c r 0 s s c u lt u r al c om mun i c at1 0 n 357ibrdar/komunikacija/seminari/matsumoto, 2000 -...

3
C R 0 S S - C U LT U R AL C OM MUN I C AT1 0 N 357 obvious political gains. However there is a renewed in- terest today in this approach. This validates the critical psychiatric insight that, unlike outmoded scientific hy- potheses that vanish when discredited, both determin- istic psychiatry and antipsychiatry may be likened to belief systems which retreat and reemerge depending on cultural needs and norms. Bibliography Cohen, 0. (Ed.). (1990). Challenging the therapeutic state: Critical perspectives on psychiatry and the mental health system [Special issue]. Journal of Mind and Be- havior, 15 (I & 2). Twenty authors from ten disciplines extend and refine criticisms of biological psychiatry and medicalization. Crossley, N. (r998). R. D. Laing and the British anti- psychiatry movement: A socio-historicalanalysis. Social Science and Medicine, 47v 877-889. Argues that British antipsychiatry may be considered a social movement, and explores its links to other “new social movements.” Hoeller, K. (Ed.). (1997). Thomas Szasz: Moral philosopher of psychiatry [Special issue]. Review of Existential Psy- chology G Psychiatry, 23 (I, 2, & 3). Contains several well-documented articles on the meaning and impact of Szasz’s entire accomplishment, including a rare dis- cussion of his work before The Myth of Mental Illness Ingleby, 11. (Ed.). (1980). Critical psychiatry: The politics of mrntal health. New York: Pantheon. Marxist-influenced, mostly European strain of critical psychiatry,expressing disagreements with both Szaszian and Laingian ap- proaches. Kotowicz, Z. (1997). R. I). Laing and the paths of anti- psychiatry. New York: Routledge. Presents an excellent introduction to, and contemporary reassessment of, Laing’s contribution to critical psychiatry. Scheper-Hughes, N., & Lovell, A. M. (Eds). (1987). Psychi- atry inside out: Selected writings of Franc0 Basaglia (A. M. Lovell & T. Shtob, Trans.). New York: Columbia Univer- sity Press. One of the few works on Basaglia available in English. Displays the breadth of his thought on var- ious topics and discusses the extent of his radical re- form efforts on behalf of mental patients in Italy. (196r). David Cohen CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION refers to the exchange of information between people of different cultural backgrounds. It is a well-studied field of re- search in several disciplines, including psychology, speech and communication, sociology, anthropology, and business. Cross-cultural communication is highly related to a similar term, intercultural communication. In actuality, there is no difference between these terms in the con- text of communication. However, there is an important and notable difference between cross-cultural and in- tercultural research. The former refers to the compari- son of two or more cultures on some variable of inter- est (e.g., differences between cultures A and B in the expression of emotions). The latter refers to the study of the interaction between people of two cultures (e.g., differences in how people of cultures A and B express emotions when they are with people of cultures B and A, respectively). There is yet a third term, iritracultural communication, which refers to communication among people within a culture. The bulk of information in cross-cultural communication comes from cross- cultural research, but has considerable application to our understanding of intercultural and intracultural communication processes. Cultural Influences on the Communication Process These influences are at work via both verbal and non- verbal communication. Verbal Communication. Verbal language is a sys- tem of symbols that denote how a culture structures its world. As such, by examining language, it is possible to see how a culture relates to its world. For example, some languages have words that do not exist in other cultures. The Eskimo language, for instance, has mul- tiple words for snow while the English language has only one (Whorf, 1956). The German word Schaden- freude (joy in another person’s misfortunes) and the Japanese word amae (sweet dependence), which do not exist in English, are other examples. That the words do not exist in other languages does not mean that the concepts are nonexistent. In Amer- ican culture, for example, it is very common to see peo- ple derive joy from others’ misfortunes! Rather, such words reflect the fact that the concept is important enough to the culture for its language to have a sepa- rate linguistic symbol for it. In this way, verbal lan- guage is a manifestation of the larger culture within which it exists. Another example of this manifestation is the case of self and other referents. In American English, for ex- ample, we typically refer to ourselves as “I,” and to someone else as “you.” There are many other lan- guages of the world, however, that do not use such simplistic terms for self and others. The Japanese lan- guage, for instance, includes an extensive choice of terms referring to oneself and others, all dependent upon the relationship between the people interacting (Suzuki, 1978). In Japanese, you refer to your teacher as “teacher” or your boss at work as “section chief” when in English the word you would normally be used. In Japanese, terms denoting status are also used within the family. There are even different terms for 1. depend- ing on the nature of status relationships. The degree

Upload: others

Post on 28-Mar-2020

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: C R 0 S S C U LT U R AL C OM MUN I C AT1 0 N 357ibrdar/komunikacija/seminari/Matsumoto, 2000 - Cross-cultural... · C R 0 S S - C U LT U R AL C OM MUN I C AT1 0 N 357 obvious political

C R 0 S S - C U LT U R AL C OM MUN I C AT1 0 N 357

obvious political gains. However there is a renewed in- terest today in this approach. This validates the critical psychiatric insight that, unlike outmoded scientific hy- potheses that vanish when discredited, both determin- istic psychiatry and antipsychiatry may be likened to belief systems which retreat and reemerge depending on cultural needs and norms.

