How To Understand The History Of Intercultural Communication

文化交流 / 傳播之研究趨向鍾玫中文摘要文化交流 / 傳播被以為是來自不同文化背景人們之間的交流活動在學術研究中, 文化交流通常被籠統的用予國際交流跨文化交流異種族交流異民族交流同文化交流異群體交流等等近年來, 無論在研究題目研究方法及理論上, 文化交流 ( 或異文化交流 ) 都有大福度的進展本文描述我個人對於文化交流領域之研究歷史研究選題和方法以及研究結果的出路之觀察中文關鍵字 : 文化交流 / 傳播, 研究趨向

1 Research Trend in Intercultural Communication <ABSTRACT> Intercultural communication is generally regarded as the study of communication of people with differing cultural backgrounds. In research, "Intercultural communication" is used as an overall term for international communication, cross-cultural communication, interracial communication, interethnic communication, intracultural communication, and intergroup communication, etc. During recent years, the field has developed enormously from what we study, how we study, to theories we use and develop. This paper looks at the trend in these areas where I observe by covering the history of intercultural communication and discussing the field, in terms of topics studied, methods used, and outlet of our research. ] Keywords:intercultural communication, research trend 1

2 Research Trend in Intercultural Communication History of Intercultural Communication Although some believe that the study of intercultural communication, especially in the United States started with the formal documentation from the post-world War II (Martin & Nakayama, 1997), one can argue that the interests and intrigues in cultural differences began long before that. For examples, early sojourners who traveled to foreign countries reported their experiences. As well, early diplomats, missionaries, and business people return to their homes with stories and observations of other cultures, ought to be considered the pioneers of the study of intercultural communication. Cultural anthropologists have studied culture and communication issues as early as the late 19 th century. According to Martin and Nakayama (1997), earlier scholars in intercultural communication included Edward Hall and others. His research for the U.S. government after the World War II on cultures resulted in his famous book The Silent Language (1959); his ideas of hi- and lowcontext culture remain to be dimensions we still use in cultural analyses today. Along with Bennedict's (1961) Chrysanthemum and the Sword: Patterns of the Japanese Culture, these studies received much attention about the influences of culture on communication, and projected much interest in the study. It was in Hall's work that "intercultural communication" was first used, and some regard that it was, symbolically, the birth of the intercultural communication field (Guan, 1995). During the following years, publications were published including books (e.g., Oliver, 1962; Smith, 1966), journals (e.g., International and Intercultural Communication Annual, 1974; International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 1977), and textbooks (e.g., Samovar & Porter, 1972). Meanwhile, professional organizations were established (e.g., the International and Intercultural Division of the Speech Communication Association in mid 1980s; and later, the International Communication Association). Moreover, courses on intercultural communication were offered at 2

3 higher education institutions in the United States starting from this period. Therefore, the actual existence of the academic field of intercultural communication did not come around until late 70s (Guan, 1995). Martin and Nakayama (1997) noted that early intercultural communication research focused on nonverbal differences (e.g., Hall, 1959) and international settings primarily. It was during the 1980s that the field began to blossom into a broader range of parameter. To date, it seems that we have expanded much more in terms of breadth than in depth. And it is depth that we are struggling to accomplish now. Intercultural Communication Research In terms of research on intercultural communication, I plan to cover research topics that we study, research methods we use, and the outlet of such research. Research Topics in Intercultural communication Today, it seems that we are studying all kinds of variables in intercultural communication research from national affiliation to self-disclosure. In order to present it with a structure, I would like to classify three categories: intercultural communication variables, variables in crosscultural studies, and contextual variables. Intercultural communication variables. This group of variables focuses on the interaction of intercultural communication situations. For example, intercultural communication competence has received much attention from scholars in recent years (e.g., Chen, 1989; Martin & Hammer, 1989). In Chen's (1989) research, specific categories were summarized about intercultural communication competence. Martin and Hammer (1989) on the other hand, conducted open-ended interviews and factoranalyzed participants' responses of what constitute intercultural communication competence. They came up with four main categories: (a) verbal messages, (b) nonverbal messages, (c) communicative functions, and (d) communication management, the attitude dimension. 3

