essay on appreciating cultural differences to effective communication

Cultural Differences’ Impact on Communication Essay

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

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

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

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

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

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

Bibliography

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

• Culture and Communication: Variations and Effectiveness
• Leadership in the Local Context
• Euro Disney's Market Entry & Problem-Solving
• Nuances between Low-Context and High-Context Communication
• Low-Context and High-Context Communication
• Challenges Confronting Event Management Businesses
• Intercultural Communication Sensitivity Against Ethnocentrism
• Relationship Between Ethnocentrism and Intercultural Communication
• The Role of Ethnocentrism in Intercultural Communication
• Confronting Complexity in Society
• Aspects of Cultural Misperception
• Cultural Differences and Intercultural Sensitivity
• Culture Shock as a Natural Phenomenon
• Limitations in Intercultural Communication
• The Western Cultural Narratives

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
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 23 March 2022

Communication competencies, culture and SDGs: effective processes to cross-cultural communication

• Stella Aririguzoh 1  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  9 , Article number:  96 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

25k Accesses

21 Citations

2 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Business and management
• Cultural and media studies

Globalization has made it necessary for people from different cultures and nations to interact and work together. Effective cross-cultural communication seeks to change how messages are packaged and sent to people from diverse cultural backgrounds. Cross-cultural communication competencies make it crucial to appreciate and respect noticeable cultural differences between senders and receivers of information, especially in line with the United Nations’ (UN) recognition of culture as an agent of sustainable development. Miscommunication and misunderstanding can result from poorly encrypted messages that the receiver may not correctly interpret. A culture-literate communicator can reduce miscommunication arising from a low appreciation of cultural differences so that a clement communication environment is created and sustained. This paper looks at the United Nations’ recognition of culture and how cultural differences shape interpersonal communication. It then proposes strategies to enhance cross-cultural communication at every communication step. It advocates that for the senders and receivers of messages to improve communication efficiency, they must be culture and media literates.

Similar content being viewed by others

Sexualized culture on livestreaming platforms: a content analysis of Twitch.tv

Kristel Anciones-Anguita & Mirian Checa-Romero

Persistent interaction patterns across social media platforms and over time

Michele Avalle, Niccolò Di Marco, … Walter Quattrociocchi

A cross-verified database of notable people, 3500BC-2018AD

Morgane Laouenan, Palaash Bhargava, … Etienne Wasmer

Public interest

The United Nations has recognized culture as a causal agent of sustainability and integrated it into the SDG goals. Culture reinforces the economic, social, and communal fabrics that regulate social cohesion. Communication helps to maintain social order. The message’s sender and the receiver’s culture significantly influence how they communicate and relate with other people outside their tribal communities. Globalization has compelled people from widely divergent cultural backgrounds to work together.

People unconsciously carry their cultural peculiarities and biases into their communication processes. Naturally, there have been miscommunications and misunderstandings because people judge others based on their cultural values. Our cultures influence our behaviour and expectations from other people.

Irrespective of our ethnicities, people want to communicate, understand, appreciate, and be respected by others. Culture literate communicators can help clear some of these challenges, create more tolerant communicators, and contribute to achieving global sustainable goals.

Introduction

The United Nations established 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015 to transform the world by 2030 through simultaneously promoting prosperity and protecting the earth. The global body recognizes that culture directly influences development. Thus, SDG Goal 4.7 promotes “… a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development.” Culture really matters (Seymour, 2007 ). Significantly, cultural cognition influences how people process information from different sources and suggests policies they may support or oppose (Rachlinski, 2021 ). Culture can drive sustainable development (United Nations, 2015 ; De Beukelaer and Freita, 2015 ; Kangas et al., 2017 ; Heckler, 2014 ; Dessein et al., 2015 ; and Hosagrahar, 2017 ).

UNESCO ( 2013 , p.iii ; 2017 , p.16; 2013a , p. 30) unequivocally states that “culture is a driver of development,” an “enabler of sustainable development and essential for achieving the 2030 Agenda” and as “an essential pillar for sustainable development.” These bold declarations have led to the growth of the cultural sector. The culture industry encourages economic growth through cultural tourism, handicraft production, creative industries, agriculture, food, medicine, and fisheries. Culture is learned social values, beliefs, and customs that some people accept and share collectively. It includes all the broad knowledge, beliefs, art, morals, law, customs, and other experiences and habits acquired by man as a member of a particular society. This seems to support Guiso, Paola and Luigi ( 2006 , p. 23) view of culture as “those customary beliefs and values that ethnic, religious, and social groups transmit fairly unchanged from generation to generation.” They assert that there is a causality between culture and economic outcomes. Bokova ( 2010 ) claims that “the links between culture and development are so strong that development cannot dispense with culture” and “that these links cannot be separated.” Culture includes customs and social behaviour. Causadias ( 2020 ) claims that culture is a structure that connects people, places, and practices. Ruane and Todd ( 2004 ) write that these connections are everyday matters like language, rituals, kingship, economic way of life, general lifestyle, and labour division. Field ( 2008 ) notes that even though all cultural identities are historically constructed, they still undergo changes, transformation, and mutation with time. Although Barth ( 1969 ) affirms that ethnicity is not culture, he points out that it helps define a group and its cultural stuff . The shared cultural stuff provides the basis for ethnic enclosure or exclusion.

The cultural identities of all men will never be the same because they come from distinctive social groups. Cultural identification sorts interactions into two compartments: individual or self-identification and identification with other people. Thus, Jenkins ( 2014 ) sees social identity as the interface between similarities and differences, the classification of others, and self-identification. He argues that people would not relate to each other in meaningful ways without it. People relate both as individuals and as members of society. Ethnicity is the “world of personal identity collectively ratified and publicly expressed” and “socially ratified personal identity‟ (Geertz, 1973 , p. 268, 309). However, the future of ethnicity has been questioned because culture is now seen as a commodity. Many tribal communities are packaging some aspects of their cultural inheritances to sell to other people who are not from their communities (Comaroff and Comaroff, 2009 ).

There is a relationship between culture and communication. People show others their identities through communication. Communication uses symbols, for example, words, to send messages to recipients. According to Kurylo ( 2013 ), symbols allow culture to be represented or constructed through verbal and nonverbal communication. Message receivers may come from different cultural backgrounds. They try to create meaning by interpreting the symbols used in communication. Miscommunication and misunderstanding may arise because symbols may not have the same meaning for both the sender and receiver of messages. If these are not efficiently handled, they may lead to stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. Monaghan ( 2020 ), Zhu ( 2016 ), Holmes ( 2017 ), Merkin ( 2017 ), and Samovar et al. ( 2012 ) observe that inter-cultural communication occurs between people from different cultural groups. It shows how people from different cultural backgrounds can effectively communicate by comparing, contrasting, and examining the consequences of the differences in their communication patterns. However, communicating with others from different cultural backgrounds can be full of challenges, surprises, and re-learning because languages, values, and protocols differ. Barriers, like language and noise, impede communication by distorting, blocking, or altering the meaning.

Communication patterns change from one nation to the next. It is not uncommon, for example, for an American, a Nigerian, a Japanese national, or citizens of other countries to work together on a single project in today’s multi-cultural workplace. These men and women represent different cultural heritages. Martinovski ( 2018 ) remarks that both humans and virtual agents interact in cross-cultural environments and need to correctly behave as demanded by their environment. Possibly too, they may learn how to avoid conflicts and live together. Indeed, García-Carbonell and Rising ( 2006 , p. 2) remark that “as the world becomes more integrated, bridging the gap in cultural conflicts through real communication is increasingly important to people in all realms of society.” Communication is used to co-ordinate the activities in an organization for it to achieve its goals. It is also used to signal and order those involved in the work process.

This paper argues that barriers to cross-cultural communication can be overcome or significantly reduced if the actors in the communication processes become culture literates and competent communicators.

Statement of the problem

The importance of creating and maintaining good communication in human society cannot be overemphasized. Effective communication binds and sustains the community. Cross-cultural communication problems usually arise from confusion caused by misconstruction, misperception, misunderstanding, and misvaluation of messages from different standpoints arising from differences in the cultures of the senders and receivers of messages. Divergences in cultural backgrounds result in miscommunication that negatively limits effective encrypting, transmission, reception, and information decoding. It also hinders effective feedback.

With the rapid spread of communication technologies, no community is completely isolated from the rest of the world. Present-day realities, such as new job opportunities and globalization, compel some people to move far away from their local communities and even their countries of origin to other places where the cultures are different. Globalization minimizes the importance of national borders. The world is no longer seen as a globe of many countries but as a borderless entity (Ohmae, 1999 ) and many markets (Levitt, 1983 ) in different countries with different cultures. As a matter of necessity, people from other countries must communicate.

The United Nations ( 2015 ) recognizes culture’s contribution to sustainable development and promotes local cultures in development programmes to increase local population involvement. Despite the United Nations’ lofty ideals of integrating culture into development, culture has hindered development at different levels. Interventions meant to enhance development are sometimes met with opposition from some people who feel that such programmes are against their own culture.

Gumperz ( 2001 , p. 216) argues that “all communication is intentional and grounded in inferences that depend upon the assumption of mutual good faith. Culturally specific presuppositions play a key role in inferring what is intended.” Cross-border communications reflect the kaleidoscope of the diverse colours of many cultures, meeting, clashing, and fusing. Like Adler ( 1991 , p. 64) observes, “foreigners see, interpret, and evaluate things differently, and consequently act upon them differently.” Diversities in culture shape interpersonal communication. Yet the basic communication process is the same everywhere. It is in these processes that challenges arise. Therefore, this study seeks to examine how each of these steps can be adapted to enhance cross-cultural communication, especially in today’s digitized era of collapsing cultural boundaries. Barriers to cross-cultural communication can be significantly reduced if the actors in the communication processes become culture literates and competent communicators.

Study objectives

The objectives of this study are

To examine United Nations efforts to integrate culture into sustainable development.

To suggest modifications to each communication process step to improve effective cross-cultural communication.

Literature review

Some authors have tried to link culture, communication, and sustainable goals.

The need to know about people’s culture

There are compelling reasons to learn about other people’s cultures.

Cultural literacies: Difficulties in cross-cultural communication can be reduced when senders of messages understand that the world is broader than their ethnocentric circles. It demands that senders of messages know that what they believe may not always be correct when communicating with receivers of these messages who are from different cultures. Logical reasoning will expect increased exposure to different cultures to increase understanding. When people of different groups communicate frequently, it is anticipated that they should understand each other better. This is what Hirsch ( 1987 ) labels as cultural literacy . In the ordinary course of things, common knowledge destroys mutual suspicion and misinterpretation that often generate conflicts.

To protect the earth: It is essential to point out that at “the most global level, the fate of all people, indeed the fate of the earth, depends upon negotiations among representatives of governments with different cultural assumptions and ways of communicating” (Tannen, 1985 , p. 203). If the world is to be protected, it is necessary to understand other peoples’ cultures who live and interact with us at different fronts and in this same world. The world is still our haven. Nevertheless, Vassiliou et al. ( 1972 ) find that increased exposure can increase people’s mutual negative stereotyping. Tannen ( 1985 , p. 211) remarks that stereotypes of ethnic groups partly develop from the poor impressions that people from other cultures have about the natives because they hold different meanings for both parties. Stereotyping is detrimental to cross-cultural communication, and its dismissal is necessary for any successful cross-cultural exchange.

Spin-offs from globalization: Bokova ( 2013 ) observes that globalization transforms all societies and brings culture to the front. She remarks that communities are increasingly growing diverse and yet interconnected. The spin-offs from globalization open great doors for exchanges, mutual enrichment of persons from different cultures, and pictures of new worlds.

The dynamics of cross-cultural communication

Different cultures emphasize different values. The emphasis on one value by one culture may lead to difficulties in cross-cultural communication with another person who does not see that particular value in the same light, for example, timeliness. It is crucial to note Sapir’s ( 1956 , p. 104) insistence that “every cultural pattern and every single act of social behaviour involves communication in either an explicit or implicit sense.” Even though Hofstede ( 2005 , p. 1) comments that “cultural differences are nuisance at best and often a disaster,” UNESCO ( 1998 , 1999 ) recognizes cultural diversity as an “essential factor of development” and an issue that matters. This makes cultural diversity a blessing rather than a disaster. The various shades of cultural values influence how we behave and communicate with others outside our cultural environment. Our ideals and biases also influence communication.

Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner ( 1997 ) developed a culture model with seven dimensions. They are universalism versus particularism (rules versus relationships); individualism versus communitarianism (the individual versus the group); specific versus diffuse (how far people get involved); neutral versus emotional (how people express emotions) ; achievement versus ascription (how people view status); sequential time versus synchronous time (how people manage time); and internal direction versus outer direction (how people relate to their environment). These cultural models signify how people from these areas communicate. People from different backgrounds may have difficulties communicating as their values may be significantly different. A good communicator must take note of this distinctiveness in values because they impact the communication processes. For example, a person who is particular about upholding written rules may not be interested in knowing who the culprit is before administering sanctions. But the other person interested in maintaining a good relationship with others may re-consider this approach.

Hofstede ( 1980 ) identifies five significant values that may influence cross-cultural communication:

Power distance: This is the gap between the most and the least influential members of society. People from different cultures perceive equality in various ways. The social hierarchy or status determines where individuals are placed. Status is conferred by inheritance or by personal achievement. Some cling to societal classification and its hierarchy of power. Others value and cherish the equality of all people. Yet, other cultures see other people as dependents and somehow inferior beings. A king in an African community is seen as far more powerful and important than his servants, who are expected to pay obeisance to him. Most countries in Europe are egalitarian. Arabic and Asian countries are high on the power index.

Individualism versus collectivism: This explains the extent to which members of a particular culture value being seen first, as individuals or as members of a community. As individuals, they are entirely held accountable for their errors. They are also rewarded as individuals for their exploits. However, in some cultures, the wider community is involved. Suppose a person makes an inglorious error. The whole community where that individual comes from shares in it. The same goes if he wins laurels and awards. The individual does not exist primarily for himself. African, Japanese, Indian, and most Asiatic nations follow the collective approach. A Chinese man has his Guanxi or Guanshi. This is his network of influential and significant contacts that smoothen his business and other activities (Yeung and Tung, 1996 ). He succeeds or fails based on his personal relationships. In other words, the basis of business is friendship. This is clear evidence of collectivism. Most people from America and Europe are individualistic. It must be pointed out that personal values mediate both community and individualistic spirit. Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner’s communitarianism vs. individualism appears very similar to this Hofstede’s individualism/collectivism orientation. The information receiver who values his individuality will be offended if he is seen as just a group member or if his negative performance on the job is discussed openly. The message sender who appreciates his subordinates would send personalized messages and expect their feedback.

Uncertainty avoidance: This shows the degree to which a particular culture is uncomfortable with uncertainties and ambiguities. Some cultures avoid or create worries about how much they disclose to other people. A culture with high uncertainty avoidance scores wants to avoid doubts by telling and knowing the absolute truth in everything. For them, everything should be plainly stated. When situations are not like this, they are offended, worried, and intolerant of other people or groups they feel are hiding facts by not being plain enough. Hofstede and Bond ( 1988 ) write that this trait is very peculiar to western Europeans. This means that people from countries like Greece, Turkey, and Spain are very high on uncertainty avoidance. Communication between people with high or low uncertainties may be hindered. Some people may appear rude and uncouth because of their straightforward ways of talking. Some Africans may see some Americans and people from Europe as too wide-mouthed because they feel they do not use discretion in talking. They say things they may prefer to keep silent about and hide from the public’s ears. On the other hand, some Americans may see some Africans as unnecessarily secretive. Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner’s ( 1997 ) universalism/particularism explains why some cultures insist on applying the rule of law no matter who the offender is.

Masculinity/feminity roles : Hofstede ( 2001 ) defines masculinity as society’s preference for success, heroism, assertiveness, and material rewards for success. Conversely, femininity is seen as the preference for co-operation, diffidence, caring for the weak and quality of life. The male-female contradiction affects communication. Females are expected to be meek homemakers that tend and nurture their family members. Like Sweden and Norway, cultures that favour females do not discriminate between the sexes. Japan and Nigeria have cultures that are predominantly masculine in orientation. Competitive and aggressive females are frowned at and seen as social deviants. In the other cultures where females are more favoured, a man may land in court and face public condemnation for domestic violence. Hofstede ( 1998 ) believes that how different cultures see the male/female roles influence how they treat gender, sexuality, and religion.

Long-time orientations: A particular society accepts some degree of long or short associations. Japanese culture scores high in long-term orientation values, commitments, and loyalty. They respect tradition, and therefore, changes in their society take a longer time to happen. Cultures with low long-term orientation do not value tradition much, nor do they go out of their way to nurture long-standing relationships. Literally, changes occur in rapid succession. There appears to be more attachment to the pursuit of immediate self-satisfaction and simple-minded well-being. Baumeister and Wilson ( 1996 , pp. 322–325) say that meaning comes from a sense of purpose, efficacy, value, and a sense of positive self-worth. Thus, if you communicate with somebody with a short-term orientation, you may think that he is too hasty and intemperate, while he may feel that you are too sluggish and not ready to take immediate action.

Hall ( 1983 ) introduces two other factors:

Time usage: Some cultures are monochronic, while others are polychronic. Monochronic cultures are known for doing one thing at a time. Western Europe is monochronic in time orientation, as illustrated by the familiar adage that says, “There is a time and place for everything!” Persons from this cultural background are very punctual and strictly adhere to plans. They are task-oriented. Polychronic cultures schedule multiple tasks simultaneously, even though there may be distractions and interruptions while completing them. Plans may often change at short notice. Such different time management and usage may constrict effective communication. A London business entrepreneur will find it difficult to understand why his business partner from Nigeria may be thirty minutes late for a scheduled meeting. The answer is in their perception of time. Some Nigerians observe what is referred to as African time , where punctuality is tacitly ignored.

Low and high context: This refers to how much a culture depends on direct or indirect verbal communication. According to Hall ( 1976 ), low context cultures explicitly refer to the topic of discussion. The speaker and his audience know that the words mean exactly what they say. In high context cultures, the meanings of words are drawn from the context of the communication process. The words may never mean what they say. For example, the sentence: I have heard . In the low context culture, it merely means that the listener has used his ears to listen to what the speaker is saying. In the high context culture, the listener knows more than what the speaker is saying and may be planning something unpleasant. Europeans and North Americans have low contexts. African and Asian nations have high contexts.

Vaknin ( 2005 ) brings in another value:

Exogenic and endogenic: This shows how people relate to their environment. Deeply exogenic cultures look outside themselves to make sense of life. Hence, they believe in God and His power to intervene in the affairs of men. Endogenic cultures draw on themselves when searching for the meaning of life. They think they can generate solutions to tackle the problems facing them. While the endogenic person may exert himself to find a solution to a challenge, his exogenic partner may believe that supernatural help will come from somewhere and refuses to do what is needed. Of course, this provides a problematic platform for effective communication.

The United Nations’ sustainable development goals and culture

The United Nations recognizes that culture is implicitly crucial to the achievement of the SDGs. No meaningful development can occur outside any cultural context because every person is born into a culture. To a large extent, our cultural foundations determine what we do and how we see things. Therefore, culture must be integrated into sustainable development strategies. Some specific goals’ targets acknowledge that culture drives development. Sustainable development revolves around economic, social, and environmental objectives for people. These goals are implicitly or explicitly dependent on culture because culture impacts people.

There are 17 Sustainable Development Goals. However, there are four specific ones that refer to culture are:

SDG 4 focuses on quality education

By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development

In other words, quality education is most effective if it responds to a place and the community’s cultural context and exactitudes. This target hinges on education promoting peace, non-violence, and cultural diversity as precursors to sustainable development. Encouraging respect for cultural diversity within acceptable standards facilitates cultural understanding and peace.

SDG 8 focuses on decent work and economic growth

By 2030, devise and implement policies to promote sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and products

Strengthening trade in cultural goods and services will provide growth impetus for local, national, and international markets. These will create employment opportunities for people whose work revolves around cultural goods. Cultural tourism generates revenues that improve the economy. In this sense, culture facilitates the community’s well-being and sustainability.

SDG 11 focuses on sustainable cities and communities

Target 11.4

Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritage

When our cultural heritage is carefully managed, it attracts sustainable investments in tourism. The local people living where this heritage is domiciled ensure that it is not destroyed and that they themselves will not damage the heritage areas.

SDG 12 focuses on responsible consumption and production

Develop and implement tools to monitor sustainable development impacts for sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and products

Several indigenous livelihoods and crafts are built on local knowledge and management of the ecosystem, natural resources, and local materials. If natural resources are depleted, production will be endangered. Local livelihoods that utilize low technology and energy generate less waste and keep their environment free from pollution. In other words, proper management of the ecosystem prevents biodiversity loss, reduces land degradation, and moderates adverse climate change effects. Where there are natural disasters, traditional knowledge already embedded in the people’s culture helps them become resilient.

