Week 3 - cultural dimensions Flashcards

1
Q

model of influence of culture (3)

A

o Culture: dimension, norms, values, ideology, belief system
o Individual: personality, feeling, thinking, attitude, intentions
o E-WOM communication: genre, conventions, language use

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

iceberg model

A

surface and deep culture

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

proxemics

A

people from different cultures perceive space differently

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

monochronic culture

A

order, schedules, promptness

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

polychronic culture

A

multiple things happen at once, stress completion of transactions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

high-context culture

A

communication is implicit and relies heavily on context

value harmony, hierarchical values, indirect communication, non-verbal cues, person’s background

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

low-context culture

A

explicit verbal communication

value honesty, assertiveness, candidness, direct pattern of speech

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

contextualisation communication style

A

continuum

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

points of criticism: Hall (6)

A
o	Research method
	Qualitative: observations, anecdotal evidence
•	Often based on one specific case
	Method not documented
o	Concepts
	Somewhat ambiguous
	Dimensions are not exhaustive per se
	Lack of comparative quantitative data
	Limited validation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Hofstede’s cultural dimensions (6)

A

o Power distance (index)
o Individualism – collectivism (dichotomy)
o Masculinity – femininity (dichotomy)
o Uncertainty avoidance (index)
o Long term orientation – short term normative orientation (dichotomy)
o Indulgence – restraint (dichotomy)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Hofstede’s onion

A

o You have to work through the layers to get to the core
o Layers: symbols, heroes, rituals, practices
 Symbols: words, clothing, hairstyle, gesture, pictures
 Heroes: people (alive or dead, real or imaginary) that have high value
 Rituals: greetings, social and religious ceremonies, the way you serve tea
 Values: honest, good, clean
 Practices: give outsiders insight into the symbols, heroes and rituals to learn about their values

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

individualism vs collectivism

A

whether people’s self-image is defined in terms of I or we

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

masculinity vs femininity

A

 Masculinity: preference for achievement, heroism, assertiveness, and material rewards for success, society is more competitive
 Femininity: preference for cooperation, modesty, caring for the weak and quality of life

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

long term vs short term normative orientation (LTO)

A

 Long: pragmatic approach, encourage thrift and efforts in modern education as a way to prepare for the future
 Short: maintain time-honoured traditions and norms, view societal change with suspicion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

indulgence vs restraint

A

 Indulgence: free gratification of basic and natural human drives (enjoying life and having fun)
 Restraint: suppression of gratification of needs, regulated by strict social norms

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

power distance index

A

degree to which the less powerful members of a society accept and expect that power is distributed unequally

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

uncertainty avoidance index

A

degree to which members of a society feel uncomfortable with uncertainty and ambiguity
 Strong UAI: rigid codes of belief and behaviour, intolerant of unorthodox behaviour and ideas
 Weak UAI: more relaxed attitude, practice counts more than principles

18
Q

how did Hofstede come up with the dimensions?

A

actual research (contrary to Hall): survey

19
Q

points of criticism: Hofstede

A

cultural attribution error
o Culture =/= nation =/= language
o National culture =/= homogeneous
o One company approach
o Outdated data collection (1966): culture does not stand still
o Limited questionnaire
o In-built western bias (dimensions are chosen from a western point of view)

20
Q

cultural attribution error

A

Fallacy of cultural attribution: I encounter a difference, therefore this is a cultural difference

21
Q

consequences of criticism Hofstede (5)

A

o Take the dimensions as hypotheses, not necessarily as explanatory factors
o Be aware of points of criticism and mention them
o Always express findings in terms of relativity
 Relative terms: in culture X there is more Y than in culture Z
o Making many observations instead of only one
 Corpus survey
 Large sample
o One swallow does not a summer make: one expression does not a culture make

22
Q

Hall (1980)

A

cultural dimensions: monochronic vs polychronic and high vs low-context cultures

23
Q

Hofstede (1981; 200)

A

six cultural dimensions

onion

24
Q

Gudykunst & Ting-Toomey (1988)