Bibliography

Cohen, 0. (Ed.). (1990). Challenging the therapeutic state: Critical perspectives on psychiatry and the mental health system [Special issue]. Journal of Mind and Be- havior, 15 (I & 2). Twenty authors from ten disciplines extend and refine criticisms of biological psychiatry and medicalization.

Crossley, N. (r998). R. D. Laing and the British anti- psychiatry movement: A socio-historical analysis. Social Science and Medicine, 47v 877-889. Argues that British antipsychiatry may be considered a social movement, and explores its links to other “new social movements.”

Hoeller, K. (Ed.). (1997). Thomas Szasz: Moral philosopher of psychiatry [Special issue]. Review of Existential Psy- chology G Psychiatry, 23 (I, 2, & 3 ) . Contains several well-documented articles on the meaning and impact of Szasz’s entire accomplishment, including a rare dis- cussion of his work before The Myth of Mental Illness

Ingleby, 11. (Ed.). (1980). Critical psychiatry: The politics of mrntal health. New York: Pantheon. Marxist-influenced, mostly European strain of critical psychiatry, expressing disagreements with both Szaszian and Laingian ap- proaches.

Kotowicz, Z. (1997). R. I). Laing and the paths of anti- psychiatry. New York: Routledge. Presents an excellent introduction to, and contemporary reassessment of, Laing’s contribution to critical psychiatry.

Scheper-Hughes, N., & Lovell, A. M. (Eds). (1987). Psychi- atry inside out: Selected writings of Franc0 Basaglia (A. M. Lovell & T. Shtob, Trans.). New York: Columbia Univer- sity Press. One of the few works on Basaglia available in English. Displays the breadth of his thought on var- ious topics and discusses the extent of his radical re- form efforts on behalf of mental patients in Italy.

(196r).

David Cohen

CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION refers to the exchange of information between people of different cultural backgrounds. It is a well-studied field of re- search in several disciplines, including psychology, speech and communication, sociology, anthropology, and business.

Cross-cultural communication is highly related to a similar term, intercultural communication. In actuality, there is no difference between these terms in the con-

text of communication. However, there is an important and notable difference between cross-cultural and in- tercultural research. The former refers to the compari- son of two or more cultures on some variable of inter- est (e.g., differences between cultures A and B in the expression of emotions). The latter refers to the study of the interaction between people of two cultures (e.g., differences in how people of cultures A and B express emotions when they are with people of cultures B and A, respectively). There is yet a third term, iritracultural communication, which refers to communication among people within a culture. The bulk of information in cross-cultural communication comes from cross- cultural research, but has considerable application to our understanding of intercultural and intracultural communication processes.

Cultural Influences on the Communication Process

These influences are at work via both verbal and non- verbal communication.

Verbal Communication. Verbal language is a sys- tem of symbols that denote how a culture structures its world. As such, by examining language, it is possible to see how a culture relates to its world. For example, some languages have words that do not exist in other cultures. The Eskimo language, for instance, has mul- tiple words for snow while the English language has only one (Whorf, 1956). The German word Schaden- freude (joy in another person’s misfortunes) and the Japanese word amae (sweet dependence), which do not exist in English, are other examples.

That the words do not exist in other languages does not mean that the concepts are nonexistent. In Amer- ican culture, for example, it is very common to see peo- ple derive joy from others’ misfortunes! Rather, such words reflect the fact that the concept is important enough to the culture for its language to have a sepa- rate linguistic symbol for it. In this way, verbal lan- guage is a manifestation of the larger culture within which it exists.

Another example of this manifestation is the case of self and other referents. In American English, for ex- ample, we typically refer to ourselves as “I,” and to someone else as “you.” There are many other lan- guages of the world, however, that do not use such simplistic terms for self and others. The Japanese lan- guage, for instance, includes an extensive choice of terms referring to oneself and others, all dependent upon the relationship between the people interacting (Suzuki, 1978). In Japanese, you refer to your teacher as “teacher” or your boss at work as “section chief” when in English the word you would normally be used. In Japanese, terms denoting status are also used within the family. There are even different terms for 1. depend- ing on the nature of status relationships. The degree

Administrator
By Matsumoto, David In Kazdin, Alan E. (Ed). (2000). Encyclopedia of psychology, Vol. 2. (pp. 357-359). American Psychological Association. 502 pp.
Page 2: C R 0 S S C U LT U R AL C OM MUN I C AT1 0 N 357ibrdar/komunikacija/seminari/Matsumoto, 2000 - Cross-cultural... · C R 0 S S - C U LT U R AL C OM MUN I C AT1 0 N 357 obvious political

358 CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION

of politeness and fluency in the language and culture is dependent on the ability to use this system properly.

