This session demonstrates the results after analyzing the data collected in order to examine the proposed relationship between cultural intelligence (CQ), psychological well-being (PWB), mindfulness, and social support. Focusing on psychological well-being, different dimensions were also examined respectively. Psychological well-being consists of six dimensions – positive relations, autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, purpose of life and self-acceptance. And social support can be divided as social support from friends, social support from family and social support from significant others.
Hypotheses examined in this study were (1) Students’ cultural intelligence is positively related to their psychological well-being when they are studying abroad. (2) Mindfulness positively strengthens the relationship between cultural intelligence and psychological well-being. (3) Mindfulness positively strengthens the relationship between cultural intelligence and six sub-dimensions of psychological well-being. (4) Social support positively strengthens the relationship between cultural intelligence and psychological well-being. (5) Social support positively strengthens the relationship between cultural intelligence and six sub-dimensions of psychological well-being. Correlation analysis was used to examine the relationship among variables and hierarchical regression analysis was used to examine the relationship further.
Participants
Data was collected through questionnaire distributed online. The participants were all Taiwanese students who are currently studying abroad. Besides they have been studying abroad for at least six months. The screening questions were used in the very beginning of the questionnaire for the purpose of ensuring that the participants fit this study. In total, there were 200 out of 268 filled questionnaire being analyzed, and the remaining 68 responses were not used because they did not meet the criterions of this study.
32
Reliability
Reliability test was done at first to ensure the quality of the questionnaire used.
There were 18 items measuring the dependent variable, PWB. The Cronbach alpha value was 0.90. For independent variable, CQ, 20 items were used to measure it and the Cronbach alpha value was 0.89. Further, the Cronbach alpha value of mindfulness’ 15 items was 0.88.
And at last, for the 12 items of social support, the Cronbach alpha value was .93. Table 4.1 presented the Cronbach alpha value of each variable.
Table 4.1.
Reliability Scale: CQ, PWB, Mindfulness and Social Support (n=200)
Scale Item Number Cronbach Alpha Value
PWB 18 .90
CQ 20 .89
Mindfulness 15 .88
Social support 12 .93
Furthermore, reliability of the different dimensions of the variables CQ, psychological well-being and socials support was also checked. CQ was comprised of cognitive CQ, metacognitive CQ, motivational CQ and behavioral CQ and the Cronbach alpha value was 0.86, 0.81, 0.86 and 0.86 respectively. Table 4.2 was shown below.
Table 4.2.
Reliability Scale: Cognitive CQ, Metacognitive CQ, Motivational CQ and Behavioral CQ (n=200)
Scale Items Cronbach Alpha Value
Cognitive CQ 7, 8, 9, 10 .86
Metacognitive CQ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 .81
Motivational CQ 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 .86
Behavioral CQ 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 .86
33
Psychological well-being consists of positive relations, autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, purpose of life and self-acceptance. There are three items used for measuring each dimension. Referring to Table 4.3, the Cronbach alpha value for each sub-dimension was 0.66, 0.78, 0.85, 0.77, 0.86, 0.85.
Table 4.3.
Reliability Scale: Positive Relations, Autonomy, Environmental Mastery, Personal Growth, Purpose of Life and Self-Acceptance (n=200)
Scale Items Cronbach Alpha Value
Positive relations 1, 2, 3 .66
For social support, the sub-dimensions are friend support, family support and significant other support. Each dimension was measured by 4 items among the total number of 12 for this variable. And the Cronbach alpha value was 0.88 for friend support, 0.91 for family support and 0.93 for significant other support as Table 4.4 showed.
Table 4.4.
Reliability Scale: Friend Support, Family Support and Significant Other Support (n=200)
Scale Items Cronbach Alpha Value
Friend Support 6, 7, 9, 12 .88
Family Support 3, 4, 8, 11 .92
Significant Other Support 1, 2, 5, 10 .93
In summary, Cronbach alpha value of the overall scale and the different dimensions of respective variables were all close to or higher than 0.7 which showed that there was good reliability in this questionnaire (George & Mallery, 2003).
