one hand, communication is the carrier of human interaction and culture, as values and norms are shared among its members through communication. On the other hand, culture may dictate how we communicate, since values and norms may prescribe our thinking and communication styles.
Culture and Communication
How culture affects communication. Culture and communication greatly influence each other. Culture teaches one how to behave in particular situations. It helps an individual in making analysis of the environment in order to decide on the best way to behave. Particular cultural backgrounds and specific communication environments influence how ...
Values' and Cultural Factors' Effects on Communication Essay
Culture dominates over a person's set belief when communicating. It influences the way one speaks, the attitude, and personal views. Personal values help one to set limits and boundaries on the kind of information one expects or is expected to communicate. But the environment people find themselves in is the one that makes them attain these ...
Cultural Differences in Communication
Examples of cultural differences are low-context and high-context cultural differences. A low-context culture relies on giving details and requires people to have formal engagements. In contrast ...
8.3 Intercultural Communication
Intercultural communication is communication between people with differing cultural identities. One reason we should study intercultural communication is to foster greater self-awareness (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). Our thought process regarding culture is often "other focused," meaning that the culture of the other person or group is what ...
(PDF) EXPLORING THE IMPACT OF CULTURE ON LANGUAGE ...
Culture affects communication . Culture influences communication styles, and this can be a significant challenge for language . learners. For example, ...
Religion, Culture, and Communication
There is an interplay among religion, community, and culture. Community is essentially formed by a group of people who share common activities or beliefs based on their mutual affect, loyalty, and personal concerns. Participation in religious institutions is one of the most dominant community engagements worldwide.
Communication: The Culture Affect Free Essay Example
Communication: The Culture Affect. Categories: Communication Culture Philosophy. Download. Essay, Pages 4 (965 words) Views. 38. Communication one of life's biggest assets yet also one of life's greatest issues. Everyone uses communication - everyone in every walk of life, in every country, everywhere. There is no way around it.
The Psychology of Communication: The Interplay Between Language and
Yet, even for a journal far ahead of its time in terms of diversity in topics and authorship, Best and Everett (2010) reported that within the early part of the current century, the majority of papers appearing in JCCP came from U.S. based researchers and/or from English-speaking countries. Although the IACCP has certainly done a lot to advance cross-cultural psychology through "exclusively ...
Cultural Differences' Impact on Communication Essay
In one of the episodes, the main character hosts a sexual harassment seminar, and an employee expresses her discomfort through the company hot-line instead of confronting him directly. Get a custom essay on Cultural Differences' Impact on Communication. Thirdly, power in high-power-distance cultures is concentrated in the hands of the few ...
Intercultural communication: Where we've been, where we're going
The purpose of this review is to critically analyze the state of intercultural communication literature. This review has three purposes. First, this review summarizes where the discipline has been, paying close attention to the discipline's history and some key areas of research. Second, this review discusses where the discipline is going ...
How Cultural, Cognitive, and Narrative Biases Affect Us
Cultural bias. A study by Perina and Wai found that the vast majority of writers and editors at the New York Times and Wall Street Journal came from elite schools with high average SAT and ACT scores.
What is CrowdStrike, the company linked to the global outage?
The global computer outage affecting airports, banks and other businesses on Friday appears to stem at least partly from a software update issued by major US cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike ...
CrowdStrike-Microsoft Outage: What Caused the IT Meltdown
Airlines, hospitals and people's computers were affected after CrowdStrike, a cybersecurity company, sent out a flawed software update.

How Does Culture Affect Communication: Exploring the Impact, Importance & Examples

How Does Culture Affect Communication?

High and Low Context Cultures

What Cultural Aspects Affect Communication?

Values and Norms

Tips for Effective Communication in Culture

Impact, Importance & Examples

Frequently Asked Questions

Why does culture influence communication?

What is the relationship between communication and culture?

Leave a Comment Cancel

Essay on How Does Culture Affect Communication

100 Words Essay on How Does Culture Affect Communication

Language and Culture

Non-Verbal Communication

Understanding and Misunderstandings

250 Words Essay on How Does Culture Affect Communication

Communication Styles

500 Words Essay on How Does Culture Affect Communication

Language Differences

Non-verbal Communication

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

7 Culture and Communication

7.1 Foundations of Culture and Identity

Personal, Social, and Cultural Identities

Difference Matters

7.2 Exploring Specific Cultural Identities

Interracial Communication

7.3 Intercultural Communication Competence

Cultivating Intercultural Communication Competence

Share This Book

About Stanford GSB

About the Experience

Full-Time Degree Programs

Non-Degree & Certificate Programs

Faculty Research

Research Hub

Research Labs

Research Initiatives

Welcome, Alumni

Admission Events & Information Sessions

What Is Normal? How Culture Affects Communication Styles

Listen & Subscribe

Full Transcript

Explore More

2.2: The Impact of Culture on Communication

Intercultural Communication

Cultivating Intercultural Communication Competence

Share This Book

Creative samples from the experts

Compare & Contrast Essay: How Culture Affects Communication

Follow Us on Social Media

Get more free essays

Send via email

Contributors Bio

Find more useful services for students

Along with Stanford news and stories, show me:

Understanding stereotypes

How well-meaning statements can spread stereotypes unintentionally

Algorithms reveal changes in stereotypes

Exploring what an interruption is in conversation

Cops speak less respectfully to black community members

How other languages inform our own

Stanford PhD student documents indigenous language of Papua New Guinea

Students explore Esperanto across Europe

Chris Manning: How computers are learning to understand language​

Stanford research explores novel perspectives on the evolution of Spanish

Language as a lens into behavior

Analyzing the tweets of Republicans and Democrats

Examining bilingual behavior of children at Texas preschool

Predicting sales of online products from advertising language

Language can help the elderly cope with the challenges of aging, says Stanford professor

Impact of Culture on Communication

8.3 Intercultural Communication

“Getting Plugged In”

Intercultural Communication: A Dialectical Approach

“Getting Critical”

Video Clip 8.2

Intercultural Communication and Relationships

Intercultural Friendships

Chris Manning: How computers are learning to understand language