This chapter outlines the research framework, research procedure, research sample and population, data collection, data analysis, research instrument and the pilot test showing how the study will be conducted later on.
Research Framework
Figure 3.1. Research framework
Research Hypotheses
Regarding on the review of the previous literature, the research questions and the framework presented in figure 3.1, the following hypotheses were proposed:
Hypothesis 1: Mandarin Language Ability has a relationship on Cultural Intelligence.
Hypothesis 2: Mandarin Language Ability has a relationship with Sociocultural Adaptation.
Hypothesis 3: Cultural Intelligence has a relationship with Sociocultural Adaptation.
Hypothesis 4: Cultural Intelligence mediates the relationship between Language Ability and Sociocultural Adaptation.
H4 Mandarin
Language Ability
Cultural Intelligence
Sociocultural Adaptation
H1 H3
H2
Gender Age Education Length of Stay
Nationality
Research Procedure
The procedure for this research is briefly described below:1. Reviewing relevant literature: Literature review was conducted in order to understand the relationship between the all of the 3 variables in this study. Hence, the literature review supported the research questions proposed in this study.
2. Identifying the research topic: Based on a review of the literature, the research topic was identified.
3. Proposing research questions and hypothesis: Based on the literature review and purposes of this study, the research questions were identified and then research hypothesis were established accordingly.
4. Designing research method and identifying research subjects: The research design was based on a quantitative, non-probability and snowballing sampling method and hence, this quantitative approach was chosen to answer the research questions in this study. The justifications for adopting this method were provided in the research method section of this study. In line with this, during the course of the development of the topic and purposes of this study, a suitable research sample was identified.
5. Instrument Selection: After discussing the research structure with the advisor and some professors, adequate questionnaires were selected based on previous measurements of the variables. A copy of this questionnaire is found in the appendix section of this study.
6. Conducting the data collection: The sample was collected based on convenient sampling.
The reason for choosing this sampling method was discussed in the data collection section.
7. Analyzing the data: The data was collected and coded using Microsoft Excel. It was later analyzed using IBM SPSS. SPSS was used to do descriptive statistics of the demographic variables as well as the other statistical methods used in this study. Detailed explanations of these statistical methods were provided in the data analysis section of this research.
8. Writing up research findings: Descriptive statistics was used to report the findings of this study. Thus, the research findings from the hypothesis was reported and conferred in the discussion part of this study.
9. Presenting the final report: Based on the research findings, conclusions, recommendations and limitations were presented.
A summary of the research procedure is provided. (Figure 3.2):
Figure 3.2. Research procedure
1. Reviewing relevant literatures
2. Identifying the research topic
3. Proposing research questions and hypothesis
4. Designing research method
5. Selecting the instrument
6. Conducting the data collection
7. Analyzing the data
8. Writing up research findings
9. Presenting the final report
Research Method
To fulfill the research purpose, quantitative approach was adopted and a questionnaire was employed for this study. As Creswell (2012) stated that quantitative research is used to study the problems by describing the trends or explaining the correlation between variables mention in the particular study. Hence, the reasons for choosing this method was based on the nature of the research hypotheses in this study which was based on the assumptions that all of the variables were positively correlated to each other, moreover, employing a quantitative method helps in establishing significance of the relationships. Therefore, since precise measurements were necessary for the validity of the research, quantitative research method was selected to implement in this study in order to objectively seek precise measurement and analysis of the variables.
Research Population and Data Collection
Due to the expected contribution of this study, the population of this study was the international students and university students in Taiwan. In 2016, there were 116,416 international students in Taiwan both diploma and non-diploma (Ministry of Education, 2018). Therefore, the method used of this study was non-probability and snowballing sampling technique to collect the data. Non-probability and snowballing sampling technique were applied to find the target participants of international students.
A soft copy of the questionnaire was sent as attachment to a group of friends with different nationalities who has been studying in Taiwan and the questionnaires were snowballing through other international students. Furthermore, the Office of International Affair of National Taiwan Normal University was asked to distribute the questionnaires out via e-mail to all alumni, exchange students and also students who currently studying in National Taiwan Normal University and Mandarin Language Center. Lastly, the hard copy was also handed out at the Mandarin Language Center area to gain more participants. Moreover, the sample size for international students in Taiwan was calculated based on Yamane formula (Yamane, 1967) (see figure 3.3).