34
Descriptive Statistics
Detailed demographic information about 200 participants is provided in this part. Factors that were included are:
Age
Gender
Current educational level
Current studying abroad program
Current studying abroad time length
Country student is studying in
Cultural difference student perceives between country he or she is studying in and Taiwan
Major official language of the country student is studying in,
Efficient communication level student perceives they are able to achieve by using official language,
Previous international experience times
These 200 participants are all Taiwanese students who are studying outside Taiwan currently. Among them, there are 133 (66.5%) female students and 67 (33.5%) male students.
The age ranges from 16 to 36 and the mean is 24.34. As for their educational level, there are 6 (3%) participants owning high school degree, 72 (36%) owning bachelor degree, 107 (53.5%) owning master degree, 12 (6%) owning doctor degree and the remaining 3 (1.5%) are associate bachelor degree. Besides, among these students, there are 16 (8%) students enrolling in exchange program, 33 (16.5%) pursuing bachelor degree, 117 (58.5%) pursuing master degree, 18 (9%) pursuing doctor degree, 11 (5.5%) enrolling in language school program, 2 (1%) as high school students and the other 3 (1.5%) as Japanese college program of specialized subject.
These students’ time length of pursuing these degree distribution is 71 (35.5%) for 6 to 12
35
months, 24 (18%) for 12 to 18 months, 48 (24%) for 18 to 24 months and 57(28.5) for over 24 months. For country student studies in, there are America, United Kingdom, Australia, Japan, Canada, France, Germany, Korea, Spain, Holland, China, Italy, Belgium, Czech Republic, Poland, South Africa and Switzerland with the cultural difference students perceive is 7.55 in average from 1 (No difference) to 10 (Totally different). In addition, the major official language of respective country includes English, Spanish, French, German, Japanese, Korean, Mandarin, Korean, Dutch, Italian, Czech and Polish and the communication level students perceive is 7.07 in average from 1 (Unable to communicate) to 10 (Communicate differently). At last, for previous international experience students have, there are 16 (8%) having no international experience before, 133 (68.5%) having at least 1 to 10 times and the other 47 (23.5%) having more than 11 times. Table 4.5 shows the detailed information of the data as follow.
Table 4.5.
Participants Demographic Statistics (n=200)
Variable Category Frequency Percentage(%)
Gender Female 133 66.5
Degree Student (Bachelor) 33 16.5
Degree Student (Master) 117 58.5
Degree Student (Doctor) 18 9
Language School Student 11 5.5
High School Student 2 1
Other 3 1.5
(continued)
36 Table 4.5. (continued)
Variable Category Frequency Percentage(%)
Time Length 6 to 12 Months 71 35.5
Official Language English 126 63
Spanish 4 2
French 5 2.5
German 18 9
(continued)
37 Table 4.5. (continued)
Variable Category Frequency Percentage(%)
Japanese 28 14
10 (Communicate fluently) 15 7.5
Previous
Overall, among all the participants, most of them are female. Approximately half of them have master degree and over half of them are taking a master degree program abroad now.
There are 40.5% among them are now studying in America. And most of them have had international experiences before.
38
Correlation Analysis
This part examines whether correlation exists among dependent variable, PWB and its 6 dimensions, independent variable, overall CQ, mindfulness and social support in order to further examines the relationship between these variables. Table 4.6 presents the mean, standard deviation, correlations, and reliability as well.
39 Table 4.6.
Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations and Reliability of Variables (n=200)
Mean S. D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
1 Gender .34 .47
2 T. L. 2.46 1.24 -.02
3 P. I. E. 4.27 1.97 -.10 -.07
4 PWB 4.80 .63 -.01 -.12 .11 (.90)
5 PR 4.77 .86 -.01 -.04 .08 .58** (.66)
6 AU 4.45 .91 .02 -.08 .13 .69** .18* (.78)
7 EM 4.79 .93 -.06 -.04 .09 .75** .26** .44** (.85)
8 PG 5.46 .66 -.04 -.09 -.05 .63** .38** .33** .33** (.77)
9 PL 4.82 .95 -.06 -.09 .12 .80** .30** .48** .53** .51** (.86)
10 SA 4.50 1.00 .07 -.15* .06 .80** .40** .48** .58** .34** .54** (.85)
11 CQ 5.26 .71 -.08 -.02 .02 .48** .32** .31** .38** .38** .32** .38** (.86)
12 MD 3.82 .82 -.03 -.06 .09 .37** .09 .28** .39** .10 .28** .39** .11 (.88)
13 SS 5.94 1.05 -.08 -.08 .08 .49** .61** .22** .32** .24** .31** .40** .34** .14* (.93)
*p< .05, **p< .01
Note. Gender: 0= Female, 1= Male: T. L= Time Length: P. I. E.= Previous International Experiences: PWB= Psychological Well-being: PR= Positive Relation: AU= Autonomy: EM= Environmental Master: PG= Personal Growth: PL= Purpose of Life: SA= Self-Acceptance: CQ= Cultural Intelligence:
MD= Mindfulness: SS= Social Support; Numbers in parenthesis is Cronbach alpha value.
