INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION
12.1 Introduction to Intercultural
Communication
Human
beings have a great desire to be with people who are similar to themselves.
This is because they share the same ways of doing things, the same values and
operate by similar rules. When we are with people who are similar to ourselves,
the ways we have of doing things just seem like common sense. However,
sometimes work or study or a sense of adventure takes us out of our comfort
zone. When this happens we realize that the things we took for granted about
human interaction are not necessarily the same for everyone. This can be a very
difficult, even shocking experience. This booklet explains what happens when
people step out of their comfort zone by experiencing other cultures, either by
travelling to another country or by being in contact with people from other
cultures who are in your home country. It explains how we react, why we react
the way we do and how to make the interaction between people from other
cultures a positive experience.
12.1.1 What is Culture?
Culture can be defined as human
creation (Freire, 1970). It is the human part of the environment (Wang,
Brislin, Wang, Williams, & Chao, 2000). In other words, culture is the
non-biological aspects of life. It is the process of generating and sharing
meaning within a social system. This social system is comprised of values,
norms and ways of behaving and so culture comprises the ways we interact,
behave, and communicate with one another. Culture is something that is learned
from parents, schools the media and the broader community. Singer (1998)
defined culture as:
a pattern of learned, group -related
perceptions – including both verbal and nonverbal language, attitudes, values,
belief systems, disbelief systems and behaviours that is accepted and expected
by an identity group (Singer, 1998:5)
Yet
cultures are not fixed. They are changing and interconnected although change
may be slow or irregular. Cultures are dynamic as they are created and
recreated through shared interactions (Gudykunst, 1983). However, these changes
may be slow or irregular.
The important thing to remember about
culture is that while it may be fundamental, it is not innate. Yet it often not
discussed, analysed or critiqued but is seen as being ‘common sense’. Culture
is made up of the shared values and assumptions of a particular group of
people. Because these values and assumptions are shared, it is easy to take
them for granted and believe that they are ‘normal’. In this way it is possible
for people to believe that the ways in which they behave and the things they
value are right and true for everyone. As Paige, (1993) has pointed out,
cultures have an internal logic and coherence and hence their own validity.
However, in
order to facilitate communication between cultures it is necessary to
understand human reality as socially constructed (Berger & Luckman 1967
cited in Paige 1993). If we can understand that then we can begin to understand
that different groups may have different values, different way of
communicating, different customs, conventions and assumptions. While these may
conflict with our own understandings and assumptions it does not necessarily
mean that they are inferior, ‘wrong’ or ‘rude’.
Wang
et al., (2000:1-3) identify the essential features of culture. They are:
(1) Culture is the human made part of the
environment.
(2) Culture reflects widely shared
assumptions about life.
(3) Culture is so fundamental that most
people do not and cannot discuss or analyse it.
(4) Culture becomes evident when someone
encounters someone from another country who deviates from their own cultural
norms.
(5) Culture is transmitted from generation
to generation
(6) Even in new situations, people can make
a judgement about what is expected in their own culture.
(7) Cultural values endure and change
takes place over a number of generations.
(8) Violations of cultural norms have an
emotional impact
It
is relatively easy (although not necessarily helpful) to make generalizations
about cultural differences.
These
key features are useful when we consider communication between cultures.
12.2 What is Intercultural Communication?
Today the
world we live in is “a global village” where no nation, group or culture can
remain anonymous (Samovar & Porter, 1991). What happens in one part of the
world affects all parts of the world. As the world is becoming smaller, we are
increasingly interacting with people from many different cultures. While modern
technology has made it easier for us to communicate with people anywhere in the
world, such interactions can be difficult if we do not know how to deal with
people and cultures different from our own. Here are examples of some of the
obvious mistakes politicians and businesses have made when it comes to dealing
with other languages cultures:
- In
- In
- Chevrolet attempted
unsuccessfully to market its Nova compact car in Latin American countries.
In Spanish, no va means “does not go” or “it doesn’t run”.
