cultural relativism and ethnocentrism essay

Ethnocentrism and Cultural Relativism

Ethnocentrism is the tendency to look at the world primarily from the perspective of one’s own culture. Part of ethnocentrism is the belief that one’s own race, ethnic or cultural group is the most important or that some or all aspects of its culture are superior to those of other groups. Some people will simply call it cultural ignorance.

Ethnocentrism often leads to incorrect assumptions about others’ behavior based on your own norms, values, and beliefs. In extreme cases, a group of individuals may see another culture as wrong or immoral and because of this may try to convert, sometimes forcibly, the group to their own ways of living. War and genocide could be the devastating result if a group is unwilling to change their ways of living or cultural practices.

Ethnocentrism may not, in some circumstances, be avoidable. We often have involuntary reactions toward another person or culture’s practices or beliefs but these reactions do not have to result in horrible events such as genocide or war. In order to avoid conflict over culture practices and beliefs, we must all try to be more culturally relative.

Cultural relativism is the principle of regarding and valuing the practices of a culture from the point of view of that culture and to avoid making hasty judgments. Cultural relativism tries to counter ethnocentrism by promoting the understanding of cultural practices that are unfamiliar to other cultures such as eating insects, genocides or genital cutting. Take for example, the common practice of same-sex friends in India walking in public while holding hands. This is a common behavior and a sign of connectedness between two people. In England, by contrast, holding hands is largely limited to romantically involved couples, and often suggests a sexual relationship. These are simply two different ways of understanding the meaning of holding hands. Someone who does not take a relativistic view might be tempted to see their own understanding of this behavior as superior and, perhaps, the foreign practice as being immoral.

D espite the fact that cultural relativism promotes the appreciation for cultural differences, it can also be problematic. At its most extreme, cultural relativism leaves no room for criticism of other cultures, even if certain cultural practices are horrific or harmful. Many practices have drawn criticism over the years. In Madagascar, for example, the famahidana funeral tradition includes bringing bodies out from tombs once every seven years, wrapping them in cloth, and dancing with them. Some people view this practice disrespectful to the body of the deceased person. Today, a debate rages about the ritual cutting of genitals of girls in several Middle Eastern and African cultures. To a lesser extent, this same debate arises around the circumcision of baby boys in Western hospitals. When considering harmful cultural traditions, it can be patronizing to use cultural relativism as an excuse for avoiding debate. To assume that people from other cultures are neither mature enough nor responsible enough to consider criticism from the outside is demeaning.

The concept of cross-cultural relationship is the idea that people from different cultures can have relationships that acknowledge, respect and begin to understand each other’s diverse lives. People with different backgrounds can help each other see possibilities that they never thought were there because of limitations, or cultural proscriptions, posed by their own traditions. Becoming aware of these new possibilities will ultimately change the people who are exposed to the new ideas. This cross-cultural relationship provides hope that new opportunities will be discovered, but at the same time it is threatening. The threat is that once the relationship occurs, one can no longer claim that any single culture is the absolute truth.

Culture and Psychology Copyright © 2020 by L D Worthy; T Lavigne; and F Romero is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Module 3: Culture

Ethnocentrism and cultural relativism, learning outcomes.

• Describe and give examples of ethnocentrism and cultural relativism

Despite how much humans have in common, cultural differences are far more prevalent than cultural universals. For example, while all cultures have language, analysis of particular language structures and conversational etiquette reveal tremendous differences. In some Middle Eastern cultures, it is common to stand close to others in conversation. North Americans keep more distance and maintain a larger “personal space.” Even something as simple as eating and drinking varies greatly from culture to culture. If your professor comes into an early morning class holding a mug of liquid, what do you assume she is drinking? In the United States, the mug is most likely filled with coffee, not Earl Grey tea, a favorite in England, or Yak Butter tea, a staple in Tibet.

The way cuisines vary across cultures fascinates many people. Some travelers pride themselves on their willingness to try unfamiliar foods, like celebrated food writer Anthony Bourdain, while others return home expressing gratitude for their native culture’s fare. Often, people in the United States express disgust at other cultures’ cuisine and think that it’s gross to eat meat from a dog or guinea pig, for example, while they don’t question their own habit of eating cows or pigs. Such attitudes are an example of  ethnocentrism , or evaluating and judging another culture based on how it compares to one’s own cultural norms. Ethnocentrism, as sociologist William Graham Sumner (1906) described the term, involves a belief or attitude that one’s own culture is better than all others,  and should therefore serve as the standard frame of reference.   Almost everyone is a little bit ethnocentric. For example, Americans tend to say that people from England drive on the “wrong” side of the road, rather than on the “other” side. Someone from a country where dog meat is standard fare might find it off-putting to see a dog in a French restaurant—not on the menu, but as a pet and fellow patron’s companion. A good example of ethnocentrism is referring to parts of Asia as the “Far East.” One might question, “Far east of where?”

A high level of appreciation for one’s own culture can be healthy; a shared sense of community pride, for example, connects people in a society. But ethnocentrism can lead to disdain or dislike for other cultures and could cause misunderstanding and conflict. People with the best intentions sometimes travel to a society to “help” its people, because they see them as uneducated or backward—essentially inferior. In reality, these travelers are guilty of  cultural imperialism , the deliberate imposition of one’s own ostensibly advanced cultural values on another culture. Europe’s colonial expansion, begun in the sixteenth century, was often accompanied by a severe cultural imperialism. European colonizers often viewed the people in the lands they colonized as uncultured savages who were in need of European governance, dress, religion, and other cultural practices.

A more modern example of cultural imperialism may include the work of international aid agencies who introduce agricultural methods and plant species from developed countries while overlooking indigenous varieties and agricultural approaches that are better suited to a particular region. Another example would be the deforestation of the Amazon Basin as indigenous cultures lose land to timber corporations.

Figure 1 . Experiencing an entirely new practice may lead to a high degree of interest or a level of criticism. The Indegenous people of Sagada, in the Philippines, have for thousands of years placed the bodies of deceased people into coffins hung on the cliffs near their villages. Some visitors may find this practice admirable, while others may think it’s inappropriate. (Credit: Arian Zwegers/flickr) Sagada, Echo Valley, hanging coffins.

Ethnocentrism can be so strong that when confronted with all of the differences of a new culture, one may experience disorientation and frustration. In sociology, we call this  culture shock . A traveler from Chicago might find the nightly silence of rural Montana unsettling, not peaceful. An exchange student from China might be annoyed by the constant interruptions in class as other students ask questions—a practice that is considered rude in China. Perhaps the Chicago traveler was initially captivated by Montana’s quiet beauty and the Chinese student was originally excited to see a U.S.-style classroom firsthand. But as they experience unanticipated differences from their own culture, their excitement gives way to discomfort and doubts about how to behave appropriately in the new situation. Eventually, as people learn more about a culture and adapt to its norms, they recover from culture shock.

Culture shock may appear because people aren’t always expecting cultural differences. Anthropologist Ken Barger (1971) discovered this when he conducted a participatory observation in an Inuit community in the Canadian Arctic. Originally from Indiana, Barger hesitated when invited to join a local snowshoe race. He knew he’d never hold his own against these experts. Sure enough, he finished last, to his mortification. But the tribal members congratulated him, saying, “You really tried!” In Barger’s own culture, he had learned to value victory. To the Inuit people, winning was enjoyable, but their culture valued survival skills essential to their environment: how hard someone tried could mean the difference between life and death. Over the course of his stay, Barger participated in caribou hunts, learned how to take shelter in winter storms, and sometimes went days with little or no food to share among tribal members. Trying hard and working together, two nonmaterial values, were indeed much more important than winning.

During his time with the Inuit tribe, Barger learned to engage in cultural relativism.  Cultural relativism  is the practice of assessing a culture by its own standards rather than viewing it through the lens of one’s own culture. Practicing cultural relativism requires an open mind and a willingness to consider, and even adapt to, new values and norms. However, indiscriminately embracing everything about a new culture is not always possible. Even the most culturally relativist people from egalitarian societies—ones in which women have political rights and control over their own bodies—would question whether the widespread practice of female genital mutilation in countries such as Ethiopia and Sudan should be accepted as a part of cultural tradition. Sociologists attempting to engage in cultural relativism, then, may struggle to reconcile aspects of their own culture with aspects of a culture they are studying.

Sometimes when people attempt to rectify feelings of ethnocentrism and to practice cultural relativism, they swing too far to the other end of the spectrum.  Xenocentrism   is the opposite of ethnocentrism, and refers to the belief that another culture is superior to one’s own. (The Greek root word xeno , pronounced “ZEE-no,” means “stranger” or “foreign guest.”) An exchange student who goes home after a semester abroad or a sociologist who returns from the field may find it difficult to associate with the values of their own culture after having experienced what they deem a more upright or nobler way of living.

Perhaps the greatest challenge for sociologists studying different cultures is the matter of keeping a perspective. It is impossible for anyone to keep all cultural biases at bay; the best we can do is strive to be aware of them. Pride in one’s own culture doesn’t have to lead to imposing its values on others. And an appreciation for another culture shouldn’t preclude individuals from studying it with a critical eye.

Overcoming Culture Shock

Figure 2. Experiencing new cultures offers an opportunity to practice cultural relativism. (Photo courtesy of OledSidorenko/flickr)

During her summer vacation, Caitlin flew from Chicago to Madrid to visit Maria, the exchange student she’d befriended the previous semester. In the airport, she heard rapid, musical Spanish being spoken all around her. Exciting as it was, she felt isolated and disconnected. Maria’s mother kissed Caitlin on both cheeks when she greeted her. Her imposing father kept his distance. Caitlin was half asleep by the time supper was served—at 10 p.m.! Maria’s family sat at the table for hours, speaking loudly, gesturing, and arguing about politics, a taboo dinner subject in Caitlin’s house. They served wine and toasted their honored guest. Caitlin had trouble interpreting her hosts’ facial expressions, and didn’t realize she should make the next toast. That night, Caitlin crawled into a strange bed, wishing she hadn’t come. She missed her home and felt overwhelmed by the new customs, language, and surroundings. She’d studied Spanish in school for years—why hadn’t it prepared her for this?

What Caitlin hadn’t realized was that people depend not only on spoken words but also on subtle cues like gestures and facial expressions, to communicate. Cultural norms accompany even the smallest nonverbal signals (DuBois 1951). They help people know when to shake hands, where to sit, how to converse, and even when to laugh. We relate to others through a shared set of cultural norms, and ordinarily, we take them for granted.

For this reason, culture shock is often associated with traveling abroad, although it can happen in one’s own country, state, or even hometown. Anthropologist Kalervo Oberg (1960) is credited with first coining the term “culture shock.” In his studies, Oberg found that most people found encountering a new culture to be exciting at first. But bit by bit, they became stressed by interacting with people from a different culture who spoke another language and used different regional expressions. There was new food to digest, new daily schedules to follow, and new rules of etiquette to learn. Living with these constant adaptive challenges can make people feel incompetent and insecure. People react to frustration in a new culture, Oberg found, by initially rejecting it and glorifying one’s own culture. An American visiting Italy might long for a “real” pizza or complain about the unsafe driving habits of Italians compared to people in the United States.

It helps to remember that culture is learned. Everyone is ethnocentric to an extent, and identifying with one’s own country is natural.

Caitlin’s shock was minor compared to that of her friends Dayar and Mahlika, a Turkish couple living in married student housing on campus. And it was nothing like that of her classmate Sanai. Sanai had been forced to flee war-torn Bosnia with her family when she was fifteen. After two weeks in Spain, Caitlin had developed a bit more compassion and understanding for what those people had gone through. She understood that adjusting to a new culture takes time. It can take weeks or months to recover from culture shock, and it can take years to fully adjust to living in a new culture.

By the end of Caitlin’s trip, she’d made new lifelong friends. She’d stepped out of her comfort zone. She’d learned a lot about Spain, but she’d also discovered a lot about herself and her own culture.

Further Research

In January 2011, a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America presented evidence indicating that the hormone oxytocin could regulate and manage instances of ethnocentrism. Read the full article “Oxytocin promotes human ethnocentrism” here .

Think It Over

• Do you feel that feelings of ethnocentricity or xenocentricity are more prevalent in U.S. culture? Why do you believe this? What issues or events might inform this?
• Modification, adaptation, and original content. Authored by : Scott Barr for Lumen Learning. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution
• What is Culture?. Authored by : OpenStax CNX. Located at : https://openstax.org/books/introduction-sociology-3e/pages/3-1-what-is-culture . Project : Sociology 3e. License : CC BY: Attribution . License Terms : Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/introduction-sociology-3e/pages/1-introduction

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

Understanding Cultural Relativism and Its Importance

Bartosz Hadyniak/E+/Getty

Beliefs of Cultural Relativism

• Limitations
• In Mental Health

Cultural Relativism vs. Ethnocentrism

• How to Promote

Cultural relativism suggests that ethics, morals, values, norms, beliefs, and behaviors must be understood within the context of the culture from which they arise. It means that all cultures have their own beliefs and that there is no universal or absolute standard to judge those cultural norms. 

"Cultural relativism leads us to accept that cultures are foundationally different, with differing social and ethical norms. This includes understanding that a person’s place of birth, including where or how a patient was raised during their formative years, is the basis of a person’s approach to the world and emotional self," says Anu Raj, PsyD , a clinical psychologist at New York Institute of Technology.

Advocates of cultural relativism suggest that one culture's values, beliefs, and norms should not be judged through the lens of another culture.

It is the opposite of ethnocentrism, which involves judging or understanding cultural beliefs from the perspective of your own. Instead, cultural relativism suggests that observers and researchers should focus on describing those practices without attempting to impose their own biases and judgments upon them.

History of Cultural Relativism

The concept of cultural relativism was introduced by anthropologist Franz Boas in 1887. While he did not coin the term, it later became widely used by his students to describe his anthropological perspective and theories.

Cultural relativism suggests that:

• Different societies have their own moral codes and practices.
• Norms, beliefs, and values must be judged and understood from the context of the culture where they originate.
• No culture is objectively better than others; cultures and their customs and beliefs are not objectively superior or inferior to any other culture.
• Practices and behaviors considered acceptable or unacceptable vary from one culture to the next.
• Cultural relativism aims to help promote acceptance, tolerance, and an appreciation for diverse cultural beliefs and practices.
• No universal ethical or moral truths apply to all people in all situations.
• What is considered right and wrong is determined by society’s moral codes.
• Researchers and observers should strive to observe behavior rather than pass judgments on it based on their own cultural perspective.

Different Types of Cultural Relativism

There are two distinct types of cultural relativism: absolute cultural relativism and critical cultural relativism.

Absolute Cultural Relativism

According to this perspective, outsiders should not question or judge cultural events. Essentially, this point of view proposes that outsiders should not criticize or question the cultural practices of other societies, no matter what they might involve.

Critical Cultural Relativism

Critical cultural relativism suggests that practices should be evaluated in terms of how and why they are adopted. This perspective suggests that cultural practices can be evaluated and understood by looking at factors such as the historical context and social influences.

It also recognizes that all societies experience inequalities and power dynamics that influence how and why certain beliefs are adopted and who adopts them.

Strengths of Cultural Relativism

Cultural relativism has a number of benefits that can help people gain greater insight into different cultures. This perspective can help:

• Promote cultural understanding : Because cultural relativism encourages seeing cultures with an open mind, it can foster greater empathy , understanding, and respect for cultures different from ours. 
• Protect cultural respect and autonomy : Cultural relativism recognizes that no culture is superior to any other. Rather than attempting to change other cultures, this perspective encourages people to respect the autonomy and self-determinism of other cultures, which can play an important role in preserving the heritage and traditions of other cultures.
• Foster learning : By embracing cultural relativism, people from different backgrounds are able to communicate effectively and create an open dialogue to foster greater learning for other cultures of the world.

Cultural relativism can also be important in helping mental health professionals deliver culturally competent care to clients of different backgrounds.

"What’s considered “typical and normal versus pathological” depends on cultural norms. It varies between providers and patients; it impacts diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis," Raj explains.

When mental health professionals account for the differences in values, and attitudes towards and of marginalized people (including communities of color and LGBTQ+ communities), providers develop respect for individual patients. Consequently, patients are less likely to be misdiagnosed and more likely to continue treatment.

Limitations of Cultural Relativism

While cultural relativism has strengths, that does not mean it is without limitations.

Failure to Address Human Rights

This perspective has been criticized for failing to address universal rights. Some suggest that this approach may appear to condone cultural practices that constitute human rights violations. It can be challenging to practice non-judgment of other cultures while still protecting people’s right to live free from discrimination and oppression.

Cultural relativism may sometimes hamper progress by inhibiting the examination of practices, norms, and traditions that limit a society’s growth and progress.

Reducing Cultures to Stereotypes

Cultural relativism sometimes falls victim to the tendency to stereotype and simplify cultures. Rather than fully appreciating the full complexity and diversity that may exist within a culture, people may reduce it to a homogenous stereotype. This often prevents outsiders from seeing the many variations that may exist within a society and fully appreciating the way cultures evolve over time.