A

communication styles in relation to the cultural dimensions

25
learning a culture (5)
``` o Values and norms are learned via language o What is important?  Politeness, roles, guilt, correctness o Who is important?  Parents, peers, outsiders o How is this importance emphasised?  Inside group, outside, intimate, private, public, formal, informal o Where is this importance emphasised?  School, home, work, media ```
26
style
verbal interaction style reflect and embody the affective, moral and aesthetic patterns of a cultures contextualizes how messages should be interpreted
27
four communicative styles
direct vs indirect succinct vs elaborate (vs exacting) personal vs contextual instrumental vs affective
28
direct vs indirect
 Direct: speaker formulates goals, intentions and wishes explicitly • Explicit, precise, to the point, categorical • ‘I’ takes first place  Indirect: more implicit phrasing of goals and intentions • Implicit, ambiguous, modest • ‘I’ is not expressed
29
succinct vs elaborate vs exacting
 Elaborate: flowery language • Flowery, rich, expressive • Many comparisons, many adjectives, many repetitions, ritual language use, exaggerations, intensifications, creativity  Succinct: understatements, pauses, silence • Concise • Sometimes less than needed, understatements, pauses, silences  Exacting: speaker’s contribution contains neither more nor less information than is required • Precise • No more, no less than necessary
30
personal vs contextual
 Personal: emphasis on expression of sender’s identity via personal pronouns and adverbs of place and time • Preferred in egalitarian society  Contextual: emphasis on prescribed role relations, not everything is explicit, much can be deduced from the context • Reflects hierarchy/asymmetrical relations
31
instrumental vs affective
 Instrumental: goal-oriented and sender-oriented language  Affective: receiver-oriented and process-oriented • Sender and receiver are working together
32
Direct vs indirect language + low vs high-context + individualism vs collectivism
* Direct: individualism + low-context | * Indirect: collectivism + high-context
33
Succinct vs elaborate (vs exacting) + low vs high-context + uncertainty avoidance
• Succinct: high-context + high uncertainty avoidance -> high apprehension level of unpredictable situations o Novel situations: understatements and silence to manage the situation • Elaborate: high-context + middle/moderate uncertainty avoidance -> fight-flight camouflaging verbal style to approach uncertainty situations • Exacting: low-context + low uncertainty avoidance -> exacting and up-front, authentic and honest
34
Personal vs contextual style + power distance
* Personal style: low power distance | * Contextual style: high power distance
35
Instrumental vs affective style + individualism vs collectivism + low vs high-context
* Instrumental: individualism + low-context | * Affective: collectivism + high-context
36
predictions by Gudykunst & Ting-Toomey (1988)
o Cultural dimensions: individualism vs collectivism  Communication style: instrumental vs affective  Communication style: direct vs indirect o Cultural dimensions: power distance  Communication style: personal vs contextual o Cultural dimensions: uncertainty avoidance  Communication style: succinct vs elaborate o Cultural dimensions: high-context vs low-context  Communication style: instrumental vs affective  Communication style: direct vs indirect  Communication style: succinct vs elaborate
37
conclusion Gudykunst & Ting-Toomey (1988) (3)
o Language styles are mainly qualitative in nature o All styles occur everywhere, but are preferred differently o More theoretical and empirical work in intercultural teams are needed, including research into specific language situations (genres)
38
black box in Gudykunst & Ting-Toomey (1988)
model of influence of culture
39
criticism Gudykunst & Ting-Toomey (1988) (8)
o Cultural attribution error o Overlap in dimensions (i.e. confounds) o Unclear definitions of dimensions, linking language expression styles o Tendentious, not based on empirical research o The chapter is written from a North American point of view o Most studies mentioned were based on qualitative research o Hofstede’s dimensions are based on outdated, company-specific data o Communication may be different nowadays e.g., social media has made communication more accessible
40
armchair approach
``` research method o Secondary literature o No empirical research o Only anecdotal evidence o No empirical basis besides reasoning ```
41
cultural dimensions may impact communicative style, but what remains?
variation with respect to genre or individual style