These
language and cultural mistakes can clearly be avoided if we increase our
knowledge and understanding of other people and their cultures. The study of
intercultural communication addresses this need by examining the communication
and interactions between people of different cultures or subcultures.
Fundamental to intercultural communication is the belief that it is through
culture that people learn to communicate. A Chinese, an Egyptian, or an
Australian, for example, learns to communicate like other Chinese, Egyptians,
or Australians. Their behavior conveys meaning because it is
learned and shared. In other words, it is cultural. Thus, the ways in which
people communicate, their language patterns, style, and nonverbal behaviors are
all culturally determined (Klopf & Park, 1982).
Samovar & Porter (1997) point out
that as cultures differ from one another, the communication practices and behaviours
of people will inevitably vary as a result of their different perceptions of
the world. Intercultural communication, more precisely then, is defined as the
study of communication between people whose “cultural perceptions and symbol
systems are distinct enough” to alter their communication (Samovar and Porter,
1997: 70). In their model of intercultural communication, Samovar and Porter
(1997) illustrate the process of how the meaning of a message changes when it
is encoded by a person in one culture and decoded by a person in another
culture in the context of his or her own cultural background. In some cases,
the message may be interpreted to carry a different meaning than was intended.
Figure
1 Intercultural Communication
Model (Source: Samovar and Porter, 1997)
In Figure 1
A, B and C represents three different cultures. Cultures A and B are similar to
one another while culture C is quite different. Within each culture is another
form similar to the shape of the influencing parent culture. This represents
the person who has been molded by his/her culture. However, the shape of the
person is somewhat different from that the parent culture since we are all
shaped by our culture, but are also influenced by other factors as well (e.g.
age, gender, class, race, etc.). Also, within any culture there is internal
variation.
The series
of arrows connecting the figures represents the production, transmission, and
interpretation of messages across cultures. When a message leaves culture A,
for example, it carries the content of the message as it is intended. When it
reaches culture B, the message changes because the new culture influences how
the message is interpreted and hence its meaning. Also, the greater the
differences between the cultures, the more likely the message will be changed.
For
example, the change that occurs between cultures A and B is much less than the
change between cultures B and C. This is because there is greater similarity
between cultures A and B and the message is interpreted more nearly like it was
originally intended. Culture C, on the other hand, is quite different from
cultures A and B and the message is interrupted differently there and becomes
more like the pattern of culture C.
Samovar and
Porter’s model shows the possibility of misunderstandings that always exist in
intercultural communication, especially if there is great variation in cultural
differences. As their model illustrates, the amount of influence a culture has
on communication between cultures clearly depends on the similarity of the
cultures. The more the cultures are alike, the less influence culture will have
on communication. For example, in intercultural communication situations
involving Americans and Canadians, culture would not have a strong impact as
the two cultures have much in common (e.g. language, geography, religion,
political system, etc.). On the other hand, we can expect culture to have great
impact when a German communicates with a Chinese as the two cultures differ
greatly (e.g. physical appearance, language, religion, concept of self, etc.)
When communicating with someone from a
different culture, we can therefore expect cultural differences to have an
influence. Cultural differences stem from our differing perceptions, which in
turn determines how we communicate with people of other cultures. By
understanding how people perceive the world, their values and beliefs, we can
better understand what they say and can anticipate potential cross-cultural
misunderstandings. Let’s now look more closely at what we mean by perceptions,
beliefs and values in the intercultural context.
Perception
is defined as “the internal process by which we select, organize and interpret
information” from the outside world (Klopf & Park, 1982:26). In other
words, our perceptions of the world are what we tend to notice, reflect upon
and respond to in our environment that are meaningful and significant to us. As
a result, no two of us perceive our surroundings in exactly the same way. This
is especially the case if we interact with people who come from cultures very
different from our own. The way in which each one of us perceives the world is
learned and is part of our cultural experience. Whether it be the judgment we
make of a certain kind of food or the responses we have to going to see the
doctor, we all react to these different events in the way that our culture has
taught. Our perceptions are culturally determined and in turn influence the way
we communicate with others.