Individual Rights vs. Cultural Values

This perspective may sometimes lead observers to place a higher priority on a culture’s collective values while dismissing individual variations. This might involve, for example, avoiding criticism of cultures that punish political dissidents who voice opposition to cultural norms, and practices.

Examples of Cultural Relativism

In reality, people make cultural judgments all the time. If you've ever eaten food from another culture and described it as 'gross' or learned about a specific cultural practice and called it 'weird,' you've made a judgment about that culture based on the norms of your own. Because you don't eat those foods or engage in those practices in your culture, you are making culture-biased value judgments.

Cultural differences can affect a wide range of behaviors, including healthcare decisions. For example, research has found that while people from Western cultures prefer to be fully informed in order to make autonomous healthcare conditions, individuals from other cultures prefer varying degrees of truth-telling from medical providers.

An example of using cultural relativism in these cases would be describing the food practices of a different culture and learning more about why certain foods and dishes are important in those societies. Another example would be learning more about different cultural practices and exploring how they originated and the purpose they serve rather than evaluating them from your own cultural background. 

In medical settings, healthcare practitioners must balance the interests and autonomy of their patients with respect and tolerance for multicultural values.

Cultural Relativism in Mental Health

Cultural relativism can also play an important role in the practice and application of mental health. "An individual’s perception of mental health, including stigma, is often influenced by their cultural identity and social values," explains Raj.

People who experience cultural discrimination are also more likely to experience higher stress levels, which can seriously affect mental health. Research has shown that perceived discrimination increases psychological distress and predicts symptoms of anxiety and depression. It also contributes to worse physical health, including a higher risk for heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and stroke.

Therapists must strive to understand people from different backgrounds to provide culturally competent care. "Through the lens of cultural competency, providers can educate themselves and elevate the plethora of coping mechanisms that a patient already might possess," says Raj. 

Cultural relativism and ethnocentrism are two contrasting perspectives that can be used to evaluate and understand other cultures.

Ethnocentrism involves judging other cultures based on the standards and values of one's own culture, often leading to a biased or prejudiced perspective .

Where cultural relativism suggests that all cultures are equally valid, ethnocentrism involves seeing your own culture as superior or more correct than others.

Cultural relativism emphasizes the importance of diversity and recognizes that values, beliefs, and behaviors can vary across societies. This can be contrasted with ethnocentrism, which promotes the idea that your own culture is the norm or benchmark against which others should be evaluated. This can limit understanding and decrease tolerance for people of different backgrounds. 

How Do You Promote Cultural Relativism?

There are a number of strategies that can help promote cultural relativism. This can be particularly important for mental health professionals and other healthcare practitioners. 

"Therapists must be able to view the world through the eyes of their patients. Most importantly, culturally competent therapists understand their patient’s behavior through the cultural framework in which they live," Raj says.

Promoting cultural relativism involves adopting an open-minded and respectful approach toward other cultures. Some things you can do to foster greater cultural relativism:

• Embrace cultural diversity : Strive to appreciate other cultures, including their unique values, traditions, and perspectives. Remember that diversity enriches our lives, experiences, and world knowledge.
• Learn more about other cultures : Take the time to explore cultures other than your own, including histories, traditions, and beliefs. Resources that can help include books, documentaries, and online resources.
• Practice empathy : Seek to understand others by imagining things from their perspective. Try to understand their experiences, challenges, and aspirations. Cultivate empathy and respect for the differences between people and cultures.
• Seek diversity : Make an active effort to spend more time with people from different walks of life. Talk to people from diverse backgrounds and approach these discussions with an open mind and a desire to learn. Be willing to share your own perspectives and experiences without trying to change others or impose your beliefs on them.
• Challenge biases : Try to become more aware of how your unconscious biases might shape your perceptions and interactions with others. Practicing cultural relativism is an ongoing process. It takes time, open-mindedness , and a willingness to reflect on your biases.

Promoting Cultural Relativism Among Mental Health Professionals

How can therapists apply cultural relativism to ensure they understand other cultural perspectives and avoid unintentional biases in therapy?   

A 2019 study found that the ideal training for therapists included graduate coursework in diversity, supervised clinical experiences working with diverse populations, experiential activities, didactic training, and cultural immersion when possible.

Avoiding Bias in Therapy

Raj suggests that there are important questions that professionals should ask themselves, including:

• How do I identify?
• How does my patient identify? 
• What prejudices or biases am I holding? 
•  Are there biases or stereotypes I hold based on my own upbringing and culture? 

She also suggests that therapists should always be willing to ask about client involvement in treatment planning. She recommends asking questions such as: 

• What approaches have been successful or failed in the past? 
• How does the patient perceive their ailment? 
• What were the results of the patient’s previous coping mechanisms? 
• How does the patient’s culture drive their behavior, coping skills, and outcomes?

By making clients an active part of their treatment and taking steps to understand their background better, therapists can utilize cultural relativism to deliver more sensitive, informed care.

The New Republic. Pioneers of cultural relativism )

Kanarek J. Critiquing cultural relativism . The Intellectual Standard. 2013;2(2):1.

Rosenberg AR, Starks H, Unguru Y, Feudtner C, Diekema D. Truth telling in the setting of cultural differences and incurable pediatric illness: A review . JAMA Pediatr . 2017;171(11):1113-1119. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.2568

Williams DR, Lawrence JA, Davis BA, Vu C. Understanding how discrimination can affect health . Health Serv Res . 2019;54 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):1374-1388. doi:10.1111/1475-6773.13222

Benuto LT, Singer J, Newlands RT, Casas JB. Training culturally competent psychologists: Where are we and where do we need to go ? Training and Education in Professional Psychology . 2019;13(1):56-63. doi:10.1037/tep0000214

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Differences Finder

Ethnocentrism vs Cultural Relativism: Understanding the Key Differences

In a world teeming with diverse cultures, the need to understand the differences and similarities between various ways of life is paramount. However, this understanding can often be clouded by ethnocentrism and cultural relativism, two …

Published on: Education

In a world teeming with diverse cultures, the need to understand the differences and similarities between various ways of life is paramount. However, this understanding can often be clouded by ethnocentrism and cultural relativism, two contrasting lenses through which we view the cultural practices of others. Ethnocentrism implies judging another culture solely by the values and standards of one’s own culture, often leading to bias and misinformation. Cultural relativism, on the other hand, advocates for evaluating a culture based on its own merits and context. Grasping these two concepts and their distinctions is essential for fostering a more inclusive and empathetic global society.

Introduction to Ethnocentrism and Cultural Relativism

Understanding ethnocentrism and cultural relativism begins with acknowledging the core principles underlying each concept. Ethnocentrism is the belief that one’s own culture is superior to others and serves as the definitive benchmark for judging other cultures. This viewpoint can lead to prejudice, miscommunication, and conflicts. Conversely, cultural relativism encourages the appreciation of different cultures within their own context, advocating that cultural practices and beliefs should only be judged by the standards of that particular culture itself. These opposing viewpoints significantly influence how people perceive and interact with others from different cultural backgrounds.

What is Ethnocentrism?

Ethnocentrism originates from the Greek words “ethnos,” meaning nation, and “kentron,” meaning center. It is a term used to describe the tendency of individuals to place their own culture at the center of all things and view other cultures through this lens. Typically, this manifests as a biased evaluation of others based on the norms, values, and customs of one’s own culture. Ethnocentrism is not inherently negative; a degree of it can foster social cohesion and a sense of identity within a group. However, when taken to extremes, it can engender intolerance, xenophobia, and an inability to appreciate cultural diversity.

What is Cultural Relativism?

Cultural relativism, a concept introduced by anthropologist Franz Boas in the early 20th century, posits that all cultures are of equal value and need to be studied without any bias. This perspective encourages an understanding that cultural beliefs and practices should be evaluated from the standpoint of the culture in question. Rather than judging a culture for its perceived strangeness or differences, cultural relativism advocates for viewing these elements as integral to the culture’s identity and survival. This concept helps mitigate ethnocentric biases by promoting open-mindedness and awareness of cultural diversity.

Key Differences Between Ethnocentrism and Cultural Relativism

The primary distinction between ethnocentrism and cultural relativism lies in their approach to understanding and evaluating cultural differences. Ethnocentrism assumes the superiority of one’s own culture and often results in the devaluation of other cultures. It leads to an “us versus them” mentality, where different cultural practices are often dismissed as inferior, wrong, or bizarre. On the other hand, cultural relativism promotes an understanding and acceptance that all cultures have their own intrinsic value and should be understood based on their own cultural context.

Another key difference is the impact these perspectives have on intercultural interactions. Ethnocentrism often leads to cultural imperialism, where one culture tries to impose its norms and values on others. It can hinder international cooperation, global business relations, and peaceful coexistence. In contrast, cultural relativism fosters mutual respect and cooperation by encouraging individuals and societies to appreciate cultural diversity. This perspective allows for more effective communication and collaboration among people from different cultural backgrounds.

Examples of Ethnocentrism

Ethnocentrism can manifest in various ways in everyday life. A common example is the Western perspective on non-Western dietary practices. For instance, practices such as eating insects, a norm in several cultures across Africa, Asia, and Latin America, are often viewed with disgust in Western cultures. This judgment is rooted in ethnocentric beliefs about what constitutes appropriate food.

Another example is language. An ethnocentric viewpoint might lead a native English speaker to consider English as the “proper” or “normal” language, while other languages are seen as strange or inferior. This can extend to accents, where non-native English speakers are often judged or discriminated against based on their way of speaking.

The realm of fashion and attire is also rife with ethnocentrism. Traditional attire from non-Western cultures, such as the hijab, sarong, or turban, is frequently scrutinized, misunderstood, or even ridiculed in Western societies. These garments, however, hold significant cultural, religious, and social meanings within their respective cultures.

Examples of Cultural Relativism

Practicing cultural relativism involves making conscious efforts to understand and respect cultural practices different from one’s own. In the context of dietary habits, a culturally relativistic approach would be to understand the nutritional, environmental, and cultural significance of diets in various societies without imposing one’s own culinary standards.

In terms of language, cultural relativism means appreciating the richness and diversity of the world’s languages and understanding language as a crucial part of cultural identity. This perspective promotes linguistic diversity and encourages learning and respecting other languages and dialects.

When it comes to attire, cultural relativism involves understanding the cultural, religious, and social significance of various forms of dress. Rather than passing judgment based on one’s own fashion standards, this approach encourages appreciation and respect for the diverse ways people around the world choose to express themselves through clothing.

Implications of Ethnocentrism and Cultural Relativism in Society

The implications of ethnocentrism and cultural relativism are far-reaching, influencing social interactions, policies, and global relations. Ethnocentrism can exacerbate social inequalities, fuel racial and ethnic tensions, and foster environments where discrimination and prejudice thrive. It can lead to misguided policies and decisions that fail to respect the cultural diversity and uniqueness of communities.

In contrast, cultural relativism has the potential to promote social harmony and inclusivity. By fostering respect for cultural differences, it can help dismantle stereotypes and combat prejudice. In policy-making, cultural relativism encourages culturally sensitive approaches that acknowledge and respect the traditions, norms, and values of different communities.

Education is a critical area where the principles of cultural relativism can have a profound impact. By incorporating diverse cultural perspectives into curricula, educators can cultivate a more inclusive and empathetic generation. This approach helps students appreciate the complexity and richness of different cultures, preparing them for a globalized world.

More in ‘Culture’

Exploring further into the vast landscape of culture, it’s essential to recognize other facets that interplay with ethnocentrism and cultural relativism. Topics such as globalization, multiculturalism, and intercultural communication offer deeper insights into how cultures interact, influence each other, and evolve over time. By delving into these areas, one appreciates the dynamic and interconnected nature of our world, highlighting the importance of understanding and respecting cultural diversity in fostering global harmony and cooperation.

Historical Development of Ethnocentrism and Cultural Relativism

The concepts of **ethnocentrism** and **cultural relativism** have rich historical roots that inform their contemporary understanding. Both emerged in reaction to each other and to various socio-political dynamics throughout history.

Ethnocentrism

The term **ethnocentrism** was first coined by William G. Sumner in 1906. It arose in response to the widespread imperialistic attitudes of Western countries in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. European colonialists often viewed their culture as superior and used this ethnocentric view to justify the exploitation and domination of non-European societies. This belief wasn’t born in a vacuum but traced back to classical antiquity, where Greek and Roman societies considered non-Greek and non-Roman people as “barbarians.”

Anthropologists and sociologists began to formally study ethnocentrism in the 20th century as globalization increased and cultures began to interact more frequently. In these studies, ethnocentrism was seen as a barrier to understanding other cultures and fostering global cohesion. Post World War II, decolonization efforts provided a practical arena to observe and critique ethnocentric policies and attitudes, particularly the social and economic inequalities they perpetuated.

Cultural Relativism

**Cultural relativism** emerged primarily as an academic and ethical counterpoint to ethnocentrism, gaining significant traction through the works of anthropologist Franz Boas in the early 20th century. Boas argued that cultures should be evaluated based on their own values and norms rather than those of another culture. He introduced this idea to challenge the racist and ethnocentric attitudes prevalent in contemporary anthropology.

Cultural relativism was instrumental in the development of more nuanced and respectful methods of studying cultures. During the mid-20th century, anthropologists like Ruth Benedict and Margaret Mead expanded on Boas’s work, promoting the view that understanding cultural context is essential for any meaningful cross-cultural analysis. In post-colonial studies, cultural relativism became a valuable lens through which scholars could critique Western domination and celebrate the intrinsic value of different cultures.

Contemporary Context

In contemporary times, both ethnocentrism and cultural relativism continue to evolve. Ethnocentrism is often analyzed in the context of globalization, immigration, and racism, where the conflicts and prejudices based on cultural differences remain relevant. Cultural relativism, while widely accepted in many academic circles, faces criticism in practical and ethical debates. Questions arise about whether all cultural practices can or should be accepted equally, especially when human rights are at stake.

These historical developments illustrate not only the complex dynamics between ethnocentrism and cultural relativism but also the importance of understanding their roots to effectively navigate current global and intercultural interactions.

Psychological Underpinnings of Ethnocentrism and Cultural Relativism

To fully grasp the dynamics of ethnocentrism and cultural relativism, it’s essential to delve into the psychological mechanisms that underlie these concepts. This exploration unveils how innate human tendencies and social influences contribute to the formation of cultural perceptions and biases.

From a psychological standpoint, ethnocentrism can be partly explained by **evolutionary theories** and **social identity theory**. Evolutionarily, early human groups who adhered strongly to their cultural norms and viewed outsiders with suspicion had better chances of survival. This creates an intrinsic “in-group” versus “out-group” mentality, which persists in modern humans.

Social identity theory further elucidates how individuals derive part of their self-concept from their group memberships. This membership can be based on nationality, ethnicity, religion, or any other significant social category. **Pride in one’s group** can enhance self-esteem, but it also often leads to the denigration of “out-groups,” which is a hallmark of ethnocentrism. This can manifest in various ways, from benign favoritism of one’s own culture to more harmful prejudices and discrimination against others.

**Cognitive biases**, such as the fundamental attribution error, contribute to ethnocentric thinking. This bias leads individuals to attribute others’ behaviors to their inherent characteristics while attributing their actions to situational factors. Thus, a culturally different group’s behaviors are often oversimplified and negatively judged, reinforcing ethnocentric attitudes.

On the flip side, cultural relativism requires an active effort to overcome these cognitive and social biases. **Psychological flexibility** and **open-mindedness** are crucial cognitive traits that enable cultural relativism. These traits allow individuals to accept and understand different cultural practices without immediate judgment.

**Empathy** plays a significant role in fostering cultural relativism. By empathetically identifying with others’ experiences and viewpoints, individuals can better appreciate the values and practices that differ from their own. This empathetic understanding is often nurtured through education and intercultural experiences, as well as through intentional perspective-taking exercises.

Additionally, **critical thinking skills** aid in transcending ethnocentric biases. Engaging in practices such as questioning first impressions, seeking out diverse viewpoints, and reflecting on one’s own cultural conditioning can promote cultural relativism. Education systems that emphasize multiculturalism and teach students to critically assess their biases and assumptions contribute significantly to fostering cultural relativism.

Neuroscientific Insights

Recent advances in **neuroscience** also shed light on the neurological basis for ethnocentrism and cultural relativism. Brain imaging studies have shown that areas of the brain associated with social cognition, such as the medial prefrontal cortex and the temporoparietal junction, are activated when thinking about in-group versus out-group members. Effective intercultural training can potentially rewire these neural pathways to foster more inclusive and less biased perceptions of different cultures.

Understanding these psychological underpinnings is crucial not only for academic study but also for practical applications in multicultural societies. Educational programs, organizational training, and policy-making can all benefit from insights into how cognitive biases and social influences shape our perceptions of different cultures, aiding in the development of strategies to promote cultural relativism and reduce ethnocentrism.

**1. What is ethnocentrism?** Ethnocentrism is the belief in the inherent superiority of one’s own culture, often leading to the judgment of other cultures based solely on the standards and norms of one’s own.

**2. What is cultural relativism?** Cultural relativism is the principle of understanding and evaluating a culture based on its own values and standards, rather than comparing it against one’s own cultural norms.

