Intercultural
communication
It has been suggested that Cross-cultural
communication be merged into this article.
Learn more
Intercultural communication (or cross-
cultural communication) is a discipline
that studies communication across
different cultures and social groups, or
how culture affects communication. It
describes the wide range of
communication processes and problems
that naturally appear within an
organization or social context made up of
individuals from different religious, social,
ethnic, and educational backgrounds. In
this sense it seeks to understand how
people from different countries and
cultures act, communicate and perceive
the world around them. Many people in
intercultural business communication
argue that culture determines how
individuals encode messages, what
medium they choose for transmitting
them, and the way messages are
interpreted.[1]
With regard to intercultural communication
proper, it studies situations where people
from different cultural backgrounds
interact. Aside from language, intercultural
communication focuses on social
attributes, thought patterns, and the
cultures of different groups of people. It
also involves understanding the different
cultures, languages and customs of
people from other countries. Intercultural
communication plays a role in social
sciences such as anthropology, cultural
studies, linguistics, psychology and
communication studies. Intercultural
communication is also referred to as the
base for international businesses. Several
cross-cultural service providers assist with
the development of intercultural
communication skills. Research is a major
part of the development of intercultural
communication skills.[2][3]
Identity and culture are also studied within
the discipline of communication to analyze
how globalization influences ways of
thinking, beliefs, values, and identity, within
and between cultural environments.
Intercultural communication scholars
approach theory with a dynamic outlook
and do not believe culture can be
measured nor that cultures share universal
attributes. Scholars acknowledge that
culture and communication shift along
with societal changes and theories should
consider the constant shifting and
nuances of society.
The study of intercultural communication
requires intercultural understanding, which
is an ability to understand and value
cultural differences. Language is an
example of an important cultural
component that is linked to intercultural
understanding.[4] Intercultural
communication is in a way the 'interaction
with speakers of other languages on equal
terms and respecting their identities'.[5]
Areas of interest
Cross-cultural business
strategies
Cross-cultural business communication is
very helpful in building cultural intelligence
through coaching and training in cross-
cultural communication management and
facilitation, cross-cultural negotiation,
multicultural conflict resolution, customer
service, business and organizational
communication. Cross-cultural
understanding is not just for incoming
expats. Cross-cultural understanding
begins with those responsible for the
project and reaches those delivering the
service or content. The ability to
communicate, negotiate and effectively
work with people from other cultures is
vital to international business.
Management
Important points to consider:
Develop cultural sensitivity
Anticipate the meaning the receiver will
get.
Careful encoding
Use words, pictures, and gestures.
Avoid slang, idioms, regional sayings.
Selective transmission
Build relationships, face-to-face if
possible.
Careful decoding of feedback
Get feedback from multiple parties.
Improve listening and observation skills.
Follow-up actions
Facilitation
There is a connection between a person's
personality traits and the ability to adapt to
the host-country's environment—including
the ability to communicate within that
environment.
Two key personality traits are openness
and resilience. Openness includes traits
such as tolerance for ambiguity,
extroversion and introversion, and open-
mindedness. Resilience, on the other hand,
includes having an internal locus of
control, persistence, tolerance for
ambiguity, and resourcefulness.
These factors, combined with the person's
cultural and racial identity and level of
liberalism, comprise that person's potential
for adaptation.
Cultural perceptions
There are common conceptualizations of
attributes that define collectivistic and
individualistic cultures. Operationalizing
the perceptions of cultural identities works
under the guise that cultures are static and
homogeneous, when in fact cultures within
nations are multi-ethnic and individuals
show high variation in how cultural
differences are internalized and
expressed.[4]
Globalization
Globalization plays a central role in
theorizing for mass communication,
media, and cultural communication
studies.[6] Intercultural communication
scholars emphasize that globalization
emerged from the increasing diversity of
cultures throughout the world and thrives
with the removal of cultural barriers.[4] The
notion of nationality, or the construction of
national space, is understood to emerge
dialectically through communication and
globalization.
The Intercultural Praxis Model by Kathryn
Sorrells, PH.D shows us how to navigate
through the complexities of cultural
differences along with power differences.