Theoretical framework

The social construction of reality is hinged on the belief that people make sense of their social world by assembling their knowledge. Scheler ( 1960 ) labels this assemblage the Sociology of Knowledge . Berger and Luckmann ( 1966 , p.15) contend that this “knowledge is concerned with the analysis of the social construction of reality.” Social construction theory builds on peoples’ comprehension of their own life experiences. From there, people make assumptions about what they think life is or should be. Young and Collin ( 2004 ) present that social constructionism pays more attention to society than individuals. Communities determine what they feel is acceptable. What is widely accepted by a particular community may be unacceptable to other people who are not members of this group. Therefore, people see an issue as good or bad based on their group’s description. Thus, what is a reality in Society A may be seen as illegal in Society B . Berger and Luckmann ( 1966 ) claim that people create their own social and cultural worlds and vice versa. According to them, common sense or basic knowledge is sustained through social interactions. These, in turn, reinforce already existing perceptions of reality, leading to routinization and habitualization. Berger and Luckmann ( 1991 ) say that dialogue is the most important means of maintaining, modifying, and reconstructing subjective reality.

Burr ( 2006 ) writes that the four fundamental tenets of social constructionism are: a critical instance towards taken-for-granted knowledge, historical and cultural specificity; knowledge sustained by social processes; and that knowledge and social action go together. This taken-for-granted knowledge is a basic common-sense approach to daily interactions. Historical and cultural specificities look at the peculiar but past monuments that have shaped the particular society. Knowledge is created and sustained by socialization. Good knowledge improves the common good. However, whoever applies the knowledge he has acquired wrongly incurs sanctions. This is why convicted criminals are placed behind bars.

Social constructions exist because people tacitly agree to act as if they do (Pinker, 2002 ). Whatever people see as realities are actually what they have learnt, over long periods, through their interactions with their society’s socialization agents such as the family, schools and churches. Cultural realities are conveyed through a language: the vehicle for communication. Language communicates culture by telling about what is seen, spoken of, or written about. However, groups construct realities based on their cultures. The media construct realities through the production, reproduction, and distribution of messages from which their consumers give meaning to their worlds and model their behaviours.

The method of study

The discourse analysis method of study is adopted for this work. Foucault ( 1971 ) developed the ‘discursive field’ to understand the relationships between language, social institutions, subjectivity, and power. Foucault writes that discourses relate to verbalization at the most basic level. The discursive method explores the construction of meanings in human communication by offering a meaningful interpretation of messages to enhance purposeful communication. Discourse analysis examines how written, or spoken language is used in real-life situations or in the society. Language use affects the creation of meaning; and, therefore, defines the context of communication. Kamalu and Isisanwo ( 2015 ) posit that discourse analysis considers how language is used in social and cultural contexts by examining the relationship between written and spoken words. Discourse analysis aims to understand how and why people use language to achieve the desired effect. The discursive method explores the construction of meanings in human communication by offering a meaningful interpretation of messages to enhance purposeful communication. Gale ( 2010 ) says that meaning is constructed moment by moment. Garfinkel ( 1967 ) explains this construction as the common-sense actions of ordinary people based on their practical considerations and judgments of what they feel are intelligible and accountable to others. According to Keller ( 2011 ), a peoples’ sense of reality combines their routinized interactions and the meanings they attach to objects, actions, and events. It is in this understanding of the natural use of language that some barriers to effective cross-cultural communication can be reduced.

Messages may assume different meanings in different situations for other people. These meanings affect social interactions. They either encourage or discourage further human communication. As Katz ( 1959 ) has written, interpersonal relationships influence communication. To make meaning out of messages and improve human relationships, it is necessary to understand that content and context may not represent the same thing to people in different situations. Waever ( 2004 , p. 198) states that “things do not have meaning in and of themselves, they only become meaningful in discourse.” Since people’s perspectives are different, it becomes extremely difficult to form a rigid basis on specific ideas. Ideas are discussed on their merits. Discursive analysis inspects the ways individuals construct events by evaluating language usage in writing, speech, conversation, or symbolic communication (Edwards, 1997 ; Harre and Gillet, 1994 ). Language is the carrier of culture. According to Van Dijk ( 1995 , p. 12), this approach is used to study descriptive, explanatory, and practical issues in “the attempt to uncover, reveal or disclose what is implicit, hidden or otherwise not immediately obvious in relations of discursively enacted dominance or their underlying ideologies.” The media play fundamental roles in the processes of constructing or reconstructing reality. They can do these because of Aririguzoh’s ( 2004 ) observation that the press impacts the political and socio-cultural sub-systems.

Culture at the international galleries

The affairs of culture came into international prominence at the UNESCO’s World Conference on Cultural Policies held in Mexico in 1982. This conference gave a broad definition of culture to include “the whole complex of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional features that characterize a society or social group. It includes not only the arts and letters but also modes of life, the fundamental rights of the human being, value systems, traditions and beliefs” (UNESCO, 1982 , p. 1).

The United Nations World Commission on Culture and Development, led by J. Perez de Cuellar, published our Creative Diversity’s Landmark Report (UNESCO, 1995 ). This report points out the great importance of incorporating culture into development. Although the Commission recognizes cultural diversities, it sees them as the actual vehicles driving creativity and innovation. During the World Decade on Culture and Development (1988–1998), UNESCO stepped up again to campaign for greater recognition of culture’s contribution to national and international development policies. In 1998, Stockholm hosted an Inter-governmental Conference on Cultural Policies for Development. Its Action Plan on Cultural Policies for Development reaffirmed the correlation between culture and development (UNESCO, 1998 ). In 1999, UNESCO and the World Bank held the Inter-governmental Conference, Culture Counts , in Florence. Here, ‘cultural capital’ was emphasized as the tool for sustainable development and economic growth (UNESCO, 1999 ).

The United Nations General Assembly adopted the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document . Here, cultural diversity was explicitly admitted as a contributor to the enrichment of humankind. The United Nations General Assembly Resolutions on Culture and Development adopted in 2010 and 2011 (65/166 and 66/208) recognize culture as an “essential component of human development” and “an important factor in the fight against poverty, providing for economic growth and ownership of the development processes.” These resolutions called for the mainstreaming of culture into development policies at all levels. The UN System Task Team on the Post 2015 Development Agenda issued a report, Realizing the Future We Want for All ( 2012 , p. ii), with a direct charge that culture has a clear role to play in the “transformative change needed for a rights-based, equitable and sustainable process of global development.” Paragraph 71 of the report declares:

It is critical to promote equitable change that ensures people’s ability to choose their value systems in peace, thereby allowing for full participation and empowerment. Communities and individuals must be able to create and practice their own culture and enjoy that of others free from fear. This will require, inter alia, respect for cultural diversity, safeguarding cultural and natural heritage, fostering cultural institutions, strengthening cultural and creative industries, and promoting cultural tourism (p. 33).

In 2005, the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions member states agreed that cultural diversity “increases the range of choices and nurtures human capacities and values. Therefore, it is a mainspring for sustainable development for communities, peoples and nations” (UNESCO, 2005 , p. 1). The Convention reiterated the importance of the link between culture and development. UNESCO also steers an International Fund for Cultural Diversity to promote sustainable development and poverty reduction among the developing and least developed countries that are parties to the Convention.

UN Resolution 2347 of 2017 focuses exclusively on protecting cultural heritage and its necessity for peace and security. This Resolution brings a thorough awareness of culture’s role as a source of stability, inclusion, driver of reconciliation, and resilience. This Resolution reinforces Resolution 2199, adopted in February 2015, partly to fight against international terrorism financing and prohibit the illicit trafficking of cultural goods from Iraq and Syria.

Communication processes for overcoming difficulties in cross-cultural communication

The primary risk in cross-cultural communication is distortion, which creates misunderstanding or even misrepresentation of the conveyed information. Baumgratz ( 1990 , pp. 161–168) shares the opinion that relevant cultural dimensions of what he calls a social communication situation should be mapped out for individuals or groups who are from different nations or cultural origins but who have realized the need to contribute to the achievement of social, institutional, organizational, group, and personal aims. The tactics to overcome difficulties in cross-cultural communication lie in the communication processes. Any of the steps can become a barrier since culture influences the behaviour of both senders and receivers of messages. Barriers impede communication by distorting, blocking, or creating misunderstandings. Hence, it is necessary to create an enabling environment that will make communicating easier. Each of the communication steps can be strategized to enhance communication.

He is the source or initiator of the message. He can be a person or an organization. If the sender is a person, Malec ( 2018 ) refers to him as the carrier of intangible culture and the creator of the tangible ones. Messages are conveyed through spoken or written words. Nevertheless, messages can also be non-verbal. The encoding includes selecting words, symbols, or gestures in composing a message. The sender should encrypt, transfer meaning, or package his messages in ways that the receivers can access them. He should use symbols that the receiver would comprehend. The first thing he should do is use a language that his receiver understands. For example, it is useless to send a message written in English to another person who only understands French. Not only is the effort wasted, but it might also generate hostility. In Nigeria, Mexican soaps are freely watched. However, their producers avoided the obvious language challenge by dubbing in English voice-overs.

Words mean different things in different languages. For example, a British boss would answer yes to a question. However, his American subordinate would answer, yeah . The boss would think that he is disrespectful and impolite. Meanwhile, the American employee would be bewildered by the boss’s apparent coldness. British people use words that have different meanings from their American counterparts. For example, the word, pant , means underwear to a Briton but a pair of trousers to an American. The Englishman may still run into trouble with other nationals because his words have different meanings to these listeners. For example, the English phrase fart means a different thing among the Danish. For them, the word means speed ! The English word gift means poison in German. If an Englishman calls somebody a brat , his Russian friend will conclude that he is calling him his brother , which is what the word means in his language. Igbo children of south-eastern Nigeria call the hawk leke . But for the Yorubas in the southwest, this is the name given to a male child.

The sender, too, must know that even body language may mean different things. He should not assume that non-verbal messages mean the same in every part of the world. In Japan, nodding the head up and down means disagreement. In Nigeria, it means the opposite. Even though his own culture invariably influences the message’s sender, he should understand that his message is intended for a cross-cultural audience. He must also realize that the contents are no longer meant for ethnic communities defined by geographical locations but for an audience connected by frequent interactions that are not necessarily in the same physical place. A message sender that values esprit de corps will incorporate this into his messages by telling them that the laurel does not go to any person in particular but to the winning team. He thus encourages everybody to join in to win, not as individuals but as members of a group. If he is high on doubt avoidance, he makes his messages very direct and unambiguous and leaves no room for misinterpretation. However, a male sender who wants to assert his masculinity may wish to sound harsh. The sender who regularly attends church services may unconsciously put some words of Scripture in his messages because of his exogenic roots. The sender with monochronic orientation will send one message and expect the task to be completed as scheduled. His linear cultural background will be offended if the result is the contrary. Similarly, the sender who places a high value on rules and regulations would send messages of punishment to those who break them but reward those who keep them without minding his relationships with them. An effective sender of messages to a cross-cultural society should state his ideas clearly, offer explanations when needed, or even repeat the whole communication process if he does not get the appropriate feedback.

This is the information content the sender wants to share with his receivers. These include stories, pictures, or advertisements. He should carefully avoid lurid and offensive content. A French man may see nothing wrong in his wife wearing a very skimpy bikini and other men ogling at her at a public beach. His counterpart from Saudi Arabia will be upset if other men leer at his wife. In addition, the wife would be sanctioned for dressing improperly and appearing in public. If a person has a message to share with others from a different cultural background, he should be careful. His listeners may not isolate his statement as being distinct from his personality.

Societies with high context culture usually consider the messages they send or receive before interpreting them. Messages are hardly delivered straightforwardly. The message is in the associated meanings attached to the pictures and symbols. Thus, those outside that community find it very difficult to understand the meaning of the messages. In low-context communication, the message is the information in words. The words mean what they say. However, a corporate sender of messages, for example, the head of the Human Resources Department of a multi-cultural company interested in building team spirit, may organize informal chit-chats and get-togethers to break the proverbial ice as well as create a convivial atmosphere where people can relate. The message he is passing across is simple: let colleagues relax, relate, and work together as team members irrespective of where they come from. All of these are communicative actions.

The channel’s work is to provide a passage for the sender to guide his message to the receiver. While face-to-face communication is ideal for intimate and close group conversations, it is impossible to talk to everybody simultaneously. Different channels of passing across the same message may be used. For example, the same message may be passed through radio, adapted for television, put online, or printed in newsletters, newspapers, and magazines. The hope is that people who missed the message on one channel may see it on another somewhere else. A pronounced media culture will hasten cross-cultural communication. Many people consume media content. However, these consumers are expected to be media literates. Aririguzoh ( 2007 , p. 144) writes that:

media literacy is the systematic study of the media and their operations in our socio-political systems as well as their contributions to the development and maintenance of culture. It is the information and communication skill that is needed to make citizens more competent. It is the ability to read what the print media offer, see what the visual media present, and hear what the aural media announce. It is a response to the changing nature of information in our modern society.

Official messages should be passed through defined routes and are best written. This would close avenues of possible denials by others if the same message were passed across verbally. It could be difficult to misinterpret the contents of a written document. Written documents have archival values. As much as possible, rumours should be stamped out. A good manager should single out regular gossips in a multi-cultural organization for special attention. Equally, an effective manager heading widely dispersed employees can co-ordinate their activities using communication technologies with teleconferencing features. Aririguzoh ( 2007 , p. 45) notes, “information and communication technologies have transformed the range and speed of dispersing information and of communicating. Today, the whole world lies a click away!”

The media of communication are shaped by the culture of the people who produce them. What they carry as contents and the form they assume are defined by the culture of the sender. In low-context societies, it is common for messages to be written. In high context societies, it is common for statements to be verbal. Importantly, Aririguzoh ( 2013 , pp. 119–120) points out that “… the mass media can effectively be deployed to provide pieces of information that enhance communication, build understanding and strengthen relationships in our rapidly changing environment dictated by the current pace of globalization. The mass media assiduously homogenize tastes, styles, and points of view among many consumers of its products across the globe. They have effectively helped in fading away national distinctions and growing mass uniformity as they create, distribute and transmit the same entertainment, news, and information to millions of people in different nations.”

The receiver is the person the sender directs his message to. In a workplace, the receiver needs the message or information to do his job. The receiver decodes or tries to understand the meaning of the sender’s message by breaking it down into symbols to give the proper feedback. If the message is verbal, the receiver has to listen actively. The message receiver must understand a message based on his existing orientations shaped by his own culture. Even the messages that he picks are selected to conform to his existing preconceptions.

Oyserman et al. ( 2002 ) make an interesting discovery: that receivers from different cultures interpret the message senders’ mannerisms. For an American, a speaker talking very quickly is seen as telling the uncensored truth. In other words, the speaker who talks too slowly implicates himself as a liar! However, for the Koreans, slow speech denotes careful consideration of others. In some cultures, particularly in Asia, the receiver is responsible for effective communication. Kobayashi and Noguchi ( 2001 ) claim that he must become an expert at “understanding without words.” Miyahara ( 2004 , p. 286) emphasizes that even children literarily learn to read other people’s minds by evaluating the subtle cues in their messages and then improvising to display the expected and appropriate social behaviour and communication. Gestures involve the movements of the hands and head of the sender. The receiver clearly understands these body movements. As painted by Sapir ( 1927 , p. 556), “we respond to gestures with an extreme alertness and, one might almost say, in accordance with an elaborate and secret code that is written nowhere, known by none, and understood by all.”

Receivers who value individualism appreciate personal freedom, believe that they can make their own decisions, and respect their performance. Those who prefer communitarianism would prefer group applause and loyalty. A monochromatic receiver would start and finish a task before starting another one. He would be offended when colleagues do not meet deadlines, are late to appointments, and do not keep rigid schedules. His co-worker, who synchronizes his time, develops a flexible working schedule to work at two or more tasks.

This is the final process. Ordinarily, the sender wants a response to determine if the message he sent out has been received and understood. Acknowledging a message does not indicate a clear understanding of its contents. Feedback can be positive or negative. Positive feedback arises when the receiver interprets the message correctly and does what the sender wants. Negative feedback comes when messages are incorrectly interpreted, and the receiver does not do what the sender of the information has intended him to do. Cross-cultural communication recognizes that people come from different backgrounds. Therefore, feedback on diverse messages would be different. A sensitive communicator would be careful how he designs his messages for a heterogeneous audience so that he can elicit the desired feedback.

It must be emphasized that no culture is superior to another as each culture meets the needs of those who subscribe to it. To a large extent, our culture influences our behaviours and expectations from other people. Although there are noticeable similarities and differences, what separates one culture from another is its emphasis on specific values. As the United Nations has affirmed, there is diversity in cultures. These diversities add colour and meaning to human existence. This suggests that particular policies should be carved out to attend to specific locations and supports Satterthwaite’s ( 2014 ) proposition that local actors should be empowered to help achieve the SDGs. What the local populace in one community may appreciate may be frowned upon and even be fought against by residents in another place. As Hossain and Ali ( 2014 ) point out, individuals constitute the societies where they live and work. While Bevir ( 1996 ) describes this relationship as that of mutual dependence, he recognizes that people are influenced by their particular social structures and therefore do not go against them. Bevir believes that social systems exist for individuals.

Societies are built on shared values, norms and beliefs. These, in turn, have profound effects on individuals. Society’s culture affects individuals while the individuals create and shape the society, including initiating sustainable development. Development rests on the shoulders of men. Thus, culture influences the ways individuals behave and communicate. The effective communicator must actively recognize these elements and work them into communication practices. As Renn et al. ( 1997 , p. 218) point out, “sustainable practices can be initiated or encouraged by governmental regulation and economic incentives. A major element to promote sustainability will be, however, the exploration and organization of discursive processes between and among different actors.”

To achieve the United Nations sustainable goals, the competent communicator has to recognize that the culture of the actors in a communication process is the basic foundation for effective communication. For example, while one individual may discuss issues face-to-face and is not afraid to express his feelings candidly, another person may not be so direct. He may even involve third parties to mediate in solving a problem. Either way, their approaches are defined by their cultural backgrounds. It may be counterproductive to assume that either of these approaches is the best. This assertion is supported by the study of Stanton ( 2020 ), who explored intercultural communication between African American managers and Hispanic workers who speak English as a second language. He finds managers that follow culturally sensitive communication strategies getting more work done. Cartwright ( 2020 ) also observes that intercultural competence and recognition of cultural differences in East and Central Europe are foundation pillars for business success. This lends credence to Ruben and Gigliotti ( 2016 ) observation that communication with people from different cultures reduces the barriers associated with intercultural communication and enhances the communication process.

Irrespective of our ethnicities, people want to communicate, understand, appreciate, and be respected by others. Effective communication is the foundation of good human relationships among team members, whether their cultural backgrounds differ or not. Good feedback is achieved when both the sender and receiver of messages create common meanings. This is what discourse is all about. Messages must be meaningful, meaningfully constructed and meaningfully interpreted. Georgiou ( 2011 ) labels this the communicative competence : acknowledgement of the intercultural dimension of foreign language education and successful intercultural interactions that assume non-prejudiced attitudes, tolerance and understanding of other cultures, and cultural self-awareness of the person communicating. An efficient communicator must understand that culture shapes people, and the people then shape society. In other words, communication shapes the world. Therefore, appropriately chosen communication strategies help blend the different cultures.

According to Bokova ( 2013 ), there is “renewed aspirations for equality and respect, for tolerance and mutual understanding, especially between peoples of different cultures.” This means that if all parties respect other team members’ cultures, a clement work environment is inevitable. Cultural literacy creates more tolerant and peaceful work environments. Achieving this starts with a re-examination of the whole communication process. The crux of cross-cultural communication is developing effective ways to appreciate the culture of others involved in the acts of communication. Understanding these differences provides the context for an enhanced understanding of the values and behaviours of others. Reconciling these differences confers competitive advantages to those who communicate effectively. The media must provide the links between senders and receivers of messages in the context of their socio-cultural environments.

The United Nations appreciates the distinctiveness in cultures and has incorporated it as a significant factor in achieving sustainable development goals. This global body has produced different documents championing this. Every development takes place in an environment of culture. The heart of sustainable development is the man. The SDGs will be more meaningful and easily achievable by recognizing that actions should be both locally and culturally relevant. Cultural differences can be effectively managed if senders and receivers of messages understand that culture shapes how people communicate and, by extension, the relationship with other people who may not necessarily be from their tribal communities. Breaking down the barriers to cross-cultural communication lies in understanding these distinct differences and consciously incorporating them into the communication processes to enhance communication competencies.

Data availability

All data analysed are contained in the paper.

Adler N (1991). International dimensions of organizational behavior, 2nd edn. Pws-Kent Publishing Company

Aririguzoh S (2004) How the press impinges on the political and socio-cultural sub-systems. Nsukka J Humanit 14:137–147. http://www.unnfacultyofarts.com/download.php?download_file=UFAJH192.pdf

Aririguzoh S (2007) Media literacy and the role of English language in Nigeria. Int J Commun 6:144–160

Google Scholar  

Aririguzoh S (2013) Human integration in globalization: the communication imperative. Niger J Soc Sci 9(2):118–141

Barth F (1969) Introduction. In: Barth F (ed.) Ethnic groups and boundaries: the social organization of culture difference. Little, Brown & Company, pp. 9–30

Baumeister R, Wilson B (1996) Life stories and the four needs for meaning. Psychol Inq 7(4):322–325

Article   Google Scholar  

Baumgratz G (1990) Personlichkeitsentwicklung und Fremdsprachenerwerb. Transnationale Kommunikationsfthigkeit im Franzosischunterricht (Personality development and foreign language acquisition: transnational communication skills in French lessons). Schoningh

Berger P, Luckmann T (1966) The social construction of reality: a treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Penguin Books Ltd

Berger P, Luckmann T (1991) The social construction of reality. Penguin Books.