When people speak the language of their culture, they reinforce their concepts of culture. If you engage fluently in the Japanese use of the elaborate system of self and other referents, for example, you will reinforce your own understanding of the Japanese culture’s em- phasis on status relationships and interdependence. If you engage fluently in American English’s “I” and “you,” you will reinforce your view of the American individuality and uniqueness. Culture and language share a highly interrelated, reciprocal relationship.

That language helps to structure thought, and vice versa, is a concept that is known as the Supir-Whorf hypothesis. It suggests that people of different cultures think differently, just by the very nature, structure, and function of their language. Since the early 1960s, some research has indicated that the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis may not be true with regard to the influence of lexical and semantic aspects of language (e.g., see the exper- iments on color names reported in Rosch & Lloyd, 1978). But, many other studies have confirmed that Sapir-Whorf is very valid with regard to the grammar and syntax of language. Also, there is a small but growing amount of evidence in research with biiin- guals that supports the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Collec- tively, Sapir-Whorf suggests that people who speak different languages may interpret the same event dif- ferently because the differences in their language are associated with different thinking styles (e.g., see Mat- sumoto, 1996, for a review of this line of research).

Nonverbal Communication. While cultural differ- ences in language are very apparent, there are major differences between cultures in nonverbal communi- cation as well. In fact, ample studies have shown that the bulk of message exchange in communication oc- curs nonverbally; depending on the study, estimates of the contribution of nonverbal behaviors to overall com- munication range as high as 90%!

There are five categories of nonverbal behav- iors: speech illustrators, conversation regulators, self- adaptors, emblematic gestures, and emotion signals (Ekman & Friesen, Serniotica, 1968, 19, 49-98). All carry some kind of communicative value and are influ- enced by culture. One of the most well-studied areas of nonverbal behavior is gesture, and many cultural sim- ilarities and differences have been documented (Morris, Collet, Marsh, & O’Shaunessy, 1980).

Facial expressions of emotion is another well-studied area of nonverbal communication. Research since the 1970s has shown that a small set of facial expressions of emotion are universally expressed (see review of early research in Ekman, 1972). These emotions in- clude anger, contempt, disgust, fear, happiness, sadness, and surprise. Cultures differ, however, in the rules gov- erning how to use these universal expressions. These

rules-called cultural display rules-are learned rules of expression management that dictate the appropri- ateness of emotion display depending on social circum- stances. Learned from infancy, we are so adept at using these rules that by the time we are adults, we do so automatically and without much conscious awareness.

There are cultural differences in other channels of nonverbal behaviors, such as in gaze and visual behav- ior, and in the use of interpersonal space. Each of these is important in its own right, and contributes greatly to communication. Mistaken inferences about feelings and intentions easily occur because of misattributions about gaze behavior that we are not accustomed to, and interactions are often strained because they occur at spaces that are too distant or close for comfort. Col- lectively, the literature suggests that culture exerts a considerable amount of influence over much of the nonverbal behaviors that occur in intercultural com- munication episodes.

The Process of Intercultural Communication

As noted above, we all learn culturally prescribed rules that govern our expressive behaviors and language. These rules also help us to decode and interpret the behaviors of others. As display rules are heavily influ- enced by culture, so are our rules of decoding.

When we interact with others, a number of normal, psychological processes occur. We naturally form cate- gories about people to help us organize the information we take in. We selectively attend to our environment, as it is impossible to attend to all possible stimuli en- tering our senses at any one time. We naturally ap- praise the actions of others around us, and make at- tributions about the causes of those actions. In most cases, those appraisals and attributions are heavily de- pendent on what we expect to be appropriate, which is related to our own learned display rules. Finally, we select attributions, appraisals, and categories to commit to long-term memory. All of these normal psychological processes underlie our own ethnocentrism (the ten- dency to view the world through one’s own cultural filters) and stereotypes (generalizations about categories of people).

Interpreting the behaviors of others, however, is not an entirely cognitive process. It is, in fact, heavily laden with emotion and values, and extremely important to our sense of self. The display and decoding rules we learn and operate with, and the stereotypes that are formed from normal psychological processes described above, create expectations of behavior. These expecta- tions are associated with value judgments of goodness, worth, and appropriateness. In intracultural commu- nication, these expectations are often met, and values are reaffirmed. Positive emotions reinforce those values and our own sense of self, or self-construals. These, in

Page 3: C R 0 S S C U LT U R AL C OM MUN I C AT1 0 N 357ibrdar/komunikacija/seminari/Matsumoto, 2000 - Cross-cultural... · C R 0 S S - C U LT U R AL C OM MUN I C AT1 0 N 357 obvious political

CROSS-CULTURAL C O U N S E L I N G 359

turn, reinforce our own display and decoding rules, ex- pectations, and stereotypes in a cyclical fashion.