This model will help you understand who
you are as an individual, and how you can
better communicate with others that may
be different from you. In order to continue
living in a globalized society one can use
this Praxis model to understand cultural
differences (based on race, ethnicity,
gender, class, sexual orientation, religion,
nationality, etc.) within the institutional and
historical systems of power. Intercultural
Communication Praxis Model requires us
to respond to someone who comes from a
different culture than us, in the most open
way we can. The media are influential in
what we think of other cultures and also
what we think about our own selves.
However it is important, we educate
ourselves, and learn how to communicate
with others through Sorrells Praxis Model.
[1]
Sorrells’ process is made up of six points
of entry in navigating intercultural spaces,
including inquiry, framing, positioning,
dialogue, reflection, and action. Inquiry, as
the first step of the Intercultural Praxis
Model, is an overall interest in learning
about and understanding individuals with
different cultural backgrounds and world-
views, while challenging one’s own
perceptions. Framing, then, is the
awareness of “local and global contexts
that shape intercultural interactions;”[7]
thus, the ability to shift between the micro,
meso, and macro frames. Positioning is
the consideration of one’s place in the
world compared to others, and how this
position might influence both world-views
and certain privileges. Dialogue is the
turning point of the process during which
further understanding of differences and
possible tensions develops through
experience and engagement with cultures
outside of one’s own. Next, reflection
allows for one to learn through
introspection the values of those
differences, as well as enables action
within the world “in meaningful, effective,
and responsible ways."[7] This finally leads
to action, which aims to create a more
conscious world by working toward social
justice and peace among different
cultures. As Sorrells argues, “In the context
of globalization, [intercultural praxis] …
offers us a process of critical, reflective
thinking and acting that enables us to
navigate … intercultural spaces we inhabit
interpersonally, communally, and
globally."[7]
Problems
The problems in intercultural
communication usually come from
problems in message transmission and in
reception. In communication between
people of the same culture, the person
who receives the message interprets it
based on values, beliefs, and expectations
for behavior similar to those of the person
who sent the message. When this
happens, the way the message is
interpreted by the receiver is likely to be
fairly similar to what the speaker intended.
However, when the receiver of the
message is a person from a different
culture, the receiver uses information from
his or her culture to interpret the message.
The message that the receiver interprets
may be very different from what the
speaker intended.
Nonverbal communication has been
shown to account for between 65% and
93% of interpreted communication.[8]
Minor variations in body language, speech
rhythms, and punctuality often cause
mistrust and misperception of the
situation among cross-cultural parties.
This is where nonverbal communication
can cause problems with intercultural
communication. Misunderstandings with
nonverbal communication can lead to
miscommunication and insults with
cultural differences. For example, a
handshake in one culture may be
recognized as appropriate, whereas
another culture may recognize it as rude or
inappropriate.[8]
Effective communication depends on the
informal understandings among the
parties involved that are based on the trust
developed between them. When trust
exists, there is implicit understanding
within communication, cultural differences
may be overlooked, and problems can be
dealt with more easily. The meaning of
trust and how it is developed and
communicated vary across societies.
Similarly, some cultures have a greater
propensity to be trusting than others.
Theories
The following types of theories can be
distinguished in different strands: focus on
effective outcomes, on accommodation or
adaption, on identity negotiation and
management, on communication
networks,on acculturation and
adjustment.[9]
Social engineering effective
outcomes
Cultural convergence
In a relatively closed social system
in which communication among
members is unrestricted, the
system as a whole will tend to
converge over time toward a state
of greater cultural uniformity. The
system will tend to diverge toward
diversity when communication is
restricted.[10]
Communication accommodation theory
This theory focuses on linguistic
strategies to decrease or increase
communicative
distances.Communication
accommodation theory seeks to
explain and predict why, when, and
how people adjust their
communicative behavior during
social interaction, and what social
consequences result from these
adjustments.[11]
Intercultural adaption
Intercultural adaptation involves
learned communicative
competence. Communicative
competence is defined as thinking,
feeling, and pragmatically behaving
in ways defined as appropriate by
the dominant mainstream culture.