Bevir M (1996) The individual and society. Political Stud 44(1):102–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00759.x

Bokova I (2013) The power of culture for development. http://en.unesco.org/post2015/sites/post2015/files/The%20Power%20of%20e%20fCulturor%20Development.pdf

Bokova I (2010) 2010 International year for the rapprochement of culture: message from Irina Bokova, Director-General of UNESCO https://www.un.org/en/events/iyrc2010/message.shtml

Burr V (2006) An introduction to social constructionism. Routledge, Taylor & Francis e-Library

Cartwright CT (2020) Understanding global leadership in eastern and central Europe: the impacts of culture and intercultural competence. In: Warter I, Warter L (eds.) Understanding national culture and ethics in organisations. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 63–74

Causadias JM (2020) What is culture? Systems of people, places, and practices. Appl Dev Sci24(4):310–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2020.1789360

Comaroff J, Comaroff J (2009) Ethnicity , inc. University of Chicago Press

De Beukelaer C, Freita R (2015) Culture and sustainable development: beyond the diversity of cultural expressions. In: De Beukelaer C, Pyykkönen MI, Singh JP (eds.) Globalization, culture, and development: the UNESCO convention on cultural diversity. Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 203–221

Dessein J, Soini K, Fairclough G, Horlings L (2015) Culture in, for and as sustainable development. Conclusions of COST ACTION IS1007 investigating cultural sustainability. European Cooperation in Science and Technology, University of Jyvaskyla https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3380.7844

Edwards D (1997) Discourse and cognition. Sage

Field L (2008) Abalone tales: Collaborative explorations of sovereignty and identity in native California. Duke University Press Books

Foucault M (1971). The order of discourse. In: Young R (ed.) Untying the text: a post-structuralist reader. Routledge and Kegan Paul Limited

Gale J (2010) Discursive analysis: a research approach for studying the moment-to-moment construction of meaning in systemic practice. Hum Syst21(2):7–37

García-Carbonell A, Rising B (2006) Culture and communication. College of Management Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, pp. 23–40

Garfinkel H (1967) Studies in ethnomethodology. Prentice-Hall

Geertz C (1973) The interpretation of cultures. Basic Books

Georgiou M (2011) Intercultural competence in foreign language teaching and learning: action inquiry in a Cypriot tertiary institution. Doctoral Thesis, University of Nottingham

Guiso L, Paola S, Luigi Z (2006) Does culture affect economic outcomes?. J Econ Perspect20(2):23–48. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.20.2.23

Gumperz JJ (2001) Interactional sociolinguistics: a personal perspective. In: Schiffrin D, Tannen D, Hamilton HE (eds.) The handbook of discourse analysis. Blackwell Publishers Ltd., pp. 215–228

Hall E (1976) Beyond culture. Doubleday

Hall E (1983) The dance of life: the other dimension of time. Doubleday

Harre R, Gillet G (1994) The discursive mind. Sage

Heckler S (2014) On the importance of culture in sustainable development. In Sillitoe P (ed.) Sustainable development: an appraisal from the Gulf region. Berghahn Books, pp. 436–459

Hirsch ED (1987) Cultural literacy: what every American needs to know. Houghton Mifflin

Hofstede G (2001) Culture’s consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA

Hofstede G (1980) Culture’s consequences: international differences in work-related values. Sage

Hofstede G (1998) Masculinity and femininity: the taboo dimension of national cultures. Sage

Hofstede G (2005) Cross-cultural communication. http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Cross-cultural_communication

Hofstede G, Bond MH (1988) The Confucius connection: from cultural roots to economic growth. Organ Dyn 16(4):4–21. http://www.clearlycultural.com/geert-hofstede-culturaldimensions/masculinity/

Holmes P (2017) Intercultural communication in the global workplace, critical approaches. Critical intercultural communication theories, issues, and concepts. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783665.ieicc0051

Hosagrahar J (2017) Culture: at the heart of SDGs. The UNESCO Courier, 1 (April–June). https://en.unesco.org/courier/april-june-2017/culture-heart-sdgs

Hossain FMA, Ali MK (2014) Relation between individual and society. Open J Soc Sci 2:130–137. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2014.28019

Jenkins R (2014). Social identity. Routledge

Kamalu I, Osisanwo A (2015) Discourse analysis. In: Kamalu I, Tamunobelema I (eds.) Issues in the study of language and literature: theory and practice. Kraft Books, pp. 169–195

Kangas A, Duxbury N, De Beukelaer C (2017) Introduction: cultural policies for sustainable development. Int J Cult Policy 23(2):129–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286632.2017.1280790

Katz E (1959) Mass communications research and popular culture. Stud Public Commun 2:10–19

Keller R (2011) The sociology of knowledge approach to discourse (SKAD). Hum Stud 34(1):43–65

Kobayashi Y, Noguchi Y (2001) Consumer insight, brand insight, and implicit communication: successful communication planning cases in Japan. In Roberts M, King R (eds.) The Proceedings of the 2001 special Asia-Pacific conference of the American Academy of Advertising. pp. 29–40

Kurylo A (2013) Inter/Cultural communication: representation and construction of culture. Sage Publications, Inc.

Levitt T (1983, May) The globalization of markets. Harv Bus Rev 92–102

Malec TE (2018) Introduction to theory of culture-related spatial development. Cogent Arts Humanit 1557583. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2018.1557583

Martinovski B (2018) A model of culture-based communication. In: Faucher C (ed.) Advances in culturally-aware intelligent systems and in cross-cultural psychological studies. Intelligent Systems Reference Library, vol 134. Springer, Cham, pp. 335–350

Merkin RS (2017) Cross-cultural communication theory and research overview. In: The international encyclopedia of intercultural communication. John Wiley & Sons, pp. 1–10

Miyahara A (2004) Toward theorizing Japanese interpersonal communication competence from a non-western perspective. In: Jandt FE (Ed.) Cross-cultural communication. Sage, pp. 279–292

Monaghan L (2020) Intercultural communication: teaching nonverbal communication. In: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Monaghan L (ed.) The international encyclopedia of linguistic anthropology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. pp. 1–6

Ohmae K (1999) The borderless world. Harper Business.

Oyserman D, Coon H, Kemmelmeier M (2002) Rethinking individualism and collectivism: evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychol Bull 128:3–72

Pinker S (2002) The blank slate: the modern denial of human nature. Penguin Books

Rachlinski JJ (2021) What is cultural cognition, and why does it matter? Annu Rev Law Soc Sci17(1):277–291. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-011921-060754

Renn O, Blattel-Mink B, Kastenholz H (1997) Discursive methods in environmental decision making. Bus Strategy Environ 6:218–231

Ruane J, Todd J (2004) The roots of intense ethnic conflict may not in fact be ethnic: categories, communities and path dependence. Eur J Sociol 45(2):209–232

Ruben BD, Gigliotti RA (2016) Leadership as social influence: an expanded view of leadership communication theory and practice. J Leadersh Organ Stud 23:467–479. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051816641876

Samovar LA, Porter RE, McDaniel ER (2012) Intercultural communication: a reader. Wadsworth Cengage Learning

Sapir E (1927) The unconscious patterning of behavior in society. In: Mandelbaum D (ed.) Selected writings of Edward Sapir. University of California Press, pp. 544–559

Sapir E (1956) Selected writings in language, culture and personality. University of California Press

Satterthwaite D (2014) Guiding the goals: empowering local actors. SAIS Rev 34(2):51–61. https://doi.org/10.1353/sais.2014.0025

Scheler M (1960) Die Wissensformen und die Gesellschaft. The forms of knowledge and society. A. Francke AG

Seymour J (2007) Culture does matter. Relig Educ 102(2):105–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/00344080701285147

Stanton RA (2020) Intercultural communication between African American managers and Hispanic workers with ESL. Doctoral Dissertation, Walden University

Tannen D (1985) Cross-cultural communication. In: Adrianus van Dijk T (ed.) Handbook of discourse analysis , vol 4. Academic Press, pp. 203–215

Trompenaars F, Hampden-Turner C (1997) Riding the waves of culture. Nicolas Brealey

UNESCO (2017) UNESCO moving forward the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development https://en.unesco.org/creativity/sites/creativity/files/247785en.pdf

UNESCO (2013) Communication & development, No. 9. Regional Office for Culture in Latin America and the Caribbean, Havana, Cuba

UNESCO (2013a). Activity report 2012 – 2013 . Regional Office for culture in Latin America and the Caribbean, Havana

UNESCO (1999) Proceedings of the seminar measuring culture and development: prospects and limits of constructing cultural indicators. In: Culture counts conference organized by the World Bank and the government of Italy in co-operation with UNESCO, Florence, Italy, 4–7 October. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0011/001191/119138eo.pdf

UNESCO (1998) Action plan on cultural policies for development adopted in by the Intergovernmental Conference on Cultural Policies for Development, Stockholm, Sweden, 2 April. http://www.unesco.org/cpp/uk/declarations/cultural.pdf

UNESCO (1995) Our creative diversity: report of the world commission for culture and development. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001429/142919e.pdf

UNESCO (1982) Mexico city declaration on cultural policies. World conference on cultural policies. UNESCO, Mexico City, Paris, 26 July–6 August

UNESCO (2005) The convention on the protection and promotion of the diversity of cultural expressions https://en.unesco.org/creativity/convention

United Nations (2012) Realizing the future we want for all: report to the secretary-general. www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pdf/Post_2015_UNTTreport.pdf

United Nations (2015) Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development http://www.unesco.org/new/en/brasilia/culture/culture-and-development/culture-in-sustainable-development/

Vaknin S (2005) The classification of cultures. http://samvak.tripod.com/class.html .

Van Dijk TA (1995) Aims of critical discourse analysis. Jpn Discourse 1:17–27

Vassiliou V, Triandis H, Vassiliou G, McGuire H (1972) Interpersonal contact and stereotyping. In Triandis H (ed.) The analysis of subjective culture. Wiley, pp. 89–115

Waever O (2004) Discursive approaches. In: Wiener A, Diez T (eds.) European integration theory. Oxford University Press, pp. 197–215

Yeung I, Tung R (1996) Achieving business success in Confucian societies: the importance of guanxi (Connections). Organ Dyn 25(2):54–65

Young R, Collin A (2004) Introduction: constructivism and social constructionism in the career field. J Vocat Behav 64(3):373–388

Zhu H (2016) Research methods in intercultural communication: a practical guide. Routledge

Download references

Acknowledgements

I acknowledge: Dr. Emmanuel Mogaji of Greenwich University for reading and pointing out helpful corrections; Professors Innocent Chiluwa, Abiodun Gesinde, David Imhonopi and Dr Evaristus Adesina of Covenant University, who went through the manuscript, suggested corrections and encouraged me not to give upe and my daughter, Victoria-Grace Onyekachi Miracle Aririguzoh, who proofread this manuscript and brought in sunshine when the clouds were grey.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Mass Communication, Covenant University, Ota, Nigeria

Stella Aririguzoh

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stella Aririguzoh .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The author declares no competing interests.

Ethical approval

There was no ethical approval or informed consent approval sought as neither applies to this paper.

Informed consent

This article does not have human participants.

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 license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license 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 license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Aririguzoh, S. Communication competencies, culture and SDGs: effective processes to cross-cultural communication. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 9 , 96 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01109-4

Download citation

Received : 28 May 2021

Accepted : 14 February 2022

Published : 23 March 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01109-4

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

This article is cited by

Cultural competence in the nursing, dentistry, and medicine professional curricula: a qualitative review.

• Maura Klenner
• Rodrigo Mariño
• Carlos Zaror

BMC Medical Education (2022)

Quick links

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

Navigating Cultural Differences: The Art of Intercultural Communication

Intercultural communication is the art of understanding and navigating cultural differences in communication styles. In today's globalized world, it's more important than ever to be able to effectively communicate across cultures. But with so many different cultural backgrounds, communication styles, and expectations, it can be a challenge to bridge the gap.

The first step to improving your intercultural communication skills is to understand and appreciate the cultural differences that exist. This means recognizing that different cultures have different communication styles, preferences, and expectations. For example, in some cultures, direct communication is valued, while in others, indirect communication is preferred.

Once you understand these differences, you can start to adapt your communication style to better suit the needs of the other culture. This may mean using different language or communication methods, or adjusting your tone and body language to be more in line with cultural norms.

It's also important to be mindful of your own cultural biases and assumptions. We all have our own cultural lenses through which we see the world, and it's easy to assume that our way of doing things is the "right" way. But by being open-minded and willing to learn from other cultures, we can expand our perspectives and become more culturally sensitive communicators.

Another key component of intercultural communication is active listening. This means not only hearing what the other person is saying, but also taking the time to understand their perspective and point of view. This can be particularly challenging when there are language barriers or when the cultural differences are particularly stark, but it's essential to effective communication.

Finally, remember that intercultural communication is a two-way street. Just as you need to adapt your communication style to better suit the needs of the other culture, they also need to adapt to yours. By working together and being open to different perspectives and approaches, you can bridge the gap and create more inclusive and effective communication.

In conclusion, intercultural communication is essential for effective communication across diverse cultures. By understanding and appreciating cultural differences, adapting your communication style, being mindful of your own biases, actively listening, and working together, you can improve your intercultural communication skills and become a more culturally sensitive communicator.

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Acquisition
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Religion
• Music and Media
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Strategy
• Business Ethics
• Business History
• Business and Government
• Business and Technology
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic Systems
• Economic History
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Administration
• Public Policy
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

16 Culture and Communication

Suraj Sharma, Postdoctoral Fellow, California State University, Northridge, USA

Leigh Anne Liu, Professor and Director of the Institute of International Business, Georgia State University, USA

• Published: 23 January 2024
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

Human cultural values and norms are developed and maintained through communication between and within individuals and between and within groups. The relationship between culture and communication is complex and challenging to study. On one hand, communication is the carrier of human interaction and culture, as values and norms are shared among its members through communication. On the other hand, culture may dictate how we communicate, since values and norms may prescribe our thinking and communication styles. In this chapter, we review the extant literature on culture and communication and explore how they influence and coevolve over time. We then propose new directions of research with theoretical and practical implications.

It is extraordinary the way people, music and cultures develop. The paths and experiences that guide them are unpredictable. Shaped by our families, neighborhoods, cultures and countries, each of us ultimately goes through this process of incorporating what we learn with who we are and who we seek to become. As we struggle to find our individual voices, I believe we must look beyond the voice we’ve been assigned and find our place among the tones and timbre of human expression. —Yo-Yo Ma

This quote by Yo-Yo Ma illustrates the ever-complex dynamics between culture and communication within individuals, interpersonally, and across social groups. The relationship between culture and communication is a compelling part of social life that infiltrates every aspect of our being. Although it is challenging to disentangle the interactions between culture and communication, we explore these mechanisms in the literature in order to offer insights to advance the field forward. In this chapter, we first analyze the literature on culture and communication from two perspectives: how culture affects communication and how communication affects culture. We then offer ideas on future research, before summarizing the takeaways of this chapter.

The evolution of culture phenomenology in communication research.

How Culture Affects Communication

Research on how culture influences communication has evolved from simple comparisons of two cultural styles in communication (e.g., Hall, 1959 , 1976 ) to a more sophisticated treatment of dynamic interactions among intra- versus intercultural interactions in various settings (e.g., Adair et al., 2015 ; Liu et al., 2010 ). Figure 16.1 depicts the progression of the role culture plays in communication research, evolving from static, negative barriers to be overcome in communication to dynamic processes to be understood and to potentially positive and multiple levels of influence on communication. Although the purpose of communication is to understand and be understood, earlier studies on culture and communication necessarily focused on deciphering the differences across cultures.

Cultural Differences as Barriers of Communication

The first stage of culture and communication research started with Edward Hall’s ( 1959 , 1976 ) anthropology work on culture, perception of time and space, and high- or low-context communication styles. Hall explains that members of different cultures vary in their orientations toward time. Some focus on the past, whereas others anchor communications on the present or future. Regarding perception of space, proxemics suggests that comfortable personal space differs across cultures. Hall also described that members of high-context cultures communicate with implicit and indirect messages that heavily emphasize the situation for interpretation while those in low-context cultures communicate with direct and explicit messages that are less sensitive to the specific situation.

Another early theoretical foundation of cultural differences was holistic versus analytical thinking styles. Holistic thinking style, on the one hand, refers to a systematic consideration of both internal attributes and external situations, as well as overall patterns, contexts, and relationships. Analytical thinking style, on the other hand, is characterized by focusing on ascribed factors and disentangling internal and external elements in phenomena ( Nisbett, 2003 ; Nisbett et al., 2001 ). A case in point can be found in the different approaches of Eastern and Western medicine. For example, when a person has stomach issues, Eastern medicine addresses the cause holistically and may view it as an imbalance of the person’s energy and will use experience-based treatments, such as acupuncture, which aim to rebalance these energies. The Western approach to the same problem would be a much more focused analysis of the stomach and use of treatments consistent with an empirically backed, scientific lens with stomach-specific medications or surgery. Applied to communication situations, Kim (2002) examined the relationships between talking and thinking among European Americans and East Asians and found that “thinking out loud” or talking helps European Americans resolve reasoning problems but doesn’t necessarily make East Asians better problem solvers. These examples highlight the effects of culture on cognitive reasoning, which then subsequently affect individuals from these culture’s communicative processes. These kinds of fundamental differences between cultures have become sources of miscommunication and misunderstanding, which are reflected in the studies of how culture influences communication at this stage.

Scholars focused on the subjective perceptions of cultural differences, which were then assumed to be negative barriers to effective communication. For example, Adler and Graham (1989) found that American, Canadian, and Japanese individuals differ when they are facing challenges of language, nonverbal behaviors, values, and patterns of thought while communicating with each other. They noted that American negotiators behave similarly regardless of whether the opponents were Japanese or American, while Japanese negotiators seem to be more tuned in to changing contexts, and thus adjust their behaviors accordingly. Similarly, Brett and Okumura (1998) found that intercultural negotiators achieve fewer desirable outcomes than intracultural negotiators, possibly because intercultural dyads encounter more difficulties to cooperation ( Matsumoto & Hwang, 2011 ; Tse et al., 1994 ). Based on an ethnographic study in global teams, Hinds et al. (2014) found that, as an important proxy of culture, language, especially language asymmetry in global teams, amplified power differences and geographic distribution among team members and triggered negative tensions. Therefore, cultural differences were viewed as a barrier due to challenges associated with decoding language, nonverbal cues, and/or intentions of cooperation.

Research on cultural values also offered implications for communication. For example, collectivism might influence how collaborative a communicator is and how likely one is to share information with others ( Cai et al., 2000 ). Cultural norms of implicit rules and guidelines may also predict tactics and strategies for interactions. For example, Adair et al. (2001) found that Japanese negotiators use positional strategies, such as pointing out limitations of alternatives to engage and influence their counterparts, while U.S. negotiators use more direct strategies to share information. Face negotiation theory ( Oetzel & Ting-Toomey, 2003 ; Ting-Toomey & Dorjee, 2018 ; Zhang et al., 2019 ) links individual identity, relationship with others, and conflict management styles to propose different patterns of communication, depending on the need to defend, protect, or accommodate one’s own and the other party’s face, or socially embedded identity. Consequently, individuals need to adjust their communicating behaviors in order to be more effective in intercultural interactions (e.g., Adair et al., 2001 ; Kim, 1988 ; Weiss, 1994 ). In sum, studies in this stage focused on cultural comparisons in communication and have generally found relatively stable and static cultural influences on communication ( Oyserman et al., 2002 ; Morling & Lamoreaux, 2008 ).

Culture as a Dynamic Process in Communication

In the second stage of culture and communication research, researchers started to look beyond values or simplified norms to study how internalized norms ( Liu, Friedman, & Chi, 2005 ; Brett et al., 2007 ), experience and cognitive mental networks (Liu et al., 2010 , 2012 ), and motivations ( De Drue & Carnevale, 2003 ; Liu et al., 2012 ) influenced patterns of communication and interpersonal dynamics. These communication patterns and dynamics include temporal sequences ( Adair & Brett, 2005 ), consensus building ( Liu et al., 2012 ), multiparty communication ( Adair & Liu, 2011 ), social distance bridging ( Kern et al., 2012 ), information exchange strategies ( Gunia et al., 2011 ), and nonverbal communication ( Semnani-Azad & Adair, 2011 ). These studies began to treat the phenomenology of culture as a dynamic and contextualized process , considering multiple interaction effects among culture, motivations, and behaviors. A few studies used culture priming, or situational variation and flexibility ( Trafimow, Triandis, & Goto, 1991 , Brewer & Gardner, 1996 ; Hong et al., 2000 ; Oyserman et al., 2009 ; Oyserman & Lee, 2008 ), to explore the dynamic and contextualized nature of culture and cultural cognitive frames. One of the most notable examples is Hong et al.’s (2000) dynamic constructivist view of cultural influence in which individual interpretation of the meaning of a message flexibly depends on the variation of the context or situation. The same person may interpret a message in culturally different ways if they are primed by a typical American or Chinese cultural image.