**3. How does ethnocentrism affect cross-cultural understanding?** Ethnocentrism can lead to misinterpretations and misunderstandings when interacting with different cultures, as it involves judging other cultures through the biased lens of one’s own cultural norms and values.

**4. Why is cultural relativism important in anthropology?** Cultural relativism is crucial in anthropology because it promotes objective and respectful understanding of different cultures, allowing anthropologists to study and describe cultural practices without imposing their own cultural biases.

**5. Can someone practice both ethnocentrism and cultural relativism?** While it’s challenging, individuals can aim to balance understanding and respecting other cultures (cultural relativism) while acknowledging and reflecting on their own cultural biases (ethnocentrism), though these two principles inherently contrast each other.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

About Diffinder

Exploring the Common Ground Between Martin Luther King Jr and Malcolm X

Comparing the leadership of jefferson davis and abraham lincoln.

• Subject List
• Take a Tour
• For Authors
• Subscriber Services
• Publications
• African American Studies
• African Studies
• American Literature

Anthropology

• Architecture Planning and Preservation
• Art History
• Atlantic History
• Biblical Studies
• British and Irish Literature
• Childhood Studies
• Chinese Studies
• Cinema and Media Studies
• Communication
• Criminology
• Environmental Science
• Evolutionary Biology
• International Law
• International Relations
• Islamic Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Latino Studies
• Linguistics
• Literary and Critical Theory
• Medieval Studies
• Military History
• Political Science
• Public Health
• Renaissance and Reformation
• Social Work
• Urban Studies
• Victorian Literature
• Browse All Subjects

How to Subscribe

• Free Trials

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section Cultural Relativism

Introduction, general overviews.

• Early Writing on Human Diversity
• Foundational Texts
• Nonrelativist Foundational Texts
• Anthropological Critiques
• Anthropological Defenses
• Philosophical Engagements
• Classics in Relativist Ethnography
• Anthropology and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
• Human Rights Revisited
• Renteln and Responses in Anthropology
• Debate on Ethical Relativism in Ethos
• Claude Lévi-Strauss and UNESCO
• The Captain Cook Controversy
• Multiculturalism and Cultural Rights
• Gender and Multiculturalism
• Power and Anthropological Authority
• Undermining Anthropological Authority
• Concepts and Categories
• Feminist Ethnography and the Critique of Universal Womanhood
• New Iterations of the Nature–Culture Debate

Related Articles Expand or collapse the "related articles" section about

About related articles close popup.

Lorem Ipsum Sit Dolor Amet

Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Aliquam ligula odio, euismod ut aliquam et, vestibulum nec risus. Nulla viverra, arcu et iaculis consequat, justo diam ornare tellus, semper ultrices tellus nunc eu tellus.

• Agriculture
• Anthropology and Theology
• Anthropology of Liberalism
• Ethnocentrism
• Ethnography
• Feminist Anthropology
• Human Rights
• Linguistic Relativity
• Ruth Benedict
• Science Studies

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming articles expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section.

• Landscape Archaeology
• Medical Activism
• Transhumance
• Find more forthcoming articles...
• Export Citations
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Cultural Relativism by Mayanthi Fernando LAST REVIEWED: 25 June 2013 LAST MODIFIED: 25 June 2013 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199766567-0003

In a 1580 essay called “On the Cannibals,” early Enlightenment thinker Michel de Montaigne posited that men are by nature ethnocentric and that they judge the customs and morals of other communities on the basis of their own particular customs and morals, which they take to be universally applicable. Montaigne’s essay foreshadowed the emergence in early 20th-century American anthropology of the principle of cultural relativism in a more robust and programmatic form, as a descriptive, methodological, epistemological, and prescriptive approach to human diversity. Franz Boas and his students, especially Melville J. Herskovits, were at the forefront of this new development, one that became foundational to modern anthropology. Against the biological and racial determinism of the time, they held that cultures develop according to the particular circumstances of history rather than in a linear progression from “primitive” to “savage” to “civilized,” that culture (rather than race or biology) most affects social life and human behavior, and that culture shapes the way members of a particular cultural group think, act, perceive, and evaluate. This new theorization of the culture concept led to a multifaceted approach to studying human diversity called cultural relativism. Cultural relativism is an umbrella term that covers different attitudes, though it relies on a basic notion of emic coherence: Each culture works in its own way, and beliefs and practices that appear strange from the outside make sense when contextualized within their particular cultural framework. More specifically, descriptive relativism holds that cultures differ substantially from place to place. Methodological relativism holds that the ethnographer must set aside his or her own cultural norms in order to understand another culture and explain its worldview. Epistemological relativism holds that because our own culture so mediates our perceptions, it is often impossible to fully grasp another culture in an unmediated way. Prescriptive or moral relativism holds that because we are all formed in culture, there is no Archimedean point from which to evaluate objectively, and so we must not judge other cultures using our own cultural norms. Recently, cultural relativism has become a straw man term, defined pejoratively as the strongest form of moral relativism; namely, that we cannot make any kind of moral judgments at all regarding foreign cultural practices. At the turn of the 20th century, cultural relativism was a progressive anthropological theory and methodological practice that sought to valorize marginalized communities in an inegalitarian world. Now cultural relativism is criticized as doing precisely the opposite: allowing repressive and inegalitarian societies to hide behind the cloak of cultural difference.

Stocking 1982 analyzes the emergence of American cultural anthropology, the rise of Franz Boas and his students, and their lasting influence. Kuper 1999 offers the most comprehensive overview of American cultural anthropology, though from a critical, social anthropological perspective dominant in Britain. The best overview of major French thinkers on the question of cultural diversity from Montaigne to Lévi-Strauss remains Todorov 1993 , which provides a good companion piece to overviews of cultural relativism that largely focus on the United States. Shweder 1984 traces American cultural anthropology’s roots in German Romanticism. Hatch 1983 and Fernandez 1990 examine anthropology’s and especially Boasian anthropologists’ relationship to cultural relativism. Renteln 1988 provides a short but comprehensive overview of more general approaches to cultural relativism within and beyond anthropology.

Fernandez, James W. 1990. Tolerance in a repugnant world and other dilemmas in the cultural relativism of Melville J. Herskovits. Ethos 18.2: 140–164.

DOI: 10.1525/eth.1990.18.2.02a00020

A close reading of Herskovits’ work on cultural relativism by one of his last students. Argues that cultural relativism was not an abstract philosophical issue but a practical and political one and that Herskovits considered cultural relativism as both a scientific method and a tool to fight injustice. Also examines some of the specific impasses that arose for Herskovits between his commitment to objective science and to political and social justice. Available online for purchase or by subscription.

Hatch, Elvin. 1983. Culture and morality: The relativity of values in anthropology . New York: Columbia Univ. Press.

Gives a critical overview of Boasian cultural relativism, including some of its epistemological, methodological, and ethical impasses. In addition to a historical overview, also argues for a new iteration of cultural relativism that overcomes what Hatch considers its earlier problems.

Kuper, Adam. 1999. Culture: The anthropologists’ account . Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.

Though often critical of cultural anthropology, and especially of cultural relativism, provides a comprehensive account of the development of the culture concept from its evolutionary civilizational sense to its contemporary, plural meaning. Examines the work of the Boasians, David Schneider, Clifford Geertz, Marshall Sahlins, and recent poststructural anthropology.

Renteln, Alison Dundes. 1988. Relativism and the search for human rights. American Anthropologist 90.1: 56–72.

DOI: 10.1525/aa.1988.90.1.02a00040

First half of the article is useful for outlining the various versions of cultural relativism in philosophy and anthropology. Provides a brief but comprehensive historical overview of the different approaches and ensuing debates. Latter half of the article takes up the question of contemporary human rights, arguing that cultural relativism is compatible with cross-cultural universals. Available online for purchase or by subscription.

Shweder, Richard A. 1984. Anthropology’s romantic rebellion against the enlightenment, or there’s more to thinking than reason and evidence. In Culture theory: Essays on mind, self, and emotion . Edited by Richard A. Schweder and Robert A. LeVine, 27–66. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.

Locates anthropology’s celebration of local context, its commitment to local rationalities, and its notion that primitive and modern are coequal within a longer genealogy that stretches back to the German Romantic movement.

Stocking, George W., Jr. 1982. Race, culture, and evolution: Essays in the history of anthropology . Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.

A classic text by the leading historian of the discipline charting the emergence of American cultural anthropology. Gives a good sense of the theoretical and political stakes in the development of Boasian anthropology and its culture concept against the racial theories popular at the time.

Todorov, Tzvetan. 1993. On human diversity: Nationalism, racism, and exoticism in French thought . Translated by Catherine Porter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.

Excellent overview of French thought from the Enlightenment onwards on the unity and diversity of the human species and its values. Particularly useful for defining key terms, including ethnocentrism , humanism , scientism , cultural relativism , universalism , and exoticism . Shows how ethnocentrism underpins certain forms of both universalism and cultural relativism. The author also offers his own theory of a universalism without ethnocentrism.

back to top

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login .

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here .

• About Anthropology »
• Meet the Editorial Board »
• Africa, Anthropology of
• Animal Cultures
• Animal Ritual
• Animal Sanctuaries
• Anorexia Nervosa
• Anthropocene, The
• Anthropological Activism and Visual Ethnography
• Anthropology and Education
• Anthropology of Islam
• Anthropology of Kurdistan
• Anthropology of the Senses
• Anthrozoology
• Antiquity, Ethnography in
• Applied Anthropology
• Archaeobotany
• Archaeological Education
• Archaeologies of Sexuality
• Archaeology
• Archaeology and Museums
• Archaeology and Political Evolution
• Archaeology and Race
• Archaeology and the Body
• Archaeology, Gender and
• Archaeology, Global
• Archaeology, Historical
• Archaeology, Indigenous
• Archaeology of Childhood
• Archaeology of the Senses
• Art Museums
• Art/Aesthetics
• Autoethnography
• Bakhtin, Mikhail
• Bass, William M.
• Benedict, Ruth
• Binford, Lewis
• Bioarchaeology
• Biocultural Anthropology
• Biological and Physical Anthropology
• Biological Citizenship
• Boas, Franz
• Bone Histology
• Bureaucracy
• Business Anthropology
• Cargo Cults
• Charles Sanders Peirce and Anthropological Theory
• Christianity, Anthropology of
• Citizenship
• Class, Archaeology and
• Clinical Trials
• Cobb, William Montague
• Code-switching and Multilingualism
• Cognitive Anthropology
• Cole, Johnnetta
• Colonialism
• Commodities
• Consumerism
• Crapanzano, Vincent
• Cultural Heritage Presentation and Interpretation
• Cultural Heritage, Race and
• Cultural Materialism
• Cultural Relativism
• Cultural Resource Management
• Culture and Personality
• Culture, Popular
• Curatorship
• Cyber-Archaeology
• Dalit Studies
• Dance Ethnography
• de Heusch, Luc
• Deaccessioning
• Design, Anthropology and
• Digital Anthropology
• Disability and Deaf Studies and Anthropology
• Douglas, Mary
• Drake, St. Clair
• Durkheim and the Anthropology of Religion
• Economic Anthropology
• Embodied/Virtual Environments
• Emotion, Anthropology of
• Environmental Anthropology
• Environmental Justice and Indigeneity
• Ethnoarchaeology
• Ethnographic Documentary Production
• Ethnographic Films from Iran
• Ethnography Apps and Games
• Ethnohistory and Historical Ethnography
• Ethnomusicology
• Ethnoscience
• Evans-Pritchard, E. E.
• Evolution, Cultural
• Evolutionary Cognitive Archaeology
• Evolutionary Theory
• Experimental Archaeology
• Federal Indian Law
• Film, Ethnographic
• Forensic Anthropology
• Francophonie
• Frazer, Sir James George
• Geertz, Clifford
• Gender and Religion
• GIS and Archaeology
• Global Health
• Globalization
• Gluckman, Max
• Graphic Anthropology
• Haraway, Donna
• Healing and Religion
• Health and Social Stratification
• Health Policy, Anthropology of
• Heritage Language
• House Museums
• Human Adaptability
• Human Evolution
• Human Rights Films
• Humanistic Anthropology
• Hurston, Zora Neale
• Identity Politics
• India, Masculinity, Identity
• Indigeneity
• Indigenous Boarding School Experiences
• Indigenous Economic Development
• Indigenous Media: Currents of Engagement
• Industrial Archaeology
• Institutions
• Interpretive Anthropology
• Intertextuality and Interdiscursivity
• Laboratories
• Language and Emotion
• Language and Law
• Language and Media
• Language and Race
• Language and Urban Place
• Language Contact and its Sociocultural Contexts, Anthropol...
• Language Ideology
• Language Socialization
• Leakey, Louis
• Legal Anthropology
• Legal Pluralism
• Levantine Archaeology
• Liberalism, Anthropology of
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistics, Historical
• Literary Anthropology
• Local Biologies
• Lévi-Strauss, Claude
• Malinowski, Bronisław
• Margaret Mead, Gregory Bateson, and Visual Anthropology
• Maritime Archaeology
• Material Culture
• Materiality
• Mathematical Anthropology
• Matriarchal Studies
• Mead, Margaret
• Media Anthropology
• Medical Anthropology
• Medical Technology and Technique
• Mediterranean
• Mendel, Gregor
• Mental Health and Illness
• Mesoamerican Archaeology
• Mexican Migration to the United States
• Militarism, Anthropology and
• Missionization
• Morgan, Lewis Henry
• Multimodal Ethnography
• Multispecies Ethnography
• Museum Anthropology
• Museum Education
• Museum Studies
• NAGPRA and Repatriation of Native American Human Remains a...
• Narrative in Sociocultural Studies of Language
• Nationalism
• Needham, Rodney
• Neoliberalism
• NGOs, Anthropology of
• Niche Construction
• Northwest Coast, The
• Oceania, Archaeology of
• Paleolithic Art
• Paleontology
• Performance Studies
• Performativity
• Perspectivism
• Philosophy of Museums
• Plantations
• Political Anthropology
• Postprocessual Archaeology
• Postsocialism
• Poverty, Culture of
• Primatology
• Primitivism and Race in Ethnographic Film: A Decolonial Re...
• Processual Archaeology
• Psycholinguistics
• Psychological Anthropology
• Public Archaeology
• Public Sociocultural Anthropologies
• Religion and Post-Socialism
• Religious Conversion
• Repatriation
• Reproductive and Maternal Health in Anthropology
• Reproductive Technologies
• Rhetoric Culture Theory
• Rural Anthropology
• Sahlins, Marshall
• Sapir, Edward
• Scandinavia
• Secularization
• Settler Colonialism
• Sex Estimation
• Sign Language
• Skeletal Age Estimation
• Social Anthropology (British Tradition)
• Social Movements
• Socialization
• Society for Visual Anthropology, History of
• Socio-Cultural Approaches to the Anthropology of Reproduct...
• Sociolinguistics
• Sound Ethnography
• Space and Place
• Stable Isotopes
• Stan Brakhage and Ethnographic Praxis
• Structuralism
• Studying Up
• Sub-Saharan Africa, Democracy in
• Surrealism and Anthropology
• Technological Organization
• Trans Studies in Anthroplogy
• Transnationalism
• Tree-Ring Dating
• Turner, Edith L. B.
• Turner, Victor
• University Museums
• Urban Anthropology
• Virtual Ethnography
• Visual Anthropology
• Whorfian Hypothesis
• Willey, Gordon
• Wolf, Eric R.
• Writing Culture
• Youth Culture
• Zora Neale Hurston and Visual Anthropology
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility

Powered by:

• [185.80.151.41]
• 185.80.151.41

Understanding Cultural Relativism: A critical Appraisal of the Theory

• December 2017
• International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding 4(6):24
• CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• Linda Du Plessis
• Imelda Smit

• Husnul Mukti

• ARCH PSYCHIAT NURS

• Ruth Benedict
• Louis P Pojman
• Jeremy Bentham
• Joel Feinberg
• Louis Pojman
• James Rachels
• Russ Shafer-Landau
• 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

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

Ethnocentrism In Psychology: Examples, Disadvantages, & Cultural Relativism

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Saul Mcleod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul Mcleod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

On This Page:

Ethnocentrism in psychology refers to the tendency to view one’s own cultural or ethnic group as superior and to judge other groups based on the values and standards of one’s group. It is the belief that one’s own culture is correct and superior compared to other cultures.

In essence, ethnocentrism leads individuals to use their own ethnic group and its standards to interpret and evaluate other groups, often in a negative manner.

Those who are ethnocentric assume their cultural norms are the ideal that other cultures should be measured against or aspire to.

For example, someone who is ethnocentric might believe their traditional cuisine or clothing is the proper way, and that other cultural practices are inferior or strange in comparison.

Or they may think their language should be the default spoken, rather than needing to accommodate other languages.

Ethnocentrism occurs when one believes that their own cultural group is superior to others.

Explanation

Individuals who are ethnocentric will believe that their culture’s beliefs, ideas, values, and practices are correct, and they use the standards in their own culture to assess other cultural groups.

They will tend to have negative attitudes toward other cultures and believe their beliefs, ideas, values, and practices are wrong or strange.

A popular example of ethnocentrism is to think of the utensils different cultures prefer to use. Some cultures prefer to use forks, spoons, and knives to eat and may believe that it is weird or incorrect that some cultures traditionally use chopsticks to eat.