Communication competence is an
outcomes based measure
conceptualized as
functional/operational conformity
to environmental criteria such as
working conditions. Beyond this,
adaptation means "the need to
conform" to mainstream "objective
reality" and "accepted modes of
experience".[12]
Co-cultural theory
In its most general form, co-cultural
communication refers to
interactions among
underrepresented and dominant
group members.[13] Co-cultures
include but are not limited to people
of color, women, people with
disabilities, gay men and lesbians,
and those in the lower social
classes. Co-cultural theory, as
developed by Mark P. Orbe, looks at
the strategic ways in which co-
cultural group members
communicate with others. In
addition, a co-cultural framework
provides an explanation for how
different persons communicate
based on six factors.
Identity negotiation or
management
Identity management theory
Identity negotiation
Cultural identity theory
Double-swing model
Communication networks
Networks and outgroup communication
competence
Intracultural versus intercultural
networks
Networks and acculturation
Acculturation and adjustment
Communication acculturation
This theory attempts to portray
"cross-cultural adaptation as a
collaborative effort in which a
stranger and the receiving
environment are engaged in a joint
effort."[14]
Anxiety/Uncertainty management
When strangers communicate with
hosts, they experience uncertainty
and anxiety. Strangers need to
manage their uncertainty as well as
their anxiety in order to be able to
communicate effectively with hosts
and then to try to develop accurate
predictions and explanations for
hosts' behaviors.
Assimilation, deviance, and alienation
states
Assimilation and adaption are not
permanent outcomes of the
adaption process; rather, they are
temporary outcomes of the
communication process between
hosts and immigrants. "Alienation
or assimilation, therefore, of a
group or an individual, is an
outcome of the relationship
between deviant behavior and
neglectful communication."[15]
Assimilation
Assimilation is the process of
absorbing the traits of the dominant
culture to the point where the group
that was assimilated becomes
indistinguishable from the host
culture. Assimilation can be either
forced or done voluntarily
depending on situations and
conditions. Regardless of the
situation or the condition it is very
rare to see a minority group replace
and or even forget their previous
cultural practices.[16]
Alienation
Alienation frequently refers to
someone who is ostracized or
withdrawn from other people with
whom they would ordinarily be
expected to associate with. Hajda, a
representative theorist and
researcher of social alienation says:
" alienation is an individuals feeling
of uneasiness or discomfort which
reflects his exclusion or self-
exclusion from social and cultural
participation."[17]
Other theories
Meaning of meanings theory – "A
misunderstanding takes place when
people assume a word has a direct
connection with its referent. A common
past reduces misunderstanding.
Definition, metaphor, feedforward, and
Basic English are partial linguistic
remedies for a lack of shared
experience."[18]
Face negotiation theory – "Members of
collectivistic, high-context cultures have
concerns for mutual face and inclusion
that lead them to manage conflict with
another person by avoiding, obliging, or
compromising. Because of concerns for
self-face and autonomy, people from
individualistic, low-context cultures
manage conflict by dominating or
through problem solving"[19]
Standpoint theory – An individual's
experiences, knowledge, and
communication behaviors are shaped in
large part by the social groups to which
they belong. Individuals sometimes view
things similarly, but other times have
very different views in which they see
the world. The ways in which they view
the world are shaped by the experiences
they have and through the social group
they identify themselves to be a part
of.[20][21] "Feminist standpoint theory
claims that the social groups to which
we belong shape what we know and
how we communicate.[22] The theory is
derived from the Marxist position that
economically oppressed classes can
access knowledge unavailable to the
socially privileged and can generate
distinctive accounts, particularly
knowledge about social relations."[23]
Stranger theory – At least one of the
persons in an intercultural encounter is
a stranger. Strangers are a 'hyperaware'
of cultural differences and tend to
overestimate the effect of cultural
identity on the behavior of people in an
alien society, while blurring individual
distinctions.
Feminist genre theory – Evaluates
communication by identifying feminist
speakers and reframing their speaking
qualities as models for women's
liberation.
Genderlect theory – "Male-female
conversation is cross-cultural
communication. Masculine and
feminine styles of discourse are best
viewed as two distinct cultural dialects
rather than as inferior or superior ways
of speaking. Men's report talk focuses
on status and independence. Women's
support talk seeks human
connection."[24]
Cultural critical studies theory – The
theory states that the mass media
impose the dominant ideology on the
rest of society, and the connotations of
words and images are fragments of
ideology that perform an unwitting
service for the ruling elite.
Marxism – aims to explain class
struggle and the basis of social relations
through economics.