Following the dynamic constructivist view of cultural influence on behavior, this group of studies found that depending on individual attributes (e.g., cognitive or social motivations) or situational factors (e.g., inter- or intracultural partners), how individuals communicate to reach agreements takes different patterns ( Liu et al., 2012 ). In intracultural situations, reaching consensus is a necessary pathway for joint gains in two-party negotiations, while in intercultural negotiations, individual cognitive adaptation has a stronger effect on joint gains ( Liu et al., 2012 ). Similarly, Adair and Liu (2011) suggested that in multiparty communication, the consensus-building process evolves through phases of information accumulation, examination, and accommodation, depending on cultural heterogeneity, group size, and individuals’ integrative and distributive mindsets.

To summarize, while the first stage of studies on culture and communication merely acknowledged the significance of negative contextual influence, this cluster of studies fully considered cultural influence on communication as situational, flexible, and varied, as evident in the multiple interaction patterns found in these papers. The next stage of research on culture’s influence of communication not only builds on the complexity of these relationships but also explores culture’s positive effects on individual communicators.

Culture’s Positive and Multiplicity Influence on Communication

In the most recent stage of culture and communication research, scholars continue to explore the multiplicity of culture and have so far discovered even more sophisticated mechanisms of culture’s influence on communication. For example, Imai and Gelfand (2010) examined cultural intelligence, the capability of knowing and behaving in culturally complex situations, in intra- and intercultural negotiations. The role of culture or cultural phenomenology in communication research has evolved from culture being treated as a barrier to be overcome by communicators to culture now offering opportunities for personal competency development and pluralistic influences (e.g., Liu & Adair, 2017 ; Liu et al., 2018 ). For example, Erez et al. (2013) found that communication in global virtual teams increased cultural intelligence and global identity over a 4-week time period and that these effects were retained 6 months later. Liu et al. (2013) suggested that multicultural experience and a communicator’s global identity versus local identity may also make a difference in the process and outcomes of interpersonal communication, especially while interacting with culturally different others. Specifically, they found that broad (but not deep) multicultural experience is associated with a higher degree of local identity, which can lead such individuals to achieve better outcomes in intracultural negotiations. On the other hand, deep, and both deep and broad multicultural experience is linked to higher global identity, which is beneficial for intercultural negotiations.

Adair et al. (2015) expanded the notions of high- and low-context communication by examining the patterns of communication tendencies with a more sophisticated study design and measures. They showed that understanding nonverbal cues in message, relationship, time, and space is especially beneficial for intercultural communications. In global virtual teams, Glikson and Erez (2020) investigated communication messages of participants and found that self-disclosure of relational messages, rather than task messages, helped create a psychologically safe communication climate for the team, which is positively related to team performance. By coding the content of early asynchronous text messages among members of 60 global virtual teams, Glikson and Erez (2020) linked communication to relationship building in intercultural settings. Their findings suggest that in virtual intercultural communications, where relationship building might be extra challenging, sharing relational messages at the beginning of interactions may be especially conducive for a positive communication climate and, ultimately, more productive team outcomes.

Researchers also examined the impact of communication media, such as email, on communication strategies and processes ( Rosett et al., 2011 ). Rosett and colleagues (2011) examined the emails of intra- and intercultural negotiations by Hong Kong Chinese and Americans. They found that in distributive situations, reduced social awareness by media may lead Hong Kong Chinese email negotiators to be more competitive than Americans and more effective than face-to-face situations. They concluded that culture’s nuanced influence on media use is of utter importance in the digital age.

Other studies explored the dynamics between specific communication properties, such as quality of communication experience in intra- versus intercultural contexts ( Liu et al., 2010 ). These authors found that quality of communication experience , measured by the degree of clarity, responsiveness, and comfort encountered by individuals, interacts with communication context in predicting outcomes. For example, in intercultural negotiations between Americans and Chinese, there was an asymmetrical experience between the two parties where Americans reported more comfort and Chinese reported more clarity. Although higher degrees of clarity, responsiveness, and comfort predicted better outcomes in all situations, the effects were much stronger in intercultural settings.

This group of studies has advanced from previous stages and has begun appreciating culture as a source of individual development, such as the potential for building cultural intelligence or multicultural experience. Cultural intelligence and multicultural experience are, in turn, constructive for communication outcomes, including producing a higher degree of satisfaction and creating both economic and subjective values. To summarize, although the research on culture’s influence on communication has evolved from simply mapping out cultural differences in behavioral patterns to a more sophisticated treatment of cultural influence with significant consideration of contextual factors, they remain fragmented, the studies are largely comparative, and as a result there is considerable potential for future research.

How Communication Affects Culture

While culture has clear impacts on the communication process and outcomes of participants involved, it is also reproduced, contested, and changed through the communicative events of the participants within a culture as well. In this sense, culture affects communication but is also affected and changed by communication, leading culture to be constantly evolving at various levels. For example, at the individual level, Lau, Chiu, and Lee (2001) proposed a reciprocal relationship between communication and shared reality in social knowledge and representation. Social knowledge and interpretation by communication partners evolve from a joint propagation of the communicative process and context. In other words, when individuals communicate, they simultaneously construct a common ground in their messages and responses through a psychologically parallel process.

Kashima (2000) reviewed and “recovered” legendary psychologist Fredric C. Bartlett’s metatheory of culture as a “universal configurationist,” treating culture as a configuration of universal components with culturally specific patterns and dynamic interactions within contexts. In other words, social interactions significantly affect culture. In this view, culture is and can be shaped and transmitted through communication within and between groups. Analyzing an example of a football player’s story in multiple communication chains, Lyons and Kashima (2001) described the process of how individual communication activities enforced stereotype-consistent storylines, which collectively produced meaning. This dynamic process of meaning production, reproduction, and convergence formed the foundation of culture as a meaning system. Kashima, Lyons, and Clark (2013) further demonstrated that interpersonal conversations are important venues that maintain cultural stereotypes. In two experiments, Kashima and colleagues found that although stereotype-inconsistent information may attract attention, stereotype-consistent information is more likely to be emphasized, narrated, and discussed. Together, Kashima and colleagues have expanded Bartlett’s metatheory of culture and offered specific empirical evidence on how communication affects cultural processes.

At a social collective level, Kashima and colleagues (2021) report that communication driven by political ideology entrenches and exacerbates polarization in societies through collective cognition. By examining political discourses through ideological commitment to an opinion, ideologically filtered interpretation, and communication in social networks, they found that polarizing opinions and interpretations are accelerated and amplified by communication and social networks, especially when disagreeable ties were cut off ( Kashima et al., 2021 ).

In international joint ventures, Brannen and Salk (2000) found that organizational work culture evolves through a negotiated process between individuals’ sense-making and the structure of organizational events based on ranges of cultural assumptions and normative orientations. A negotiated work culture emerges over time as the result of compromises in human resource management, meeting in the middle in operations, innovating new ideas for both partner groups, and dividing labor ( Brannen & Salk, 2000 ).

Digging deeper into the social cognitive mechanisms of how communication interacts with culture, there seem to be three key mediums through which communication interacts and shapes culture: (1) language, (2) nonverbal communication and emotions/emotional expression, and (3) music. Here we elaborate on how these mediums of communication both influence and are influenced by culture and how these effects apply to organizational contexts.

Holtgraves and Kashima (2008) define language as a “semiotic tool for meaning making and exchange” (p. 73). Language provides a systematic means of communicating highly abstract ideas and represents one of the principal ways that humans communicate with each other. Humans use language to enable interactions for social coordination and survival ( Ko, 2016 ). As a culturally transmitted system, language evolves together with cultural change ( Tallerman, 2005 ), and at the same time, culture evolves as a result of language use (Chomsky, 1965 , 2010 ). Language and culture are thus dynamically coupled, perpetually shaping each other. While language is a powerful medium for the creation, maintenance and transmission of culture, research shows that language systems of a particular culture may also affect the cognitions of the participants within that culture ( Ji et al., 2004 ; Hamers & Blanc, 2000 ; Markman & Hutchinson, 1984 ; Whorf, 1956 ; Logan, 1986 ). The language(s) one learns within their culture appears to have a profound impact on shaping how they perceive, order, and categorize the many diverse stimuli within any given environment or context ( Vygotsky, 1962 , Hamers & Blanc, 2000 ; Ji et al., 2004 ).

This provocative idea is not without debate within the literature. At the center of this debate is the Sapir–Whorf linguistic relativity hypothesis , whose main theme is that culture, through language, has the ability to influence how an individual thinks ( Ji et al., 2004 ). The two views originating from this hypothesis are linguistic determinism and linguistic relativity, with each contending a different degree of power that language exerts on the cognitive processes of its speakers ( Huang & Tse, 2017 ; Hardin & Banaji, 1993 ; Hunt & Agnoli, 1991 ; Kay & Kempton, 1984 ). Linguistic determinism refers to “the view that the structure of language strongly influences or fully determines the way its native speakers perceive the world” ( Huang & Tse, 2017 , p. 4). While this powerfully deterministic view has been largely disconfirmed (e.g., Berlin & Kay, 1969 ; Heider, 1972 ; Heider & Olivier, 1972 ), the linguistic relativity view, which differs in the magnitude of influence language exerts on cognition, remains a fruitful topic for language researchers. Linguistic relativity “postulates that the structural differences between languages are generally paralleled by nonlinguistic cognitive differences in the native speakers of the two languages” ( Huang & Tse, 2017 , p. 4). Overall, the question boils down to whether or not people think in language, and if they do, how it shapes thought.

Early debates on this hypothesis looked at physically perceptive domains such as “color, number, space, time and musical pitch” ( Huang & Tse, 2017 , p. 4). A popular example of debate in this field looks at the differing perceptions of colors in languages that differ in the number of words they use to differentiate different colors. While some languages, such as Dugum Dani, may only have two basic color terms to differentiate between black and white ( Heider, 1972 ), other languages, such as Russian and Turkish, have up to 12 basic color terms ( Ozgen & Davies, 1998 ; Huang & Tse, 2017 ). Universalists are researchers that hold that color-perceptive capabilities are universal and innate (e.g., Berlin & Kay, 1969 ; Franklin & Davies, 2004 ), while linguistic relativity hypothesis supporters contend that language plays a role in an individual’s ability to cognitively differentiate and categorize colors ( Roberson et al., 2000 ; Winawer et al., 2007 ). For example, Winawer et al. (2007) found that Russians, whose language differentiates between lighter blue and darker blue, were faster at differentiating these colors than individuals from English-speaking countries who have just one broad word for these two colors.

Another example of the impact of language on cognition would be Kashima and Kashima’s study (1998) on the differences between individuals who use languages that allow for pronoun dropping compared to languages that do not. Languages differ in the use of person-indexing pronouns, which are called deixis . Examples of deixis within the English language are “I” and “you.” In some languages, such as Chinese and Japanese, linguistic rules allow for the dropping of pronouns, “despite the absence of verb inflections and the grammatical rule of subject–verb agreement” ( Kashima & Kashima, 1998 , p. 464; Hinds, 1982 ; Huang, 1984 ; Li & Thompson, 1976 ). Reasons for why this pronoun dropping occurs is not without extensive debate (e.g., Berman, 1990 , 1992 ; Bloom, 1990 ; Valian, 1990 ).

The cognitive grammar view ( Langacker, 1987 ) contends that “a deictic expression indexes elements in the particular situation where the speech takes place … [and] describes a relationship between the speaker and the speech context, that is, the manner in which the speaker relates to the social context of the speech” ( Kashima & Kashima, 1998 , p. 465; Langacker, 1987 , pp. 128–132). This construal relationship then causes a perceptive shift in the focal point of what is being expressed. For example, expressions with explicit first-person singular pronouns (1PS) such as I, and second-person singular (2PS) pronouns, explicitly cause individuals to become the salient focus of the expression. Languages that then allow for the dropping of these pronouns allow the speakers to emphasize or deemphasize the self or other and the contextual environment in communicative events ( Kashima & Kashima, 1998 ). Kashima and Kashima (1998) found evidence of coinciding cultural differences with these linguistic differences, such as finding lower levels of individualism in cultures whose languages allow for pronoun dropping.

In organizational settings, Liu et al. (2015) found that relational metaphors used by international joint venture partners to describe their relationships, whether it is equal or hierarchical, will interact with equity structures of the joint venture in shaping the quality of the relationship and their achievement of strategic goals over time. In other words, the use of an equal relational metaphor, such as a “modern marriage,” rather than a hierarchical one, such as a “patriarchal family,” would contribute to higher-quality relationships and a more productive work culture in joint ventures. Additionally, in an extensive case study of a Japanese multinational enterprise, Neeley (2017) showed that an intentional mandate of a common language not only changed individual employees’ values and identities, but also transformed the organizational culture into a more global one. Therefore, although rooted in cultures, common languages and strategic use of language can facilitate the construction of or reshaping of new organizational cultures.

Nonverbal Communication and Emotions

While linguistic communication represents an extraordinary human capability for abstract communication, verbal communication is not the only way that humans are able to communicate. In fact, it is estimated that nonverbal behavior accounts for around 60 to 90% of human communication ( Mehrabian, 2017 ). Nonverbal mechanisms of communication involve body language, gesture, and emotional expression, all of which are anchored on the capacity for empathy. The literature on these nonverbal communicative capabilities can provide additional insight into cultural differences and similarities of communication. Emotion, emotional expression, and empathy provide a foundational ability for tuning into reading both nonverbal behaviors and verbal behaviors to maximize the accurate deciphering of what it is another individual is trying to communicate (and even may not be consciously trying to communicate).

Emotions serve as a powerful device for effective nonverbal communication. They are complex feelings that are deeply social in nature. Social systems benefit from the capacity of individuals to experience and express emotions ( Keltner & Haidt, 1999 ), so collective emotional expressions may become normative in a culture. In this sense, display rules for how emotions are conveyed and interpreted in a certain culture are likely passed on to future generations and solidify the cultural norm of emotional expression. There must exist a physiological mechanism, or a form of body language, for expressing emotions in order for them to be read by others. Answers to the questions “What are emotions” and “where do they come from” remain a hot topic of debate within the literature, with deep implications for the culture and communication field. To understand the interaction between culture and communication, specifically related to emotions and emotional expression, it is necessary to understand the current debate within the literature regarding the nature versus nurture origin of emotions.

Different researchers from different emotional theory camps differ in the universality versus cultural specificity of felt emotion and emotional expression. For example, basic emotion theorists believe, for the most part, that felt and expressed emotion is largely universal, whereas social construction theorists believe the other extreme, that felt and expressed emotion is largely culturally specific. The basic emotions perspective views emotions as an innate and universal process that serves as “motivational amplifiers” ( Tomkins, 1962 ). In this view, emotions serve to cause a certain reaction “to tasks that require change in some way” ( Warrenburg, 2020 , p. 4). Basic emotion theorists believe that emotions are innate and present at or shortly after birth and are thus universal. Sadness, for example, is a functional state with a specific and shared coinciding feeling, activated physiologies and expressions that serve to communicate that feeling, or the awareness of that feeling to another individual ( Ekman, 1992 ; Tomkins, 1962 ). Similarly, the emotion of disgust, together with its associated nonverbal body cues, also seems to be produced universally in reaction to something offensive or revolting, perhaps to communicate to another individual that something is potentially dangerous ( Trompenaars & Turner, 1997 ). It would make sense for feelings and expressions of sadness and disgust to be universally felt and recognized given their evolutionary importance to survival.

Social construction theorists view emotions as entirely a social artifact that is the product of the cultural context in which they exist and that aid in the performance of culturally specific tasks ( Mesquita et al., 2016 ). How one emotionally reacts to any given stimulus, to social construction theorists, is largely dependent on the social consequences of this emotional experience and the normativity of what emotion other individuals from that culture typically feel ( Warrenburg, 2020 ; Mesquita et al., 2016 ). For these theorists, each culture has specific emotions that aid in the success of that individual. For example, the independent versus collective cultural differences between Western and Eastern cultures, respectively, have an impact on what emotions will be felt in any given situation ( Mesquita et al., 2016 ). Individuals learn through constant exposure within their environment and are thus “a ‘social reality’ [that] depend[s] on the collective intentionality of a group of people” ( Warrenburg, 2020 , p. 32; Barrett, 2017 ; Mesquita et al., 2016 ) and are ultimately heavily informed and impacted by the norms and values of the cultural context. Therefore, when individuals from one culture enter into another culture, emotional acculturation occurs, where the individual begins to learn and experience new emotional states consistent with this new cultural context ( Barrett, 2017 ).

Research into determining cultural differences regarding the ability to read emotional expressions from cultures that are the same and different from one’s own culture has posed two conflicting models: the cultural equivalence model and the cultural advantage model of emotion recognition . On the one hand, the c ultural equivalence model of emotion recognition aligns more closely with basic emotion theorists, who contend that because emotional communication is largely rooted physiologically in making individuals more evolutionarily equipped for survival, individuals will be able to equally evaluate the emotional expressions of both ingroup and outgroup members regardless of what culture they belong to ( Darwin, 1872 ; Preston & de Waal, 2002 ). On the other hand, the cultural advantage model of emotion recognition believes that individuals are more evolutionarily equipped for survival through the ability of individuals from the same ingroup to be better at reading the emotional expressions of other individuals from the ingroup compared to the outgroup ( Anderson & Keltner, 2002 ; Thibault et al., 2006 ). In organizational life, although emotions are reactions to happenings within a context, collective emotions are also building blocks for organizational actions that eventually form norms and construct culture over time.

An early review of culture and emotions by Mesquita and Frijda (1992) situated cultural variations in emotions within a framework of the cognitive-process model of emotions . In this view, “whether cultural differences or similarities are found depends to an important degree on the level of description of the emotional phenomena” (p. 179). This model breaks the emotional response of an individual into a process of elicitation and manifestation containing various stages that allow for a deeper dive into each and show whether differences or similarities between cultures exist within them. These stages are, first, the antecedent events , which may differ across cultures, thus affecting what individuals within each culture expect and are sensitive to. The second stage, event coding, explains that individuals from within a culture will code and categorize events in a schematic way facilitated by their culture, thus affecting how the event will be emotionally appraised. In the third stage, or the appraisal stage , events are “appraised with respect to their implications for the subject’s well-being and his or her possibilities for coping with the event” ( Mesquita & Frijda, 1992 , p. 180). The fourth stage would be the physiological reaction patterns that explain how an emotional response is both due to and affected by physiological responses to a stimulus. The fifth stage is described as action readiness , where “emotional states involve changes in action readiness” ( Mesquita & Frijda, 1992 , p. 180). For example, the emotional state of fear may elicit a survival instinct composed of cognitions that aid self-protection. The sixth stage is emotional behavior . Once an emotional state is generated, behaviors are generated by the individual, depending on the “availability and expected effectiveness of the various behavior patterns” ( Mesquita & Frijda, 1992 , p. 180). Lastly, the seventh stage is regulation , which “refers to both inhibitory control and voluntary enhancement” ( Mesquita & Frijda, 1992 , p. 180). Thus, by adding more nuance to the particular stages involved in an individual’s emotional state, research into culture and emotions is better able to dissect and understand cultural similarities and differences. While culture provides a framework vital to how an individual learns to organize their reality and what expectations of behavior are deemed acceptable for that given context, there still appears to be a shared, biologically based innate emotional expression system across all humans.

Matsumoto and Hwang (2019) have elaborated on this model and proposed the biocultural model of emotion . This model reconciles the differences and similarities across cultures through the idea that a “biologically-based, core emotion system is calibrated, regulated, and elaborated by culture and culture learning” (p. 501). These researchers conducted a study comparing the spontaneous emotional expression of blind and sighted Judo athletes and found evidence for universal facial expressions of emotions based on a core biological system. Because blind individuals who were unable to learn what facial expressions are associated with what emotions in the context of their cultures exhibited the same facial expressions as those sighted, there is evidence for this basic emotional system. This substantiates the idea that, at least some emotional expressions, served an evolutionary, phylogenetic advantage to communicate with and be understood by others. At the same time, this does not deny cultural specificities; “the interaction between biology and culture in human emotions allows for complex social networks and relationships, and enhances the meaning of normal, daily activities” (p. 512). With emotions and emotional expressions being explicated as a key human tool for nonverbal communication, it is thus vital to explore the importance of an important communication tool that seems able to convey deep, nonverbal messages and to evoke powerful emotional responses in nearly every culture around the world, music ( Wallmark et al., 2018 ; Vuoskoski & Eerola, 2017 ).

Music is a powerful, almost magical tool important in conveying highly abstract ideas and emotions, but it is ultimately social in nature. As Wallmark et al. (2018) state, “by disclosing the affective and cognitive states of actual or imagined human actors, musical engagement can function as a mediated form of social encounter, even when listening by ourselves” (p. 1). Although music is an intense manifestation of cultural variations, we believe that musical practice is a particularly insightful domain to investigate the mechanisms of how this communication medium ultimately shapes and advances the cultural setting it exists in.