4 One of the most studied issues in intercultural communication is the concept of uncertainty reduction (Gudykunst, 1988). The study extended the interpersonal theory of uncertainty reduction in intercultural communication settings and points at the importance and essential values of reducing and managing uncertainty. It has been further developed into the anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) theory by Gudykunst (1993). In recent years, technology and its impact on communication has received much attention. Specifically, communication on the Internet with people of different cultural background has been studied (Ma, 1996). Another area of research has been the issue of identity versus diversity. In the awakening realization of the growing intercultural situations, many people realize the importance of diversity and working in a diverse cultural environment. However, in the process of dealing with diversity in today's society, people realize that they sacrifice their unique cultural identity. In order to preserve such identities, one often needs to turn to his/her own cultural group for insights and strength. There needs to be a strong sense of the self, be it a personal, cultural, or a mixture of both kind of identity (e.g., Dodd, 1998; Martin & Nakayama, 1997; Martin, Nakayama, & Flores, 1998; Tanno & Gonzalez, 1998). While these are examples of communication variables we study in intercultural interactions, the next section is devoted to comparative cultural studies called "cross-cultural communication." Cross-cultural communication. Cross-cultural communication refers to the range of studies that looks at communication variables in different cultures and compare their similarities and differences in order to understand specific cultures. While some confusion and overlap exist between intercultural and cross-cultural communication studies, this section focuses on comparison. From the early research on language and language use differences (Whorf, 1956) to nonverbal studies (e.g., Hall, 1959), this line of research has been used to summarize similarities and differences between and among cultures. Another important line of such study is the comparison of values between or among cultures. From the early stages of intercultural communication research, there has been much 4

5 focus on this issue (e.g., Oliver, 1970). Oliver reported his observations of differences in cultural values between the western cultures, especially the U.S. and eastern cultures such as Japan and India. Many other studies in the early stage also focused on comparing North America and Japan. More recently, Yum's (1988) article on interpersonal and relational patterns explained differences in patterns of value and behavior for Koreans as influenced by Confucianism as compared with the western cultural values. On the other hand, Ting-Toomey's research (e.g., 1985) has focused much on conflict management styles in different cultures, mostly between eastern and western cultures. A wellreceived panel at SCA in 1994 by Ting-Toomey and her students examined ethnic identification and its correlation with conflict management styles in five cultures. Other research has examined variables such as self-disclosure, self-concept, etc. A recognizable trend in this area is that the studies are moving from comparing larger culture frames such as the East and the West, as presented with Japan and North America, to more specific cultures. As a matter of fact, recent publications have indicated that there is a trend or need for individual accounts in intercultural communication field. Gonzalez, Houston, and Chen's (1997) book, Our Voices, is a good example. Contexts The last category I would like to focus on is intercultural communication studies by contexts. By this I mean the research that focuses on contextual factors and the analysis of such factors. One of the most important area is organizational communication. Organization, as a context, has been regarded as a culture. Therefore, studies of organizational cultures have been a growing area in intercultural research (Chen & Chung, 1997). Another context is political or international political communication. This refers to the line of research that focuses on analyzing international political events and leaders (e.g., Heisey, 1993). Most of these studies are critical in nature. And finally, but not least, the important area of intercultural adaptation as projected by Kim (1988) may also be considered a context in that it focuses on immigrants' experiences and examines their communication behavior in the process of fitting in the host culture. Related to this area, is the group of research on cultural shock and reentry shock of sojourners and 5

6 immigrants. Then, the last category, perhaps a different category from contexts, is theories of intercultural communication. This is best represented by the edited book by Wiseman (1995) of Intercultural Communication Theory. Many other books and journal articles also contribute to the ongoing process of theorizing intercultural communication. Again, as a trend, there is a tendency to be more specific in developing theories. For example, one of the panels hosted by ACCS this year at the National Communication Association will be on developing intercultural communication theories with a Chinese perspective. Another trend worth noting is that there is a great increase of natives other than the traditional white American scholars studying the various topics in intercultural communication. These scholars provide personal experiences and observations to the field and contribute to our understanding of their cultures. One indication is the growing number of professional organizations by such scholars (e.g., Association for Chinese Communication Studies, Chinese Communication Association, and Chinese Communication Society), as well as the increasing memberships in these organizations (e.g., ACCS). Research Methods The following section is on research methods used in intercultural communication studies. From the early studies of cultural anthropology to the more recent scientific approach developed from social sciences such as sociology and psychology, we are experiencing a normal developmental trend as in most other academic fields. According to Martin and Nakayama (1997), at present, we have three main approaches to intercultural research: (a) social science, (b) interpretive, and (c) critical. Plus, they advocated a dialectical approach. Social science approach After the initial stage of exploring, which I consider the "descriptive stage," we started testing our ideas and thoughts about what we observe in intercultural communication. The social science approach provides us the tools to quantify our variables and analyze statistic results. Studies using this method usually are those examining specific variables such as demographic information, behavioral patterns, etc. For instance, the amount of self-disclosure, the degree of 6