40
When it comes to the dependent variable of this study, psychological well-being, it is shown that students’ psychological well-being is significantly and positively related to the independent variable, CQ (r= .48, p< .01). Psychological well-being is significantly and positively related to mindfulness (r= .37, p< .01). And it is significantly and positively related to social support (r= .49, p< .01).
Independent variable CQ is significantly and positively related to six dimensions of psychological well-being, positive relation (r= .32, p< .01), autonomy (r= .31, p< .01), environmental master (r= .38, p< .01), personal growth (r= .38, p< .01), purpose of life (r= .32, p< .01) and self-acceptance (r= .38, p< .01). Also, CQ is significantly and positively related to social support (r= .34, p< .01).
Mindfulness is significantly and positively related to four of six sub-dimensions of psychological well-being, autonomy (r= .28, p< .01), environmental master (r= .39, p< .01), purpose of life (r= .28, p< .01) and self-acceptance (r= .39, p< .01). And mindfulness is also significantly and positively related to social support (r= .14, p< .05).
Last but not least, social support is significantly and positively related to every dimension of psychological well-being, positive relation (r= .61, p< .01), autonomy (r= .22, p< .01), environmental master (r= .32, p< .01), personal growth (r= .24, p< .01), purpose of life (r= .31, p< .01) and self-acceptance (r= .40, p< .01).
In summary, the independent variable, CQ is significantly and positively related to dependent variable, psychological well-being (r= .48, p< .01) and its all dimensions. In other words, the higher students’ CQ is, the higher their psychological well-being is. Through this correlation analysis, the hypothesis this study proposed, students’ CQ is positively related to their psychological well-being when studying abroad, is supported.
41
Hierarchical Regression Analysis
The previous part indicated that the correlation between each variable. The results turned out that the independent variable, cultural intelligence is correlated with the dependent variable, psychological well-being. Therefore, this part is going to present the hierarchical regression analysis results in order to further examine the relationship among cultural intelligence, mindfulness, social support and psychological well-being.
Referring to Table 4.7, the results of the linear regression analysis with psychological being as the dependent variable show that 33% of the total variance of psychological well-being were explained by the independent variables, cultural intelligence and mindfulness (F=
20.81; p< .001). Cultural intelligence was found significant (β= .46, p< .001). Therefore, H1 is supported.
H1: Students’ CQ is positively related to their psychological well-being when studying abroad
However, according to Table 4.7, the moderating effect of mindfulness on the relationship between cultural intelligence and psychological well-being is not significant. In addition, there is also no significance existing when mindfulness as moderator in the relationship between cultural intelligence and each sub-dimension of psychological well-being. So, H2 describing that mindfulness moderates the relationship between cultural intelligence and psychological well-being and H2-1 describing that mindfulness strengthens the relationship between cultural intelligence and six sub-dimensions of psychological well-being are both not supported.
42 Table 4.7.
Results of Regression Analysis of Psychological Well-being, Mindfulness as Moderator (n=200) Psychological well-being
As for Table 4.8, the results turned out that there is no significance with overall social support as a moderator in the relationship between cultural intelligence and psychological well-being.
43 Table 4.8.
Results of Regression Analysis of Psychological Well-being, Social Support as Moderator (n=200) dimensions of social support, friend support, family support and significant other support were further examined whether they affect the relationship between cultural intelligence and psychological well-being respectively. The results indicated that there was no significance for friend support, family support, and significant other support either as Table 4.9, Table 4.10, and
44 Table 4.11 showed.
Table 4.9.