𝑛 = 𝑁 1 + 𝑁𝑒'
Figure 3.3. Yamane formula
Source: Adopted from “Statistic” by Yamane, 1967, an Introductory Analysis (2nd Edition).
Copy right 1967 by New York: Harper and Row Where, n = the sample size
N = the size of the population e = the error of 5 percentage points
By using Yamane’s formula of the sample size with the 5% error, there should be at least 500 questionnaires distribute, and expected 400 questionnaires will be received, which resulted in a response rate of 80%. However, of the questionnaires that will be received could be found both invalid due to the incomplete data, therefore, the final result of the usable questionnaires might be reduced. Lastly, through the introduction of several international students, there were approximately 400 international students filled in the questionnaire and finally, this study gained 351 valid responses from the participants.
Research Instruments
The research instrument of this study was a questionnaire and it comprise of three parts:
language ability, cultural intelligence and sociocultural adaptation. Please see the appendix for a full and completed copy of this questionnaire. These measures are described below:
Mandarin Language Ability
Mandarin Language Ability can illustrate the understanding of the culture, which can later show the cultural adjustment as hypothesized. Language and culture can be reversed with each other, they are inseparable and highly interrelated as once claimed that “culture is communication”
(Hall, 1959, p. 97), the reverse is also true: “communication is culture.” Language composes with many components of subset: linguistic component (sounds, signs, and grammar), a paralinguistic component (tone, pitch, volume, speed, and affective aspects), an extralinguistic component
(a repertoire of styles appropriate for different circumstances). Noted that all of the components are interrelated to each other and by understanding every dimension, it needs the understanding of the cultural background (Fantini, 1995). Therefore, it is important to examine language ability to understand the adjustment. To be concluded, in this study, mandarin language ability was measured by asking the respondents to rate themselves on their competency or their language ability in the following scales from 0 to 5 from no competence to fluent, near native (Swift, 2002), see also table 3.1.
Table 3.1.
Mandarin Language Proficiency Scale
Scale Description
0 No competence
1 A few words or phrases
2 Can get by in limited circumstances
3 Can get by in most circumstances
4 Confident
5 Fluent/Near native
Cultural Intelligence
Cultural Intelligence was measured by(Ang, Van Dyne, Koh, 2006; Ang, Van Dyne, Koh, Ng, Templer, Tay, & Chandrasekar, 2007) CQ with the 20 items that can be divided into four-factor model involving with four items for metacognitive CQ, six for cognitive CQ, five for motivational CQ, and five for behavioral CQ. Sample items include “I am conscious of the cultural knowledge I apply to cross cultural interactions” for metacognitive CQ; “I know the legal and economic systems of other cultures” for cognitive CQ; “I enjoy interacting with people from different cultures” for motivational CQ; and “I change my verbal behavior when a cross cultural interaction requires it” for behavioral CQ. CQs item is rated on a 7-point Likert’s scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Higher scores represent higher cultural intelligence. Hence, this instrument helped to show the ability to understand culture in unfamiliar context because when ones have to move to the new environment, they usually face the struggle of fitting in in the new culture. Shrinivas, Harrison, Shaffer, and Luk (2005) also stressed on the
importance of adaptation of the sojourners, which can be identified into two types, which are sociocultural adaptation and psychological adaptation (Searle & Ward, 1990). Cronbach’s alphas in the past studies showed high reliability of this questionnaire scale (Imai & Gelfand, 2010; Nel, Nel, Adams, & De Beer, 2015). For instance in Imai and Gelfand (2010), the overall result of the cronbach’s alphas was stated as (α = 0.92), along with high reliability for the four-dimensional subscales: metacognitive CQ (α = 0.90), cognitive CQ (α = 0.91), motivational CQ (α = 0.89) and behavioral CQ (α = 0.90).
Table 3.2.