9.2.2 Beliefs
Beliefs are the judgments we make
about what is true or probable. They are usually linked to objects or events
that posses certain characteristics that we believe to be true with or without
proof (Samovar & Porter, 1997). For example, we have beliefs about religion
(there is a God), events (the meeting was successful), other people (she is
friendly) or even about ourselves (I am hard-working). According to Price
(2000), most of our beliefs are ideas about how things work, why things are the
way they are, and where things come from. Many of our beliefs are also
concerned with providing an explanation for things which would otherwise be
unpredictable or inexplicable, such as the weather, death and romance. Like our
perception, our beliefs are determined by our cultural backgrounds and
experiences. We are taught very early on what to believe based on what our
culture considers worthy and true. Subsequently, our belief systems form the
basis of our values, which determine in large measure how we behave and relate
to others.
12.2.3 Values
Values are
defined as “an enduring set of beliefs that serve to guide or direct our
behaviour” (Klopf & Park, 1982). They represent the norms of a culture and
specify, for instance, what is good or bad, right or wrong, rude or polite,
appropriate or inappropriate. In other words, they provide us with a set of
rules for behaving, making choices and reducing uncertainty. Like our
perceptions and beliefs, values are learned and hence subject to
interpretation. When we interpret behaviour, an object, or an event, we are
applying value judgments, which reflect our particular culture.
For instance, an English person who values personal space
very highly may consider it rude when a Mexican stands too close. A Japanese who
values conformity may find it inappropriate when an American express too much
of his or her own opinions. The relative importance of values within each
culture can also be revealed through sayings, such as “Time is money”
(American), “A zebra does not despise its stripes” (African) or “No need to
know the person, only the family”(Chinese). Such sayings impart values that are
important in each culture and can provide us with a better understanding of
others’ cultural beliefs.
One of the
criticisms of discussions of intercultural communication is that it can be said
to generalise about cultures. However, our aim is not to oversimplify, or to
claim that ‘Asian students are like this’ and ‘Australian students and like
that’. The idea that there is such a thing as an ‘Asian student’ is clearly an
over generalisation as Asia is a vast area,
comprising many nations. Even the idea of a ‘Chinese’ student is a difficult
one. Do we mean only mainland China
When thinking about communication
between cultures, rather than thinking of them as entirely separate and static
it is more useful to consider them as dynamic and interconnected. However, it
is also important to consider that for particular characteristics (for example
individualist/collectivist), while individuals in each culture will be found
across the spectrum, in any one culture people will be clustered around a
certain point. Although people are clustered around a certain point, there is
also an area of overlap where they may share some similarities.
12.3 Barriers to Intercultural Communication
12.3.1 Ethnocentrism
It is quite
normal to have the values of the community in which you were brought up. These
are the ways in which you live your life and interact with others. They are the
things you take for granted. It is not ‘bad’ to have Anglo Saxon Australian
values or to have Hong Kong Chinese values. What is important is an
understanding that your way of doing things may not be the same as everyone
else’s.
Ethnocentrism
is a belief in the centrality of one’s own culture. It often involves judging
aspects of another culture by the standards of one’s own. Bennett (1993:30)
defines ethnocentrism as ‘assuming that the worldview of one’s own culture is
central to all reality’. Said (1978) has described the ways in which the West
has polarised East and West so that the West possesses positive characteristics
(strength, activity, reliability) whereas the East is depicted as having
opposing characteristics (fragility, passivity, wily unreliability). Bennett
(1993) has proposed a developmental sequence towards intercultural sensitivity.