Ethnocentrism can occur for anyone across most cultures and societies and is not limited to one culture.

It is thought to occur largely because people have the greatest understanding of their own culture, leading them to believe that the norms and standards of their own culture are universally adopted.

So, if they notice anything that deviates from their cultural norms, this can lead to ethnocentric attitudes.

Some researchers believe that ethnocentrism comprises in-group favoritism and vilification of out-groups; thus, people have a high opinion of their own group and think negatively about out-groups.

How does ethnocentrism relate to psychology?

The predominant view in psychology has been white males, mainly from the USA.

It means psychologists ignore views, values, language, or culture from elsewhere.

For example, views about the signs and symptoms of mental disorders in the DSM are based on white male experiences, so other experiences are ignored.

Views about appropriate patterns of child rearing are based on the practices shared in white, English-speaking cultures and other ways devalued.

In psychology, ethnocentrism can exist when researchers design studies or draw conclusions that can only be applied to one cultural group.

Ethnocentrism occurs when a researcher assumes that their own culturally specific practices or ideas are ‘natural’ or ‘right.’

The individual uses their own ethnic group to evaluate and judge other individuals from other ethnic groups. Research that is ‘centered’ around one cultural group is called ‘ethnocentric.’

When other cultures are observed to differ from the researcher’s own, they may be regarded negatively, e.g., ‘primitive,’ ‘degenerate,’ ‘unsophisticated,’ ‘undeveloped,’ etc.

This becomes racism when other cultures are denigrated, or their traditions are regarded as irrelevant etc.

Ethnocentrism in psychology can reduce the generalisability of findings since the researchers may not have accounted for cultural diversity.

What are the disadvantages of ethnocentrism?

While it is not necessarily bad to believe your culture is good or to be patriotic, ethnocentrism is the belief that your culture is superior, which can come with downfalls.

Ethnocentrism can lead to people being more close-minded to how other people live, almost as if they are living in a bubble of their own culture. This can reinforce the in-group/out-group mentality.

Believing that one’s own culture is correct can spread misinformation about other cultures, leading to negative consequences.

If a group upholds the belief that other groups are inferior to them, this could result in groups discriminating against each other. On an extreme scale, ethnocentrism can lead to prejudice or racism.

Upholding the sanctity of one’s own culture may hinder societal progress and may prevent cooperation between cultures.

Cultural groups may be less likely to help each other in times of need and may only seek to preserve the people in their own group whom they consider more important.

Specifically, ethnocentrism in research could result in negative consequences if the materials used for research are produced with one culture in mind.

An example of this is when the United States Army used IQ tests on individuals before World War I, which was biased towards white American ideas of intelligence.

Because of this, Europeans had lower scores of intelligence, and African Americans were at the bottom of the IQ scale.

This had a negative effect on the attitudes of white Americans towards these other groups of people, specifically that they were not as intelligent as them.

When research does not consider ethnocentrism, this can reinforce pre-existing discrimination and prevent other cultures from having equal opportunities.

Ethnocentrism examples

Ethnocentrism in samples.

Some of the most famous psychological studies (such as Milgram’s, Asch’s , and Zimbardo’s) used only white American males in their samples.

Conclusions were drawn from the results that the results would be the same across all cultures. However, the results were different when these studies were replicated on other groups of people.

As these studies were conducted a long time ago, you may expect that psychological research is more culturally diverse now.

However, psychology still has a long way to go to be truly representative of all cultures. There is still a strong Western bias, with one analysis finding that 90% of participants in research are drawn from Western countries, with 60% of these participants being American (Thalmayer et al., 2021).

They go on to say that only about 11% of the world’s population is represented in the top psychology journals and that 89% of the population is neglected.

The Strange Situation 

Ainsworth’s classic study of The Strange Situation (1970) is an example of ethnocentric research. This study was developed to assess the attachment types of infants – the sample in this study used all American infants.

Many researchers assumed this study has the same meaning for infants from other cultures as it did for American children. However, the results from other cultures were very different.

Most noteworthy are the differences observed in Japanese and German infants compared to American infants.

While the American ideal standard for attachment is ‘secure attachment,’ many Japanese infants displayed behaviors that would be considered ‘insecure-resistant attachment’ whilst many of the German infants displayed what would be considered ‘insecure-avoidant attachment.’

The different results from other cultures were presented as ‘abnormal’ and in need of explanation rather than considering that the differences are due to cultural differences in how children are raised.

It does not mean that German mothers are more insensitive or that Japanese mothers are too clingy to their children just because their infants react differently to American children.

The methods used in The Strange Situation are examples of imposed etic, meaning to study a culture from the outside and make inferences in relation to one culture’s standard.

More valid results could be obtained through the use of an emic study, meaning studying culture from the inside.

Ethnocentrism and Cultural Bias

Cultural bias in psychology is when research is conducted in one culture, and the findings are generalized to other cultures or are accepted as universally applicable.

Ainsworth’s research is culturally biased since standards were set regarding what securely attached means based on an American-only sample.

This theory was then generalized to other cultures so that what was considered the behavior of securely attached children in America should be what all children in other cultures should behave to be considered securely attached.

The parenting styles and behavior of their infants in cultures outside of America being seen as abnormal because it doesn’t fit the American norms is what relates cultural bias to ethnocentrism.

Another example of cultural bias relates to the designs of standardized tests such as intelligence tests. Intelligence tests that are designed by Western researchers reflect the idea of what the West considers as being intelligent.

However, Western cultures may have a different idea of what qualifies as intelligence compared to other cultures.

Thus, when using Western-designed intelligence tests in non-western countries, there is likely to be a bias in the results since the test measures something from the benchmark of different cultural experiences.

This can lead to ethnocentrism if those outside of the West score significantly lower on intelligence scores, leading to the West having the misconception that non-Western countries are less intelligent.

There are two types of cultural bias that can relate to psychological research:

Alpha bias – this occurs when a theory assumes that cultural groups are profoundly different. Since their differences are exaggerated, the cultural norms and values of the researchers are considered superior to other cultures.

Beta bias – this occurs when real cultural differences are ignored or minimized. All people are assumed to be the same, resulting in research that is universally applied to all cultures.

What is Cross-Cultural Psychology?

Cross-cultural psychology is a branch of psychology that examines how cultural factors influence human behavior.

The goal is to look at both universal and unique behaviors to establish the ways in which culture has an influence on behavior, relationships, education, etc.

After focusing on North American and European research for many years, Western researchers began to question whether many of the observations and ideas that were considered to be universal actually apply to other cultures outside of the sample that was studied.

Many cross-cultural psychologists have found that many observations about human thought and behavior may only be generalizable to specific groups.

An emic approach, which looks within cultures to identify behaviors that are specific to that culture, is usually the most appropriate approach to studying cross-culturally.

With the emic approach, researchers can immerse themselves fully into a culture and develop a deep understanding of their practices and values.

From this, they can develop research procedures and interpret the findings with that culture in mind. These procedures would then not be used across other cultures where they may yield invalid results.

What topics can be studied in cross-cultural psychology?

Cross-cultural psychology can explore many topics, such as:

Child development – whether unique cultural practices influence development.

Emotions – do all people experience emotions the same way? Is emotional expression universal?

Language – whether the acquisition of language and its development is similar or different between cultures?

Relationships – the differences in family, romantic relationships, and friendships that are influenced by culture.

Personality – the degree to which aspects of personality might be influenced by or linked with cultural influences.

Social behavior – understanding how cultural norms and expectations have an effect on social behavior.

What are the benefits of cross-cultural psychology?

By understanding what could have been cultural bias, researchers have increased their understanding of the impact of culture, cultural differences, and culture-specific behaviors.

This has had benefits when it comes to diagnosing mental illness, for example. Previously, some culture-specific behaviors were often misdiagnosed as a symptom of a disorder.

Recent issues of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) now include a list of culture-specific behaviors that help diagnose mental health issues accurately.

Modern researchers are now able to travel a lot more than they would have done in the past. They are able to have contact with people from all across the globe as well as being able to hold talks and conferences where researchers from different cultures can meet to discuss ideas.

This may mean there should be less cultural bias now since researchers from other cultures being able to talk can help grow understanding and acceptance of differences.

Researchers can also use input from people from different cultures to discuss any potential methodology flaws which can lead to cultural bias.

Ethnocentrism vs. cultural relativism

Ethnocentrism and cultural relativism are two ways in which we assess a culture that is not our own.

While ethnocentrism means someone may judge other cultures based on the standards of their own cultures, cultural relativism is the notion that a culture should be understood on its own terms, without judgment against the criteria of another culture.

Someone who is ethnocentric may believe that their culture is ‘correct’ and ‘normal,’ but someone who adopts cultural relativism understands that one culture is not better than another.

An example of ethnocentrism is believing that the traditional clothing of a culture other than your own is ‘strange’ or ‘incorrect.’ In contrast, cultural relativism would appreciate and accept that different cultures have their own clothing and would not make a negative judgment about someone’s clothing even if it is different from what is the norm for them.

In research, cultural relativism is the ideology that what may be observable in research may only make sense from the perspective of the observed culture and cannot be applied to different cultures.

Ethnocentrism can be avoided or reduced by studying culture using an emic approach. This approach aims to observe cultural differences in the relevant context and uses that culture’s concepts or standards.

Ethnocentric studies are not inherently invalid and should not be disregarded. Instead, researchers should make sure to point out that their research may only be applied to the sample they studied, and the application to other cultures is questionable.

Cultural Relativism in Psychology 

An example of how cultural relativism is relevant in research is noted by Sternberg (1985), who stated that the meaning of intelligence is different in every culture.

They noticed that in some cultures, coordination and motor skills are essential to life, so if someone excels in these skills, they are considered highly intelligent according to that culture.

However, in other cultures, motor skills are less relevant to intelligent behaviors, and the culture instead values vast knowledge on a range of topics, such as intelligence instead.

There is the development of ‘indigenous psychologies’ in research, which draws explicitly on the unique experience of people in a different cultural context.

Afrocentrism is an example of this, which suggests that theories of people with African heritage must recognize the African context of behaviors and attitudes.

This approach matters because it has led to the emergence of theories that are more relevant to the lives and cultures of people not only in Africa but also those far removed from their African origins.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are some examples of ethnocentric behavior.

In psychology, ethnocentric behavior can occur when a researcher conducts a study in a particular culture and then states in their findings that their results can be generalized to all cultures.

Likewise, when researchers apply their theory to another culture, and the results differ from what was the norm in their culture, they state that there is something wrong with that culture.

Otherwise, some other examples of ethnocentric behavior include:

– Judging other cultures’ food and specialty dishes.

– Judging people’s cultural outfits.

– Expecting others to speak your language and criticizing them if they can’t.

– Historical colonialism.

– Judging someone who chooses to live on their own when it is traditional to always live with family in your culture.

What is ethnorelativism?

Ethnorelativism is the ability to see values and behaviors as cultural rather than universal.

It is a belief based on respect for other cultures, believing that all groups, cultures, or subcultures are inherently equal.

Furthermore, it is the belief that other cultures are no better or worse than one’s own but are equally valid despite their differences.

What is the difference between ethnocentrism and racism?

As ethnocentrism implicates a strong identification with an in-group, it can lead to ingrained negative feelings and stereotyping of out-group members, which can be confused with racism.

Whilst they are not the same, ethnocentrism can lead to prejudiced behaviors and attempts to impose one’s subjective culture onto other cultural groups.

Ethnocentric attitudes can lead to prejudice and discrimination based on race and the belief that one race is superior to all others.

What is the difference between ethnocentrism and xenocentrism?

While ethnocentrism is the belief that one’s own culture is superior and correct compared to others, xenocentrism is the belief that other cultures are better than one’s own culture.

Essentially, xenocentrism is the opposite of ethnocentrism. In some ways, xenocentrism is considered deviant behavior as it goes against the norms of what someone is expected to appreciate.

Examples of this can include:

– The belief is that vehicles manufactured in other countries are better than ones made in your own country.

– European Renaissance artists desired to emulate ancient Greek artwork.

– The belief that cheeses and wines from other countries are superior to the products from your own country.

– The belief that the style of clothing in another culture is superior to those within your own culture.

– The idea that quality products cannot be purchased in one’s own country.

Further Information

• Teo, Thomas, and Angela R. Febbraro. “Ethnocentrism as a form of intuition in psychology.” Theory & Psychology 13.5 (2003): 673-694.
• Christopher, J. C., & Hickinbottom, S. (2008). Positive psychology, ethnocentrism, and the disguised ideology of individualism. Theory & psychology, 18(5), 563-589.

Hasa. (2020, February 17). What is the Difference Between Ethnocentrism and Cultural Relativism. PEDIAA. https://pediaa.com/what-is-the-difference-between-ethnocentrism-and-cultural-relativism/#:~:text=and%20Cultural%20Relativism-,Definition,using%20standards%20of%20another%20culture

Rosado, C. (1994). Understanding cultural relativism in a multicultural world.  The Elements of Moral Philosophy , 15-29.

Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity, and wisdom. Journal of personality and social psychology, 49(3), 607.

Thalmayer, A. G., Toscanelli, C., & Arnett, J. J. (2021). The neglected 95% revisited: Is American psychology becoming less American? American Psychologist, 76(1), 116–129.

Tilley, J. J. (2000). Cultural relativism.  Hum. Rts. Q. ,  22 , 501.

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

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 12 October 2022

A cross-cultural comparison of ethnocentrism and the intercultural willingness to communicate between two collectivistic cultures

• Muhammad Yousaf 1 ,
• Muneeb Ahmad 2 ,
• Deqiang Ji 3 ,
• Dianlin Huang 4 &
• Syed Hassan Raza 5  

Scientific Reports volume  12 , Article number:  17087 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

10k Accesses

6 Citations

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Human behaviour

There is a prevalent notion regarding divergence in the extent of ethnocentrism and the intercultural willingness to communicate across cultures. Given this cultural divergence, research is replete with comparative studies of ethnocentrism and the intercultural willingness to communicate between individualistic and collectivistic cultures. However, to our knowledge, a comparison of these crucial cultural tendencies within and their consequences for collectivistic cultures has been overlooked. Thus, this study provides a cross-cultural comparison of ethnocentrism and the intercultural willingness to communicate among university students from two collectivist cultures, i.e., Pakistan and China. The researchers employed a cross-sectional design. A sample of 775 students was collected using a survey technique. The findings show that Pakistani students are more ethnocentric and have a lower intercultural willingness to communicate than Chinese students. Moreover, males were found to be more ethnocentric and less willing to communicate in intercultural settings than females in both countries. These findings validate the notion of ethnocentrism divergence across collectivistic countries and its influence on the intercultural willingness to communicate. Additionally, they demonstrate the role of demographic attributes in evolving ethnocentrism and the intercultural willingness to communicate. Accordingly, these findings also confirm the ecological assumption that contextual factors, such as demographic attributes (e.g., past interactions with foreigners), influence communication schemas. Therefore, concerning its management, these findings suggest that increased people-to-people interactions between the two focal countries can better foster their mutual understanding to reap an increased harvest of the fruits of the Belt and Road Initiative.

Similar content being viewed by others

Insider-outsider: Methodological reflections on collaborative intercultural research

Cultural diversity in unequal societies sustained through cross-cultural competence and identity valuation

Cultural distances between home and host countries inspire sojourners to engage in intercultural exchange upon repatriation

Introduction.

Ethnocentrism is a global phenomenon and influences social interaction 1 , 2 . It has been the source of ethnic strains in different regions, such as South Africa and Lebanon 3 . It is assumed to be a twisted form of racism—a prejudice in individuals’ thinking regarding people they perceive to be the same ethnicity as themselves 4 and a negative treatment of those who belong to a different ethnicity 5 . However, most ethnocentric research compares individualistic cultures (e.g., the US and Western Europe) with collectivistic cultures (e.g., Korea, Japan and China) 6 , 7 , 8 . It is acknowledged that individualistic (Western) cultures emphasize the content of communications via the explicit and direct meanings of these communications. In contrast, collectivist (Eastern) cultures mainly value the context of communications 9 , 10 , i.e., meanings are implicit, indirect and context orientated. For that reason, people from collectivistic cultures are relatively more ethnocentric than people from individualistic cultures 11 . Put differently, collectivistic cultures are interdependent, i.e., group decisions are valued more than in individualistic cultures that emphasize personal decisions. Collectivistic individuals are more likely to associate themselves with their cultural group, which corresponds to increased ethnocentrism. Consequently, it is more likely that people show increased prejudice and discrimination in collectivistic cultures than in individualistic cultures 10 . To this end, some scholars have suggested that members of a collectivist culture are anticipated to exhibit distinct ethnocentric attitudes. However, the idea that collectivistic cultures are more ethnocentric than individualistic cultures has not been consistently supported by empirical studies. In this regard, the results show varying trends among both individualistic and collectivistic cultures 8 . For instance, for Korean students 6 and Chinese students 12 , researchers have reported a lower level of ethnocentrism than among American students, while Japanese students are reported to have a higher level of ethnocentrism than US students 3 . Moreover, international students have scored lower in ethnocentrism from the Malaysian perspective 13 . In contrast, Pakistani university students are more ethnocentric than their Chinese counterparts 14 . These inconsistent findings echo the involvement of various understudied ecological antecedents, which may make the extent of ethnocentrism salient in diverse cultures, irrespective of any patterns narrated in prior cultural models.

