Having introduced the research, outlined its significance, and state its purposes in chapter one, this chapter provides a thorough review of previous research done in the area of intercultural communication between international students and host students. Such a literature review cannot be exhaustive, for there is always a need to refer to the past to make contributions to the future.
Intercultural Communication
It is said that humans‘ first response to any noted difference is usually to avoid it. This can be seen throughout history. When colonizers were unsuccessful in avoiding different people, they tried to convert them. When they could neither avoid nor convert them, they would kill them. However, people do not need to psychically harm others to eliminate them. When a vast majority or anyone who has the upper hand go out of their way to make the lives of the less privileged others miserable in an organization or neighborhood, they also ―kill‖ them, for they cannot flourish and often times, they do not survive (Bennett, 1998).
One way to avoid killing anyone because of notably differences is through the understanding of intercultural communication. Intercultural communication is a ―Symbolic process in which people from different cultures creates shared meanings" (Lustig & Koester, 2003, p. 51). It occurs when large and important cultural differences create dissimilar interpretations and expectations about how to communicate competently. Intercultural communication entails face-to-face or person-to-person interaction among human beings. For communication of this magnitude to take place, each participant must view him/herself as being perceived by others. Thus, all participants must see themselves as possibly engaged in communication and capable of giving and receiving feedback. Effective intercultural communication is vital to not only the establishment but also the maintenance of positive intergroup relations. Some main factors that are believed to be critical to intercultural communication competence, for they strongly impact the favorability of intergroup contacts,
12
include cultural knowledge and awareness, communication skills, and tolerance for ambiguity (Giles & Johnson, 1981; Gudykunst, 1986; Lustig & Koester, 1996).
As has been noted, people of different cultures must find ways to get along, for communication is vital to everyday survival as well as positive intergroup relations. Intercultural communicators must equip themselves with the necessary skills such as cultural awareness and tolerance for the unfamiliar, because they strongly impact the favorability of intergroup contact.
Table 2.1
Definition of Intercultural Communication
Definition Author and Year
Intercultural communication is the sharing of information on different levels of awareness and control between people with different cultural backgrounds, where different cultural backgrounds include both national cultural differences and differences which are connected with participation in the different activities that exist within a national unit.
(Allwood, 1985, p. 3)
Acts of communication undertaken by individuals identified with groups exhibiting intergroup variation in shared social and cultural patterns. These patterns, individually expressed, are the major variables, in the purpose, the manner, and means, by which the communicative process is effected.
A symbolic process in which people from different cultures create shared meanings. It occurs when large and important cultural differences create dissimilar interpretations and expectations about how to communicate competently.
(Damen, 1987, p. 23)
(Lustig & Koester,
2003, p. 49-51)
13
Intercultural Communication of Students Intercultural Communication of International Students
Far too many times, international students experience feelings of uncertainty and anxiety about how to integrate into their host society. They often question the deeds that prescribe social norms in their host country and whether or not they are adhering to these norms. It is quite obvious to most visitors to a foreign country, that there are notable differences in various aspects of the way of life such as dress, food, sports, and leisure activities, of that foreign country. Other differences exist in the way they carry themselves, their personality, and interests. In regards to international students all of these differences between the host country and their country of origin, can result in incompatibility among students, intercultural conflicts, and social alienation.
According to researchers, having a local or domestically based social support system is significant in the acculturation process and for the successful adaptation of international students into their host culture, because it easies the transition process (Hayes & Lin, 1994; Yeh & Inose, 2003). Berry (1997a, 1997b) emphasizes that the atmosphere as well as the attitude of the host country nationals are important in the acculturation process, for these provide the framework, in which acculturation will span out and relations will be developed.
When intercultural communication of internationals is looked at, a lot is left up to the host country to decide if the experience of the international personnel will be a favorable one. If it is the culture of the host country or dominant society to marginalize minority groups, then the minority groups will have less successful relationships and more conflicts in their interactions.