Cultural Intelligence Questions
CQ Factor Questionnaire Items
Meta Cognitive CQ 1 I am conscious of the cultural knowledge I use when interacting with people with different cultural background.
Meta Cognitive CQ 2 I adjust my cultural knowledge as I interact with people from a culture that is unfamiliar to me.
Meta Cognitive CQ 3 I am conscious of the cultural knowledge I apply to cross-cultural interactions.
Meta Cognitive CQ 4 I check the accuracy of my cultural knowledge as I interact with people from different cultures.
Cognitive CQ 1 I know the legal and economic systems of other cultures.
Cognitive CQ 2 I know the rules (e.g., vocabulary, grammar) of other languages.
Cognitive CQ 3 I know the cultural values and religious beliefs of other cultures.
Cognitive CQ 4 I know the marriage systems of other cultures.
Cognitive CQ 5 I know the arts and crafts of other cultures.
Cognitive CQ 6 I know the rules for expressing non-verbal behaviors in other cultures.
Motivational CQ 1 I enjoy interacting with people from different cultures.
Motivational CQ 2 I am confident that I can socialize with locals in a culture that is unfamiliar to me.
(continued)
Table 3.2. (continued)
CQ Factor Questionnaire Items
Motivational CQ 3 I am sure I can deal with the stresses of adjusting to a culture that is new to me.
Motivational CQ 4 I enjoy living in cultures that are unfamiliar to me.
Motivational CQ 5 I am confident that I can get accustomed to the shopping conditions in a different culture.
Behavioral CQ 1 I change my verbal behavior (e.g., accent, tone) when a cross-cultural interaction requires it.
Behavioral CQ 2 I use pause and silence differently to suit different cross-cultural situations.
Behavioral CQ 3 I vary the rate of my speaking when a cross-cultural situation requires it.
Behavioral CQ 4 I change my non-verbal behavior when a cross-cultural situation requires it.
Behavioral CQ 5 I alter my facial expressions when a cross-cultural interaction requires it.
Sociocultural Adaptation
Sociocultural Adaptation was measured by using sociocultural adaptation Scale or SCAS in many studies (Antonakopoulou, 2001; Hsu, 2012; Simic & Tanaka, 2010; Ward & Kennedy, 1993a, 1994; Ward & Rana-Deuba, 1999; Yang et al., 2006; Zhao, 2010). It was assessed with 25 relevant items from the SCAS from Ward and Kennedy (1999) 41-item scale. For SCAS, it requires participants to choose the amount of difficulty using five-point scale. It rates from no difficulty, slight difficulty, moderate difficulty, great difficulty to extreme difficulty. With higher scores (great difficulty), it indicates the greater of social difficulties and sociocultural adaptation problems (Ward & Rana-Deuba, 1999). The 25 chosen items of SCAS (α = 0.85) can be divided into 3 categories, which are academic adaptation, survival adaptation and also interpersonal adaptation. In addition, SCAS can be proven as the scale that is reliable regarding to the previous researches (Ward & Kennedy, 1993, 1994a, 1994b) and as it was stated to originally develop as an assessment of intercultural competence with emphasis on behavioral domains
Control Variables
Additionally, for sociocultural adaptation, there are some key factors that have been identified as affecting SA: gender, age and language fluency (Wilson, 2011), therefore, from previous studies, it has shown that gender, age (Hechanova, Beehr, & Christiansen, 2003; David Lackland Sam, 1998), previous overseas experience (Shrinivas et al., 2005), and language ability (Shaffer, Gregersen, Ferzandi, Harrison, & Black, 2006; Shrinivas et al., 2005). But this is not all, regarding to Cross (1995) and Mori (2000), nationality is someone that cannot be overlooked because people from different country have different way to adjust in unusual cultural setting. In the conclusion, gender, age, education, length of stay and nationality will be set as control variables in this study.
Table 3.3.