Ethnocentrism has an impact on the willingness to communicate, particularly the intercultural willingness to communicate. As a result, it affects the way members of different cultures show the intercultural willingness to communicate. To date, the intercultural willingness to communicate (IWTC) scale has been used by researchers in Australia 15 , Estonia 16 , Micronesia 17 , New Zealand 18 , Russia 19 Sweden 20 , and, quite recently, in New Zealand 21 . The intercultural willingness to communicate (IWTC) scale is different from the willingness to communicate (WTC) scale. The WTC refers to people’s communication tendencies with friends, colleagues, and strangers. In contrast, the IWTC relates to people’s willingness to be involved in communication encounters with people from different cultures, races, and backgrounds 7 . Ethnocentrism influences the intercultural willingness to communicate among people of different cultures 3 , 22 . In this context, researchers have found that the more ethnocentric an individual is, the less tendency toward communication the individual shows in intercultural settings 23 , 24 . Likewise, it has been found that ethnocentrism influences individuals’ understanding of other cultures and upholds their love for their own culture. However, these results are not consistent 25 . Some researchers have found that Korean students are both less ethnocentric and less interculturally willing to communicate than American students 6 . Similarly, it has been concluded that Romanian students have a higher ethnocentric score and lower IWTC than their American counterparts 7 . Moreover, it has found that Pakistani students are more ethnocentric and have less IWTC than Chinese students 26 .

However, it has been found that New Zealand’s management students have a moderate ethnocentric score and that they are also moderate in their intercultural willingness to communicate 21 . Furthermore, the researchers have shown that differences even exist among Asian countries with regard to ethnocentrism and the IWTC in their cross-cultural interactions 6 , 7 . In a recent study, conducted in Portugal, it has been found that ethnocentrism hinders intercultural communication interactions 27 .

However, despite an increased interest in ethnocentrism and its impact on the IWTC, it is surprising that little empirical research has been conducted in collectivistic cultures while considering possible ecological antecedents. Therefore, what remains to be investigated is how ethnocentrism influences intercultural willingness in collectivistic cultures such as China and Pakistan, where the extended network of family and friends is given much importance. This requires a careful examination of the questions that explain how ecological settings, such as demographic attributes among individuals, influence their interactions while communicating with others that draws from past studies (see for review 28 ) that suggest individuals uphold demographic attributes that may influence their patterns of actions based on their ecological environment. Nevertheless, both nations are culturally diverse in terms of their cultural dimensions and cultural orientations (see for review 29 ). Correspondingly, these cultural dimensions serve as each society’s collective schemas, guiding the members of a particular society to behave in a specific condition 30 .

Recently, both Pakistan and China have engaged in joint projects ranging from student exchange programs to developmental projects under the Belt & Road Initiative umbrella. Both countries, being collectivistic, provide a unique context for investigating the influence of ethnocentrism and the intercultural willingness to communicate. Thus, it is timely to offer a deeper understanding to policy-makers regarding the intercultural communication relations between the nationals of these two nations. Therefore, this study investigates the extent of ethnocentrism among Pakistani and Chinese students and how it influences their intercultural willingness to communicate in cultural and ecological settings while interacting with outgroups. To the best of our knowledge, there is not a single study that has documented the influence of ethnocentrism on the intercultural willingness to communicate in the context of collectivistic cultures. To address this gap in the literature, this study, therefore, contributes to our understanding of how people from two collectivistic cultures with a different set of values, emotions, and communicative norms interact with one another in intercultural settings.

Literature review

Theoretically unpacking the concept of culture.

The extensive social sciences literature is categorized into either the ‘essentialist’ or ‘no essentialist’ view of culture 31 . The former is termed positivist, and the latter is labeled ‘interpretive’. Hofstede is considered the proponent of the ‘essentialist’ notion of culture. This view posits that culture within a nation emphasizes categorizing people into different groups based on certain qualities (ibid). Likewise, one’s culture is also differentiated from that of others according to a set of essential qualities. In this view, culture is felt, experienced and seen by other individuals. This promotes stereotyping, i.e., we treat in-groups as superior and outgroups as inferior. In other words, we treat those who come from our own culture different than those who belong to a separate culture. In contrast, the nonessentialist notion of culture treats culture as a moveable entity. In this view, people treat culture as a different thing in different places. The essentialist notion is also called ‘Orientalist’, i.e., people treat cultures as we/them categories. Outgroups are considered inferior and weak, and in-groups are treated favorably and deemed superior 31 . In this study, we have adopted an essentialist notion of culture. The literature is replete with evidence that cultural dimensions influence intercultural interactions; however, this study unswervingly investigates how ethnocentric traits drive communicative actions, such as the willingness to communicate. Compared to past studies that compare the intercultural willingness to communicate between countries based on their individualist vs. collectivist cultural variability, we argue that ethnocentrism can affect the communicative actions of the people in different cultures with the same cultural variability. This is in line with theoretical notions that any ethnocentrism inhibits intercultural communication. Drawing on the orientalist standpoint, the degree of ethnocentric traits determines the evasion that leads to outlining one’s communicative predispositions. In summary, when individuals interact with people from other cultures, they sense dissimilarities, including those in communicative patterns. Most people respond to these differences with an ethnocentric approach, employing their communicative norms that they consider appropriate. As such, when intercultural encounters occur, people apply their own cognitive framework—outlined by their degree of ethnocentrism—and judge any differences, which can lead to an unwillingness to communicate. Further implications of this process are delineated in the next sections.

Ethnocentrism

Ethnocentrism is a crucial concept for understanding social interactions among individuals in different cultures. Sumner first introduced the term ethnocentrism to the social sciences literature. He defined it as “the technical name for this view of things in which one’s own group is the center of everything, and all others are scaled and rated with reference to it” (p. 13) 32 . That is, one group considers itself superior to other groups. In another study 33 , it has been maintained that ethnocentrism “is our defensive attitudinal tendency to view the values and norms of our culture as superior to other cultures, and we perceive our cultural ways of living as the most reasonable and proper ways to conduct our lives” (p. 157). In this context, some cultures are treated as superior to others. In their study of traditional Chinese culture and art communication in the digital era, researchers observed that treating cultures as ‘us’ and ‘them’ also affects individuals' evaluation of such cultures 34 . This indicates that the attitude of individuals toward a particular culture mediates their evaluation of other cultures. In a similar vein, a positive attitude toward other cultures affects the intercultural communication competence of individuals. This consistent view has been shared in prior studies 1 , 2 , 35 , 36 , 37 ). These findings suggest the manifestation of ethnocentrism across cultures. Accordingly, everyone is ethnocentric to a certain extent, as ethnocentrism manifests differently based upon individuals’ cultural and ecological education learning. This effect is thus a phenomenon where an individual’s own group is a point of reference for interpreting and evaluating members of other groups or cultures 6 , 38 , 39 .

Recently, it has been proposed that “ethnocentrism [is] the belief that one’s own culture is superior to all others. [Where one] view[s] the rest of the world through the narrow lens of one’s own culture” (p. 183) 40 . Additionally, ethnocentrism has mainly been used to study in-group and outgroup attitudes 41 , 42 . In previous research, scholars 2 have identified several attitudinal and behavioral characteristics of ethnocentric individuals. Regarding behavioral ethnocentrism, individuals develop good relations with ingroup members but have a sense of competition with outgroup members 2 . The findings have shown that Japanese students are more ethnocentric than American students 1 . Likewise, it was found that Pakistani university students are more ethnocentric than their Chinese counterparts 14 . Thus, ethnocentrism is a crucial barrier to effective communication. Pakistan and China have discrete political and media systems, cultural norms, and values. Building on past cultural models (i.e., Schwartz, Hofstede, and GLOBE), regardless of any similar clusters (collectivism/individualism), all nations have many dissimilarities, such as their orientation toward a specific phenomenon 43 . With respect to collectivism/individualism, Hofstede theoretically identified five dimensions of culture: ‘power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity/femininity and long W term/short W term orientation’. These cultural dimensions influence the communication of individuals in intercultural contexts along with ethnocentrism (ibid.). Therefore, we argue that both Pakistani and Chinese individuals, while collectivistic, are diversified based on their learned values, including ethnocentric phenomena; thus, in light of the literature, we hypothesize the following:

Pakistani students will score significantly higher on ethnocentrism than Chinese students.

Intercultural willingness to communicate

Communication is a basic human instinct and is central to human interaction; accordingly, it is inevitable for individuals to understand other individuals and perceive cultural variations. Today, humans live in a globalized and rather interdependent world, where the role of intercultural communication has drastically increased. It is an indubitable fact that cultural context influences intercultural communication 44 . Specifically, intercultural communication involves interactions and managing the differences between people from different cultures 45 , 46 . Intercultural communication also entails “respect for diversity”, which leads to entering into dialog with others and working for “harmony without uniformity”. Such acknowledgment of diversity in intercultural communication is made possible by caring for others’ cultures 47 . This requires justly understanding others’ cultures by utilizing intercultural communication, which can foster individuals to overcome cultural prejudices by engaging with diversity. To this end, the willingness to interact with others is central in ensuring such diversification.

It was found that the willingness to communicate is an “individual’s attitude” when engaging in communication with others 48 . In contrast, it has been suggested that the “intercultural willingness to communicate (IWTC) is defined as one’s predisposition to initiate intercultural communication encounters” (p. 400) 49 . Although the intercultural willingness to communicate (IWTC) seems related to the willingness to communicate (WTC), it is conceptually quite different from the latter 50 . The WTC is related to an individual’s inclination to initiate communication with others when the individual has the freedom to communicate. Put differently, the WTC refers to people’s communication tendencies with friends, colleagues, and strangers. In contrast, the IWTC relates to people’s willingness to be involved in communication encounters with people from different cultures, races, and backgrounds (ibid).

Additionally, ethnocentrism influences intercultural communication. In a study of Japanese and American participants, the more ethnocentric participants had a less empathetic understanding of other cultures, affecting how they interacted with other individuals 3 . Ethnocentrism is also different in various countries, and culture is the main factor that mediates it. In this context, Chinese college students have been shown to be less ethnocentric and have less IWTC than their American counterparts, who are more ethnocentric and have greater IWTC 12 . However, another study has shown that Romanian college students scored significantly higher on the ethnocentric scale and lower on the IWTC scale than their American counterparts 7 . Additionally, it has been reported that Korean college students have significantly lower scores on both the ethnocentric and the IWTC scales than American students 6 . In the Iranian context, it was concluded that ethnocentrism influences the intercultural willingness to communicate between both English and non-English major students 51 . In a more recent study, it was concluded that a higher level of ethnocentrism corresponds to a lower level of the intercultural willingness to communicate among Chinese and Indian undergraduate students studying at a private Malaysian university 52 .

Moreover, some studies of individualistic cultures have explored the IWTC among management students in New Zealand 21 . However, these studies have focused on the individualistic–collectivistic culture dichotomy. To our knowledge, there is no accessible study that has compared ethnocentrism and the intercultural willingness to communicate among respondents from collectivistic cultures.

Although the Chinese and Pakistani cultures are similar to the Japanese and Korean cultures because both fall into the category of collectivistic cultures, both Korean and Japanese participants can vary in their degree of ethnocentrism. Although Chinese and Pakistani cultures are collectivistic, they have many dissimilarities. For example, the shared cultural attributes of individuals in both nations and their tendencies toward collectivism are quite different. For example, Pakistan is scored notably higher than China on the collectivism dimension by Hofstede 29 . Another difference, as narrated above, is their diverse shared cultural attributes, which imply many variances in a given attitude. Thus, there will be a different level of ethnocentrism among participants from these countries; consequently, this will affect the intercultural willingness to communicate. Despite their collectivistic cultures, Pakistan and China share many dissimilarities, ranging from their media systems and political systems to their cultural norms. There should be dissimilarities among people in terms of their willingness to communicate in different cultures due to their disparate norms, values, and communication practices 49 . Therefore, we hypothesize the following:

There is a difference in the level of their predisposition toward the intercultural willingness to communicate between Pakistani and Chinese students.

Influence of ethnocentrism on the predisposition toward the intercultural willingness to communicate

Culture and communication are mutually supportive; one’s level of ethnocentrism affects an individual’s intercultural willingness to communicate with people from other cultures. In this vein, “there is not one aspect of human life that is not touched and altered by culture” (p. 14) 53 . This discussion classifies culture into high-context and low-context. In the former, communication is very explicit, and its meanings are shared by society members; in the latter, communication is implicit, and detailed information, including context, is needed to delineate a message. Asian countries likely hold high-context cultural tendencies. High-context cultures are found in countries such as Korea, Japan, China, and Pakistan; on the other hand, low-context cultures are found in countries similar to the USA and Germany. For instance, individuals from low‐context cultures are more social and confrontation-avoiding than those from high-context cultures 54 . As a result, a greater extent of ethnocentrism is probable within high-context cultures and serves as a mechanism for deciphering cultural differences. Put differently, ethnocentrism affects our understanding of other cultures and influences people’s willingness to communicate with others.

Two communication predispositions, ethnocentrism and the intercultural willingness to communicate, influence individuals’ intent toward intercultural interactions with people from different cultural backgrounds 6 . Thus, ethnocentrism leads to a lack of the intercultural willingness to communicate, which results in cultural conflict. In this context, knowledge of communication predispositions, such as ethnocentrism, helps identify the factors responsible for creating cultural conflict between two cultures 3 . Consequently, it also facilitates adopting effective communication strategies to address a conflict between individuals from two different cultures.

Although ethnocentrism is an individual disposition, it varies from culture to culture and is primarily contextual and cultural. In this regard, ethnocentrism has both negative and positive characteristics. Furthermore, the literature has suggested that members of collective cultures follow in-group authority, are eager to uphold the veracity of their in-group, and are reluctant to collaborate with people from outgroups 3 . Therefore, people in such cultures are expected to be more ethnocentric and to have less willingness to communicate. Moreover, ethnocentric people tend to foster supportive relationships with people belonging to their in-group while being contentious toward and possibly reluctant to cooperate with outgroup members (ibid). Therefore, ethnocentrism is largely considered an adverse trait, associated with intercultural communication. In this scenario, ethnocentrism stems from the ambiguity that can diminish the intercultural willingness to communicate 7 , 12 . For instance, individuals perceive a higher extent of ambiguity when communicating with outgroup members (e.g., strangers) than with members of their ingroup. Therefore, ethnocentrism-driven intercultural communicative anxiety can prevent individuals from communicating effectively. It can promote putting ‘patriotism’ before one’s own group interests and act as a communication barrier between people from different cultures and backgrounds 22 . Hence, ethnocentrism affects people’s attitudes toward one another in addition to their communication behaviors when they interact with one another in intercultural settings. In light of this literature, we therefore propose our third hypothesis:

There is a negative influence of ethnocentrism on the predisposition toward the intercultural willingness to communicate between Pakistani and Chinese students.

Influence of demographics on ethnocentrism and the intercultural willingness to communicate

Past research has identified that regardless of cultural dissimilarities among cultures, demographic attributes are vital in predicting several predispositions and behavioral outcomes 55 . These demographic attributes and other sociocultural factors, such as norms or beliefs, provide an ecological environment to an individual in a given culture 56 . In turn, individuals learn and groom themselves within this ecological environment 28 , 43 . For example, people learn acceptable behaviors (i.e., norms), which are regulated by the social institutions available to them in such ecological settings. On the other hand, demographics also expose people to diverse ecological settings, allowing them to learn differently, even within a culture 57 . Hence, each demographic segment (men/women) of a particular culture has a different socialization based on the ecological resources provided to its members 58 . For example, Pakistani women are guided by their family system (ecological resource) concerning how to interact/communicate when encountering men. It is possible that these demographic attributes and ecological settings among diverse nations enable different viewpoints about different actions.

Accordingly, actions and attitudes, such as ethnocentrism and the intercultural willingness to communicate, are certainly influenced by demographic attributes. Thus, demographic variables such as gender, past interactions with foreigners, and background (urban or rural) influence the attitude of respondents. For instance, recent studies 55 have reported that gender significantly influences ethnocentrism and the intercultural willingness of respondents in intercultural settings. Likewise, a respondent’s background also plays a significant role in his or her ethnocentric score and, consequently, intercultural willingness to communicate. In addition, the experience of interactions with foreigners is another variable that affects ethnocentrism and the intercultural willingness to communicate. The socioeconomic status and gender of a respondent influence his or her academic performance 59 . Therefore, in the context of this study, we assume that the gender, past experience of interactions with foreigners, and rural or urban background of a respondent influence his or her ethnocentrism and intercultural willingness to communicate. Thus, we hypothesize the following:

Based on their demographic features such as gender, foreign interactions, and urban or rural background, there is a difference in the influence of ethnocentrism on the predisposition toward the IWTC between Pakistani and Chinese students.

Research design

Participants and data collection.