History of assimilation
Forced assimilation was very common
in the European colonial empires the
18th, 19th, and 20th centuries. Colonial
policies regarding religion conversion,
the removal of children, the division of
community property, and the shifting of
gender roles primarily impacted North
and South America, Australia, Africa,
and Asia.
Voluntary assimilation has also been a
part of history dating back to the Spanish
Inquisition of the late 14th and 15th
centuries, when many Muslims and Jews
voluntarily converted to Roman
Catholicism as a response to religious
prosecution while secretly continuing their
original practices. Another example is
when the Europeans moved to the United
States.[16]
Intercultural competence
Intercultural communication is competent
when it accomplishes the objectives in a
manner that is appropriate to the context
and relationship. Intercultural
communication thus needs to bridge the
dichotomy between appropriateness and
effectiveness:[25] Proper means of
intercultural communication leads to a
15% decrease in miscommunication.[26]
Appropriateness: Valued rules, norms,
and expectations of the relationship are
not violated significantly.
Effectiveness: Valued goals or rewards
(relative to costs and alternatives) are
accomplished.
Competent communication is an
interaction that is seen as effective in
achieving certain rewarding objectives in a
way that is also related to the context in
which the situation occurs. In other words,
it is a conversation with an achievable goal
that is used at an appropriate
time/location.[25]
Components
Intercultural communication can be linked
with identity, which means the competent
communicator is the person who can
affirm others' avowed identities. As well as
goal attainment is also a focus within
intercultural competence and it involves
the communicator to convey a sense of
communication appropriateness and
effectiveness in diverse cultural
contexts.[25]
Ethnocentrism plays a role in intercultural
communication. The capacity to avoid
ethnocentrism is the foundation of
intercultural communication competence.
Ethnocentrism is the inclination to view
one's own group as natural and correct,
and all others as aberrant.
People must be aware that to engage and
fix intercultural communication there is no
easy solution and there is not only one way
to do so. Listed below are some of the
components of intercultural
competence.[25]
Context: A judgment that a person is
competent is made in both a relational
and situational context.This means that
competence is not defined as a single
attribute, meaning someone could be
very strong in one section and only
moderately good in another.
Situationally speaking competence can
be defined differently for different
cultures. For example, eye contact
shows competence in western cultures
whereas, Asian cultures find too much
eye contact disrespectful.
Appropriateness: This means that one's
behaviours are acceptable and proper
for the expectations of any given
culture.
Effectiveness: The behaviours that lead
to the desired outcome being achieved.
Motivations:This has to do with
emotional associations as they
communicate interculturally. Feelings
which are one's reactions to thoughts
and experiences have to do with
motivation. Intentions are thoughts that
guide one's choices, it is a goal or plan
that directs one's behaviour. These two
things play a part in motivation.[25]
Basic tools for improvement
The following are ways to improve
communication competence:
Display of interest: showing respect and
positive regard for the other person.
Orientation to knowledge: Terms people
use to explain themselves and their
perception of the world.
Empathy: Behaving in ways that shows
one understands the point of view of
others
Task role behaviour: initiate ideas that
encourage problem solving activities.
Relational role behaviour: interpersonal
harmony and mediation.
Tolerance for unknown and ambiguity:
The ability to react to new situations
with little discomfort.
Interaction posture: Responding to
others in descriptive, non-judgmental
ways.[25]
Patience[27]
Active listening[28]
Clarity[28]
Important factors
Proficiency in the host culture language:
understanding the grammar and
vocabulary.
Understanding language pragmatics:
how to use politeness strategies in
making requests and how to avoid
giving out too much information.
Being sensitive and aware to nonverbal
communication patterns in other
cultures.
Being aware of gestures that may be
offensive or mean something different
in a host culture rather than one's own
culture.
Understanding a culture's proximity in
physical space and paralinguistic
sounds to convey their intended
meaning.[29]
Traits
Flexibility.
Tolerating high levels of uncertainty.
Self-reflection.
Open-mindedness.
Sensitivity.
Adaptability.
"Thinking outside the box" and lateral
thinking[29]
Verbal communication
Verbal communication consist of
messages being sent and received
continuously with the speaker and the
listener, it is focused on the way messages
are portrayed. Verbal communication is
based on language and use of expression,
the tone in which the sender of the
message relays the communication can
determine how the message is received
and in what context.