7 ethnic identity, and levels of intercultural communication competence, etc. Most of these studies started in early 1980s and continue to today. Interpretive approach. The interpretive approach was most prominent starting in the late 1980s (Martin & Nakayama, 1997). This approach is well represented by ethnographic research during the time (e.g., Carbaugh, 1989; Philipsen, 1992). It emphasizes the importance of depth in our examination of the data and thick descriptions and deep understanding of the cultures we study. Critical approach Finally, the critical approach is similar to the interpretive approach. Critical researchers, however, believe in "subjective (not objective) reality" (Martin & Nakayama, 1997, p. 35). As interpretive researchers, critical researchers also place importance on studying the contextual situations of communication. Most research done with this method seem to focus on historical artifacts by examining the text very carefully and considering all factors involved, in order to understand a certain phenomenon at a particular time in history. The dialectical approach to intercultural communication As mentioned above, Martin and Nakayama (1997) have advocated a dialectical approach to studying intercultural communication. According to them, this approach accepts all of the above three approaches in terms of their "contradictions and ambiguities" in a "yin and yang" manner (Martin & Nakayama, 1997, p. 37). It sees that cultural reality is both objective and subjective. "Culture influences and is influenced by communication... Communication is individual and it is also social" (Martin & Nakayama, 1997, p. 37). A combined approach If I may see the dialectical approach as a philosophy in which we may examine intercultural communication, it is, then, not necessarily a method in studying the subject. Instead, I would 7

8 propose that in light of the dialectical approach, we use a mixed approach of the social science, interpretive, and critical approaches. That is, we may have the option to triangulate our studies and hope to achieve maximum balance in objectivity and subjectivity. This is what I would call a combined approach. We are now hoping to hear less of arguments between quantitative and qualitative researchers about the other not being acceptable, and that both will see the merits of the other method and appreciate the values each has to offer. For example, more and more quantitative researchers are appreciating the ethnographic research that our field is producing. Outlet of Research Now that I have examined the research topics and methods, let me briefly mention the outlet of our research, chronologically. Early sojourners shared their experiences via diaries or personal journals. Official documents which contribute much to our understanding of cultures now were published when the effort was involved from the government (e.g., Bennedict, 19 ; Hall, 1959). In the process of developing the field, our textbooks came along from early 1970s to the much greater choices of present time (e.g., Chen & Starosta, 1998; Dodd, 1982, 1998; Gudykunst, 1991; Gudykunst & Kim, 1984, 1992; Gudykunst, Ting-Toomey, Sudweeks, & Stewart, 1995; Martin & Nakayama, 1997; Samovar & Porter, 1972, 1998). This trend indicates the flourishing of the field as well as the breadth of topics and extension of areas we cover in the field. Meanwhile, series of journal articles have been published in our professional journals and conference papers presented over the last few decades. While most of these took place in the United States, in recent years, we are seeing more and more of "international" scholars involved in the process and presentations. Furthermore, in most recent years, especially in the 1990s, we are seeing a growing number of conferences held at international sites. Not only is the International Communication Association holding its conferences in difference international locations, but also there is a growing number of conferences hosted by international countries such as this conference in Taiwan and the one next month in Japan. I was personally involved in coordinating an international conference in Beijing, China in summer 1996. During my trip to Thailand in March 1998, I learned that an international conference on communication will be held at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok, Thailand later this year. These all provide outlets for our research and allow scholars all over the world to share our 8