There is more than enough evidence, which supports the notion that unfavorable relations with host nationals have drastic consequences for the psychological well-being of international students (Leong & Chou, 1996; Paige, 1990; Pedersen, 1991). According to Ward & Rana-Deuba (2000), there are substantial variations in U.S. American students‘ reaction to international students. Some will befriend internationals students, while others will not (Ward, 2001). On the other hand, however, international students may also bring about a number of positive outcomes among members of the host country. Some research proposes that domestic
14
students feel curious, interested, and inspired by their foreign guests (Spencer-Rodgers &
McGovern, 2002).
The literature on international-host student interactions propels the idea that there is generally low interaction between the two groups (Abe, Talbot & Geelhoed, 1998; Burns, 1991;
Nesdale & Todd, 1993; Smart, Volet & Ang, 1998; Ward & Masgoret, 2004; Zimmerman, 1995).
It is mentioned that while international students would prefer interaction, host students prefer low levels of interaction (Beaver & Tuck, 1998; Nesdale & Todd, 1993; Volet & Ang, 1998). In a research conducted on New Zealand university students, Beaver & Tuck found that the host students and internationals students, alike, desire for cross-cultural interactions dropped from their first year to their second year of undergraduate study, and the two groups tend to go through the rest of their university years unaware of each other‘s existence (Nesdale & Todd, 1993).
Studies indicate that international students, who feel a sense of connectedness towards their host country‘s social network, are less likely to experience acculturation related stress but are more likely to adjust successfully (Coelho et al., 1962; Ingman, 2003; Yeh & Inose, 2003).
Although it has been proven that close relationships with host country nationals result in enhanced cultural adjustment, many international students tend to maintain close social contact with those of their own kind, i.e., ethnicity or other international students (Constantine & Sue, 2005). There are two main reasons behind such behavior. For one, international students try to create a subculture or support group for themselves, while away in the host country. Since people are accustomed to living with those, who are similar to themselves, this is an effective way for them to share feelings of homesickness, insecurity, loneliness, and so on. Secondly, local students come off as rather passive and most time wait for international students to initiate conversations and friendships. It has been said that trying to make friends with local students is extremely difficult and sometimes disappointing. According to Arthur (2004), ―People here ask how you are, but then keep on walking‖.
Thus, it is evident that communication with people from different cultures is commonly associated with adverse emotional responses. Because of various communication obstacles, many individuals may feel uncomfortable and anxious when interacting with culturally different others (Stephan & Stephan, 1985). Although accented speech is at times viewed as socially
15
attractive, the process of accented speech is somewhat demanding. Thus, members of the dominant group may feel a sense of impatience and frustration when communicating with non-native speakers of a language (Dodd, 1998). Additionally, non-non-native speakers of a language are regarded as less favorable than native speakers on a broad spectrum of attributes, including competence and trustworthiness, just to name a few (Edwards, 1982). Group differences in emotional expressivity, non-verbal communication styles, and cultural variations in norms, and customs also add to the confusion of intercultural encounters (Kim, 1986; Gudykunst & Hammer, 1988). In the long run, constant repeated communication failures and emotionally burdened cultural misunderstandings can eventually give rise to a negative mindset toward the culturally different.
Quite a few researchers mentioned the need for intervention to create contact between local and international students (Volet & Ang, 1998; Todd & Nesdale, 1997; Ward, 2001). Lack of such intervention may result in the two groups (local and international students) spending their time at university completely unaware of the other rather than making the most of the opportunities to interact. It must be mentioned that any discussion of the challenges facing international students cannot be generalized, simple because of the fact that international students come from diverse backgrounds and are significantly different (Ryan & Louie 2007). It is evident that in order to promote cross-cultural interactions more information is needed about the barriers facing intercultural friendships and the paths that lead to successful intercultural friendships.
In short, the difficulties that international students face while studying abroad can result in intercultural conflicts and social alienation. It has been noted that having a local or domestically based social support system is significant in the acculturation of international students into their host culture, because it soothes the transition process. Despite the number of difficulties involved with integrating local and international students in the same classroom, international students can also help to bring about a number of positive outcomes among members of the host country.