Factors that affect verbal communication:
Tone of voice
Use of descriptive words
Emphasis on certain phrases
Volume of voice
The way a message is received is
dependent on these factors as they give a
greater interpretation for the receiver as to
what is meant by the message. By
emphasizing a certain phrase with the
tone of voice, this indicates that it is
important and should be focused more on.
Along with these attributes, verbal
communication is also accompanied with
non-verbal cues. These cues make the
message clearer and give the listener an
indication of what way the information
should be received.[30]
Example of non-verbal cues
Facial expressions
Hand gestures
Use of objects
Body movement
In terms of intercultural communication
there are language barriers which are
effected by verbal forms of
communication. In this instance there is
opportunity for miscommunication
between two or more parties.[31] Other
barriers that contribute to
miscommunication would be the type of
words chosen in conversation. Due to
different cultures there are different
meaning in vocabulary chosen, this allows
for a message between the sender and
receiver to be misconstrued.[32]
Nonverbal communication
Nonverbal communication is behavior that
communicates without words—though it
often may be accompanied by words.
Minor variations in body language, speech
rhythms, and punctuality often cause
differing interpretations of the situation
among cross-cultural parties.
Kinesic behavior is communication
through body movement—e.g., posture,
gestures, facial expressions and eye
contact. The meaning of such behavior
varies across countries.
Occulesics are a form of kinesics that
includes eye contact and the use of the
eyes to convey messages.
Proxemics concern the influence of
proximity and space on communication
(e.g., in terms of personal space and in
terms of office layout). For example, space
communicates power in the US and
Germany.
Paralanguage refers to how something is
said, rather than the content of what is
said—e.g., rate of speech, tone and
inflection of voice, other noises, laughing,
yawning, and silence.
Object language or material culture refers
to how people communicate through
material artifacts—e.g., architecture, office
design and furniture, clothing, cars,
cosmetics, and time. In monochronic
cultures, time is experienced linearly and
as something to be spent, saved, made up,
or wasted. Time orders life, and people
tend to concentrate on one thing at a time.
In polychronic cultures, people tolerate
many things happening simultaneously
and emphasize involvement with people.
In these cultures, people may be highly
distractible, focus on several things at
once, and change plans often.
Clothing and the way people dress is used
as a form of nonverbal communication.
Interdisciplinary orientation
Cross-cultural communication endeavours
to bring together such relatively unrelated
areas as cultural anthropology and
established areas of communication. Its
core is to establish and understand how
people from different cultures
communicate with each other. Its charge
is to also produce some guidelines with
which people from different cultures can
better communicate with each other.
Cross-cultural communication, as with
many scholarly fields, is a combination of
many other fields. These fields include
anthropology, cultural studies, psychology
and communication. The field has also
moved both toward the treatment of
interethnic relations, and toward the study
of communication strategies used by co-
cultural populations, i.e., communication
strategies used to deal with majority or
mainstream populations.
The study of languages other than one's
own can serve not only to help one
understand what we as humans have in
common, but also to assist in the
understanding of the diversity which
underlines our languages' methods of
constructing and organizing knowledge.
Such understanding has profound
implications with respect to developing a
critical awareness of social relationships.
Understanding social relationships and the
way other cultures work is the groundwork
of successful globalization business
affairs.
Language socialization can be broadly
defined as “an investigation of how
language both presupposes and creates
anew, social relations in cultural
context”.[33] It is imperative that the
speaker understands the grammar of a
language, as well as how elements of
language are socially situated in order to
reach communicative competence.
Human experience is culturally relevant, so
elements of language are also culturally
relevant.[33]:3 One must carefully consider
semiotics and the evaluation of sign
systems to compare cross-cultural norms
of communication.[33]:4 There are several
potential problems that come with
language socialization, however.