While the capacity to create, utilize, and enjoy music as a communicative medium for meaning and emotion appears to be universal, the musical practice, both in how and what meaning is communicated, is deeply entrenched within its cultural context. A national anthem both reflects and projects the salient features of the country’s characters. Iconic musicians such as the Beatles and the Grateful Dead both lead and symbolize the spirit of the time, with widespread resonance of the messages carried through their melodies, harmonies, rhythms, and lyrics. Organizations often choose music in advertising, company websites, or lobbies to aid the expression of their products’ properties and shape organizational climate for consumers, employees, and business associates. In this sense, as an integral part of cultural expression, music coevolves with culture. Additionally, there is ample evidence of how music and musical practice have affected and shaped the culture in which it exists, such as the musical event Woodstock ( Lovesey, 2020 ). Woodstock was a music and arts festival that epitomized, affected, and was affected by the cultural context in which it existed. As Lovesey (2020) states, Woodstock “registered a paradigm shift in cultural, intellectual, and musicological history” (p. 121).

Evidence for further communicative implications of music come from Wallmark et al. (2018) in their study of the neurophysiological effects of trait empathy and music. Recent studies have suggested that empathy “is related to emotional identification and feelings of intimacy or social connectedness” ( Leman, 2007 , p. 122; Berthoz & Jorland, 2004 ). Leman (2007) states that “listening to music can be seen as a socializing activity in the sense that it may train the listener’s self in social attuning at empathic relationships” (p. 126). While empathy is a vital mechanism central to all communicative mediums, within this study, empathy was hypothesized to be a key mechanism in how music is perceived and processed. Wallmark et al. (2018) conducted a study that examined the fMRIs of individuals differing on cognitive and affective trait empathy levels and found physiological evidence for a link between empathy and music, explicating music as a potentially fruitful avenue for further investigating and understanding cultural similarities and differences in communication.

Evolutionarily, it would make sense for acculturation and socialization processes to include musical practices for groups and organizations to have a mechanism for enhancing cohesion and coordination. As Sun Tzu (2012) states in The Art of War , “Gongs and drums and banners and flags make the army hear with the same ear and see with the same eye” (p. 45). Embodied listening of a group of people may cause the harmonization of movement among the individuals, in turn causing an “increased liking between interaction partners” ( Leman, 2007 , p. 126), in what Lakin et al. (2003) refer to as the chameleon effect of nonconscious mimicry . A group with strong cohesion and effective communication capabilities could, at least historically, engage in more complex and collective coordinated action, positioning groups that leverage these capabilities as more adept for survival. In this sense, music serves as a form of nonverbal communication that promotes a “sense of groupishness” that enables conflict management, bonding, and collective survival of the group ( Brown, 2000 ; Cross & Morley, 2010 ; Cross, 2007 ).

To summarize, music has been an unsung communication tool in shaping, maintaining, and creating cultural norms and taste, ranging from national anthems to cultural icons. Visionary organizations have already started strategic manipulation of sound in workspace for senses of community and creativity (e.g., Krukowski, 2019 ). Together, language, nonverbal communication, emotion, and music not only dynamically influence and interact with culture, but also offer new and fertile avenues of studying culture and communication.

Future Research for Culture and Communication

Although communication is an essential activity in human and organization life across cultures, research on culture and communication has largely taken a static, fragmented, and de-contextualized view. Szkudlarek et al. (2020) offer a comprehensive critique on communication in international business and point out that the existing literature does not address the dynamic and contextualized nature of communication. For example, they note that the extant works in the field tend to overly rely on etic dimensions that do not capture within-culture dynamics, or the situational complexity of communication, and may cause superficial and even misleading findings. One of the reasons, we speculate, is that the field of communication has been dominated by the Western analytical thinking style that focuses on decontextualized and discrete inquiries ( Nisbett et al., 2001 ). Moving forward, processual, relational, and contextual perspectives of research on culture and communication promise to provide a more holistic inquiry of the field ( Szkudlarek et al., 2020 ; Liu et al., 2021 ; Corner et al., 2021 ). Specifically, Liu et al. (2021) suggest that communicators in multicultural relationships might switch, expand, and fuse their culturally typical communal or exchange schemata of relationships. As an important aspect of intercultural competency, Corner et al. (2021) maintain that when communicating with foreign counterparts, especially those based in emerging markets, individuals need to consider the perspectives and uncertainties embedded within the context, as well as initiating and cultivating relationships. Future empirical research is needed to fill these gaps and test the propositions of studying culture and communication in processual, embedded relationships, and contextualized situations that can provide dynamic, holistic findings on the interactions between culture and communication.

Research in culture and communication has gradually shifted from a static, compartmentalized understanding into one that is more dynamic, context dependent, and process oriented whereby individuals iteratively negotiate meaning. For future research, we propose that research on culture and communication could be oriented more holistically, specifically, (1) temporally, (2) spatially, (3) inter- and intrapersonally, and (4) inter- and intraculturally.

By temporally , we refer to an increased emphasis being placed on the chronical conditions that gave rise to the circumstances and environments in which communicative events exist. Culture and communicative capabilities, mediums, and meanings are the result of thousands of years of constant evolution and still continue to evolve dynamically. A shift from a view that treats communication and culture as a static cross section to one that is processual would yield fruitful avenues for future research ( Szkudlarek et al., 2020 ; Cramton et al., 2021 ). Past research in culture and communication that views communicative events as static and isolated snapshots miss out on the richness of the “interactive, evolving, and complex” nature of communication processes in reality ( Szkudlarek et al., 2020 , p. 6). Both the capabilities for communication and the implied meaning of communicative tools are the result of constant iterative sense-making processes negotiated by the many different participants across many different mediums. Future research should investigate how “past experiences, individual predispositions and situational contingencies affect the communication process” ( Szkudlarek et al., 2020 p. 6). Methodologies that utilize longitudinal data may yield prolific insights for the study of culture and communication.

By spatially , we refer to an increased emphasis on the specific contextual and environmental circumstances where communication occurs. Past research has been largely decontextualized, overlooking the specific contexts in which communication events occur and the effects these contexts may have on communication. Varner (2000) argues that “the multiplicity of contexts is crucial for making sense of communicative processes” ( Szkudlarek et al., 2020 , p. 3). An example of such a context is the tight versus loose norms in societies, which in a way dictated the communication of responses and actions by countries in coping with the COVID-19 pandemic (e.g., Gelfand et al., 2021 ).

Additionally, many scholars have shown that media types and mediums play a role in communicative interactions and outcomes (e.g., Klitmøller & Lauring, 2013 ; Daft & Lengel, 1986 ) and called for research to include a more diverse range of media platforms ( Ishii, Lyons, & Carr, 2019 ). Future research should investigate how different mediums yield different communicative outcomes, such as across digital platforms, musical formats, or in-person communicative events and what the variables within these mediums contribute, culturally, emotionally, and cognitively to these outcomes. Further, Keller and Tian (2021) advocate for studying the interconnected paradoxes between linguistic tensions embedded in organizational paradoxes. An example is that linguistic tensions such as explicit versus implicit messages can complicate organizational management paradoxes, such as control versus autonomy. Therefore, the multiplicity of contextual influence holds the promise of sophisticated inquiries in future research on culture and communication.

By calling for research to be more interpersonal and intrapersonal , we refer to an increased emphasis being placed on communicative events that occur between individuals and even within individuals. Interpersonal communication involves negotiations of meaning. Much of the past literature on communication has focused on the organizational or group level, such as investigating “knowledge characteristics, organizational culture, and the perceived importance of sender and receiver attitudes, motivation or communication skills” ( Szkudlarek et al., 2020 , p. 4; Minbaeva, 2007 ; Morgulis-Yakushev et al., 2018 ). Focusing on the integration of organizational level and individual level and viewing communicative events and processes from a multilevel perspective presents an avenue that may probe at the deep nuance involved in communicative events.

Within the individual level, a focus on intrapersonal communication may also help generate novel and exciting insights into the study of communication and culture. Interfacing an individual’s many identities and changing the salience and availability of self-construal schemas and its impact on culture and communication provide a fruitful avenue for research. Intrapersonal negotiation may occur through introspective avenues such as meditation but may also be facilitated through altered states of consciousness such as through music, mind altering substances and one’s environmental context. Researchers have begun investigating and elaborating on the “multiple selves” theory. Angyal (1965) proposed that “the mind is made up of subsystems which interact, resulting in setting and shifting sets” ( Lester, 2012 , p. 1). Thus, individuals may simultaneously have many “selves” that hold different priorities, which contribute to an inner dialogue in the process of decision making. Different selves have different goals, different priorities, and ultimately different cognitions that are most saliently accessible, especially for individuals with multiple cultural identities and experiences. These selves may be primed by cultural artifacts within the environment, emotional states, or the salient identities of their peers. Thus, it is important to understand different selves and states of consciousness for a more holistic understanding of communication. This view emphasizes the need to understand communicative events within the environments and contexts in which they exist, as well as the cognitive and emotional states of the individual, whether primed by existing stimuli within their environment, and the effects on communicative processes and outcomes.

Lastly, we propose that research in culture and communication be expanded more to investigate intercultural and intracultural communication . Both communication and communication competence are the result of a relational exchange between two individuals. As discussed earlier, no communicative event between individuals happens in a vacuum, and each of these individuals will bring to the table a set of existing predispositions and preexisting assigned meanings, which may heavily impact communication. For example, although intercultural communication has been studied (e.g., Imai & Gelfand, 2010 ; Liu et al., 2010 , 2012 ), a more dialectical approach is needed to recognize the dynamic and interactive nature in complex situations ( Corner et al., 2021 ; Martin, 2015 ; Szkudlarek et al., 2020 ). Thus, further research should infuse more culturally diverse views in understanding, holistically, what individuals bring from their own culture and how that, in turn, affects the communicative events.

Existing literature, however, on cross-cultural perspectives has seemingly missed out on the dynamic nature and complexity of intercultural communication, especially in complex temporal and special situations. While previous studies have been insightful in their own way, with a few exceptions of qualitative studies (e.g., Brannen & Salk, 2000 ), almost all intercultural communication studies (e.g., Brett & Okumura, 1998 ; Imai & Gelfand, 2010 ; Liu et al., 2010 , 2012 ) used lab studies with single or repeated negotiation simulations. Longitudinal, contextualized, and both qualitative and quantitative field experiments might better capture the evolving forces in inter- and intracultural interactions ( Brannen et al., 2017 ; Lee et al., 2020 ; Casrnir, 1999 ; Nardon, 2017 ). In order to better understand the dynamic and fluid nature of intercultural and intracultural communicative events, moving from comparative methodologies such as surveys, to diverse and rich methodologies such as “narrative analysis (e.g., Gertsen & Søderberg’s, 2011 ), ethnographic field studies (e.g., Moore & Mahadevan, 2020 ), in-depth cases (e.g., Piekkari et al., 2020 ), critical analysis (e.g., Romani et al., 2020 ) or even experimental designs ( Fischer & Karl, 2020 )” may be better suited ( Szkudlarek et al., 2020 , p. 2).

We summarize main takeaways on Table 16.1 and below.

Five Key Takeaways

  Dynamic Constructivist View—Individuals are composed of various overlapping and interwoven cultures with different associated norms and values that may become more or less cognitively salient depending on the context. Contexts are composed of various cues, which are then associated with existing cultural frames within an individual ( Hong et al., 2000 ). Accordingly, different contexts will prime different cultural identities by causing a cultural frame and its associated cognitions to become more salient and enacted, affecting subsequent communicative events. Future research should remain highly sensitive to cues within a context and its effects on an individual’s cognitive frame.

  Holistic Thinking—Previous research on culture and communication, dominated by Western theories and research norms, focus more on the analytical traditions and perspectives. Krukowski (2019) showed that an integration of space and sound communicates to both the conscious and the unconscious mind and created a new kind of work culture at WeWork and the Yard in New York. Future research should consider a more holistic perspective that better integrates elements of communication such as language, emotion, music, and contexts into organization studies.

  Social Cognitive Theory—Culture and communication research should further deploy the use of a social cognitive theory ( Fiske & Taylor, 1991 ) that examines mental models before and after communicative events and the valence and arousal of emotions associated with certain cognitions for a more nuanced understanding of communicative processes and outcomes. Felt emotions will determine how individuals engage in sensemaking ( Maitlis et al., 2013 ), that is, how cues are extracted into existing frames, largely effecting how information will be communicated and understood by both parties in a communicative event.

  Cultural Evolution Perspective—Cultural identities, within both individuals and societies are not a static monolith but are instead composed of a constellation of subparts that are constantly changing and evolving (e.g., Wilson, 2002 ). Cultures are composed of many subcultures that are constantly interacting, causing them to gradually evolve. Individuals within these cultures are constantly negotiating and co-constructing realities with each other, within and between their cultures and communities. Individuals are then also composed of various interconnected identities that are dynamically interacting as an individual constructs their identity. Future research should examine how cultures change and evolve due to the interactions of the subcultures that compose them, as well as how individuals constantly change and evolve as they gradually negotiate a sense of self through the many cultures and subcultures they belong to. Doing so would require examining cross and intracultural communication at both the group and individual level for a more detailed understanding of culture and communication.

  Communication Mediums—Different mediums of communication may offer different insights into cultural differences and similarities. By grounding each medium into its given context and exploring each, a more thorough analysis of culture and communication can be conducted. Language, nonverbal body language, emotions and emotional expression, music, and other cultural artifacts provide fruitful and incredibly interesting avenues for future investigation. These different mediums consist of different psychological and physiological mechanisms that are interwoven and that should be holistically taken into consideration to further understand communicative similarities and differences of the capabilities of individuals from both different and the same cultures.

Adair, W. L. , & Brett, J. M. ( 2005 ). The negotiation dance: Time, culture, and behavioral sequences in negotiations.   Organization Science , 16 (1), 33–51.

Google Scholar

Adair, W. L. , & Liu, L. A. ( 2011 ). Building shared mental models in multicultural multiparty negotiations: The dynamic process.   Research on Managing Groups and Teams , 14 , 57–78.

Adair, W. L. , Buchan, N. , Chen, X.-P. , & Liu, D. ( 2015 ). A model of communication context and measure of context dependence.   Academy of Management Discovery , 2 (2), 198–217.

Adair, W. L. , Okumura, T. , & Brett, J. M. ( 2001 ). Negotiation behaviors when cultures collide: The US and Japan.   Journal of Applied Psychology , 86 (3), 371–385.

Adler, N. J. , & Graham, J. L. ( 1989 ). Cross-cultural interaction: The international comparison fallacy?   Journal of International Business Studies , 20 (3), 515–537.

Anderson, C. , & Keltner, D. ( 2002 ). Open peer commentary: The role of empathy in the formation and maintenance of social bonds.   Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 25 (1), 21–22.

Angyal, A. ( 1965 ). Neurosis and treatment . New York: John Wiley.

Google Preview

Barrett, L. F. ( 2017 ). How emotions are made: The secret life of the brain . New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Berlin, B. , & Kay, P. ( 1969 ). Basic color terms: Their universality and evolution . Berkeley: University of California Press.

Berman, L. A. ( 1992 ). First person identities in Indonesian conversational narratives.   Journal of Asian Pacific Communication , 3 , 3–14.

Berman, R. A. ( 1990 ). On acquiring an (S)VO language: Subjectless sentences in children’s Hebrew.   Linguistics , 28 , 1135–1166.

Berthoz, A. , & Jorland, G. (Eds.). ( 2004 ). L’ Empathie . Paris: Jacob.

Bloom, P. ( 1990 ). Subjectless sentences in child language.   Linguistic Inquiry , 21 (4), 491–504.

Brannen, M. Y. , Gómez, C. , Peterson, M. F. , Romani, L. , Sagiv, L. , & Wu, P. C. ( 2017 ). People in global organizations: Culture, personality, and social dynamics. In H. W. Lane , M. L. Maznevski , M. E. Mendenhall , & J. McNett (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of global management (pp. 26–54). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Brannen, M. Y. , & Salk, J. ( 2000 ). Partnering across borders: Negotiating organizational culture in a German-Japanese joint venture.   Human Relations , 53 (4), 451–487.

Brett, J. M. , & Okumura, T. ( 1998 ). Inter-and intracultural negotiation: US and Japanese negotiators.   Academy of Management Journal, 41, 495–510.

Brett, J. M. , Tinsley, C. H. , Shapiro, D. L. , & Okumura, T. ( 2007 ). Intervening in employee disputes: How and when will managers from China, Japan, and the US act differently?   Management and Organizational Review , 3 (2), 183–204.

Brewer, M. B. , & Gardner, W. ( 1996 ). Who is this “We”? Levels of collective identity and self representations.   Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 71 (1), 83–93.

Brown, S. ( 2000 ). The “musilanguage” model of music evolution. In N. Wallin , B. Merker , and S. Brown (Eds. ), The origins of music (pp. 271–300). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Cai, D. A. , Wilson, S. R. , & Drake, L. ( 2000 ). Culture in context: Individualism/collectivism, negotiator role, framing, and paths to integrative agreements.   Human Communication Research , 26 , 591–617.

Casrnir, F. L. ( 1999 ). Foundations for the study of intercultural communication based on a third-culture building model.   International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23, 91–116.

Chomsky N. ( 1965 ). Aspects of the theory of syntax . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Chomsky, N. ( 2010 ). Poverty of stimulus: Unfinished business. Transcript of a presentation given at Johannes-Gutenberg University, Mainz.

Corner, A. J. , Liu, L. A. , & Bird, A. ( 2021 ). Intercultural competencies for emerging markets: A contextualized approach.   International Business Review , 30 (3), 101792.

Cramton, C. D. , Köhler, T. , & Levitt, R. E. ( 2021 ). Using scripts to address cultural and institutional challenges of global project coordination.   Journal of International Business Studies , 52(1), 56–77.

Cross, I. ( 2007 ). Music and cognitive evolution. In L. Barrett & R. Dunbar (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology . Oxford Library of Psychology 2012. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198568308.013.0045 , accessed 20 March 2023.

Cross, I. , & Morley, I. R. M. ( 2010 ). The evolution of music: Theories, definitions and the nature of the evidence. In S. Malloch and C. Trevarthen (Eds.), Communicative Musicality: Exploring the Basis of Human Companionship (No. 5, pp. 61–81). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Daft, R. L. , & Lengel, R. H. ( 1986 ). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design.   Management Science , 32 (5), 554–571.

Darwin, C. ( 1872 ). The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex (Vol. 2). D. Appleton.

De Dreu, C. K. W. , & Carnevale, P. J. ( 2003 ). Motivational bases of information processing and strategy in conflict and negotiation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 35, pp. 235–291). Amsterdam: Elsevier Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(03)01004-9

Ekman, P. ( 1992 ). An argument for basic emotions.   Cognition and Emotion , 6(3–4), 169–200.

Erez, M. , Lisak, A. , Harush, R. , Glikson, E. , Nouri, R. , & Shokef, E. ( 2013 ). Going global: developing management students’ cultural intelligence and global identity in virtual culturally diverse teams.   The Academy of Management Learning and Education Journal , 12 (3), 330–355.

Fischer, R. , & Karl, J. A. ( 2020 ). Experimental methods in cross-cultural management. In B. Szkudlarek , L. Romani , D. Caprar , and J. S. Osland (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of cross-cultural management (pp. 111–126). London: SAGE.

Fiske, S. T. , & Taylor, S. E. ( 1991 ). Social cognition . New York, NY: Mcgraw-Hill Book Company.

Franklin, A. , & Davies, I. R. L. ( 2004 ). New evidence for infant colour categories.   British Journal of Developmental Psychology , 22 , 349–377.

Gelfand, M. J. , Jackson, J. C. , Pan, X. , Nau, D. , Pieper, D. , Denison, E. , Dagher, M. , Van Lange, P. A. M. , Chiu, C.-Y. , & Wang, M. ( 2021 ). The relationship between cultural tightness–looseness and COVID-19 cases and deaths: A global analysis.   The Lancet Planetary Health , 5 (3), e135–e144.

Gertsen, M. C. , & Søderberg, A. M. ( 2011 ). Intercultural collaboration stories: On narrative inquiry and analysis as tools for research in international business.   Journal of International Business Studies , 42 (6), 787–804.

Glikson, E. , & Erez, M. ( 2020 ). The emergence of a communication climate in global virtual teams.   Journal of World Business , 55 (6), 1–10.

Gunia, B. C. , Brett, J. M. , Nandkeolyar, A. , & Kamdar, D. ( 2011 ). Paying a price: Culture, trust, and negotiation consequences.   Journal of Applied Psychology , 96 (4), 774–789.

Hall, E. T. ( 1959 ). The silent language . New York: Random House.

Hall, E. T. ( 1976 ). Beyond culture . New York: Doubleday.

Hamers, J. F. , & Blanc, M. H. A. ( 2000 ). Bilinguality and bilingualism (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hardin, C. , & Banaji, M. R. ( 1993 ). The influence of language on thought.   Social Cognition, 11, 277–308.

Heider, E. R. ( 1972 ). Universals in color naming and memory.   Journal of Experimental Psychology , 93 , 10–20.

Heider, E. R. , & Olivier, D. C. ( 1972 ). The structure of the color space in naming and memory for two languages.   Cognitive Psychology , 3 , 337–354.

Hinds, J. ( 1982 ). Ellipsis in Japanese . Edmonton, Canada: Linguistic Research.

Hinds, P. J. , Neeley, T. , & Cramton, C. D. ( 2014 ). Language as a lightning rod: Power contests, emotion regulation, and subgroup dynamics in global teams.   Journal of International Business Studies , 45 (5), 536–561.