In this study, we used a cross-sectional design vis-à-vis the survey method to conduct a cross-cultural comparison of ethnocentrism and the intercultural willingness to communicate between Pakistani and Chinese students. Two samples were purposively chosen from a leading university in Pakistan and in China. The aim of selecting a purposive sample from these two universities was to represent two well-known institutes of communication studies in each country. Students from all parts of these countries select these respective universities for majoring in communications. Thus, considering the nature and significance of this study, the researchers chose the purposive sample of students majoring in communication in both universities. In addition to other places for interaction, university life offers unique opportunities for students worldwide to interact with others 60 . Therefore, exploring ethnocentrism and the IWTC with university students seemed more practical and provided a heterogeneous sample. The students studying at these two universities are almost representative of the total student population majoring in communications. In total, 788 respondents completed the self-report survey questionnaire. After dropping 13 redundant responses, the sample consisted of 775 respondents. In this final sample, seven respondents did not report their gender, 33 did not mention their age, 21 omitted any information about traveling abroad, 27 did not give information regarding their residence, and 18 did not provide any information about their interactions with foreigners.

Pakistani sample

A self-report survey questionnaire with demographic variables was administered to Pakistani students enrolled in the communications program at the University of Punjab, Lahore-Pakistan. The survey was in the English language, and the survey instrument included the ethnocentrism and IWTC scales. The Pakistani sample consisted of 387 respondents, of which 167 were males and 217 were females. The respondents’ ages ranged from 18 to 39 years (M = 22.86, SD = 2.3). Eighty-two students had traveled abroad, whereas 291 had never traveled abroad. Ninety-three students came from rural areas, and 282 came from urban backgrounds. Two hundred forty-one students reported that they had experienced interactions with foreigners, and 132 had not had any interactions with foreigners.

Chinese sample

The Chinese sample comprised 388 students—74 males and 310 females—enrolled in a communications program. The Chinese respondents’ ages ranged from 17 to 39 years (M = 21.40, SD = 2.8). One hundred seven students had traveled abroad, and 274 had never went abroad. Eighty-four reported a rural background, while 289 were from urban areas. Three hundred nineteen had experience interacting with foreigners, whereas 65 had never interacted with foreigners. For Chinese students, the English version of the revised Generalized Ethnocentrism Scale was translated into Chinese by two native doctoral students enrolled in the communications major. Any discrepancies in their translations were discussed and resolved.

Measurement of variables

To obtain their ethnocentrism score, participants were administered the 22-item revised Generalized Ethnocentrism Scale (GENE). Of its 22 items, 15 are scored to obtain an ethnocentrism score. This 22-item scale is a Likert-type response scale, ranging from strongly disagree = 1 to strongly agree = 5. The ethnocentrism scale has good internal consistency. The higher the score of respondents on the ethnocentrism scale, the higher their ethnocentrism is. For instance, for American and Romanian participants, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was previously reported to be 0.90 and 0.81, respectively 7 . In this study, the reliability of the 15-item scale for Chinese participants was 0.86 and 0.81 for Pakistani participants.

The IWTC scale was administered to respondents to measure their intercultural willingness to communicate 49 . The scale consisted of 12 items—half (six) were filler items and half were used to obtain a IWTC score. The IWTC scores ranged from 0 to 100%. A score of 0 means never willing to talk in an intercultural situation, and 100 means always willing to talk. The higher the score respondents have, the greater their intercultural willingness to communicate. For Chinese students, the English version of the IWTC Scale was translated into Chinese by two native doctoral students enrolled in the communications major. Any discrepancies in their translations were discussed and resolved. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient values for the 6-item IWTC scale in a previous study for Korean and American samples were 0.83 and 0.91, respectively 6 . Likewise, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of the 6-item intercultural-willingness-to-communicate scale was 0.90 for an American sample in a study where that of the Romanian participants was 0.81 7 . In the current study, the reliabilities of the 6-item IWTC scale for the Pakistani and Chinese samples were 0.83 and 0.91, respectively.

Demographic variables

Drawing on previous studies suggesting the potential role of demographic attributes in predicting ethnocentrism and the intercultural willingness to communicate, this study used three demographic attributes, namely, gender, past interaction with foreigners, and background (urban or rural).

Descriptive analysis

Initially, we performed descriptive analysis to test the normality of the data by observing the outliers and histograms that indicated a normal distribution of data across both samples. Table 1 illustrates the mean and standard deviation of the IWTC and ET separately for both samples. In addition, bivariate correlation analysis was performed, which revealed that all variables were significantly correlated across both samples (see Table 3 ). After normality testing, the study performed confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and validity

The study used the multigroup methodical approach, which suggests analyzing group differences 61 , 62 . These differences were examined by CFA for the identification of the invariance and factor loadings. This approach is useful for determining the measurement equivalence of how particular factors remain the same when explaining their parent variables in different cultural settings by constraining and unconstricting the paths. The results of the multigroup CFA reveal that the comparison of both models showed no significant differences, and thus, invariance was verified. Furthermore, the results of the CFA of the Chinese sample (n = 387) reveal that after deleting four items, the third, sixth, and seventh items of ethnocentrism and the second item of IWTC, all other items had loadings better than the suggested cutoff value (0.6) 63 , 64 . The recommended cutoff criterion for the goodness of fit measures is that the value of × 2/df should be within the range of 1 to 5. It is also recommended to attain at least five indices other than chi-square threshold values that may be employed separately to evaluate model fit. These include baselines and indices such as CFI, TLI and IFI and GFI ≥ 0. 90. For RMSEA and SRMR, values of 0.01, 0.05 and 0.08 indicate outstanding, decent and average fit, respectively, which imply a satisfactory fit. The measurement model solution revealed fit statistics for this research as follows: x 2 /df = 2.72; SRMR = 0.04; RMSEA = 0.043; GFI = 0.92; CFI = 0.95; IFI = 0.97 and TLI = 0.96.

Additionally, the models were tested for discriminant and convergent validity via the factor loadings. Using HTMT analysis, composite reliability and average variance extracted values were examined (see Table 2 ), and they met the threshold values suggested in the literature 63 , 65 . The loadings of the factors are given in Table 3 .

Hypothesis testing

Independent samples t tests were used to test three hypotheses (H1, H2, and H4). The independent samples t test was conducted to compare the ethnocentrism score for Pakistani and Chinese students; its results indicate that there is a significant difference between Pakistani (M = 38.49, SD = 6.8) and Chinese students (M = 35.73, SD = 5.5; t (773) = 6.17, p = 0.000, two-tailed). Similarly, the results of an independent samples t test comparing the intercultural willingness to communicate between the two cultures show that Chinese students have a higher intercultural willingness to communicate score (M = 299.41, SD = 136.24) than Pakistani students (M = 267.41, SD = 160.06, t (771) =  − 2.99, p = 0.003, two-tailed). Moreover, an independent-sample t test between gender and the ethnocentric scores indicated that male participants (M = 38.00, SD = 6.34) are more ethnocentric than female participants (M = 36.66, SD = 6.35; t (766) = 2.73, p = 0.007, two-tailed). Likewise, an independent samples t test for the IWTC between the two samples indicated that male respondents (M = 259.89, SD = 143.06) have less intercultural willingness to communicate than females (M = 294.25, SD = 150.60, t (764) =  − 2.98, p = 0.003, two-tailed). In other words, female participants are more willing to communicate with people from different cultures. When we compared within-sample differences for gender, we found that within Pakistan, there is no significant difference for the ethnocentrism score between males (M = 38.5, SD = 6.90) and females (M = 38.48), SD = 6.94, t (382), = 0.05, p = 0.96, two-tailed). However, within the Chinese sample, we found that males (M = 36.84, SD = 4.67) are more ethnocentric than females (M = 35.38, SD = 5.56, t (382) = 2.08, p = 0.04, two-tailed). For both samples, there were no significant differences in the IWTC between males and females. We did not find a significant difference in the ethnocentrism score for those 189 respondents who reported that they had traveled abroad (M = 36.44, SD = 6.39) or for the 565 who had not traveled abroad (M = 37.29, SD = 6.36, t (752) = − 1.95, p = 0.11, two-tailed). Similarly, no significant difference was found for the intercultural willingness to communicate among those who had traveled abroad (M = 298.86.SD = 145.9) and those who had not traveled abroad (280.60, SD = 150.69, t (750) = 1.45, p = 0.148 (two-tailed).

An independent samples t test for rural students showed no significant difference in the ethnocentrism score between rural (M = 37.16, SD = 6.32) and urban students M = 37.16, SD = 6.36, t (746) = 0.004, p = 0.99, two-tailed). Our independent samples t test for the IWTC of urban and rural students showed that urban students (M = 292.43, SD = 149.4) scored significantly higher than rural students (M = 263.44, SD = 145.84, t (744) = − 2.26, p = 0.02, two-tailed). Hence, urban students have a greater IWTC than their rural counterparts. When we compared those students who had experience interacting with foreigners to those who did not, we found a significant difference in ethnocentrism between the former (M = 36.36, SD = 6.11) and the latter (M = 39.20, SD = 6.64, t (755) = − 5.47, p = 0.000, two-tailed). However, there was no significant difference in the IWTC of students who had such interactions (M = 289.44, SD = 145.31) and those who did not (M = 269.09, SD = 156.89, t (753) = 1.65, p = 0.09 (two-tailed). An independent samples t test comparison between undergraduate and postgraduate students regarding their ethnocentrism score showed a significant difference. The undergraduate students (M = 37.7761, SD = 6.56) were more ethnocentric than the postgraduate students (M = 36.4241, SD = 6.13, t (773) = 2.96, p = 0.003 (two-tailed). For the IWTC analysis, there was also a significant difference. The undergraduates (M = 297.53, SD = 155.26) had a greater tendency toward the intercultural willingness to communicate than the postgraduate students (M = 269.01, SD = 141.75, t (771) = 2.66, p = 0.008 (two-tailed).

Moreover, to validate Hypothesis H3, we constructed two structural models for each country’s sample, i.e., one for China and one for Pakistan (see Fig.  1 ). This approach permitted us to detect the all-inclusive suitability of the proposed models for both samples and whether the data could validate the structural models 63 , 66 . The results of the commonly used fit indices revealed each model’s goodness of fit (Table 4 ).

Structural model (Pakistani sample).

The results for our test of H3 illustrate that ethnocentrism negatively affected the predisposition to intercultural competence (= − 0.24, p = 0.05) in the Pakistani sample and negatively affected the predisposition to intercultural competence (= − 0.13, p = 0.04) in the Chinese sample (see Figs.  1 , 2 ).

Structural model (Chinese sample).

However, these results supported H3 regarding the Pakistani sample due to its high score on the ethnocentrism scale. Hence, ethnocentrism more negatively affected the predisposition to intercultural competence among the Pakistani sample than among the Chinese sample.

Our first hypothesis (H1) posits that Pakistani students would have more ethnocentric scores than their Chinese counterparts. In this study, the Pakistani students scored significantly higher on the Ethnocentrism (GENE) scale than the Chinese students. Therefore, Hypothesis 1 is supported. Our second hypothesis suggests that there is a difference between the predisposition to the intercultural willingness to communicate between Pakistani and Chinese students. This hypothesis is also supported. As Pakistani students are more ethnocentric, they consequently have less intercultural willingness to communicate than Chinese students, who are less ethnocentric and have a greater tendency toward the intercultural willingness to communicate. These findings validate the notion presented in existing cultural theories, such as Hofstede’s 29 , i.e., national culture drives individuals’ schemas of actions.

Similarly, a plausible explanation could be drawn from a national culture; that is, regardless of, e.g., a similar Asian context, there are certain cultural dissimilarities across cultures. For example, individuals living together amid shared cultural characteristics, such as norms, regulate their actions and tendencies to react in a situation 42 . Furthermore, the ecological environment where people socialize affects their behavioral patterns 56 . Likewise, the Chinese ethnic group has a higher education level. They are more self-centered and less cooperative, but they are also more diligent, tolerant and easy-going, respecting other ethnic minorities and cherishing family values 67 . Therefore, Chinese students are less ethnocentric and more willing to communicate in intercultural settings. In contrast, Pakistan is a diverse country, housing religious and ethnic minorities; there, the religious element is more dominant than the cultural element.

Consequently, Pakistani students are more ethnocentric and less interculturally eager to interact. One of the likely reasons for this greater ethnocentrism and lesser intercultural eagerness to engage in intercultural interactions is the religious socialization of the students. They are more reserved and less willing to engage in intercultural communication with people with another origin, culture, and values. The males in both samples are more ethnocentric than females and consequently less willing to engage in intercultural communication.

These findings support those of previous research 6 , 12 . These findings also support the rich body of communication studies, suggesting that females are more open and relation oriented during communications 68 . This research line can explain why females are less ethnocentric and more willing to communicate interculturally than their male counterparts. Thus, China’s rise as an economic player on the global stage and its subsequent integration with the world amid increasing cross-cultural exchanges provide Chinese students more opportunities for interaction and communication in different intercultural settings with people from different countries with different cultures and political and social values. Therefore, their lower level of ethnocentrism and greater intercultural willingness to communicate than Pakistani students makes sense and is not surprising.

The students with an urban background were also more willing to communicate in intercultural situations than those who reported rural backgrounds. In both countries, contemporary urban cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, Lahore, and Islamabad provide more cultural, educational, and communication-based opportunities for students than their rural counterparts. This enhances their competence and cultural communication abilities in different situations with different people from diverse backgrounds. Therefore, their greater intercultural willingness to communicate in different intercultural circumstances is also reasonable. Additionally, the students who had experience interacting with foreigners were less ethnocentric than those who did not. Consequently, we conclude that ethnocentrism influences the intercultural willingness to communicate. Chinese students are less ethnocentric and more willing to communicate interculturally, whereas Pakistani students are more ethnocentric and have a lower tendency toward the intercultural willingness to communicate.

Implications of intercultural understanding for a community of shared interests

Despite multidimensional cultural differences, ranging from political systems and media systems to religious and cultural taboos, a better intercultural understanding can be achieved through the effective use of intercultural communication between two nations. It is, therefore, essential to recognize that intercultural understanding can be achieved by introducing new courses in curricula and by giving students assignments that have intercultural communication dimensions in colleges and universities. This will provide them with an opportunity to become familiar with sensitive issues related to culture, ethnicity, and religion. This sheds light on the significance of intercultural dialog for increasing intercultural understanding and harmony between people from both China and Pakistan. It is pertinent for achieving the shared political, economic, and diplomatic goals and objectives of both countries. The more we have such interactions, the more we can understand and celebrate our differences, consequently reducing intercultural differences. In this regard, “although the challenges of an increasingly diverse world are great, the benefits are even greater” (p. 4) 69 . To reap the benefits of this increasingly diverse and integrated world and prepare themselves for better intercultural communication, Chinese and Pakistani students should equip themselves by actively engaging in intercultural communication interactions. These intercultural engagements can be beneficial. In this context, a significant decrease in students’ pre- and postscores of ethnocentrism is observed in a service-learning project via a different cultural context 70 . Likewise, increased intercultural interactions between Chinese and Pakistani politicians, media practitioners, businessmen, and students could foster better intercultural understandings by avoiding sensitivities and appreciating common grounds while celebrating differences to further strengthen the ties between the two countries. Moreover, these findings could be useful in business interactions, educational settings, and media engagements, improving the understanding of political norms, values and cultures to create a harmonious environment to reap an increased harvest of the fruits of the Belt & Road Initiative. In addition, both countries can include more content about each other in their educational curricula to enhance the familiarity of their people with the relevant politics, religion, ethics, and economics. In this regard, evidence from a different context has shown that collaborative learning between students in America and New Zealand via email was beneficial for developing their intercultural competence and improving their understanding of each other 71 . Similarly, China and Pakistan can enhance the intercultural competence of their peoples to create a community of shared interests.

Policy implications

In light of the findings of this article, the researchers suggest that some practical steps should be taken by relevant stakeholders. At a practical level, exchanges between the two countries should be encouraged to enable first-hand experiences and a better and deeper understanding of their media and political systems and cultural sensitivities. The relevant stakeholders should take into consideration the lack of proper media representation in each country among their respective media outlets. Although after the launch of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), the presence of each country in the other’s media has significantly improved, there is a need for more media content based on shared objectives, cultural dimensions, and festivals to foster better intercultural communication and understanding among ordinary people, government officials, and nongovernmental organizations. In this regard, more cultural exchanges among politicians, media practitioners, businesspeople, cultural industry professionals, movie makers, and students is a prerequisite for promoting better awareness of both countries’ cultures, norms, customs, and values. Accordingly, scholars have suggested that increased first-hand experiences and interactions are essential to understanding the relevant issues and sensitivities while strengthening the relationship between countries 72 . These interactions can improve cultural understandings among the public in both countries. Moreover, this enhances empathetic understanding, which is effective for better communication in different cultures where communication practices are supposed to be different.