Sometimes people can over-generalize or
label cultures with stereotypical and
subjective characterizations.[34] Another
primary concern with documenting
alternative cultural norms revolves around
the fact that no social actor uses language
in ways that perfectly match normative
characterizations.[33]:8 A methodology for
investigating how an individual uses
language and other semiotic activity to
create and use new models of conduct
and how this varies from the cultural norm
should be incorporated into the study of
language socialization.[33]:11,12
See also
Adaptive behavior
Adaptive behaviors
Clyde Kluckhohn
Cultural diversity
Cultural intelligence
Cultural schema theory
Culture shock
Framing (social sciences)
Intercultural competence
Lacuna model
Multilingualism
Richard D. Lewis
Value (personal and cultural)
References
Notes
1. Lauring, Jakob (2011). "Intercultural
Organizational Communication: The
Social Organizing of Interaction in
International Encounters". Journal of
Business and Communication. 48 (3):
231–55.
doi:10.1177/0021943611406500 .
2. Drary, Tom (April 9, 2010). "3 Tips For
Effective Global Communication" .
Archived from the original on 2010-
04-13.
3. "Intercultural Communication Law &
Legal Definition" .
Definitions.uslegal.com. Retrieved
2016-05-19.
4. Saint-Jacques, Bernard. 2011.
“Intercultural Communication in a
Globalized World.” In Intercultural
Communication: A Reader, edited by
Larry A. Samovar, Richard E. Porter,
and Edwin R. McDaniel, 13 edition, 45-
53. Boston, Mass: Cengage Learning.
5. Byram, Gribkova & Starkey, 2002
6. Crofts Wiley, Stephen B. 2004.
“Rethinking Nationality in the Context
of Globalization.” Communication
Theory 14 (1):78–83.
7. Kathryn, Sorrells (2015-09-29).
Intercultural communication :
globalization and social justice
(Second ed.). Los Angeles. ISBN 978-
1452292755. OCLC 894301747 .
8. Samovar Larry, Porter Richard,
McDaniel Edwin, Roy Carolyn. 2006.
Intercultural Communication A
Reader. Nonverbal Communication.
pp13.
9. Cf. Gudykunst 2003 for an overview.
10. Kincaid, D. L. (1988). The convergence
theory of intercultural communication.
In Y. Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds.),
Theories in intercultural
communication (pp. 280–298).
Newbury Park, CA: Sage. p.289
11. Dragojevic, Marko; Gasiorek, Jessica;
Giles, Howard (2015).
"Communication Accommodation
Theory" (PDF). The International
Encyclopedia of Interpersonal
Communication. pp. 1–21.
doi:10.1002/9781118540190.wbeic0
06 . ISBN 9781118540190.
12. Gudykunst, W. & Kim, Y. Y. (2003).
Communicating with strangers: An
approach to intercultural
communication, 4th ed., 378. New
York: McGraw Hill.
13. Orbe, 1998. p.3
14. Kim Y.Y.(1995), p.192
15. Mc.Guire and Mc.Dermott, 1988, p.
103
16. Pauls, Elizabeth. "Assimilation" .
www.britannica.com.
17. Giffin, Kim (2009). "Social alienation
by communication denial". Quarterly
Journal of Speech. 56 (4): 347–357.
doi:10.1080/00335637009383022 .
18. Griffin (2000), p. 492
19. Griffin (2000), p. 496
20. Social group
21. Collins, P. H. (1990). Black feminist
thought: Knowledge, consciousness,
and the politics of empowerment.
Boston: Unwin Hyman.
22. Wood, 2005
23. Intercultural Communication:
Globalization and Social Justice (1
ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc. 2013.
ISBN 978-1412927444.
24. Griffin (2000), p. 497
25. (Lustig & Koester, 2010)
26. "Facts and Figures" . Cultural Candor
Inc.
27. Geldart, Phil. "Excellent
Communication Requires Patience" .
eaglesflight.
28. "Importance of Communication Skills
at Work Place" . linguasofttech.
Retrieved 22 April 2018.
29. (Intercultural Communication)
30. Hinde, R. A. (1972). Non-verbal
communication; edited by R. A. Hinde.
-. Cambridge [Eng.]: University Press,
1972.
31. Esposito, A. (2007). Verbal and
nonverbal communication behaviours
[electronic resource] : COST Action
2102 International Workshop, Vietri
sul Mare, Italy, March 29–31, 2007 :
revised selected and invited papers /
Anna Esposito ... [et al.] (eds.). Berlin ;
New York : Springer, c2007.
32. Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. K. (2001).
Intercultural communication : a
discourse approach / Ron Scollon and
Suzanne Wong Scollon. Malden, MA :
Blackwell Publishers, 2001
33. Rymes, (2008). Language
Socialization and the Linguistic
Anthropology of Education.