Holtgraves, T. M. , & Kashima, Y. ( 2008 ). Language, meaning, and social cognition.   Personality and Social Psychology Review , 12 (1), 73–94.

Hong, Y. Y. , Morris, M. W. , Chiu, C. Y. , & Benet-Martinez, V. ( 2000 ). Multicultural minds: A dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition.   American Psychologist , 55 (7), 709–720.

Huang, J. ( 1984 ). On the typology of zero anaphora.   Ohak Yongu [Language Research], 20, 85–105.

Huang, Y. , & Tse, C. S. ( 2017 ). Linguistic relativity in conceptual metaphors.   Psychology of bilingualism: The cognitive and emotional world of bilinguals . In A. Ardila , A. Cieślicka , R. Heredia , and M. Rosselli (Eds.), Psychology of bilingualism. The bilingual mind and brain book series (pp. 3–26). Cham: Springer.

Hunt, E. , & Agnoli, F. ( 1991 ). The Whorfian hypothesis: A cognitive psychology perspective.   Psychological Review , 98 , 377–389.

Imai, L. , & Gelfand, M. J. ( 2010 ). The culturally intelligent negotiator: The impact of cultural intelligence (CQ) on negotiation sequences and outcomes.   Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 112 , 83–98.

Ishii, K. , Lyons, M. M. , & Carr, S. A. ( 2019 ). Revisiting media richness theory for today and future.   Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies , 1 (2), 124–131.

Ji, L. J. , Zhang, Z. , & Nisbett, R. E. ( 2004 ). Is it culture or is it language? Examination of language effects in cross-cultural research on categorization.   Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 87 (1), 57.

Kashima, Y. ( 2000 ). Recovering Bartlett's social psychology of cultural dynamics.   European Journal of Social Psychology , 30 (3), 383–403.

Kashima, Y. , Lyons, A. , & Clark, A. ( 2013 ). The maintenance of cultural stereotypes in the conversational retelling of narratives.   Asian Journal of Social Psychology , 16 (1), 60–70.

Kashima, E. S. , & Kashima, Y. ( 1998 ). Culture and language: The case of cultural dimensions and personal pronoun use.   Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology , 29 (3), 461–486.

Kashima, Y. , Perfors, A. , Ferdinand, V. , & Pattenden, E. ( 2021 ). Ideology, communication and polarization.   Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B , 376 (1822), 20200133.

Kay, P. , & Kempton, W. ( 1984 ). What is the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis?   American Anthropologist , 86 , 65–79.

Keller, J. , & Tian, P. ( 2021 ). The organizational paradox of language. In R. Bednarek , M. P. Cunha , J. Schad , and W. R. Smith . (Eds.), Interdisciplinary dialogues on organizational paradox: Investigating social structures and human expression, Part B ( Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. 73b ) (pp. 101–122). Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Limited.

Keltner, D. , & Haidt, J. ( 1999 ). Social functions of emotions at four levels of analysis.   Cognition and Emotion , 13 (5), 505–521.

Kern, M. C. , Lee, S. , Aytug, Z. , & Brett, J. M. ( 2012 ). Bridging social distance in intercultural negotiations: “You” and the bicultural negotiator.   International Journal of Conflict Management , 23 (2), 173–191.

Kim, H. S. ( 2002 ). We talk, therefore we think? A cultural analysis of the effect of talking on thinking.   Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 83 (4), 828–842.

Kim, Y. Y. ( 1988 ). Communication and cross-cultural adaptation . Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Klitmøller, A. , & Lauring, J. ( 2013 ). When global virtual teams share knowledge: Media richness, cultural difference and language commonality.   Journal of World Business , 48 , 398–406.

Ko, K. H. ( 2016 ). Origins of human intelligence: The chain of tool-making and brain evolution.   Anthropological Notebooks , 22 (1), 5–22.

Krukowski, D. (2019). The ideal conditions for sound art and office productivity aren’t so far apart. The New Yorker , March 4. https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-ideal-conditions-for-sound-art-and-office-productivity-arent-so-far-apart/amp

Lakin, J. L. , Jefferis, V. E. , Cheng, C. M. , & Chartrand, T. L. ( 2003 ). The chameleon effect as social glue: Evidence for the evolutionary significance of nonconscious mimicry.   Journal of Nonverbal Behavior , 27 (3), 145–162.

Langacker, R. W. ( 1987 ). Foundations of cognitive grammar (Vol. 1). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Lau, I. Y-M. , Chiu, C-Y. , & Lee, S-L. ( 2001 ). Communication and shared reality: Implications for the psychological foundations of culture.   Social Cognition, 19, 350–371.

Lee, E. S. , Nguyen, D. C. , & Szkudlarek, B. ( 2020 ). Global migration and cross-cultural management: Understanding the past, moving towards the future. In B. Szkudlarek , L. Romani , D. V. Caprar , and J. S. Osland (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of contemporary cross-cultural management (pp. 409–423). London: SAGE.

Leman, M. ( 2007 ). Embodied music cognition and mediation technology . Cambridge, MA: MIT press.

Lester, D. ( 2012 ). A multiple self theory of the mind.   Comprehensive Psychology , 1 , 2–9.

Li, Ci. N. , & Thompson, S. A. ( 1976 ). Subject and topic : A new typology of language. In C. N. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp. 457–489). New York: Academic Press.

Liu, L. A. , & Adair, W. L. ( 2017 ). Intercultural communication in international negotiation. In Y. Y. Kim and K. McKay-Semmler (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Intercultural Communication (pp. 1–14). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.

Liu, L. A. , Adair, W. L. , & Bello, D. C. ( 2015 ). Fit, misfit, and beyond fit: Relational metaphors and semantic fit in international joint ventures.   Journal of International Business Studies , 46 (7): 830–849.

Liu, L. A. , Adair, W. L. , Tjosvold, D. , & Poliakova, E. ( 2018 ). Understanding intercultural dynamics: Integrating insights from competition and cooperation in complex contexts.   Cross Cultural and Strategic Management , 25 (1), 2–31.

Liu, L. A. , Chiu, C. Y. , & Zhang, Z.-X. ( 2021 ). Dynamic transformation of communal and exchange schemata in multicultural relationships.   Cross Cultural & Strategic Management , 28 (2), 368–383.

Liu, L. A. , Chua, C. H. , & Stahl, G. ( 2010 ). Quality of communication experience: Definition, measurement, and implications for intercultural negotiations.   Journal of Applied Psychology , 95 (3), 469–487.

Liu, L. A. , Friedman, R. A. , Barry, B. , Gelfand, M. J. , & Zhang, Z-X. ( 2012 ). The dynamics of consensus building in intracultural and intercultural negotiations.   Administrative Science Quarterly , 57 (2), 269–304.

Liu, L. A. , Friedman, R. A. , & Chi, S-c. ( 2005 ). “ Ren Qing ” versus the “Big 5”: The need for culturally sensitive measures of individual difference in negotiation. Management and Organization Review , 1 (2), 225–247.

Liu, L. A. , Ma, L. , Chua, C.-H. , Zhang, Z.-X. , & Barzantny, C. ( 2013 ). The confluence of cultural richness and global identity in intracultural and intercultural negotiations.   Academy of Management Proceedings , 1 , 841–846.

Logan, R. F. ( 1986 ). The alphabet effect . New York: Morrow.

Lovesey, O. ( 2020 ). Introduction to “Woodstock University”: The idea of Woodstock.   Popular Music and Society , 43 (2), 121–125. doi:10.1080/03007766.2019.1687679

Lyons, A. , & Kashima, Y. ( 2001 ). The reproduction of culture: Communication processes tend to maintain cultural stereotypes.   Social Cognition , 19 (3: Special issue), 372–394.

Maitlis, S. , Vogus, T. J. , & Lawrence, T. B. ( 2013 ). Sensemaking and emotion in organizations.   Organizational Psychology Review , 3 (3), 222–247.

Markman, E. , & Hutchinson, J. ( 1984 ). Children’s sensitivity to constraints on word meaning: Taxonomic versus thematic relations.   Cognitive Psychology , 16 , 1–27.

Martin, J. N. ( 2015 ). Revisiting intercultural communication competence: Where to go from here.   International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 48, 6–8.

Matsumoto, D. , & Hwang, H. S. ( 2011 ). Cooperation and competition in intercultural interactions.   International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 35 (5), 677–685.

Matsumoto, D. , & Hwang, H. S. ( 2019 ). Culture, emotion, and expression. In K. D. Kieth (Ed.), Cross-cultural psychology: Contemporary themes and perspectives (pp. 501–515). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.

Mehrabian, A. ( 2017 ). Nonverbal communication . New York: Routledge.

Mesquita, B. , Boiger, M. , & De Leersnyder, J. ( 2016 ). The cultural construction of emotions.   Current Opinion in Psychology , 8 , 31–36.

Mesquita, B. , & Frijda, N. H. ( 1992 ). Cultural variations in emotions: A review.   Psychological Bulletin , 112 (2), 179.

Minbaeva, D. ( 2007 ). Knowledge transfer in multinational corporations.   Management International Review , 47 , 567–593.

Moore, F. , & Mahadevan, J. ( 2020 ). Ethnography and cross-cultural management. In B. Szkudlarek , L. Romani , D. V. Caprar , and J. S. Osland (Eds.), The Sage handbook of contemporary cross-cultural management (pp. 128–140). London: SAGE.

Morgulis-Yakushev, S. , Yildiz, H. E. , & Fey, C. F. ( 2018 ). When same is (not) the aim: A treatise on organizational cultural fit and knowledge transfer.   Journal of World Business, 53, 151–163.

Morling, B. , & Lamoreaux M. ( 2008 ). Measuring culture outside the head: A meta-analysis of individualism–collectivism in cultural products.   Personality and Social Psychology Review , 12 (3), 199–221.

Nardon, L. ( 2017 ). Working in a multicultural world: A guide to developing intercultural competence . Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

Neeley, T. ( 2017 ). The language of global success: How a common tongue transforms multinational organizations . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

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

Nisbett, R. E. , Peng, K. , Choi, I. , & Norenzayan, A. ( 2001 ). Culture and systems of thought: holistic versus analytic cognition.   Psychological Review , 108 (2), 291.

Oetzel, J. , & Ting-Toomey, S. ( 2003 ). Face concerns in interpersonal conflict: A cross-cultural empirical test of the face-negotiation theory.   Communication Research , 36 , 599–624.

Oyserman, D. , Coon, H. M. , & Kemmelmeier, M. ( 2002 ). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses.   Psychological Bulletin , 128 (1), 3–72.

Oyserman, D. , & Lee, S. W. S. ( 2008 ). Does culture influence what and how we think? Effects of priming individualism and collectivism.   Psychological Bulletin , 134 (2), 311–342.

Oyserman, D. , Sorensen, N. , Reber, R. , & Chen, S. X. ( 2009 ). Connecting and separating mind-sets: Culture as situated cognition.   Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 97 (2), 217–235.

Ozgen, E. , & Davies, I. R. L. ( 1998 ). Turkish color terms: Tests of Berlin and Kay’s theory of color universals and linguistic relativity.   Linguistics, 36, 919–956.

Piekkari, R. , Welch, C. , & Zølner, M. ( 2020 ). The uneasy relationship between the case study and cross-cultural management. In B. Szkudlarek , L. Romani , D. Caprar , & J. S. Osland (Eds.). The SAGE handbook of cross-cultural management (pp. 156–170). London: SAGE.

Preston, S. D. , & de Waal, F. B. M. ( 2002 ). Empathy: Its ultimate and proximate bases.   Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25, 1–72.

Roberson, D. , Davies, I. , & Davidoff, J. ( 2000 ). Color categories are not universal: Replications and new evidence from a stone-age culture.   Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 129 , 369–398.

Romani, L. , Mahadevan, J. , & Primecz, H. ( 2020 ). Methods of critical cross-cultural management. In B. Szkudlarek , L. Romani , D. Caprar , & J. S. Osland (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of cross-cultural management (pp. 141–155). London: SAGE.

Rosette, A. S. , Brett, J. M. , Barsness, Z. , & Lytle, A. L. ( 2011 ). When cultures clash electronically: The impact of email and social norms on negotiation behavior and outcomes.   Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology , 43 (4), 628–643.

Semnani-Azad, Z. , & Adair, W. L. ( 2011 ). The display of “dominant” nonverbal cues in negotiation: The role of culture and gender.   International Negotiation , 16 (3), 451–479.

Szkudlarek, B. , Osland, J. S. , Nardon, L. , & Zander, L. ( 2020 ). Communication and culture in international business–Moving the field forward.   Journal of World Business , 55 (6), 101–126.

Tallerman, M. (Ed.) ( 2005 ). Language origins: Perspectives on evolution . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Thibault, P. , Bourgeois, P. , & Hess, U. ( 2006 ). The effect of group-identification on emotion recognition: The case of cats and basketball players.   Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 42 , 676–683.

Ting-Toomey, S. , & Dorjee, T. ( 2018 ). Communicating across cultures . New York: Guilford Publications.

Tomkins, S. ( 1962 ). Affect imagery consciousness: Volume I: The positive affects . New York: Springer.

Trafimow, D. , Triandis, H. C. , & Goto, S. G. ( 1991 ). Some tests of the distinction between the private self and the collective self.   Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 60 (5), 649–655.

Trompenaars F. , & Turner, C. ( 1997 ). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding diversity in global business . New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Tse, D. K. , Francis, J. , & Walls, J. ( 1994 ). Cultural differences in conducting intra- and inter-cultural negotiations.   Journal of International Business Studies , 25 (3), 537–555.

Tzu, S. ( 2012 ). The art of war . Vij Books India Pvt Ltd.

Valian, V. ( 1990 ). Null subjects: A problem for parameter-setting models of language acquisition.   Cognition , 35 , 105–122.

Varner, I. I. ( 2000 ). The theoretical foundation for intercultural business communication: A conceptual model.   The Journal of Business Communication , 37 , 39–57.

Vuoskoski, J. K. , & Eerola, T. ( 2017 ). The pleasure evoked by sad music is mediated by feelings of being moved.   Frontiers in Psychology , 8 , 439.

Vygotsky, L. S. ( 1962 ). Thought and language . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Wallmark, Z. , Deblieck, C. , & Iacoboni, M. ( 2018 ) Neurophysiological effects of trait empathy in music listening.   Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience , 12 , 66.

Warrenburg, L. A. ( 2020 ). Comparing musical and psychological emotion theories.   Psychomusicology: Music, Mind, and Brain . 30 (1), 1–19.

Weiss, S. E. ( 1994 ). Negotiating with Romans: Part 1.   Sloan Management Review , 35 (2), 51–61.

Whorf, B. L. ( 1956 ). Language, thought, and reality . Cambridge, MA: Technology Press of MIT.

Wilson, M. ( 2002 ). Six views of embodied cognition.   Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 9 , 625–636.

Winawer, J. , Witthoft, N. , Frank, M. C. , Wu, L. , Wade, A. R. , & Boroditsky, L. ( 2007 ). Russian blues reveal effects of language on color discrimination.   Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 7780–7785.

Zhang, Q. , Oetzel, J. , Ting-Toomey, S. , & Zhang, J. ( 2019 ). Making up or getting even? The effects of face concerns, self-construal, and apology on forgiveness, reconciliation and revenge in the United States and China.   Communication Research , 46 (4), 503–524.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Beyond Intractability

The Hyper-Polarization Challenge to the Conflict Resolution Field: A Joint BI/CRQ Discussion BI and the Conflict Resolution Quarterly invite you to participate in an online exploration of what those with conflict and peacebuilding expertise can do to help defend liberal democracies and encourage them live up to their ideals.

Follow BI and the Hyper-Polarization Discussion on BI's New Substack Newsletter .

Hyper-Polarization, COVID, Racism, and the Constructive Conflict Initiative Read about (and contribute to) the  Constructive Conflict Initiative  and its associated Blog —our effort to assemble what we collectively know about how to move beyond our hyperpolarized politics and start solving society's problems. 

By Michelle LeBaron

June 2003  

Cultural Diversity

Montaigne said, "The most universal quality is diversity."[1] Given that diversity abounds, the project of understanding each other is both daunting and important. It is a journey never finished, because the process and the endpoints change constantly. The journey is bound up with communication and conflict, since misunderstandings and miscommunication can cause and escalate conflict. Effective communication is often the key to making progress in a conflict.

Progress through conflict is possible, and the route is twofold. First, self-knowledge and self-awareness are needed. Without these, our seemingly normal approaches to meaning-making and communication will never be clear enough that we can see them for what they are: a set of lenses that shape what we see, hear, say, understand, and interpret. Second, cultural fluency is needed, meaning familiarity with culture and the ability to act on that familiarity.[2] Cultural fluency means understanding what culture is, how it works, and the ways culture and communication are intertwined with conflicts.

This may sound simple enough, but it actually requires significant, continuous effort. As Edward T. Hall writes in the introduction to his book, The Dance of Life ,[3] for us to understand each other may mean, "reorganizing [our] thinking...and few people are willing to risk such a radical move." Communication theorists, anthropologists, and others have given us tools to develop awareness of our own lenses, and to facilitate the reorganization of thinking necessary to truly understand others whose starting points may differ from our own. Two of these tools are explored here.

Communication Tools for Understanding Culture

The tools we will examine here relate to communication and ways of seeing the self in relation to others. They are:

• High-context and low-context communication, and
• Individualist and communitarian conceptions of self and other.

Since all of these tools are used in the service of understanding culture, a working definition of culture is useful. Donal Carbaugh defines culture as "a system of expressive practices fraught with feelings, a system of symbols, premises, rules, forms, and the domains and dimensions of mutual meanings associated with these."[4] He also suggests culture is "a learned set of shared interpretations about beliefs, values, and norms, which affect the behaviors of a relatively large group of people."[5] In each of these definitions, culture is linked to communication and a wide range of human experience including feelings, identity, and meaning-making. Communication is the vehicle by which meanings are conveyed, identity is composed and reinforced, and feelings are expressed. As we communicate using different cultural habits and meaning systems, both conflict and harmony are possible outcomes of any interaction.

There is no comprehensive way to understand culture and its relationships to communication and conflict. The two tools outlined here give windows into how different groups of people make sense of their worlds. They are neither reliable guides to every member of a particular group nor are they fixed in nature, since culture is constantly evolving and changing as people within groups and the contexts around them change. These two sets of tools are the most frequently used classifications of cultures used by anthropologists and communication scholars. We begin with one of the most familiar sets of tools: high-context and low-context communication.

High-context and Low-context Communication refers to the degree to which speakers rely on factors other than explicit speech to convey their messages. This tool, developed by Edward T. Hall,[6] suggests that communication varies according to its degree of field dependence, and that it can be classified into two general categories -- high-context and low-context. Field dependence refers to the degree to which things outside the communication itself affect the meaning. For example, a request for a child to "shut the door" relies comparatively little on context, while a comment containing meaning other than what is on the surface relies largely on context for its meaning to be received. A high-context message of disagreement might be telegraphed to a spouse or a co-worker by the words chosen or the way they are spoken, even if no disagreement is explicitly voiced.

Hall says that every human being is confronted by far more sensory stimuli than can possibly be attended to. Cultures help by screening messages, shaping perceptions and interpretations according to a series of selective filters. In high-context settings, the screens are designed to let in implied meanings arising from the physical setting, relational cues, or shared understandings. In low-context settings, the screens direct attention more to the literal meanings of words and less to the context surrounding the words.

All of us engage in both high-context and low-context communication. There are times we "say what we mean, and mean what we say," leaving little to be "read in" to the explicit message. This is low-context communication. At other times, we may infer, imply, insinuate, or deliver with nonverbal cues messages that we want to have conveyed but do not speak. This is high-context communication. Most of the time, we are somewhere nearer the middle of the continuum, relying to some extent on context, but also on the literal meaning of words.

To understand this distinction between high-context and low-context communication, ask yourself these questions:

• Do I tend to "let my words speak for themselves," or prefer to be less direct, relying on what is implied by my communication? (low-context communication)
• Do I prefer indirect messages from others, and am I attuned to a whole range of verbal and nonverbal cues to help me understand the meaning of what is said? (high-context communication)

As will quickly become clear, most people can and do function at both ends of the high-context, low-context continuum. There are times when direct, clear communication is most appropriate, and times when it is preferable to communicate in layers of meaning to save face, spare feelings, or allow for diffuse interpretations. Most people rely on a whole range of verbal and nonverbal cues to understand the meaning of what is said. Even in the most direct, low-context setting, meanings will be conveyed that are not explicitly spoken.

The novelist Amy Tan describes the different starting points of English and Chinese this way: "I try to explain to my English-speaking friends that Chinese language is more strategic in manner, whereas English tends to be more direct; an American business executive may say, 'Let's make a deal,' and the Chinese manager may reply, 'Is your son interested in learning about your widget business?' Each to his or her own purpose, each with his or her own linguistic path."[7]

As people communicate, they move along a continuum between high context and low context. Depending on the kind of relationship, the situation, and the purpose of communication, they may be more or less explicit and direct. In close relationships, communication short-hand is often used, which makes communication opaque to outsiders but perfectly clear to the parties. With strangers, the same people may choose low-context communication.