16
Intercultural Communication of Chinese Students
Many studies have shed light on the intercultural encounters of the Chinese, more specifically of Chinese students studying abroad. These studies have placed tremendous focus on the intercultural communication either between the Chinese students and the students of the host countries, or between Chinese students and students of other cultures in the classroom context.
These studies have analyzed difficulties and identified strategies to improve various problems, which have arisen within this context. The following section reviews the literature on intercultural communication of Chinese students. In the context of this review, Chinese is taken to mean any person, who is of ethnic Chinese descent.
Liu (2001) discussed the face-saving and politeness strategies used by Chinese students in the American classroom. He pointed out that Chinese students‘ silence in the classroom is ascribed to the Chinese concept of saving face. He also identified the reason why Chinese students save their face by keeping silent in the classroom on the basis of case studies of two Chinese students. In his study, Liu argues that although the silence patterns can sometimes lead to intercultural misunderstandings and stereotyping of Chinese students, this Chinese way of politeness and face strategies should, nonetheless, be treated with intercultural sensitivity and respect. He suggested that Chinese students should develop a new face-saving concept to better interact with other students and to adapt to the new community.
In his study, Gao (2000) analyzed the influence of Chinese native language and culture on the verbal and nonverbal communication of Chinese students, when they interact with English native speakers in Australia. Through means of survey and interview with Chinese students in Australia, Gao found that both verbal and nonverbal communication characterizes Chinese cultural values and customs. He mentions that deeply embedded Chinese culture and background affects their way of life in Australia and contributes to the difficulties and miscommunication in their new living environment. Gao specifically discussed some influences caused by differences in social status, approach to academic study, work opportunities, recreation, and verbal and nonverbal communication when Chinese students studies and lives in the new cultural community. He concluded by saying, "Acquisition of a non-native language by an immigrant is culture-orientated; the more you are ready to embrace a culture the more you are tuned to the
17
language of that culture; and as a result the more you will be competent in that language" (Gao, 2000, p.15).
Liao (1996) discussed the importance of second language or L2 cultural knowledge in English Language Teaching (ELT) teaching in China. She first categorized the common types of cultural mistakes made by Chinese students. These include the transfer of speech acts that involves Chinese students using "where are you going" as an initiation for a greeting. This is unacceptability of L2 customs‘ which incorporates the use of politeness and modesty strategies Another is the common contradiction between the English and Chinese value senses, such as violating the teacher‘s privacy. Then, there is the generalization of foreign countries, which could be classified as stereotyping of L2 culture, which can lead to more serious miscommunication difficulties than linguistic mistakes. Within this framework, Liao proposes the inclusion of L2 cultural knowledge in language teaching. This idea of inclusion can be incorporated in three main ways. A well-designed language curriculum can be developed. A proper, cultural, syllabus as well as testing method can also be designed. Changes of modern language can also be reflected. Hence, this will lead to increase awareness of language teaching and keeping up with current trends in society.
Research on Chinese students studying in a Western (New Zealand) learning environment was conducted by Holmes (2005). In the study, she revealed the difficulties Chinese students encounter in seeking collaborative relationships with their New Zealand counterparts in seeking help from the general teaching staff and in communicating and learning between their own culture and the culture of the host country. Holmes suggests that Chinese students should try to reframe their primary learning as well as communication style so as to make room for other styles. Holmes also mentions that the Australian local students can also benefit from proper intercultural awareness training, so as to better understand and, therefore, more easily adapt to the different ways of learning and the new cultural environment. Educational institutions can also apply intercultural skills in seeking out ways of assessing Chinese and other international students (Holmes 2005).
In another study conducted on Chinese students‘ communicative competence in the University of Canberra in Australia, Liu (2004) investigates how Chinese students "Made the full
18
use of speaking environment" in Australia to improve their communicative competence (Lou, 2004, p. 24). The study focuses on Chinese students‘ communication experiences with the local Australian students. The relationship between language study and intercultural communication ability is also highlighted. Liu states, "Only one third of Chinese students are actively involved in interactions with Australian students" (Lou, 2004, p. 24). The majority are "inactive or incapable" of communicating with the local students. She suggests that the language teacher‘s intercultural competence should be further improved; "The pedagogy of teaching intercultural communication needs to be updated and implemented" (Liu, 2004, p. 25).