His model outlines the stages which people go through when faced with the
difficulties of intercultural contact. He refers to the first three stages as
the ethnocentric stages of denial, defence and minimization.
o Bennett’s (1993) Model
The first
stage is one of denial, in which a person confronted with cultural difference
avoids or denies the existence of any difference. This can happen in two ways,
through isolation or separation. Isolation occurs if a population is both
physically separated and homogenous. In such cases, it is possible to deny the
existence of any cultural differences or consider them unimportant in one’s own
world. Separation is the intentional construction of barriers that create
distance between cultures. This separation facilitates denial. Bennett points
out that one of the dangers of separation is that another culture becomes seen
as less than human. An extreme example of separation is the apartheid system in
South Africa
(1) In Bennett’s model, the second stage
of ethnocentrism is defence. This strategy occurs as a way to counter the
impact of cultural differences which are perceived as threatening. A person
does this as a way of maintaining the integrity of their own worldview. The
defence stage has three forms; denigration, superiority and reversal.
Denigration or negative stereotyping involves attributing undesirable
characteristics to everyone in a particular cultural category. The Nazis and
the Ku Klux Klan are extreme versions of this form of defence but there are countless
other examples of negative stereotyping. Superiority is another form of
defence. It is a positive evaluation of one’s own culture which does not
necessarily involve denigrating others. The example that Bennett gives is that
of modernisation, which tends to assume Western superiority and assumes that
the aim of all developing nations is to follow the Western model. The third
form of defence is reversal, which is the flip-side of superiority. It is the
denigration of one’s own culture and an assertion of the superiority of the
other.
(2) Minimization is the third stage of
ethnocentrism. In this stage, people will seek to hide difference under
cultural similarities. Part of minimization is an assumption of universal
characteristics shared by all humanity. However this assumption is usually made
by the dominant culture. Bennett suggests that people tend to use their own
worldview to interpret other’s behaviour and that the idea of a ‘universal
truth’ is usually based on one’s own values.
12.3.2 Stereotypes
As
an extension of ethnocentrism, stereotypes are one of the obvious barriers to
intercultural communication. Samovar & Porter (1991:280) define stereotypes
as “the perceptions or beliefs we hold about groups or individuals based on our
previously formed opinions or attitudes”. As the definition suggests,
stereotypes do not develop suddenly but are formed over a period of time by our
culture. They are made up of bits and pieces of information that we store and
use to “make sense” of what goes on around us. Stereotypes can be either
positive or negative and as (Barna, 1997) points out they help us to “make
sense” of the world by categorizing and classifying people
and situations we encounter. We may
revert to stereotyping, for example, when we are overseas and are faced with
people and situations we are not accustomed to. While stereotyping may reduce
the threat of the unknown, it interferes with our perceptions and understanding
of the world, when applied to individuals or groups. Often stereotypes are problematic
because they are oversimplified, overgeneralized and/or exaggerated. Statements
such as “Blacks are…”, “Athletes are not…”, or “ Women should…” are stereotypes
because their content are beliefs based on half-truths or distortions about a
group of people.
Jandt,
(2001) identified a number of ways in which stereotypes are harmful and impede
communication. First, stereotypes can cause us to assume that a widely held
belief is true, when it may not be. Second, the continual use of stereotypes
reinforces our beliefs and can also cause us to assume a widely held belief is
true of any one individual in the group. If a group is stereotyped as
dishonest, for example, we tend to apply that stereotype to all members of that
group, regardless of individual differences. Third, when we use negative
stereotypes to interpret the behaviour of individuals within a group, this
further impedes intercultural communication by reinforcing those negative
stereotypes. Such negative stereotyping can become a “self- fulfilling
prophecy” for those who are stereotyped and hence place them at risk. An
example of this would be the prevalent stereotype that women are not good at
math and science, which in turn may cause women to internalise such beliefs and
avoid studying or pursuing maths or science related professions.
Prejudice,
like stereotypes, can be either positive or negative although it is generally
referred to as “the unfair, biased, or intolerant attitudes or opinions towards
another person or group simply because they belong to a specific religion,
race, nationality, or another group” (Samovar and Porter, 1991: 281). A person
who thinks, “I don’t want (name of group) living in my neighborhood,” for
example, is expressing a prejudice. Again like stereotypes, prejudice involves
the preconceptions of individuals or groups based on unfounded opinions,
attitudes, or beliefs. Jandt’s (2001: 75) definition of prejudice further
elaborates the damaging effect of prejudice as “persons within the group are not
viewed in terms of their individual merit but according to the superficial
characteristics that make them part of the group”.