Sociocultural Adaptation Questions
Items from the Sociocultural Adaptation Scale 1. Making friends
2. Using the transport system 3. Making yourself understood 4. Getting used to the pace of life 5. Going shopping
6. Worshipping in your usual way 7. Talking about yourself with others 8. Understanding jokes and humor
9. Dealing with someone who is unpleasant/cross/aggressive 10. Getting used to the local food/finding food you enjoy 11. Following rules and regulations
12. Dealing with the bureaucracy 13. Adapting to local accommodation 14. Finding your way around
15. Dealing with the climate
16. Dealing with people staring at you
(continued)
Table 3.3. (continued)
Items from the Sociocultural Adaptation Scale 17. Going to coffee shops/food stalls/restaurants/fast food outlets 18. Understanding the local accent/language
19. Living away from family members overseas/independently from your parents 20. Adapting to local etiquette (e.g. manners, customs)
21. Getting used to the population density 22. Dealing with people of higher status
23. Understanding what is required of you at university 24. Coping with academic work
25. Expressing your ideas in class
Validity and Reliability
Peer review, pilot test and confirmatory factor analysis were used to test the validity and reliability of the questionnaire ensuring that the questionnaire being used in this study is valid and reliable to conduct further.
Peer Review
In this study, there are two measurements used, which can be identified as CQ and SCAS to measure the cultural intelligence and the sociocultural adaptation. Peer review was performed on October, 2018 to make sure that there will be no difficulty filling in the questionnaire by letting two international students who have currently studied their master degree in Taiwan, by this qualification, it made them qualified to be the participants of the study.
One of the participants is studying at Graduate Institute of International Human Resource Development (IHRD), National Taiwan Normal University and another respondent is studying International Master of Business Administration (IMBA), National ChengChi University to complete the questionnaire. The first participant from IHRD mentioned that “the questions are easy to understand and they are very relatable.” The second participant from IMBA informed that
“the questionnaire is understandable and I do not think it will cause any confusion.” In conclusion,
regarding to the comments that are previously mentioned, it shows the questionnaire is ready to be used and it will not cause any confusion to the participants overall.
Pilot Study
The pilot test was preliminarily performed in order to measure the Cronbach’s Alpha value in each scale, which are the Cultural Intelligence Scale and also Sociocultural Adaptation Scale before running the real study. Pilot test was aimed to help detecting any problems within the designed instrument before proceeding with the formal study. For the pilot test, 65 questionnaires were distributed and 50 were successfully received. After conducted the Cronbach’s Alpha test, it has shown that the questionnaire questions have a good reliability (α = 0.911), which is more than expected objective to have at least .70 (α = 0.70) or more than .70 (α > 0.70). Therefore, there was no further adjustment to designed instrument
Table 3.4.
Cronbach’s Alpha Value Test Results of the Pilot Study
Variable Name Cronbach’s Alpha Value
Cultural Intelligence .907
Sociocultural Adaptation .950
Reliability Analysis
Cronbach’s Alpha was used to test validity and reliability of the questionnaire. The following table shows the results obtained from the pilot study and also the results from the formal study. All the variables exceeded (α = 0.800) both from pilot study and the formal test, meaning that all of the questions were reliable to use (see table 3.4).
Table 3.5.
The Reliability of the Questionnaire
Variables Items Cronbach’s Alpha Values
Pilot Study Formal Study Pilot Study Formal Study
Metacognitive CQ 4 4 .847 .867
Cognitive CQ 6 6 .905 .879
Motivational CQ 5 5 .826 .880
Behavioral CQ 5 5 .859 .866
Sociocultural Adaptation 25 25 .950 .932
Confirmatory Factor Analysis
To measure validity, the 351 questionnaires were analyzed in order to measure the model fit for this study. According to Awang (2012), the researcher mentioned that the number of factor loading of each item should be higher than 0.6. In relation to table 3.4, the result of almost half of the items exceeded 0.6. However, some of the items did not reach the criteria. Fortunately, the significant number of t-value are satisfactory good since the number of the items all exceeded 1.96 and due to the relationships among all of the items showing in the arrow variances (figure 3.4.), it helps to adjust the goodness-of-fit indices number. Thence, this model can be considered as a good model fit even though the numbers within factor loading were not all good. Additionally, as reported in table 3.6, it shows the number of chi-square to degree of freedom χ2/df, (adjusted) goodness of fit ((A)GFI), comparative fit index (CFI), relative fit index (RFI), normed fit index (NFI), Tucker Lewis index (TLI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and root mean square residual (RMR) indicating the good model fit of this study. Firstly, the ratio of chi-square to degree of freedom (χ2/df) was 1.028, it can be acknowledged as a good model fit.