Encyclopedia of Language and
Education, 2(8, Springer)
34. Handford, Michael (2019). "Which
"culture"? A critical analysis of
intercultural communication in
engineering education". Journal of
Engineering Education.
doi:10.1002/jee.20254 .
Bibliography
Bhawuk, D. P. & Brislin, R. (1992). "The
Measurement of Intercultural Sensitivity
Using the Concepts of Individualism and
Collectivism", International Journal of
Intercultural Relations(16), 413–36.
Ellingsworth, H.W. (1983). "Adaptive
intercultural communication", in:
Gudykunst, William B (ed.), Intercultural
communication theory, 195–204, Beverly
Hills: Sage.
Fleming, S. (2012). "Dance of Opinions:
Mastering written and spoken
communication for intercultural
business using English as a second
language" ISBN 9791091370004
Graf, A. & Mertesacker, M. (2010).
"Interkulturelle Kompetenz als globaler
Erfolgsfaktor. Eine explorative und
konfirmatorische Evaluation von fünf
Fragebogeninstrumenten für die
internationale Personalauswahl", Z
Manag(5), 3–27.
Griffin, E. (2000). A first look at
communication theory (4th ed.). Boston,
MA: McGraw-Hill. n/a.
Gudykunst, William B., & M.R. Hammer.
(1988). "Strangers and hosts: An
uncertainty reduction based theory of
intercultural adaption" in: Kim, Y. & W.B.
Gudykunst (eds.), Cross-cultural
adaption, 106–139, Newbury Park: Sage.
Gudykunst, William B. (2003),
"Intercultural Communication Theories",
in: Gudykunst, William B (ed.), Cross-
Cultural and Intercultural
Communication, 167–189, Thousand
Oaks: Sage.
Hidasi, Judit (2005). Intercultural
Communication: An outline, Sangensha,
Tokyo.
Hogan, Christine F. (2013), "Facilitating
cultural transitions and change, a
practical approach", Stillwater, USA: 4
Square Books. (Available from Amazon),
ISBN 978-1-61766-235-5
Hogan, Christine F. (2007), "Facilitating
Multicultural Groups: A Practical Guide",
London: Kogan Page, ISBN 0749444924
Kelly, Michael., Elliott, Imelda & Fant,
Lars. (eds.) (2001). Third Level Third
Space – Intercultural Communication
and Language in European Higher
Education. Bern: Peter Lang.
Kim Y.Y.(1995), "Cross-Cultural adaption:
An integrative theory.", in: R.L. Wiseman
(Ed.)Intercultural Communication Theory,
170 – 194, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Messner, W. & Schäfer, N. (2012), "The
ICCA™ Facilitator's Manual. Intercultural
Communication and Collaboration
Appraisal", London: Createspace.
Messner, W. & Schäfer, N. (2012),
"Advancing Competencies for
Intercultural Collaboration", in: U.
Bäumer, P. Kreutter, W. Messner (Eds.)
"Globalization of Professional Services",
Heidelberg: Springer.
McGuire, M. & McDermott, S. (1988),
"Communication in assimilation,
deviance, and alienation states", in: Y.Y.
Kim & W.B. Gudykunst (Eds.), Cross-
Cultural Adaption, 90 – 105, Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Oetzel, John G. (1995), "Intercultural
small groups: An effective decision-
making theory", in Wiseman, Richard L
(ed.), Intercultural communication theory,
247–270, Thousands Oaks: Sage.
Spitzberg, B. H. (2000). "A Model of
Intercultural Communication
Competence", in: L. A. Samovar & R. E.
Porter (Ed.) "Intercultural
Communication – A Reader", 375–387,
Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing.
Wiseman, Richard L. (2003),
"Intercultural Communication
Competence", in: Gudykunst, William B
(ed.), Cross-Cultural and Intercultural
Communication, 191–208, Thousand
Oaks: Sage.
Lustig, M. W., & Koester, J. (2010).
Intercultural competence : interpersonal
communication across cultures / Myron
W. Lustig, Jolene Koester. Boston :
Pearson/Allyn & Bacon, c2010
Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Intercultural_communication&oldid=90053335
4"
Last edited 11 days ago by an anon…
Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless
otherwise noted.