9 interest and work. As a trend, I can see this to be growing and will grow more in the years to come. Conclusions The above is based on my own research review and personal observations. Generally, I see that we are spreading a great deal in terms of breadth in areas and topics that we study and that we need to now get more depth in our research and touch on more subtle issues, for instance, the use of technology and its impact on the human communication process, multiple-cultural identities, diversity issues and political implications, and degree of cultural adaptation, etc. I understand that some of these have been started but believe that we need to promote more. Also, a more holistic approach to research method is called for and such an approach may help us discover more dimensions and create fuller understanding of our field. Finally, more outlets for our research, especially, I would like to see that there is more application of what we study and how it may benefit the human race in the new century to come. By this paper, I only intend to summarize my observations. As a new student in the field, I do not at all intend to consider it inclusive. 9

10 References Caubaugh, D. (1989). Fifty terms for talk: A cross-cultural study. International and Intercultural Communication, 13, 93-120. Chen, G. (1989). Relationships of dimensions of intercultural communication competence. Communication Quarterly, 37, 118-133. Chen, G. (November 1993). A Chinese perspective of communication competence. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Miami, FL. Chen, G., & Chung, J. (1997). The "five Asian dragons": Management behaviors and organizational communication. In L. A. Samovar & R. E. Porter (Eds.), Intercultural communication, (pp. 317-328). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Dodd, C. H. (1998). Dynamics of intercultural communication. Boston, MA: McGraw Hill. Gonzalez, A., Houston, M., & Chen V. (Eds.). (1997). Our voices: Essays in culture, ethnicity, and communication (2 nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury. Guan, S. (1995). Intercultural communication: A knowledge in advancing international communication skills. Beijing, China: Peking University Press. Gudykunst, W. B. (1988). Uncertainty and anxiety. In Y. Kim & W. Gudykunst (Eds.), Theories in intercultural communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Gudykunst, W. B. (1991). Bridging differences: Effective intergroup communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Gudykunst, W. B. (1993). Toward a theory of interpersonal and intergroup communication: An anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) perspective. In R. Wiseman & J. Koester (Eds.), Intercultural communication competence. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Gudykunst, W. B., & Kim, Y. Y. (1992). Communicating with strangers: An approach to intercultural communication. New York: McGraw Hill. Gudykunst, W. B., Ting-Toomey, S., Sudweeks, S., & Stewart, L. (1995). Building Bridges: 10

11 Interpersonal skills for a changing world. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. Hall, E. T. (1959). The silent language. New York: Doubleday. Hegde, R. S. (November 1993). Passages from tradition: Communication competence and gender in India. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Miami, FL. Heisey, D. R. (1993). The strategy of narrative and metaphor in interventionist rhetoric: International case studies. In David Zarefsky (Ed.), Social movement: Essays in honor of Leland M. Griffin, (pp. 186-209, 253-256). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. Kim, Y. Y. (1988). Communication and cross-cultural adaptation: An integrative theory. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. Ma, R. (1996). Computer-mediated conversation as a new dimension of intercultural communication between East Asian and North American college students. In S. C. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social, and cross-cultural perspective, (pp. 173-185). Amsterdam, Netherland: John Benjamins. Martin, J. N., & Hammer, M. R. (1989). Behavioral categories of intercultural communication competence: Everyday communicators' perceptions. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 13, 303-332. Martin, J. N., & Nakayama, T. K. (1997). Intercultural communication in contexts. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield. Martin, J. N., Nakayama, T. K., & Flores, L. A. (1998). Readings in cultural contexts. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield. Miyahara, A. (November 1993). Communication competence: A Japanese perspective. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Miami, FL. Philipsen, G. (1992). Speaking culturally. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Samovar, L. A., & Porter, R. E. (1997). Intercultural communication. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Tanno, D. V., & Gonzalez, A. (Eds.). (1998). Communication and identity across cultures. 11

12 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ting-Toomey, S. (1985). Toward a theory of conflict and culture. In W. B. Gudykunst, L. P. Stewart, & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), Communication, culture and organizational processes. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, thought and reality. J. B. Carroll (Ed.). Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press. Wiseman, R. L. (Ed.). (1995). Intercultural communication theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Yum, J. O. (1988). The impact of Confucianism on interpersonal relations and communication patterns in East Asia. Communication Monographs, 55, 374-388. Yum, K. (November 1993). Communication competence: A Korean perspective. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Miami, FL. 12

13 Research Trend in Intercultural Communication Mei Zhong Dept. of Journalism and Mass Communication, Iowa State University Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication Assistant professor 13