To bridge the gender ethnocentrism gap on a more general level, more cross-cultural communication courses should be introduced in colleges and universities, providing more opportunities and a better understanding of different cultures and their norms for multicultural coexistence and appreciation. Such courses can allow students to orient themselves with other cultures, appreciate similarities, and celebrate differences. This engagement can help students appreciate the sensitivities of other cultures and better manage intercultural conflicts in organizational and economic contexts. In summary, in a globalized world, intercultural competency is a broad-ranging and critical issue, affecting communication within interpersonal contact and in the domain of business. There is a long-standing debate regarding the important phenomenon of how cultural divergence serves as a key factor in barriers to cultural competence. This paper thus provides empirical evidence and validates the notion of cultural divergence within rarely studied collectivistic cultures. This evidence can be a starting point to consider cultural tendencies while planning for cultural competence among the two focal nations, which have recently initiated business and cultural ties. For example, other intercultural interactions under the Belt and Road Initiative could also aid businesspersons, officials and interpersonal communication in both countries if the relevant authorities take the abovementioned steps. Hence, we could reap a larger harvest of the fruits of a common and shared destiny based on mutual respect and goals under the vision of the ‘Belt and Road Initiative’ vision by promoting intercultural harmony and mutual understanding between these brotherly and friendly countries.

Strengths and limitations

The strength of this study is its consideration of the native cultures of both countries, i.e., China and Pakistan. This has resulted to some extent in a more representative perspective of both China and Pakistan than is readily available to international students. However, this research has some limitations as well. First, the sample of this study was limited to university students, and the data reported here are based on a self-reported survey of the respondents. Although the sample size is large and has statistical significance, it is not strictly random. Therefore, the findings should be generalized with caution.

On the other hand, selecting university students helps control for and minimize the variance and diversity present in these two countries’ populations. Second, much of the research on intercultural communication has centered on cultural dimensions, such as high and low context culture communication and individualistic and collectivistic cultures. We suggest that scholars look beyond the dichotomy of individualistic and collectivistic cultures 73 and explore the influence of cultural background and other demographic variables on ethnocentrism and, consequently, the intercultural willingness to communicate between different individuals. Such an approach can help us better understand the communication traits and predispositions that affect effective cross-cultural communication between individuals with different cultural backgrounds. Finally, there is a need to explore ethnocentrism and its influence on the intercultural willingness to communicate within both developed and developing countries with different demographic variables.

Institutional review board statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Research Ethical Committee of CMCS, University of Gujrat, Gujrat, 50700, Pakistan, Letter No. UOG/CMCS/2020/180.

Informed consent statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request due to ethical and privacy restrictions.

Lewis, I. M. Social Anthropology in Perspective (Cambridge University Press, 1985).

Google Scholar  

Lusting, M. W. & Koester, J. Intercultural Competence: Interpersonal Communication Across Cultures (Harper Collins, 1999).

Neuliep, J. W., Chaudoir, M. & McCroskey, J. C. A cross-cultural comparison of ethnocentrism among Japanese and United States college students. Commun. Res. Rep. 18 , 137–146 (2001).

Article   Google Scholar  

Edmonds, B., Hales, D. & Lessard-Phillips, L. Simulation models of ethnocentrism and diversity: An introduction to the special issue. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 20 , 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439318824316 (2019).

Hales, D. & Edmonds, B. Intragenerational cultural evolution an ethnocentrism. J. Conflict Resolut. 63 , 1283–1309. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002718780481 (2019).

Lin, Y., Rancer, A. & Lim, S. Ethnocentrism and intercultural willingness to communicate: A cross-cultural comparison between Korean and American college students. J. Intercult. Commun. Res. 32 , 117–128 (2003).

Lin, Y., Rancer, A. & Trimbitas, O. Ethnocentrism and intercultural-willingness-to-communicate: A cross-cultural comparison between Romanian and US American college students. J. Intercult. Commun. 34 , 138–151 (2005).

Lu, Y. & Hsu, C.-F. Willingness to communicate in intercultural interactions between Chinese and Americans. J. Intercult. Commun. Res. 37 , 75–88 (2008).

Gudykunst, W. B. Communication in Japan and the United States (State University of New York Press, 1993).

Triandis, H. C. Culture and Social Behavior (McGraw-Hill, 1994).

Merkin, R. S. Individualism-collectivism and saving face. In Saving Face in Business: Managing Cross-cultural Interactions (ed. Merkin, R. S.) 81–117 (Palgrave Macmillan, 2018).

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Butcher, M. M. & Haggard, C. Ethnocentrism and Intercultural Willingness to Communicate: A Cross-cultural Comparison Between Chinese and US College Students (National Communication Association, 2009).

Nadeem, M. U., Mohammed, R. & Dalib, S. Influence of sensation seeking on intercultural communication competence of international students in a Malaysian university: Attitude as a mediator. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 74 , 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2019.10.006 (2020).

Yousaf, M. A cross-cultural comparison of ethnocentrism among Chinese and Pakistani university students. In Fusion, Reconstruction, Innovation—The Reality and Future of Journalism Research (融合.重构.创新-新闻学研究的现实与未来) (eds Chang, L. & Ruhan, Z.) 197–205 (Communication University of China Press, 2017).

Barraclough, R. A., Christophel, D. M. & McCroskey, J. C. Willingness to communicate: A cross-cultural investigation. Commun. Res. Rep. 5 , 187–192 (1988).

McCroskey, J. C. Reliability and validity of the willingness to communicate scale. Commun. Q. 40 , 16–25 (1992).

Burroughs, N. F. & Marie, V. Communication orientations of Micronesian and American students. Commun. Res. Rep. 7 , 139–146 (1990).

Hackman, M. Z. & Barthel-Hackman, T. A. Communication apprehension, willingness to communicate, and sense of humor: United States and New Zealand perspectives. Commun. Q. 41 , 282–291 (1993).

Christophel, D. M. Russian communication orientations: A cross-cultural examination. Commun. Res. Rep. 13 , 43–51 (1996).

McCroskey, J. C., Burroughs, N. F., Daun, A. & Richmond, V. P. Correlates of quietness: Swedish and American perspectives. Commun. Q. 38 , 127–137 (1990).

Campbell, N. Ethnocentrism and intercultural willingness to communicate: A study of New Zealand management students. J. Intercult. Commun. 40 , 1404–1634 (2016).

Neuliep, J. W. & McCroskey, J. C. The development of a US and generalized ethnocentrism scale. Commun. Res. Rep. 14 , 385–398 (1997).

Arasaratnam, L. A. & Banerjee, S. C. Ethnocentrism and sensation seeking as variables that influence intercultural contact-seeking behavior: A path analysis. Commun. Res. Rep. 24 , 303–310 (2007).

Wrench, J. S., Corrigan, M. W., McCroskey, J. C. & Punyanunt-Carter, N. M. Religious fundamentalism and intercultural communication: The relationships among ethnocentrism, intercultural communication apprehension, religious fundamentalism, homonegativity, and tolerance for religious disagreements. J. Intercult. Commun. Res. 35 , 23–44 (2006).

Wiseman, R. L., Hammer, M. R. & Nishida, H. Predictors of intercultural communication competence. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 13 , 349–370 (1989).

Yousaf, M. Ethnocentrism and intercultural willingness to communicate: A cross-cultural comparison among Pakistani and Chinese university students. In Paper presented at Annual International Conference of the China Association for Intercultural Communication (CAFIC) (2017).

Gonçalves, G., Sousa, C., Arasaratnam-Smith, L. A., Rodrigues, N. & Carvalheiro, R. Intercultural communication competence scale: Invariance and construct validation in Portugal. J. Intercult. Commun. Res. https://doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2020.1746687 (2020).

Leung, K. & Morris, M. W. Values, schemas, and norms in the culture–behavior nexus: A situated dynamics framework. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 46 , 1028–1050 (2015).

Hofstede, G. Culture’s recent consequences: Using dimension scores in theory and research. Int. J. Cross-cult. Manag. 1 , 11–17 (2001).

Raza, S. H., Bakar, H. A. & Mohamad, B. Advertising appeals and Malaysian culture norms: Scale content validation. J. Asian Pac. Commun. 28 , 61–82 (2018).

Holliday, A. Culture as constraint or resource: Essentialist versus non-essentialist views. Jpn. Learn. 20 (2000).

Sumner, W. G. Folkways (Ginn, 1906).

Ting-Toomey, S. Communicating Across Cultures (Guilford Press, 2012).

Zhang, Y., Yousaf, M. & Xu, Y. Chinese traditional culture and art communication in digital era: Strategies, issues, and prospects. J. Media Stud. 32 , 61–75 (2017).

Gudykunst, W. B. & Kim, Y. Y. Communicating with Strangers: An Approach to Intercultural Communication (McGraw-Hill, 1997).

Gudykunst, W. B. & Nishida, T. Bridging Japanese/North American Differences (Sage, 1994).

Book   Google Scholar  

Samovar, L. A. & Porter, R. E. Understanding intercultural communication: An introduction and overview. In Intercultural communication: A reader (eds Samovar, L. A. & Porter, R. E.) 6–17 (Wadsworth Publishing Company, 2000).

Booth, K. Strategy and Ethnocentrism (Routledge, 2014).

LeVine, R. A. & Campbell, D. T. Ethnocentrism: Theories of Conflict, Ethnic Attitudes, and Group Behavior (Wiley, 1972).

Ferraro, G. Cultural Anthropology: An Applied Perspective 7th edn. (Thomson Wadsworth, 2008).

Brewer, M. B. & Campbell, D. T. Ethnocentrism and Intergroup Attitudes: East African Evidence (Wiley, 1976).

Grant, P. R. Ethnocentrism in response to a threat to social identity. J. Soc. Behav. Pers. 8 , 143–154 (1993).

Abu Bakar, H., Bahtiar, M., Halim, H., Subramaniam, C. & Choo, L. S. Shared cultural characteristics similarities in Malaysia’s multi-ethnic society. J. Intercult. Commun. Res. 47 , 243–267 (2018).

Yang, Q. Intercultural communication in the context of a Canada-China Sister School partnership: The experience of one new basic education school. Front. Educ. China 12 , 200–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11516-017-0016-3 (2017).

Buhrig, K. & Thije, J. D. T. Beyond Misunderstanding: Linguistic Analyses of Intercultural Communication (John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2006).

Samovar, L. A., Porter, R. E. & McDaniel, E. R. Communication Between Cultures 7th edn. (Wadsworth, 2010).

Samovar, L. A., Porter, R. E. & McDaniel, E. R. Intercultural Communication: A Reader 13th edn. (Wadsworth Publishing Company, 2012).

McCroskey, J. C. & Richmond, V. P. Willingness to communicate. In Personality and Interpersonal Communication (eds McCroskey, J. C. & Daly, J. A.) 129–156 (Sage, 1987).

Kassing, J. W. Development of the intercultural willingness to communicate scale. Commun. Res. Rep. 14 , 399–407 (1997).

McCroskey, J. C. & Richmond, V. P. Willingness to communicate: A cognitive view. J. Soc. Behav. Pers. 5 , 19 (1990).

Hosseini Fatemi, A., Khajavy, G. H. & Choi, C. W. Testing a model of intercultural willingness to communicate based on ethnocentrism, ambiguity tolerance and sensation seeking: The role of learning English in Iran. J. Intercult. Commun. Res. 45 , 304–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2016.1190776 (2016).

Pragash, M., Sultana, M. A. & Khor, K. K. Ethnocentrism and intercultural willingness to communicate: A study of Malaysian private university. Int. J. 3 , 16–23 (2018).

Hall, E. T. Beyond Culture (Anchor, 1976).

Kim, D., Pan, Y. & Park, H. S. High-versus low-context culture: A comparison of Chinese, Korean, and American cultures. Psychol. Mark. 15 , 507–521. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199809)15:6%3c507::AID-MAR2%3e3.0.CO;2-A (1998).

Solhaug, T. & Kristensen, N. N. Gender and intercultural competence: Analysis of intercultural competence among upper secondary school students in Denmark and Norway. Educ. Psychol. 40 , 120–140 (2020).

Gelfand, M. J., Harrington, J. R. & Jackson, J. C. The strength of social norms across human groups. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 12 , 800–809 (2017).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Eko, B. S. & Putranto, H. The role of intercultural competence and local wisdom in building intercultural and inter-religious tolerance. J. Intercult. Commun. Res. 48 , 341–369 (2019).

Sandberg, J. et al. Social learning, influence, and ethnomedicine: Individual, neighborhood and social network influences on attachment to an ethnomedical cultural model in rural Senegal. Soc. Sci. Med. 226 , 87–95 (2019).

Lacey, R., Dwalah, F. & Kenyatta, C. J. Impact of demographic variables on African-American student-athletes’ academic performance. Educ. Found. 26 , 93–111 (2012).

Justen, J. R. Ethnocentrism, Intercultural Interaction and US College Students’ Intercultural Communicative Behaviors: An Exploration of Relationships (Master’s Theses). (University of Tennessee–Knoxville, 2009).

Chen, F. F., Sousa, K. H. & West, S. G. Teacher’s corner: Testing measurement invariance of second-order factor models. Struct. Equ. Model. 12 , 471–492 (2005).

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Yousaf, M. et al. Immunity debt or vaccination crisis? A multi-method evidence on vaccine acceptance and media framing for emerging COVID-19 variants. Vaccine 40 , 1855–1863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.01.055 (2022).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. & Anderson, R. E. Multivariate Data Analysis (Pearson Prentice Hall, 2010).

Raza, S. H., Abu Bakar, H. & Mohamad, B. The effects of advertising appeals on consumers’ behavioural intention towards global brands: The mediating role of attitude and the moderating role of uncertainty avoidance. J. Islam. Mark. 11 , 440–460. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-11-2017-0134 (2019).

Raza, S. H., Hasnain, A. & Khan, S. W. Cross-cultural evaluation of the mediation of attitudes in relationship of cultural values and behavioral reactions toward web based advertising. South Asian J. Manag. Sci. 12 , 1–24 (2018).

Jin, Q., Raza, S. H., Yousaf, M., Zaman, U. & Siang, J. M. L. D. Can communication strategies combat COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy with trade-off between public service messages and public skepticism? Experimental evidence from Pakistan. Vaccines 9 , 757. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines9070757 (2021).

Seok, et al. The perception of characteristics, behaviors, cultures, and traditions toward own and other ethnic groups. Int. J. Asian Hist. Cult. Trad. 1 , 11 (2013).

Ivy, D. K. & Backlund, P. Exploring Gender Speak: Personal Perspectives in Gender Communication 2nd edn. (McGraw-Hill, 2000).

Neuliep, J. W. Intercultural Communication: A Contextual Approach 4th edn. (Sage, 2009).

Borden, A. W. The impact of service-learning on ethnocentrism in an intercultural communication course. J. Exp. Educ. 30 , 171–183 (2007).

Campbell, N. You’ve got mail! Using email technology to enhance intercultural communication learning. J. Intercult. Commun. 16 (2009).

Ji, D., Hu, Z. & Muhammad, Y. Neighboring competitor? Glob. Media China 1 , 234–250 (2016).

Schwartz, S. H. Beyond individualism-collectivism: New cultural dimensions of values. In Individualism and Collectivism: Theory, Method, and Applications (eds Kim, U. et al. ) 85–119 (Sage, 1994).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Center for Media and Communication Studies, University of Gujrat, Gujrat, Pakistan

Muhammad Yousaf

Chinese Department, National University of Modern Languages, Islamabad, Pakistan

Muneeb Ahmad

Institute for a Community with Shared Future, Communication University of China, Beijing, China

Institute of Communication Studies, Communication University of China, Beijing, China

Dianlin Huang

Department of Communication Studies, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan

Syed Hassan Raza

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors equally contributed to develop conceptual framework, research and planning, manuscript writing, data curation, analysis and editing of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Syed Hassan Raza .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

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

Rights and permissions

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

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Yousaf, M., Ahmad, M., Ji, D. et al. A cross-cultural comparison of ethnocentrism and the intercultural willingness to communicate between two collectivistic cultures. Sci Rep 12 , 17087 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-21179-3

Download citation

Received : 17 March 2022

Accepted : 23 September 2022

Published : 12 October 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-21179-3

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

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

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

The Importance of Ethnocentrism and Culture Relativism

This essay about the contrasting perspectives of ethnocentrism and cultural relativism in understanding human societies. It explores how ethnocentrism, rooted in a sense of superiority, contrasts with cultural relativism, which encourages empathy and understanding of diverse cultures. Through this exploration, it highlights the importance of balancing these perspectives for navigating intercultural interactions and fostering mutual respect and appreciation.

How it works

Ethnocentrism and tilled relativism, in manner from double luminaries in constellation the tilled understanding, offer an antithesis possibilities, that bring up our conceptions tapestry multiple human societies. In ballet intercultural space co-operation, these concepts, orbit friendly friend, every proof his gravitational strain our terms, relation, and worldview.

Ethnocentrism, akin despite gravitational contraignent, these put us on an anchor despite our tilled clean prospect, predisposes types, to weigh their tilled norms, clean values, and practices, so as above despite that of other.

This prospect, assures a value belonging and equality, can too generate prejudices, prejudices, and even conflicts, when megascopic despite his extreme demonstrations. In one flow from history, ethnocentrism was advancement contraignent behind conquests, colonization, and the tilled assimilation, new-born in child his wake imprint the tilled fragmentation and disagreement.