Prejudice can take many forms, ranging
from those that are almost impossible to detect (unintentional) to those that
are clearly blatant (intentional). Brislin (1988) discusses six ways in which
prejudice can express itself in intercultural communication: 1) red- neck
racism, 2) symbolic racism, 3) tokenism, 4) arm’s length prejudice, 5) real
likes and dislikes, and 6) the familiar and unfamiliar. Red-neck racism, which
Brislin (1988: 341) maintains is found all over the world, occurs when “certain
people believe that members of a given cultural group are inferior according to
some imagined standard and that the group members are not worthy of decent
treatment”. Clear examples of this form of prejudice can be found throughout
history in the treatment of indigenous groups people all over the world.
Symbolic
racism, according to Brislin, is when members of one culture have negative feelings
about another culture because they believe the “outside culture” is a threat to
their group. For example, people may be against affirmative action programs if
they believe that members of certain groups are being given preferential
treatment and pose as a threat to their view of equal treatment for all.
Tokenism, on the other hand, is more difficult to detect since it often
involves the harboring of negative attitudes towards members of another group.
Those who harbor such feelings may even go out of their way to prove that they
are not prejudice by engaging in activities to include members of the out
group. Brislin cites examples of this often found in the hiring practices of
large organizations where women and minorities may be used as tokens to convince
administrators that their hiring practices are non-discriminatory
Like
tokenism, the fourth type of prejudice is also hard to detect as it often
involves friendly behaviors with members of the out group on certain occasions,
but these people are held at “arm’s length” in other situations where one may
be expected to be more personal. An example of this form of prejudice may be
seen in our interactions at a party where more impersonal topics are discussed.
In this setting, we may treat others in a very friendly manner, but this may
change in other settings which may require us to be more intimate. The fifth
form of prejudice, real likes and dislikes, occurs when people avoid
interacting with those whose behaviors they perceive as unpleasant, unhealthy
and even immoral. For example, Brislin notes that as many as 50 percent of
American students indicated that they would use people’s smoking habits as a
reason to limit interactions with the m.
Brislin’s
final type of prejudice, the familiar and unfamiliar, deals with instances when
people choose to associate only with others like themselves. He cites examples
of this found in most large cities around the world where people tend to seek
out interactions and live near those who are from their own
cultural groups. Samovar and Porter (1991) suggest that this is because human
beings tend to avoid the unknown and, hence, gravitate towards what is known
and familiar. Yet, as Brislin’s different types of prejudice clearly
illustrate, prejudice in its milder form is nevertheless prejudice and can
often lead to discrimination and racist behavior. As an extreme and intentional
form of prejudice, discrimination impedes intercultural communication as it
involves the “unfavorable treatment and/or denial of equal treatment of
individuals or groups because of race, gender, religion, ethnicity or
disability” (CCMIE, 2001).
12.3.4 Language
Language is
one of the most obvious barriers to intercultural communication but perhaps not
the most fundamental. People who do not share a language or who feel that they
have imperfect command of another person’s language may have some difficulties
communicating. There is also the possibility of misunderstandings occurring
between people when they do not share a common language. However sharing a
common language does not always guarantee understanding. Even speakers of the
same language do not have exactly the same understanding of the meanings of
words.
Even
when cultures speak the same language they do not always understand one another.