Results of Regression Analysis of Psychological Well-being, Friend Support as Moderator (n=200)
Psychological well-being
Variables Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Step 1
Age 0.07 0.12 0.12
Gender -0.02 0.05 0.05
Previous International Experience
0.11 0.09 0.09
Step 2
CQ 0.39*** 0.39***
Friend Support 0.34*** 0.35***
Step 3
CQ x Friend Support 0.03
R2 0.02 0.36 0.36
Adjusted R2 0.001 0.35 0.001
ΔR2 0.02 0.24 0.01
F 1.04 21.87*** 18.20***
ΔF 1.04 52.30*** 0.24
Note. ***p< .001
45 Table 4.10.
Results of Regression Analysis of Psychological Well-being, Family Support as Moderator (n=200)
Psychological well-being
Variables Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Step 1
Age 0.07 0.10 0.10
Gender -0.02 -0.001 -0.001
Previous International Experience
0.11 0.08 0.08
Step 2
CQ 0.41*** 0.41***
Family Support 0.27*** 0.27***
Step 3
CQ x Family Support 0.01
R2 0.02 0.32 0.32
Adjusted R2 0.001 0.31 0.30
ΔR2 0.02 0.31 0.00
F 1.04 18.43*** 15.28***
ΔF 1.04 43.83*** 0.01
Note. ***p< .001
46 Table 4.11.
Results of Regression Analysis of Psychological Well-being, Significant Other Support as Moderator (n=200)
Although there is no significance for moderator, social support, when cultural intelligence serves as independent variable and overall psychological well-being serves as dependent variable, there is significance for social support as moderator when one dimension of psychological well-being, autonomy, is examined as dependent variable (β= .16, p< .05) as
47
table 4.12 shows. Therefore, social support has a moderating effect on the relationship between cultural intelligence and autonomy which is one of psychological well-being dimensions according to hierarchical regression analysis in this study. Therefore, hypothesis listed below is partially supported.
H3-1: Social support strengthens the relationship between cultural intelligence and six sub-dimensions of psychological well-being.
Table 4.12.
Results of Regression Analysis of Autonomy (n=200) Autonomy
48
Figure 4.1. Figure of the moderating effect of social support in the relationship between cultural intelligence and autonomy
Social support is able to strengthen the relationship between cultural intelligence and autonomy. This study categorized social support into two groups, Low and High according to the scores which means the level of individual’s perception toward social support. In Figure 4.1, there are two lines representing two different groups and the slope are 0.23 for Low group, and 0.46 for High group. This can be explained that as cultural intelligence increases, the degree of the increase of autonomy is the highest in social support High group. It indicates that the moderating effect of social support is the strongest when score of social support is comparatively high. In other word, the relationship between cultural intelligence and autonomy is moderated by the social support, such that the relationship is stronger for individuals with a higher social support.
49
Discussion
This study is conducted to examine the relationship among cultural intelligence, psychological well-being, mindfulness and social support. After executing the correlation analysis and linear regression analysis, it is found evident that cultural intelligence has a positive effect on psychological well-being. That is to say, the higher level of cultural intelligence an individual possesses, the better an individual’s psychological well-being. In other words, if one could have more knowledge about different culture, have higher interest in adjusting himself or herself into different cultural environment, and have better ability to plan and act better in a different culture, they could feel themselves functioning better psychologically. This is also explained by Ward et al. (2000) that the ability to deal with cross cultural issues influences positively the psychological well-being.
In addition, although LeBel and Dubé (2001) and Csikszentmihalyi (1990) made experiments and found that mindfulness is able to bring joyful feeling, the moderating effect of mindfulness which could strengthen the relationship between cultural intelligence and psychological well-being is not found in this study. The possible reasons for not able to have this result might be (1) the sample numbers was not enough. (2) the high heterogeneity among samples. Students participating in this study went to different countries. And the cultural difference was not control in this study. Therefore, it might affect students’ adaptation condition and further affected the outcome of the results in this study.
The last thing to be discussed is the moderating effect of social support. Mechanic (1976) found that social support could be critical during individual’s adaptation process and the result of this study also showed that social support could strengthen the relationship between cultural intelligence and autonomy, one construct of psychological well-being defined by Ryff and Singer (2008). A person with higher level of autonomy feels he or she is more self-determined and more independent. They feel being able to evaluate themselves by their own standard
50
instead of others’ approval (Ryff, 1989). Besides, Pearlin et al. (1981) also indicated that social support is helpful for bring out positive psychological influence through enhancing self-esteem and a sense of controlling over the environment.
51