As can be seen, many studies have investigated the intercultural encounters of the Chinese students studying abroad. To a large extent, these studies have focused on the intercultural communication either between the Chinese students and the students of the host countries, or between Chinese students and students of other cultures in the classroom context.
These studies have analyzed difficulties and identified strategies to improve various problems, which have arisen within this context.
Improving Intercultural Communication Five Core Assumptions of Intercultural Communication
According to Toomey (1999) there are five core assumptions, of intercultural communication, which are said to increase the understanding of the intercultural communication processes.
1. Intercultural communication involves varying degrees of cultural group membership differences.
When people of different cultures interact with each other, both differences as well as similarities are present between them. In engaging in intercultural communication, they need to develop an understanding of the unique differences that exist between, yet recognize and appreciate the similarities that lie within them.
19
2. Intercultural communication involves the simultaneous encoding and decoding of verbal and nonverbal messages in the exchange process.
Effectively encoding and decoding messages can lead to shared meaning as well as deep clarity and understanding. Communicators can carefully choose words and actions or behaviors that make others, who are different, feel included and as ease.
3. Many intercultural encounters involve well-meaning clashes.
According to Bristin (1993) ―Well–meaning clashes‖ refer to misunderstanding encounters in which people are ―…Behaving properly and in a socially skilled manner according to the norms in their own culture‖. However, behaviors that might be suitable in one culture might be considered improper and ineffective in another.
4. Intercultural communication always takes place in a context.
Intercultural communication does not take place independent of time or time. In fact, intercultural communication is always bound to context, that is, patterns of thinking and behavior are always interpreted within an interactive context. In order to gain an in-depth understanding of the intercultural communication process, communicators must observe the link among communication patterns, context, and culture.
5. Intercultural communication always takes place in embedded systems.
People are programmed and acculturated into their culture through their family, education, religious, and political systems as well as through their socioeconomic systems. All of these institutions influence their day-to-day life. They are surrounded by people who adhere to similar beliefs and norms. Thus, it is clear that when individuals want to learn about other cultures or groups, they must use different cultural viewfinders so as to see things from their perspective.
Toomey (1999) outlined five core assumptions, of intercultural communication, which are said to increase the understanding of the intercultural communication processes. However, intercultural communicators must realize that although these assumptions may be rigidly followed, smooth communication does not always take place. In fact, there are times when quite
20
the opposite of what is hope for might be achieved, and intercultural communicators might end up in more conflict after adhering to these guidelines.
Difficulties in Intercultural Communication
Communicating with people from different cultures can sometimes pose quite a challenge.
Differences in culture, to a large extent, can account for the way people act, make decisions, and form opinions. Thus, culture is chief to what people see, how they make sense of what they see, and how they express themselves. Communication poses a problem as people from different cultures interact with each other. Often times, they misunderstand each other, and react in ways that are inappropriate. Below are some barriers to intercultural communication.
Du Praw & Axner (1997) outline six barriers to intercultural communication:
1. Different Communication Styles.
The way in which people communicate varies from culture to culture. One aspect of communication style is the use of language. Different cultures use words and phrases differently. Some cultures place a huge importance on non-verbal communication, while others do not. Non-verbal communication ―Includes not only facial expressions and gestures; it also involves seating arrangements, personal distance, and sense of time (Du Praw & Axer, 1997, p.1). Additionally, different norms adhering to the right amount of assertiveness, when communicating can add to cultural misunderstandings. For example, some Caucasian Americans consider raised voices to be a sign of hostility, while some African, Jewish and Italian Americans often feel that an increase in volume is a sign of an exciting conversation among friends.
2. Different Attitudes toward Conflict.
In many cultures, conflict is often denoted as a negative thing; however, some
In many cultures, conflict is often denoted as a negative thing; however, some