During intercultural encounters, however, chances are greater that we interact with people whose behav- iors do not conform to our expectations. When this oc- curs, we often interpret those behaviors, instinctively and naturally, as transgressions against our value sys- tem and morality. Consequently, they produce negative emotions, which are upsetting to our self-construals. The process of intercultural communication, therefore, is an exciting and interesting one because of the si- multaneous blending of different culturally based rules of encoding and decoding. Unfortunately, because of these dynamics, it is also a source of conflict.

When negative emotions are aroused in intercul- tural encounters, these emotions tell us that there is a discrepancy between our expectations, stereotypes, value system, and reality. When this occurs, we can either assimilate our observations into our expectations (e.g., convince ourselves that our observations were a fluke and our expectations and stereotypes are correct), or we can accommodate our expectations to the reality (e.g.. entertain the hypothesis that our stereotypes may be incorrect). Intercultural communication processes, therefore, have inherent potential for either self-growth and the development of new ways of thinking, or a crystallization of old ways of thinking, depending on how the individual deals with the challenge to self and expectations incumbent to the elicitation of the nega- tive emotions produced by the interpretations of inap- propriate behavior.

Because intercultural communication processes are laden with such unknowns, there is a considerable amount of uncertainty and anxiety attendant upon such exchanges. By understanding that such uncer- tainty and anxiety are natural, and by developing ways of regulating one’s negative emotional reactions and channeling them toward accommodation and self- growth rather than stagnation, we can build bridges across cultures that can help to reduce intercultural conflict and produce effective communication.

Bibliography

Asante, M., & Gudykunst, W. (Eds.). (1989). Handbook of intercultural and international communication. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Brislin. R.. Cushner, K., Cherrie, C.. & Yong, M. (1986). Intercultural interactions: A practical guide. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Condon, J.. & Yousef, S. (1975). A n introduction to intercul- tural communication. New York: Macmillan.

Ekman. I! (1972). Universal and cultural differences in fa- cial expressions of emotion. In J. R. Cole (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation, 1971. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Matsumoto, D. (1996). Culture and psychology. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Morris, D., Collett, P., Marsh, P., & O’Shaughnessy, M. (1980). Gestures: Their origins and distribution. New York: Scarborough.

Rosch, E., & Lloyd, B. B. (Eds.). (1978). Cognition and cate- gorization. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Samovar, L. A., & Porter, R. E. (1997a). Communication be- tween cultures. Belmont. CA: Wadsworth.

Samovar, L. A., & Porter, R. E. (1997b). Intercultural com- munication. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Suzuki, T. (1978). Japanese and the Japanese. Tokyo: Kodan- sha.

Triandis, H. C. (1994). Culture and social behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, thought, and reality. Cam- bridge, MA: MIT Press.

David Matsumoto

CROSS-CULTURAL COUNSELING. Any helping re- lationship that assesses, understands, and evaluates a client’s behavior in the multiplicity of cultural contexts where that behavior was learned and is displayed may be termed cross-cultural counseling. These cultural con- texts may be narrowly defined to include ethnicity or nationality, but they may also be broadly defined to in- clude ethnographic, demographic, status, and affiliation identifiers. According to the broad definition of culture, all counseling is rightly understood to be cross-cultural counseling. Culture is then a central rather than a mar- ginal or exotic aspect of counseling, focused on the client’s salient affiliation to each particular cultural context. In recent years the term multicultural has been preferred over cross-cultural counseling to emphasize the multiplicity of cultural groups and contexts in which counseling occurs.

The identification of specific competencies developed when the Division 17 Education and Training Commit- tee of the American Psychological Association (APA) (Sue et al., 1982) published a position paper describing a three-stage developmental sequence of competence beginning with multicultural “awareness,” then mov- ing to multicultural “knowledge,” and finally to multi- cultural “skill” competencies. This framework has been elaborated by Sue, Arredondo, and McDavis (1992) and others who specify those competencies needed to serve multicultural populations. The competency framework has since been adopted by both Division 17 of the APA and by the American Counseling Association. There is a need for defined competencies in multicultural coun- seling. The Basic Behavioral Science Task Force of the National Advisory Mental Health Council (1996) has identified specific examples where ( I ) social and cul- tural beliefs influence diagnosis and treatment: ( 2 ) di- agnosis differs across cultures: ( 3 ) symptoms are