Low- and high-context communication refers not only to individual communication strategies, but may be used to understand cultural groups. Generally, Western cultures tend to gravitate toward low-context starting points, while Eastern and Southern cultures tend to use high-context communication. Within these huge categories, there are important differences and many variations. Where high-context communication tends to be featured, it is useful to pay specific attention to nonverbal cues and the behavior of others who may know more of the unstated rules governing the communication. Where low-context communication is the norm, directness is likely to be expected in return.

It is less important to classify any communication as high or low context than it is to understand whether nonverbal or verbal cues are the most prominent. Without this understanding, those who tend to use high-context starting points may be looking for shades of meaning that are not present, and those who prefer low-context communication may miss important nuances of meaning.

The choice of high-context and low-context as labels has led to unfortunate misunderstandings, since there is an implied ranking in the adjectives. In fact, neither is better or worse than the other. They are simply different. Each has possible pitfalls for cross-cultural communicators. Generally, low-context communicators interacting with high-context communicators should be mindful that

• nonverbal messages and gestures may be as important as what is said;
• status and identity may be communicated nonverbally and require appropriate acknowledgement;
• face-saving and tact may be important, and need to be balanced with the desire to communicate fully and frankly;
• building a good relationship can contribute to effectiveness over time; and
• indirect routes and creative thinking are important alternatives to problem-solving when blocks are encountered.

High-context communicators interacting with low-context communicators should be mindful that

• things can be taken at face value rather than as representative of layers of meaning;
• roles and functions may be decoupled from status and identity;
• efficiency and effectiveness may be served by a sustained focus on tasks;
• direct questions and observations are not necessarily meant to offend, but to clarify and advance shared goals; and
• indirect cues may not be enough to get the other's attention.[8]

As communicators factor awareness of high-context and low-context communication into their relations, conflict may be lessened and even prevented.

Individualism and Communitarianism is the second dimension important to conflict and conflict resolution. In communitarian settings (sometimes called collectivist settings), children are taught that they are part of a circle of relations. This identity as a member of a group comes first, summed up in the South African idea of ubuntu: "I am because we are." In communitarian settings, members are rewarded for allegiance to group norms and values, interdependence, and cooperation. Wherever they go, their identity as a member of their group goes out in front. Identity is not isolated from others, but is determined with others according to group needs and views. When conflict arises, behavior and responses tend to be jointly chosen.

Individualist patterns involve ideas of the self as independent, self-directed, and autonomous. Many Western conflict-resolution approaches presuppose exactly this kind of person: someone able to make proposals, concessions, and maximize gains in their own self-interest. Children raised in this milieu are rewarded for initiative, personal achievement, and individual leadership. They may be just as close to their families as a child raised in a communitarian setting, but they draw the boundaries differently: in case of a conflict, they may feel more free to choose their individual preference. Duty, honor, and deference to authority are less prominent for those with individualist starting points than communitarian ones.

Individual and communitarian identities are two quite different ways of being in the world. They connect at some point, of course, since all groups are made up of individuals and all individuals find themselves in relationship with various groups. But the starting points are different. To discern the basic difference, ask yourself which is most in the foreground of your life, the welfare, development, security, prosperity, and well-being of yourself and others as individuals, or the shared heritage, ecological resources, traditional stories, and group accomplishments of your people? Generally, those who start with individualism as their beginning tend to be most comfortable with independence, personal achievement, and a competitive conflict style. Those who start with a communal orientation are more focused on social connections, service, and a cooperative conflict style.

French anthropologist Raymonde Carroll, who is married to a North American, suggests that North Americans tend to see individual identities as existing outside all networks. This does not mean that social networks do not exist, or that they are unimportant, but that it is notionally possible to see the self apart from these. In the North American view, there is a sense that the self creates its own identity, as in the expression, a "self-made person." This view explains why it is unnecessary for North Americans to hide things about their past, such as humble origins. It also explains why the alcoholic brother of a president of the United States is seen as having no connection to the president's standing or ability. In a communitarian setting, identity is defined much more by the person's social network, and cannot be so easily separated.

One way to discern communitarian or individualist starting points is to listen to forms of greeting and address. Thomas Morning Owl, a member of the Confederated Umatilla Tribes in Oregon, reports that his response to the question 'Shinnamwa?' (Who are you?) would not be his name, but a description of his father, mother, and tribe, and the place they came from. Morning Owl reflects that individual identities are subsumed into the collective in his culture: "Who preceded you, is who you are."[9]

Members of communitarian cultures place less importance than individualists on relationships with outsiders, such as strangers or casual acquaintances. Boundaries around relationships tend to be less porous in communitarian contexts like Japan, where attention is focused on maintaining harmony and cohesion with the group. In the individualist setting of the United States, by contrast, "friendly" behavior is directed to members of in-groups and strangers alike. This difference can lead to misunderstandings across cultures, since the U.S. American behavior of friendliness to strangers may be seen as inappropriately familiar by those from communitarian settings, while U.S. Americans may find social networks in communitarian settings very difficult to penetrate.

No matter which starting point seems natural, it is important to keep the entire continuum in mind when trying to understand and address conflict. From each vantage point, it is useful to remember some things:

From an individualist starting point,

• achievement involves individual goal-setting and action;
• I am ultimately accountable to myself and must make decisions I can live with;
• while I consult with others about choices, I am autonomous: a discrete circle; and
• I believe in equality and consider everyone able to make their own personal choices.

From a communitarian starting point,

• maintaining group harmony and cohesion is important, and my decisions should not disrupt that;
• choices are made in consultation with family and authority figures and their input is weighted as heavily, or even more heavily, than mine. I am an overlapping circle amidst other overlapping circles;
• my decisions reflect on my group and I am accountable to them as a member; and
• I notice hierarchy and accept direction from those of higher status than myself.

With these differences in mind, it is important for individualists to recognize the web of relations encompassing the communitarian party to a conflict, and to act in recognition of those. Similarly, it is helpful for those from communitarian settings to remember that individualists value autonomy and initiative, and to act in ways that respect these preferences.

Combining Starting Points: High-Context/Low-Context and Individualism/Communitarianism

As with any set of starting points, neither of these starting points exists in isolation. High-context communication often corresponds with communitarian settings, just as low-context communication often occurs in individualist settings. This is not always true, but it is worth exploring because it is frequently the case. Where communitarianism is the preferred starting point, individual expression may be less important than group will. Indirect communication that draws heavily on nonverbal cues may be preferable in such a setting, because it allows for multiple meanings, saves face, leaves room for group input into decisions, and displays interdependence. In individualist settings, low-context communication may be preferable because it is direct, expresses individual desires and initiatives, displays independence, and clarifies the meaning intended by the speaker.

Nobel Peace Laureate Jimmy Carter understood the importance of high-context communication with his counterparts from Israel and Egypt in the historic Camp David peace negotiations. In one example, Carter reports that Prime Minister Begin was about to leave the negotiations after several days, discouraged at having reached an impasse. Carter met Begin at his accommodations and presented him with pictures of the three heads of state, inscribed with the names of each of Begin's grandchildren. Prime Minister Begin repeated the names of his grandchildren out loud as he paused to look at the pictures, seeming to reflect on the importance of the peace negotiations to the grandchildren's futures.

Carter knew instinctively that no direct, low-context appeal would work to bring Prime Minister Begin back to the negotiating table. Perhaps low-context requests were already tried without success. Instead, Carter relied on a high-context reference to legacy, future generations, and the relations that Begin cared about. He invoked the communities each leader served by reminding Begin of his grandchildren. Through Carter's masterful, high-context appeal, negotiations resumed and peace was achieved between neighbors who had been in intractable conflict for many years.[10]

This example shows the importance of these two interrelated starting points, individualism/communitarianism and low/high context. While there are many exceptions to cultural patterns and all of us use different starting points depending on the context, noticing the intersections of ways of making meaning is often a useful window into conflict dynamics.

[1] Montaigne, 1580. Quoted in Tracy Novinger. Intercultural Communication . (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2001)

[2] This is closely related to the concept of framing .

[3] Edward T. Hall, The Dance of Life. The Other Dimension of Time (New York: Doubleday, 1983), 7.

[4] Donal Carbaugh, Intercultural Theory [on-line] Available from http://eco.ittralee.ie/personal/theories-III.php#1 ; Internet. 

[5] Lustig, Myron and Jolene Koester. 1998. Intercultural Competence: Interpersonal Communication Across Cultures (3 rd Ed.). (Addison-Wesley Publishing, 1998), 30.

[6] Edward T. Hall, Beyond Culture . (New York: Anchor/Doubleday, 1971)

[7] Tan, Amy. "The Language of Discretion," in About Language 3 rd Ed ., E.H.Roberts and G. Turgeon, eds. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1992), 142.

[8] These points are taken from Michelle LeBaron, Bridging Cultural Conflicts: New Approaches for a Changing World (San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 2003)

[9] Quoted in Tracy Novinger, Intercultural Communication (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 2001), 31.

[10] Jimmy Carter, Keeping Faith (New York: Bantam Books, 1982), 392, 399.

Use the following to cite this article: LeBaron, Michelle. "Communication Tools for Understanding Cultural Differences." Beyond Intractability . Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Information Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. Posted: June 2003 < http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/communication-tools >.

Additional Resources

The intractable conflict challenge.

Our inability to constructively handle intractable conflict is the most serious, and the most neglected, problem facing humanity. Solving today's tough problems depends upon finding better ways of dealing with these conflicts.   More...

Selected Recent BI Posts Including Hyper-Polarization Posts

• Lorelei Kelly on Strengthening Democracy at the Top and the Bottom -- Lorelei Kelly describes the work of the bipartisan Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress which passed 202 recommendations, many unanimously. Over 1/2 have been implemented and most others are in progress.
• Massively Parallel Peace and Democracy Building Links for the Week of March 24, 2024 -- A rename of our regular "colleague and context links" to highlight how these readings and the activities they describe all fit within our "massively parallel" peace and democracy building framework--or show why it is needed.
• Massively Parallel Peace and Democracy Building Roles - Part 1 -- People engaged in massively parallel peace and democracy building play at least 50 different roles. In Part 1 of this three part series, we explore the roles played by the "strategizers," or "big thinkers" who help us understand the both nature of the problem and possible responses.

Get the Newsletter Check Out Our Quick Start Guide

Educators Consider a low-cost BI-based custom text .

Constructive Conflict Initiative

Join Us in calling for a dramatic expansion of efforts to limit the destructiveness of intractable conflict.

Things You Can Do to Help Ideas

Practical things we can all do to limit the destructive conflicts threatening our future.

Conflict Frontiers

A free, open, online seminar exploring new approaches for addressing difficult and intractable conflicts. Major topic areas include:

Scale, Complexity, & Intractability

Massively Parallel Peacebuilding

Authoritarian Populism

Constructive Confrontation

Conflict Fundamentals

An look at to the fundamental building blocks of the peace and conflict field covering both “tractable” and intractable conflict.

Beyond Intractability / CRInfo Knowledge Base

Home / Browse | Essays | Search | About

BI in Context

Links to thought-provoking articles exploring the larger, societal dimension of intractability.

Colleague Activities

Information about interesting conflict and peacebuilding efforts.

Disclaimer: All opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Beyond Intractability or the Conflict Information Consortium.

Beyond Intractability 

Unless otherwise noted on individual pages, all content is... Copyright © 2003-2022 The Beyond Intractability Project c/o the Conflict Information Consortium All rights reserved. Content may not be reproduced without prior written permission.

Guidelines for Using Beyond Intractability resources.

Citing Beyond Intractability resources.

Photo Credits for Homepage, Sidebars, and Landing Pages

Contact Beyond Intractability    Privacy Policy The Beyond Intractability Knowledge Base Project  Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess , Co-Directors and Editors  c/o  Conflict Information Consortium Mailing Address: Beyond Intractability, #1188, 1601 29th St. Suite 1292, Boulder CO 80301, USA Contact Form

Powered by  Drupal

production_1

Navigating Cultural Differences in Communication

Eloquence Everly

As an affiliate, we may earn a commission from qualifying purchases. We get commissions for purchases made through links on this website from Amazon and other third parties.

In today’s diverse workplace, effective communication is crucial for building strong and successful teams. However, communicating across cultures can present unique challenges due to  cultural differences in communication  styles and norms. Understanding and managing these differences is essential to foster an inclusive and productive work environment.

Cultural differences in communication  encompass various aspects, including verbal and non-verbal cues. Verbal communication can be influenced by  language barriers , while  non-verbal communication  includes body language, facial expressions, and  personal space . By navigating these cultural differences, you can enhance your  cross-cultural communication  skills and create meaningful connections.

In this article, we will explore the importance of cultural understanding in communication, the impact of  non-verbal communication  differences,  personal space  and proxemics, greetings and physical contact,  cultural influences on teamwork , dining etiquette and business customs, and the role of language and communication tempo. By addressing these areas, you can develop strategies to effectively communicate in diverse cultures and strengthen professional relationships.

Key Takeaways:

• Understanding cultural differences is crucial for effective  communication in diverse cultures .
• Non-verbal communication  varies across cultures, such as body language and facial expressions.
• Personal space  and proxemics differ among cultures and can impact communication dynamics .
• Greetings and physical contact customs vary, so it’s important to be culturally sensitive.
• Cultural influences play a significant role in teamwork and collaboration.

Importance of Cultural Understanding in Communication

In today’s interconnected world, cultural sensitivity is essential in fostering effective communication.  Cultural diversity in communication  encompasses more than just ethnicity or nationality. It involves embracing a deep understanding of beliefs, language, food, religion, customs, music, arts, social institutions, and rituals. By recognizing and appreciating these cultural aspects, we can navigate through communication barriers and create an inclusive and harmonious environment.

When engaging in  cross-cultural communication , it is crucial to be culturally sensitive. This means being aware of and respectful towards the diversity of cultures and traditions. By adapting our communication styles to accommodate different cultural backgrounds, we can bridge the gap and build stronger connections.

“To effectively communicate, we must realize that we are all different in the way we perceive the world and use this understanding as a guide to our communication with others.” – Tony Robbins

Cultural sensitivity in communication  allows for open dialogue, free from biases and stereotypes. It promotes empathy, understanding, and mutual respect. By valuing cultural diversity and embracing different perspectives, we can enhance our communication skills and establish meaningful connections with individuals from various cultures.

Creating an environment of cultural understanding fosters trust and inclusion, leading to collaborative and innovative teamwork. It enables individuals to contribute their unique experiences and knowledge, contributing to the growth and success of organizations. Organizations that prioritize  cultural diversity in communication  benefit from the rich tapestry of ideas, perspectives, and solutions that emerge from diverse teams.

By valuing cultural understanding and sensitivity in communication, we can break down barriers, foster meaningful relationships, and create a more inclusive and globalized society.

The Benefits of Cultural Sensitivity in Communication

• Promotes empathy and understanding
• Builds trust and inclusivity
• Fosters collaboration and teamwork
• Enhances creativity and innovation
• Expands cultural knowledge and awareness

Cultural Diversity in Communication: A Table of Insights

Non-verbal communication differences in different cultures.

Non-verbal communication is a vital component of  intercultural communication . It encompasses body language, facial expressions, gestures, and other forms of non-verbal cues, which can vary significantly across different cultures. Understanding and adapting to these differences is crucial for effective  cross-cultural communication .

In Western cultures, eye contact is often seen as a sign of attentiveness and respect. However, in certain East Asian cultures such as Japan and China, prolonged eye contact may be considered impolite or even aggressive. To avoid misunderstandings and cultural barriers, it is important to be aware of these diverse interpretations and adjust your behavior accordingly.

“The most important thing in communication is hearing what isn’t said.” – Peter Drucker

Non-verbal communication also extends to other aspects such as facial expressions, posture, and gestures. For example, a thumbs-up gesture is commonly understood as a positive sign in Western cultures. However, in some Middle Eastern countries, it can be seen as offensive. Therefore, being aware of these nuances and adapting your non-verbal cues can foster better cross-cultural understanding and eliminate potential communication barriers.

In summary, non-verbal communication plays a significant role in  intercultural communication . Recognizing and respecting the differences in body language, facial expressions, and other non-verbal cues across cultures is vital for effective cross-cultural communication. By being mindful of these variations, we can bridge the gap and create meaningful connections in diverse cultural settings.

Personal Space and Proxemics in Cross-Cultural Communication

Personal space is a cultural norm that varies across different cultures. Edward Hall’s theory of proxemics suggests that individuals maintain varying degrees of personal distance based on their social setting and cultural background. Understanding these cultural differences in personal space is crucial for effective cross-cultural communication, as it can prevent misunderstandings and discomfort.

In high-contact cultures like South America and the Middle East, closer proximity and more physical touch are preferred in communication. This reflects the cultural value of establishing close relationships and connections. On the other hand, low-contact cultures such as the United States and Northern Europe maintain greater personal space. Individuals in these cultures prefer a certain level of distance during interactions.

By being aware of and respecting these cultural norms related to personal space, you can navigate cross-cultural interactions more effectively. Adapting your behavior to align with the personal space expectations of different cultures can help foster positive communication experiences and build stronger relationships.

Cultural Differences in Greetings and Physical Contact

In cross-cultural communication, greetings and physical contact play a significant role in establishing connections and building rapport. Different cultures have their own unique customs and expectations when it comes to greetings, which can vary from a simple handshake to more intimate gestures.

While a handshake is a common form of greeting in the United States, it’s essential to remember that not all cultures follow the same practice. In some cultures, greetings may involve a bow, a kiss on the cheek, or simply nodding. It’s important to be observant and follow the lead of colleagues or locals to ensure you are respecting their cultural norms and avoiding misunderstandings.

Furthermore, physical contact can be a sensitive matter and may vary depending on the culture and the nature of the relationship. Some cultures emphasize more physical touch, while others maintain a greater personal distance. It’s crucial to be attentive to non-verbal cues and adjust your behavior accordingly to avoid discomfort or offense.

Understanding and adapting to these cultural differences in greetings and physical contact are vital for effective cross-cultural communication. By being respectful and mindful of cultural norms, you can establish positive connections, foster understanding, and enhance your overall communication experience.

• Each culture has its own unique customs and expectations for greetings.
• Handshakes are common in the United States, but other cultures may prefer different forms of greeting, such as bows, kisses on the cheek, or nods.
• Physical contact can vary across cultures, so it’s important to be attentive and adapt your behavior accordingly.
• Following the lead of colleagues and being mindful of cultural norms promotes effective cross-cultural communication.

“When I traveled to Japan for a business meeting, I quickly learned that bowing was the preferred form of greeting instead of a handshake. It was important for me to show respect and adapt to this cultural norm. By following the lead of my Japanese colleagues, I was able to establish a positive connection and foster a productive working relationship.”

Cultural Influences on Teamwork and Collaboration

Cultural differences can have a significant impact on teamwork and collaboration in diverse cultures. Understanding and appreciating these cultural influences is crucial for fostering effective collaboration. It is important to recognize that cultural backgrounds shape individuals’ work styles and preferences, and addressing these differences can lead to more harmonious and productive teamwork.

The Value of Cultural Differences

In some cultures, self-sufficiency is highly valued, and individuals tend to prioritize individual achievements and autonomy. In contrast, other cultures prioritize cooperation and community, placing a greater emphasis on collective goals and team collaboration. These cultural differences can shape the way individuals approach teamwork and problem-solving.

By recognizing and valuing the diverse cultural perspectives within a team, you can harness the strengths of each individual and create a collaborative environment where everyone feels valued and heard.

For example, in cultures that emphasize individualism, team members may excel at taking initiative and working independently. On the other hand, cultures that value collectivism may possess strong teamwork and collaboration skills. By blending these strengths, you can create a well-rounded team that excels both individually and collectively.

Navigating Cultural Differences for Effective Collaboration

Building effective collaboration within a culturally diverse team requires understanding and respect for each individual’s cultural background. It’s important to create an inclusive environment where everyone feels comfortable sharing their perspectives and ideas.

Here are some strategies to effectively navigate cultural differences and promote collaboration:

• Encourage open communication: Create a safe space for team members to express their thoughts and opinions, and actively listen to diverse perspectives.
• Foster cultural sensitivity: Promote cultural sensitivity by providing cultural awareness training and resources to help team members better understand each other’s backgrounds.
• Embrace diverse perspectives: Encourage team members to share their unique experiences and insights, as diverse perspectives can lead to innovative solutions and better decision-making.
• Adapt communication styles: Recognize that communication styles vary across cultures and adapt your communication approach to ensure clarity and understanding.
• Establish clear goals and expectations: Clearly define team goals, roles, and expectations to ensure everyone is aligned and working towards a shared objective.

By implementing these strategies, you can enhance collaboration and leverage the cultural diversity within your team.

Cultural Influences on Teamwork – Case Study

To illustrate the impact of  cultural influences on teamwork , let’s look at a case study:

In an international marketing team, “Team A” consists of individuals from various cultural backgrounds. John, an American team member, values individual autonomy and prefers working independently. Mei, a Chinese team member, values community and collaboration, and prefers working in a group setting. Initially, John and Mei faced challenges in aligning their work styles. John felt frustrated by Mei’s preference for group work, while Mei felt that John’s tendency to work alone was isolating her from the team. However, through open communication and cultural understanding, they were able to bridge the gap. The team set clear expectations for individual and group work, allowing John to contribute autonomously while also providing opportunities for Mei to collaborate. In the end, John and Mei recognized the value of their cultural differences, leveraging their respective strengths to achieve better outcomes for the team. Their collaboration became more effective, resulting in increased productivity and a stronger team dynamic.