Secondly, the number of AGFI, CFI, RMSEA and RMR were unquestionably good stating respectively as 0.908, 0.997, 0.009 and 0.046. Furthermore, the other indices such as GFI and NFI were slightly below good range of good model fit but they still considered as in an acceptable range (Cheung & Rensvold, 2002). Hence, it can be said that this study did have a good model fit as articulating within table 3.6, 3.7 and figure 3.4.
Table 3.6.
Result of Confirmatory Factor Analysis 1
Construct Items Factor Loading SE t
Cultural Intelligence MeCQ1 .671 <---> <--->
MeCQ2 .660 .073 12.922
MeCQ3 .630 .064 14.463
MeCQ4 .660 .093 10.858
CCQ1 .371 .091 6.120
CCQ2 .423 .111 6.785
CCQ3 .435 .092 7.017
CCQ4 .460 .116 7.101
CCQ5 .475 .102 7.524
CCQ6 .449 .101 7.035
MCQ1 .568 .082 8.739
MCQ2 .585 .097 8.784
MCQ3 .612 .093 9.031
MCQ4 .553 .103 8.368
MCQ5 .644 .101 9.003
BCQ1 .642 .107 9.615
BCQ2 .572 .104 8.483
BCQ3 .571 .104 8.620
BCQ4 .573 .108 8.696
BCQ5 .497 .111 7.780
(continued)
Table 3.6. (continued)
Construct Items Factor Loading SE t
Sociocultural Adaptation SA1 .597 <---> <--->
SA2 .601 .088 9.612
SA3 .605 .092 9.807
SA4 .706 .092 10.824
SA5 .608 .094 9.907
SA6 .516 .101 8.459
SA7 .611 .090 10.679
SA8 .530 .094 8.763
SA9 .484 .098 8.172
SA10 .633 .111 10.026
SA11 .683 .097 10.519
SA12 .591 .093 9.587
SA13 .701 .099 10.782
SA14 .749 .096 11.286
SA15 .563 .097 9.237
SA16 .497 .098 8.304
SA17 .645 .092 10.141
SA18 .365 .096 6.621
SA19 .557 .103 9.046
SA20 .710 .090 10.815
SA21 .612 .096 9.911
SA22 .593 .089 9.537
SA23 .627 .097 10.042
SA24 .519 .088 8.536
SA25 .498 .087 9.028
Note: <---> = do not report because of constrained parameters, MeCQ = metacognitive CQ, CCQ
= cognitive CQ, MCQ = motivational CQ, BCQ = behavioral CQ, SA = sociocultural adaptation
Table 3.7.
Result of Confirmatory Factor Analysis 2
χ2/df GFI AGFI CFI RFI NFI TLI RMSEA RMR Goodness-of-fit Indices 1.028 .916 .908 .997 .906 .918 .997 .009 .046
Figure 3.4. Confirmatory factor analysis model
Data Analysis
After collecting the data, the data was coded by numerical sequences and analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 23in order to determine whether or not there is a statistically significant relationship between each of the 3 variables, which are Mandarin Language Ability, Cultural Intelligence and also the Sociocultural Adaptation.
Descriptive analysis was performed along with reliability analysis, correlation analysis, confirmatory analysis and multiple linear regression, respectively. Firstly, the descriptive analysis was conducted to describe the arbitrary demographic of this study, which expected to explain the standard deviation and other distribution of the data. Secondly, reliability analysis was performed in order to find the reliability of the questionnaire used showing the consistency within the study.
Thirdly, correlation analysis was chosen to measure the relationship between three variables, following with the fourth analysis, which is confirmatory analysis. The confirmatory analysis was utilized to find the validity, because if the result did not find to be valid, it could mean that the result was not meaningful to the study. Lastly, multiple regression analysis was used to analyze the mediating effect as hypothesized previously.