On opposition end a merciful ghost link the tilled relativism, lens, that refracts light space human variety, tracks down a kaleidoscope proofs, that illuminate our existence divide tilled. Put on an anchor in principle compassion and understanding, the tilled relativism contests us, to pass a border our tilled clean paradigms and to estimate riches and complication other cultures on their clean terms. These convince us despite one hangs judgement and move the tilled variety so as fountain enriching as a threat.

In his kernel, the tilled relativism serves a space compass, guiding we through no marked map territories the variety tilled with obedience and open-mindedness. Confirms validity and autonomy every culture, she delegates one weigh minor societies, for reclaim and to celebrate their property without dread submission or erasure. In implementation so, the tilled relativism becomes a headlight hope in an universe, all and dominated forces hegemony and homogenization tilled.

Unit, in manner from meats, close in délicat, celestial dance, ethnocentrism and the tilled relativism is due to find, that aplomb navigate space currents the tilled co-operation. While ethnocentrism assures the value tilled identical and belonging, he is due to be released a space prospect offered the tilled relativism, to adjure lowering in fanaticism and intolerance. So, while the tilled relativism encourages a compassion and understanding, it is due to be reasonable in principles rights suitable any semi man and dignity, to adjure lowering in moral relativism. Except that, the tilled relativism invites us to undertake a walk self-discovery space, contests us, to ask origins and importances our tilled prejudices and clean guess-work. These beckons we, to investigate expansion spacious human variety, outstrips a border our tilled clean blister, to move a tapestry experience space man in his whole complication and beauty.

In a symphony space human existence, ethnocentrism and the tilled relativism appear so as double luminaries, every deposit his energy and only prospect despite space dance the tilled understanding. It comes true through co-operation they space contraint, as us navigate expansion variety, one forge connections, and one build bridges, that move spacious distances between us human boundless. In implementation so, we illuminate a space black with light compassion radiant, understands, and the tilled estimation.

Cite this page

The Importance Of Ethnocentrism And Culture Relativism. (2024, Apr 29). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/the-importance-of-ethnocentrism-and-culture-relativism/

"The Importance Of Ethnocentrism And Culture Relativism." PapersOwl.com , 29 Apr 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/the-importance-of-ethnocentrism-and-culture-relativism/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Importance Of Ethnocentrism And Culture Relativism . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-importance-of-ethnocentrism-and-culture-relativism/ [Accessed: 31 Jul. 2024]

"The Importance Of Ethnocentrism And Culture Relativism." PapersOwl.com, Apr 29, 2024. Accessed July 31, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/the-importance-of-ethnocentrism-and-culture-relativism/

"The Importance Of Ethnocentrism And Culture Relativism," PapersOwl.com , 29-Apr-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-importance-of-ethnocentrism-and-culture-relativism/. [Accessed: 31-Jul-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Importance Of Ethnocentrism And Culture Relativism . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-importance-of-ethnocentrism-and-culture-relativism/ [Accessed: 31-Jul-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

How to Avoid Ethnocentrism – Essay on Promoting Cultural Relativism

• 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

Introduction

• Ethnocentrism & How to Reduce It
• Cultural Relativism

In an effort to understand ethnocentrism which is defined as, the tendency to believe that one’s cultural beliefs and their culture’s ethnic values to be superior to others. The inclination to believe that one’s ethnic or cultural group is better than another when compared to one’s culture.

Ethnocentrism is an attitude that is expressed in one’s belief that their own culture or their ethnic group is superior to others. The term was first used by William Graham Summer (1840-1910) as he sought to describe the view that one’s cultural heritage is the centre of everything and all other cultures are measured and referenced to it.

This is influenced by the standards set in one’s culture and one employs these standards as a bar to judge other cultures. It is defined as using one’s cultural heritage as the starting point to judge other cultures.

Cultural relativism on the other hand is the belief that all cultures are equal. Avoiding the temptation to pass judgment over another culture and putting in effort to understand the culture.

This means that in order to understand another culture, studying the cultural practices, beliefs, rites and ceremonies, language, institutions and so on. In studying the influence of ethnocentrism over culture, relativism is relative because they each affect the other either positively or negatively.

What Is Ethnocentrism and How Can It Be Reduced

Ethnocentrism is closely related to such as racism, prejudice, and even xenophobia but does not necessarily involve them. The core idea of this term is judging other cultures through the lens of your own one. Thus, a person disregards the standards of the particular culture and instead applies those practices, behaviors, and beliefs familiar to them. Ethnocentrism is widely applied in research to understand societal attitudes, as it is a good indicator for measuring how a society can accommodate or tolerate another culture or ethnic group.

The high level of ethnocentrism indicates an individual’s perception of what is considered an outsider group. This perception influenced by the standards set in one’s culture and the way an individual employs these standards as a bar to judge other cultures. For many psychologists and sociologists, it is a big question – why are people ethnocentric, and how they can promote cultural pluralism among them.

Here are the recommendations on how to avoid ethnocentrism:

• Be aware of the cultural biases of your own culture – recognize that it is not inherently superior.
• Learn about and try to understand other cultures – read, travel, or interact with people from different cultures.
• Be open-minded and challenge your beliefs – consider that other cultures may have different ways of doing things that are equally valid.
• Treat people from foreign cultures respectfully – no stereotypes and generalizations about other cultures!

How to Promote Cultural Relativism

Various studies have been conducted to suggest the causes of ethnocentrism. Understanding the causes of ethnocentrism helps to reduce it and therefore promote cultural relativism. Social identity, which is an individual identifying with a particular group that more often than not leads to the development of a negative attitude as well as stereotyping of persons of an outsider group.

This can be reversed by ensuring there is an avenue for interactions between members of a society. Exposure to different cultures can help fight the negative attitude as well as stereotyping.

Some personality types are regarded as said to be more vulnerable to adopting what is considered an ethnocentric prejudice. Social scientists have attributed the development of such an attitude to lack of exposure to other cultures.

This can be countered by ensuring maximum interaction between members of different cultural groups. This can achieve by the creation of a heterogonous society this can be achieved through encouraging interactions in institutions such as schools and work places.

Economic ethnocentrism can be countered by encouraging healthy competition for the limited resources in society. This is ethnocentrism developed from the perception that certain economic resources are entitled to a certain ethnic group.

Competition for scarce resources in society by the different ethnic groups can lead to perceived or real conflict between ethnic groups resulting in ethnocentrism. Exposure to different cultures promotes equality as well as equity among the different ethnic groups.

Ethnocentrism is the belief that one’s culture is superior to others. It involves using one’s culture or ethnic group as the central point for rating other cultures. Culture relativism involves viewing all cultures as equal.

Understanding ethnocentrism and its causes helps to encourage culture relativism. Research has shown that individuals with high level of education are more accommodative of other cultures other than their own.

This indicates that educating people about other cultures and increasing their literacy can help reduce ethnocentrism as well as promote culture relativism. Increasing interaction between members of different ethnic groups and between different cultures increases cultural relativism.

• African American Studies
• Ethnocentrism and its Effects on Individuals, Societies, and Multinationals
• Ethnography: Ethnocentrism Concept Analysis
• Cultural Relativism and Cultural Values
• Relationship Between Ethnocentrism and Intercultural Communication
• The Mystery of Chinese Culture: Behind the Walls of White
• Efficient Intercultural Interaction and Communication
• Syncretism in the American Culture
• Concepts of Development of Jewish Culture
• The Surprises of a Dutch Birthday
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, June 1). How to Avoid Ethnocentrism – Essay on Promoting Cultural Relativism. https://ivypanda.com/essays/reduction-of-ethnocentrism-and-promotion-of-cultural-relativism/

"How to Avoid Ethnocentrism – Essay on Promoting Cultural Relativism." IvyPanda , 1 June 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/reduction-of-ethnocentrism-and-promotion-of-cultural-relativism/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'How to Avoid Ethnocentrism – Essay on Promoting Cultural Relativism'. 1 June.

IvyPanda . 2018. "How to Avoid Ethnocentrism – Essay on Promoting Cultural Relativism." June 1, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/reduction-of-ethnocentrism-and-promotion-of-cultural-relativism/.

1. IvyPanda . "How to Avoid Ethnocentrism – Essay on Promoting Cultural Relativism." June 1, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/reduction-of-ethnocentrism-and-promotion-of-cultural-relativism/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "How to Avoid Ethnocentrism – Essay on Promoting Cultural Relativism." June 1, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/reduction-of-ethnocentrism-and-promotion-of-cultural-relativism/.

We use cookies to enhance our website for you. Proceed if you agree to this policy or learn more about it.

• Essay Database >
• Essay Examples >
• Essays Topics >
• Essay on America

Ethnocentrism And Cultural Relativism Essay Examples

Type of paper: Essay

Topic: America , Supreme Court , Criminal Justice , Diversity , Morality , Belief , Behavior , Culture

Words: 1400

Published: 01/01/2020

ORDER PAPER LIKE THIS

More than often, culture is learned, shared and patterned in the society through aspects of enhancing unified cultural institutional change throughout interactions among individuals. Nonetheless, diverse cultures exist in a social environment allows for increased constant interactions between internal and external cultural values that articulates in the concepts of ethnocentrism and cultural relativism (Spade & Ballantine, 2012). Even though, it is not easier to accept the beliefs, values and practices of other cultures it is essential not to become judgmental and harsher towards any specific cultural value and norms. More noticeably, ethnocentrism and cultural relativism remains as ways in which individuals from different cultures can understand the perceptions of different cultures that should be grounded in the empirical reality and perceptions with increased relations to socio-cultural differences.

Ethnocentrism is considered as the tendency in which individuals undertake to judge other cultures according to the criteria of an individual’s own culture depending on the level of correctness of their way of life especially those from primitive cultures. In most cases, ethnocentrism makes individuals to either judge others as positive, negative or extremely negative based on their cultural differences (Spade & Ballantine, 2012). On the other hand, cultural relativism is mainly characterized by the idea that different cultures or ethnic groups have to be appraised based on the basis of its own values and norms of behavior. As a result, cultural relativism is more likely to give rational decisions as compared to ethnocentrism as it is based on different cultures as it is not based on the basis of another culture (Ballantine & Roberts, 2012).

As a matter of fact, both ethnocentrism and cultural relativism are similar because they give different perspectives on diverse cultures based on the behaviors and beliefs of other people raised in other cultures. In addition, as measures of cultural differences both ethnocentrism and cultural relativism is based on the notion that allows individuals to view different habits, traits and values of an individual based on relevance another set of different cultural values.

In most cases, ethnocentrism makes individuals to always view their own culture to be more superior to any other culture as they measure other communities’ values, beliefs and practices in relation to their own culture. As a result, ethnocentrism as a way of perceiving different cultures can lead to cultural misinterpretation as it often misrepresents communication between human beings (Ballantine & Roberts, 2012).

On the other hand, cultural relativism remains rational as it enhances the concept of importance of a particular cultural idea as it acknowledges that it varies from one society to another. As a result, cultural relativism allows individuals to view people from different cultures based on varied ethical and moral standards that remain relative to what a particular culture believes to be good or bad, right or wrong. More importantly, cultural relativism allows sociologists to look at a culture and understand it as much as possible before making judgments in accordance with values, norms and morals of a particular culture (Spade & Ballantine, 2012). As a result, cultural relativism gives a wider perspective of diverse cultures, in terms of attaining the finest possible understanding of diverse cultures.

In addition, cultural relativism seeks to understand an individual based on their own culture while ethnocentrism bases itself centrally on an individual’s use of their cultural norms, morals, as well as values to judge and compare other cultures. As a result, individuals tend to view their way of life based on their practices and behaviors in which we think, live and act as correct even though, it indicates a clear deviance from the fact that the internal norms is seen as wrong in other cultures. More significantly, the perspective of other cultures depends on the different three levels of cultural perspective of ethnocentrism that is either a positive one, a negative one, or an extreme negative one. This is because positive ethnocentrism remains coherent, this is because it seeks a point of view that is widely accepted as it is based on an individual’s way of life that remains preferable to all others, as it gives a wider perspective that acknowledges others based on the initiative that there is nothing erroneous with feelings that define different cultures.

Perhaps, the American culture tends to have increased levels of ethnocentrism as compared to cultural relativism as individuals had increased tendency to view their own culture as being superior and apply their cultural values, norms, beliefs and behavior when judging individuals who initially lived or were raised in other cultures (Spade & Ballantine, 2012). In most cases, the idea of not giving diverse cultures an equitable opportunity, propagates as it remains a measure that make Americans become judgmental and harsher towards any specific cultural value and norms (Ballantine & Roberts, 2012). Even though, ethnocentrism seems to discriminate and rationalize individuals from different cultures it is essential to understand that the perceptions of different cultures is grounded in the empirical reality and perceptions with increased relations to socio-cultural differences. On the other hand, it is indispensable to consider that behavior of Americans in terms of other individuals’ standards remains relevant because it is normal for individuals to view actions that take place in other cultures from the codes of their native culture. As a result, there should always remain a perception that gives an assumption of fairness.

More importantly, ethnocentrism has an increased level of influence within the society as it contributes to social solidarity among individuals from the same culture as it creates a sense of value and community especially among the American people who share a cultural tradition (Spade & Ballantine, 2012). However, there is increased likelihood that individuals who judge other based on their relatively familiar expectations and their opinions and customs focus on being right, true, proper, natural and moral. As a result, most of the individuals who interact with the different American culture find the different behavior and beliefs that individuals hold as strange, unnatural, immoral and savage. In most cases, ethnocentrism seeks to believe that individuals who come from other cultures have primitive cultures, as they relate their own way of lives with that of individuals from other cultures. In addition, individuals from the American culture create an instant tendency to believe that some cultures remain more backward in their lack the technology and consumerism in their practices.

Arguably, cultural relativism allows individuals to view people from different cultures based on varied ethical and moral standards. In fact, this remain relative to what a particular culture believes to be bad or good, wrong or right (Spade & Ballantine, 2012). As a result, cultural relativism, as opposed to ethnocentrism allows individuals from within the American culture and outside to look at different cultures and understand each as much as possible before making judgments in accordance with values, norms and morals of a particular culture (Ballantine & Roberts, 2012). More considerably, cultural relativism is mainly characterized by the idea that different culture or ethnic group differ and as a result, has to be appraised based on the center of its own norms and values of behavior. In most cases, cultural relativism is more likely to give rational decisions as compared to ethnocentrism as it is based on different cultures as it is not based on the basis of another culture.

Conclusively, it is essential to always be rational based on judgment given on an individual’s belief, behavior, values and norms to ensure uniformity. In most cases, it is essential to apply the measures of uniformity based in cultural relativism into practice as it easily allows all the nations to develop unique sects of ethnic, as well as cultural norms. As a result, the level of biasness and lack of uniformity from such cultural values that vary depending with individuals from one ethnic group to the other can enhance increased superiority of diverse cultures. More significantly, it is necessary to understand that ethnocentrism gives a tendency in which individuals undertake to judge other cultures according to the criteria of their own culture depending. Without a doubt, cultural relativism is more likely to give rational decisions as compared to ethnocentrism as it is based on different cultures as it is not based on the basis of another culture.

Ballantine, J. & Roberts, K. (2012). Our social world: introduction to sociology. Los Angeles: Sage Publishers.

Spade, J. & Ballantine, J. (2012). Schools and society: a sociological approach to education. Los Angeles: Sage Publishers.

Cite this page

Share with friends using:

Removal Request

Finished papers: 629

This paper is created by writer with

ID 249947575

If you want your paper to be:

Well-researched, fact-checked, and accurate

Original, fresh, based on current data

Eloquently written and immaculately formatted

275 words = 1 page double-spaced

Get your papers done by pros!

Other Pages

Critical analysis literature reviews, holiness biographies, ireland biographies, perception biographies, ernest hemingway biographies, microsoft biographies, investigation biographies, magic biographies, logic biographies, example of shortage of nurses essay, example of essay on same sex marriages in the usa, sampling plan essay examples, example of research paper on apple iphone, example of essay on what is global warming, comparison of the us and the polish constitution course work examples, are cellular phones dangerous research paper sample, making moral decisions essay example, essay on dawkins and the principle of gradualism, place matters case study sample, free essay about are organizations rational, free essay about cooperative nursing work experience, example of essay on supporting mathematical standards in preschool education, free research paper on how technologys social side effects, good example of jorge ramos a true leader essay, good example of essay on solar power, sick building research paper samples, good companies with good and bad service case study example, good research paper on first argument, good course work on the leadership style of jesus, good essay on smokings effects on human system, good report on the never event initiative, are citizens of a state obliged to obey every law order of their state essays examples, pareto analysis of employee turnover course work examples, book summarization book review sample, herp essays, aris essays, althea essays, my creature from the black lagoon essays, biodegradation essays, caci essays, child centered learning essays.

Password recovery email has been sent to [email protected]

Use your new password to log in

You are not register!

By clicking Register, you agree to our Terms of Service and that you have read our Privacy Policy .

Now you can download documents directly to your device!

Check your email! An email with your password has already been sent to you! Now you can download documents directly to your device.

or Use the QR code to Save this Paper to Your Phone

The sample is NOT original!

Short on a deadline?

Don't waste time. Get help with 11% off using code - GETWOWED

No, thanks! I'm fine with missing my deadline