By recognizing and embracing  cultural influences on teamwork , you can create a collaborative environment that harnesses the strengths of each team member, leading to improved productivity and more successful outcomes.

Cultural Differences in Dining Etiquette and Business Customs

Dining customs and business practices vary greatly across cultures, and it’s essential to understand and respect these differences to avoid unintentional faux pas and enhance cross-cultural business relationships. From acceptable eating habits to gift-giving customs, each culture has its own unique traditions and table manners that shape their dining etiquette. By being aware of and adapting to these practices, you can navigate cross-cultural dining experiences with ease and show respect for the customs of others.

In some cultures, business discussions are conducted over meals, while in others, they are strictly separate. For instance, in many Asian cultures, meals provide an opportunity for establishing relationships and conducting business. On the other hand, in Western cultures, business meetings are typically held in formal office settings. By understanding these cultural distinctions, you can ensure that you are appropriately adhering to the expectations and norms of the specific cultural context.

Table Manners and Etiquette

Table manners play a significant role in dining etiquette and can vary greatly from one culture to another. It’s crucial to familiarize yourself with the customs of the country or culture you are interacting with to avoid unintentionally offending others or creating awkward situations. Here are a few examples of cultural differences in table manners:

• In some cultures, it’s polite to eat every morsel on your plate as a sign of appreciation, while in others, leaving a little food is considered courteous to show that you are satisfied.
• Using the correct utensils is crucial in some cultures. For instance, in Western cultures, the fork is held in the left hand and the knife in the right, while in Asian cultures, chopsticks are the customary utensils.
• Proper seating arrangements can also vary. In some Asian cultures, the most important person is seated at the head of the table, while in other cultures, the host or eldest individual is given that position of honor.

Understanding these cultural variations in table manners and etiquette will help you navigate dining situations with confidence and respect.

Gift-Giving Customs

Gift-giving customs differ across cultures and can have important implications in business settings. In some cultures, gifts are exchanged as a sign of respect, appreciation, or to establish closer relationships. However, in other cultures, gifts may be more symbolic and have specific meanings. For example:

In Japan, the act of gift-giving is deeply rooted in their culture and plays a vital role in establishing and maintaining business relationships. Gifts are often presented with both hands, and the recipient typically waits until the giver leaves before opening them.

These cultural nuances should be taken into consideration when engaging in cross-cultural business interactions to ensure that your gift selection and presentation align with the customs and expectations of the particular culture.

Behaviors During Meals

Appropriate behavior during meals is another aspect of  cross-cultural dining etiquette . Being mindful of the following behaviors can help you avoid misunderstandings and show respect for the cultural norms:

• In some cultures, it is considered impolite to start eating until the host or senior individuals begin, while in others, it’s customary to start eating as soon as the food is served.
• Chewing with your mouth closed and avoiding loud chewing noises is generally expected in most cultures as a basic display of table manners.
• Engaging in polite conversation during the meal is common in many cultures, while in others, it may be more reserved. Observing and adapting to the conversation style of your dining companions is key.

Being aware of and respecting these dining customs will contribute to successful cross-cultural business interactions and help you establish rapport with individuals from different cultures.

Being mindful of  cross-cultural dining etiquette  and understanding  business customs in different cultures  is key to building strong international relationships and avoiding embarrassing social mishaps. By paying attention to table manners, gift-giving customs, and appropriate behavior during meals, you can navigate cross-cultural dining situations with confidence and demonstrate cultural sensitivity. Embracing and respecting cultural differences will not only enhance your business interactions but also foster understanding and appreciation between individuals from different backgrounds.

Language and Communication Tempo in Cross-Cultural Settings

Verbal communication is a vital aspect of cross-cultural interactions. However, it’s important to recognize that communication styles and tempo can vary significantly across different cultures. The pace of speech, the use of pauses, and the overall tempo of conversations can differ based on cultural norms and preferences.

In some cultures, such as those in Latin America and the Mediterranean, people tend to speak at a faster tempo, with animated expressions and gestures. This rapid pace reflects the enthusiasm and warmth of communication in these cultures. On the other hand, certain cultures like those in Japan and Scandinavian countries prioritize a slower, more measured speech tempo, emphasizing clarity, precision, and thoughtful expression.

Understanding these language and communication tempo differences is crucial for effective cross-cultural communication. It allows you to adapt your own communication style and tempo to match the cultural expectations of those you are communicating with. By doing so, you can establish rapport, mutual understanding, and create a comfortable environment for dialogue.

Language barriers  can also pose challenges in cross-cultural communication, even with the assistance of translators. It’s important to be mindful of the potential difficulties that language differences can create and take steps to bridge the gap.

Here are some strategies to overcome language barriers in cross-cultural settings:

• Utilize visual aids:  Incorporate visual elements such as diagrams, images, or charts to supplement verbal communication. Visual aids can help convey meaning and enhance understanding, regardless of language proficiency.
• Use simple and clear language:  Avoid complex sentence structures, idioms, slang, or jargon that may be difficult to interpret for non-native speakers. Choose words and phrases that are easily understood across different language backgrounds.
• Practice active listening:  Pay close attention to non-verbal cues, such as body language and facial expressions, to comprehend the underlying meaning of the message. Active listening helps you better understand the speaker’s perspective and fill in potential gaps in communication.
• Encourage questions and clarifications:  Create a safe and open environment where individuals feel comfortable asking questions or seeking clarifications. Encouraging proactive communication can help overcome language barriers and foster effective dialogue.

“Effective communication is not just about speaking the same language. It’s about understanding and adapting to the unique ways in which different cultures express themselves.”

Cross-Cultural Communication Tempo Comparison

By recognizing and adapting to the diverse language and communication tempo in cross-cultural settings, you can overcome language barriers and promote effective communication and understanding.

In  conclusion ,  cultural differences in communication  play a crucial role in our increasingly globalized world. Understanding and respecting diverse cultural aspects that influence communication is key to bridging the gap and fostering effective cross-cultural relationships and collaboration.

By embracing cultural sensitivity, we can adapt our communication styles to accommodate different cultural norms and preferences. This leads to improved understanding, reduced misunderstandings, and stronger connections in diverse workplaces and communities.

Recognizing the impact of cultural differences in communication allows us to break down barriers and create an environment of inclusivity and open dialogue. By actively engaging with diverse perspectives and investing in cross-cultural understanding, we can create high-functioning, diverse teams that thrive on effective communication.

What are cultural differences in communication?

Cultural differences in communication refer to the variations in verbal and non-verbal aspects of communication that exist among different cultures, including language, body language, facial expressions, and more.

Why is cultural understanding important in communication?

Cultural understanding is crucial for effective communication across cultures. Embracing cultural sensitivity and diversity helps eliminate prejudices, stereotypes, and misconceptions, creating an environment of open, transparent communication.

How do non-verbal communication differences affect cross-cultural communication?

Non-verbal communication differences , such as body language and facial expressions, can vary across cultures. Understanding and adapting to these differences is essential for effective communication, as misinterpretations can lead to misunderstandings or tension.

What is personal space and proxemics in cross-cultural communication?

Personal space refers to the physical distance individuals maintain from one another in social settings. Edward Hall’s theory of proxemics suggests that different cultures have varying expectations of personal space, and understanding these differences can prevent misunderstandings in cross-cultural interactions.

How do cultural differences affect greetings and physical contact?

Different cultures have distinct preferences for greetings and physical contact. Understanding and respecting these customs is important to avoid misunderstandings. Greetings can range from handshakes to bows, and physical contact can vary depending on cultural norms and the nature of the relationship.

What role does cultural influence play in teamwork and collaboration?

Cultural influences shape an individual’s work style and preferences, which can impact teamwork and collaboration. Recognizing and appreciating these differences fosters better collaboration, as cultural backgrounds can inform different approaches to problem-solving and teamwork.

How do cultural differences impact dining etiquette and business customs?

Dining customs and business practices can vary greatly across cultures. Understanding and respecting these traditions and manners is crucial for successful cross-cultural business relationships. Being aware of practices like table manners, gift-giving customs, and appropriate behavior during meals promotes effective communication.

How do language and communication tempo differ across cultures?

Verbal communication styles and tempo can vary across cultures. Some languages have a faster pace of speech, while others are slower. Being aware of these differences aids in effective communication. Language barriers can also be a challenge, and finding ways to bridge the gap is important in cross-cultural communication.

Why is understanding cultural differences in communication important in today’s globalized world?

Understanding and navigating cultural differences in communication is essential in today’s globalized world. By embracing cultural sensitivity and adapting communication styles, we can foster improved understanding, reduced misunderstandings, and stronger connections in diverse workplaces and communities.

About the author

Latest Posts

Journal of Visual Communication and image Representation

Welcome to the Visual Communication Journal – Image Insights. In this journal, we explore the fascinating world of visual communication and image representation. We delve into the latest technologies, theories, and research in these fields to uncover the power of […]

Visual Communication Jobs in 2024

The field of visual communication offers a wide range of job opportunities in design and media. These careers encompass various roles in creating, producing, and exhibiting visual content. From graphic design to digital media, there are numerous options in the […]

Visual Communication Meaning in Tamil Explained

Visual communication meaning in Tamil is “கட்புலத் தொடர்பாடல்”. This term refers to the use of visual elements, such as signs, typography, graphics, and images, to convey ideas and information. It is a form of communication that relies on visual cues […]

Introduction

Appreciating different cultures.

The following characteristics show differences between cultures and should be considered by effective writers:

• Amount of Detail Expected – High-context cultures such as Japan, China, and France provide little details in their writing. A high-context culture is based on fewer, deeper relations with people; there are many unspoken social rules and understandings within the culture. People in these cultures expect readers to have enough knowledge about the communication before they begin reading. In areas such as instructions, for example, it is assumed that readers have enough background knowledge or experience that there is no need to explain different tools used or walk the reader through any steps. People in low-context cultures such as the United States, Great Britain, and Germany assume readers know very little before they begin reading. Low-context cultures have a greater number of surface-level relations; rules are more explicitly defined so others know how to behave. People in low-context cultures expect detailed writing that explains the entire process. Writers should consider the cultural audience of their writing so that readers are not insulted by an excess or lack of information.
• Distance Between the Top and Bottom of Organizational Hierarchies – Many organizations in the United States and Western Europe have great distances with many layers between top-level management and low-level workers. When the distance is large, writing to employees above and below tends to be more formal. In cultures where companies are more flatly organized, communication between layers tends to be less formal.
• Individual versus Group Orientation – Many Asian and South American cultures are collectivist, meaning people pursue group goals and pay attention to the needs of the group. In individualistic cultures such as the United States and Northern Europe, people are more interested in personal achievement. Writers should know if they are writing to an audience that is “me-oriented” or one that is “we-oriented.”
• In-person Business Communications – There are several differences that one should be aware of when meeting a colleague with a different cultural background. For instance, some cultures stand very close to each other when talking and some prefer to have distance. Some cultures make eye contact with each other and some find it disrespectful. There are also certain cultures where an employee will not disagree or give feedback to their superior. It is seen as disrespectful. In these cultures, it is usually unacceptable to ask questions.
• Preference for Direct or Indirect Statements – People in the United States and Northern Europe prefer direct communications, while people in Japan and Korea typically prefer indirect communications. When denying a request in the U.S., a writer will typically apologize, but firmly state that request was denied. In Japan, that directness may seem rude. A Japanese writer may instead write that the decision has not yet been made, delaying the answer with the expectation that the requester will not ask again. In Japan, this is viewed as more polite than flatly denying someone; however, in the United States this may give false hope to the requester, and the requester may ask again.
• Basis of Business Decisions – In the United States and Europe, business decisions are typically made objectively with consideration given to cost, feasibility, timeliness, etc. In Arab cultures, business decisions are often made on the basis of personal relationships. Writers should know if a goal-oriented approach is best, or if a more personable communication would be preferred.

Gaining Knowledge about Intercultural Readers

It is often difficult to determine who will be reading your documents. It is important to distinguish your audience before writing. When writing to a wide variety of people, knowing their cultural biases, assumptions, and customs are essential. There are a variety of resources online that provide cultural information about countries around the world. Understanding differences reduces the amount of miscommunication when doing global business. As an example, in the United States many times the date is written Month, Day, Year, but in other countries they write a date Day, Month, Year. Knowing this can reduce the confusion of when things are sent, due, and timelines. Learning information about other nationalities helps you relate to your readers as well as prepare you for the future. Readers will appreciate your knowledge about their customs.

Other Sources

Previous communications kept by your company can also be a useful tool for determining how to write to another culture. If the writing was well received, you will able to look for clues as to how to structure your writing. Writing that resulted in a new partnership or a completed sale may be the best indicator of how to structure your writing.

Unknown Readers

It is not always possible to know who your reading audience may be. Many emails or memos written to your intended audience may go through numerous people. Although you may be targeting one type of audience, it is important to not forget about the “phantom,” “future,” and “complex” readers.

Phantom readers – Real but unnamed readers are phantom readers. They are “behind the scenes” and their presence is usually unknown to a writer. Phantom readers are included in communications that require a decision. A clue to phantom readers presence is that the person written to is not high enough in organizational hierarchy to make a decision. It is important to meet the needs of the phantom readers because they may be the most important reader.

Future Readers – Written communications may still be used weeks, months or even years after being written. Every company document is considered a legal document, so lawyers and judges could be future readers. Future readers can also be employees who retrieve old communications for information or ideas. Writing communications with future readers in mind will save time and give documents an appeal that will please a wide range of readers.

Complex Audiences – Addressing a group of people who will be reading from many perspectives is a complex audience. Focusing on writing to complex audiences will allow you to relate to people from many different backgrounds. It is important to relate to each reader while not taking away from your overall communication.

Mindful Tips When Writing

• Never Use Racial Profiling : Racial slurs, profiling or any other form in a professional document are unacceptable in every instance. NO matter how comfortable you are with your audience. If the document were to come in the possession of unintended hands it could look highly negative upon you. The professional world on no level tolerates writing like this. Save it for your personal or individual writing.
• Never Use Profanity : Again, this is not accepted in the professional world on any level. Even writing between co-workers, this can offend and look negatively upon you.
• Be Mindful and Respectful of Religious Beliefs : Avoid words like bless, god, covet, bible, or any other religious connotations . Avoid mentioning holiday names, for example; “During the Christmas Season…” , but rather “During this holiday season…” . This will ensure no one group feels excluded or discriminated against. Again, writing in this way is just professional courtesy.
• Avoid Slang : This is a general tip for all writing, but avoiding slang terms will ensure your words are not misconstrued and taken other than your intended meaning.

• Appreciating Different Cultures. Provided by : WikiBooks. Located at : http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Professional_and_Technical_Writing/Ethics/Cultures . Project : Professional and Technical Writing. License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Image of Gesture. Authored by : Val Kerry. Located at : https://flic.kr/p/fXaoJ . License : CC BY-NC-SA: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike
• Image of Two Men. Authored by : Bahrain International Airport. Located at : https://flic.kr/p/guoPub . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Image of Cubicle Workers. Authored by : Moresheth. Located at : https://flic.kr/p/59dsNh . License : CC BY: Attribution
• Image of Leaning Against the World. Authored by : Foxspain Fotografia. Located at : https://flic.kr/p/5Uvbj2 . License : CC BY: Attribution

2.8 Appreciating Different Cultures

Today, the majority of workplaces are multicultural. Employees in the workplace are more likely to come from different backgrounds including cultural environments and different parts of the world. The textbook, Technical Communication by Paul V. Anderson, makes a point to emphasize cultural differences. It is important to take into account whom a document will be read by.

The following characteristics show differences between cultures and should be considered by effective writers:

Amount of Detail Expected

High-context cultures such as Japan, China, and France provide little details in their writing. A high-context culture is based on fewer, deeper relations with people; there are many unspoken social rules and understandings within the culture. People in these cultures expect readers to have enough knowledge about the communication before they begin reading. In areas such as instructions, for example, it is assumed that readers have enough background knowledge or experience that there is no need to explain different tools used or walk the reader through any steps. People in low-context cultures such as the United States, Great Britain, and Germany assume readers know very little before they begin reading. Low-context cultures have a greater number of surface-level relations; rules are more explicitly defined so others know how to behave. People in low-context cultures expect detailed writing that explains the entire process. Writers should consider the cultural audience of their writing so that readers are not insulted by an excess or lack of information.

Distance Between the Top and Bottom of Organizational Hierarchies

Many organizations in the United States and Western Europe have great distances with many layers between top-level management and low-level workers. When the distance is large, writing to employees above and below tends to be more formal. In cultures where companies are more flatly organized, communication between layers tends to be less formal.

Individual versus Group Orientation

Many Asian and South American cultures are collectivist, meaning people pursue group goals and pay attention to the needs of the group. In individualistic cultures such as the United States and Northern Europe, people are more interested in personal achievement. Writers should know if they are writing to an audience that is “me-oriented” or one that is “we-oriented.”

In-person Business Communications

There are several differences that one should be aware of when meeting a colleague with a different cultural background. For instance, some cultures stand very close to each other when talking and some prefer to have distance. Some cultures make eye contact with each other and some find it disrespectful. There are also certain cultures where an employee will not disagree or give feedback to their superior. It is seen as disrespectful. In these cultures, it is usually unacceptable to ask questions.

Preference for Direct or Indirect Statements

People in the United States and Northern Europe prefer direct communications, while people in Japan and Korea typically prefer indirect communications. When denying a request in the U.S., a writer will typically apologize, but firmly state that request was denied. In Japan, that directness may seem rude. A Japanese writer may instead write that the decision has not yet been made, delaying the answer with the expectation that the requester will not ask again. In Japan, this is viewed as more polite than flatly denying someone; however, in the United States this may give false hope to the requester, and the requester may ask again.

Basis of Business Decisions  

In the United States and Europe, business decisions are typically made objectively with consideration given to cost, feasibility, timeliness, etc. In Arab cultures, business decisions are often made on the basis of personal relationships. Writers should know if a goal-oriented approach is best, or if a more personable communication would be preferred.

Interpretation of Images, Gestures, and Words

Words, images, and gestures can mean different things in different cultures. Knowing how images will be interpreted in another culture is crucial before sending documents to unfamiliar audiences. For example, hand gestures are interpreted differently around the world, and graphics showing hands should generally be avoided. Also, religiously affiliated wording can cause offense by readers. “I’ve been blessed to work with you” and comments that lend themselves to religious references should be avoided in the business setting.

Gaining Knowledge about Intercultural Readers

It is often difficult to determine who will be reading your documents. It is important to distinguish your audience before writing. When writing to a wide variety of people, knowing their cultural biases, assumptions, and customs are essential. There are a variety of resources online that provide cultural information about countries around the world. Understanding differences reduces the amount of miscommunication when doing global business. As an example, in the United States many times the date is written Month, Day, Year, but in other countries they write a date Day, Month, Year. Knowing this can reduce the confusion of when things are sent, due, and timelines. Learning information about other nationalities helps you relate to your readers as well as prepare you for the future. Readers will appreciate your knowledge about their customs.

Technical Writing at LBCC Copyright © 2020 by Will Fleming is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Cultural Diversity — Appreciation of Cultural Differences in the Police Force to Effective Communication

Appreciation of Cultural Differences in The Police Force to Effective Communication

• Categories: Cultural Diversity Diversity Police

About this sample

Words: 2292 |

12 min read

Published: Feb 11, 2023

Words: 2292 | Pages: 5 | 12 min read

Table of contents

The police force, women in the police force, lgbtq community in policing, promotional opportunities, increasing diversity, increasing diverse populations, sexual harassment.

• Espiritu, D. (2017). The future of diversity and police legitimacy. Journal of California Law Enforcement, 51(3), 7-14.
• Kenneth Novak, G. C. (2017). Police and Society. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Linda S. Miller, K. M. (2014). Community Policing: Partnerships for Problem Solving. Cengage Learning.
• Why is Cultural Diversity Important. (n.d.). Retrieved from partnerships internation: https://www.partnershipinternational.ie/why-is-cultural-diversity-important/

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr Jacklynne

Verified writer

• Expert in: Social Issues Law, Crime & Punishment

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

5 pages / 2486 words

6 pages / 2507 words

1 pages / 570 words

3 pages / 1552 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Cultural Diversity

Cultural diversity within the workplace is a growing phenomenon, especially in multinational corporations that operate in global markets. This essay undertakes a comparative analysis of multinational corporations to draw [...]

Learning about other cultures is a profound and transformative journey that goes beyond acquiring knowledge; it is a gateway to personal growth and global citizenship. This essay delves into the significance of learning about [...]

Lastly, I must acknowledge and appreciate the love and kindness that I experienced since I arrived in this country. When I joined the university, I never expected that I will be received by my classmates with such [...]

In an increasingly interconnected world, the concept of the "cultural plunge" has gained significant relevance and importance. A cultural plunge, often known as cultural immersion or cultural exposure, is an intentional and [...]

Cultural relativism is a concept that has sparked significant debate and controversy within American culture. The idea that cultural practices and beliefs should be understood within the context of the culture in which they [...]

As social decent variety increments crosswise over races, ethnicities, dialects, nationalities, strict contrasts, and globalization, social assorted variety in the working environment has expanded as sexual direction is spoken [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Snapsolve any problem by taking a picture. Try it in the Numerade app?