Americans and Australians, for example, use quite different vocabulary for some
things and have different slang. An Australian once tried to buy a bus ticket
in Texas
Other ways
in which language can be a barrier to intercultural communication are problems
of vocabulary equivalence, idiomatic equivalence, experiential equivalence and
conceptual equivalence (Jandt, 2001). Lack of vocabulary equivalence occurs
when there are not words in one language that correspond precisely with the
meaning of words in another. This occurs particularly with specific or very
descriptive words. Jandt (2001:149) cites an example from Axtell (1994) of an
English speaking business person who writes a letter to be translated into
Japanese including the sentence ‘we wonder if you would prepare an agenda for
our meeting’. While ‘wonder’ is used in the sentence as a polite way of asking
the Japanese to prepare the agenda, it can be translated into Japanese as
‘doubt’ and so the sentence would read ‘We doubt that you would prepare an
agenda for our meeting’. In this case a well- meaning sentence can
inadvertently cause great offence.
Idiomatic
equivalence can cause communication problems because although native speakers
understand the meanings of an idiom, they can be difficult for a non-native
speaker to understand and translated directly they can be either bizarre or
meaningless. For example, ‘the old man kicked the bucket’ is meaningless
unless you know that to kick the bucket means to die. Another problem is that
of experiential equivalence. Objects or experiences that do not exist in one
culture are difficult to translate into the language of another culture. For
example, the Chinese concept of guanxi has no precise English equivalent
although it does have connotations that can be expressed in English words such
as relationship, connection, obligation and dependency.
Conceptual
equivalence is a barrier for communication if ideas or concepts are not
understood in the same ways in different cultures. Jandt (2001) gives the
example of concepts such as freedom. Understandings of what is meant by the
notion of ‘freedom’ in the United
States
12.3.5 Nonverbal Communication
Nonverbal
communication can be a barrier to intercultural communication. Nonverbal
communication is communication without words. Messages are sent through
gestures, proximity, eye contact, expectations regarding time and so on. These
forms of communication can easily be misinterpreted.
Jandt
(2001) identifies a number of ways in which nonverbals are used to communicate
messages. The first of these is replacing spoken messages. For instance it is
possible to greet someone who is a long way off by waving and a police officer
can direct traffic using nonverbal communication. Another use of nonverbal communication
is to send uncomfortable messages. It is possible to convey the message ‘I’m in
a hurry and have to go’ in nonverbal ways that may be less likely to hurt
someone’s feelings. It is also possible to tell someone you find them
attractive in nonverbal ways and so avoid some of the embarrassment that would
be involved if you were to say it in words. Jandt describes making status clear
as another useful function that is performed more effectively by nonverbal
communication as it is less threatening. He uses the example of the US
Turn-taking
in a conversation is another form of non-verbal communication. We know when it
is our turn to speak by a number of signals that are not verbal. It is very
rare in a conversation for someone to actually tell us (in words) when it is
our turn and how long we have to speak. Ho wever, there are signals that tell
us and these signals vary between cultures.
Another
use of nonverbal communication is to reinforce or modify a verbal message. It
is possible to indicate something about the verbal message by a nonverbal
gesture. For example, gesturing someone to come or waving as well as speaking a
greeting.
Nonverbal
messages can take a number of forms. Some of these are our use of personal
space; gestures, facial movements and eye contact; use of time and use of
touch. Other important non verbal messages can involve interpretations of the
meanings of silence, clothing, the arrangement of space and furniture and so
on. Because the meanings which are attached to all these things differ from one
culture to another, it is possible to misread the message.
There are a number of examples of ways
in which nonverbal messages can be misinterpreted. Some of these are outlined
below:
(1) The distance that one would stand when
talking to a stranger varies from culture to culture and someone breaking these
unspoken rules makes us very uncomfortable.
(2) Gestures and eye contact can have very
powerful meanings yet these meanings can vary across cultures. In some
cultures, the appropriate greeting is a handshake, in others a bow, in others
an embrace. Jandt refers to the circular forefinger and thumb gesture which in
the US France it can
mean zero or worthless and in Brazil Australia
(3) Some cultures understand time as
cyclical, others view it as linear. Our use of time also varies. What a 10.30
business appointment means and whether or how long you should be kept waiting
can vary from culture to culture.
(4) Silence has different meanings for
different cultures. For some cultures, silence can indicate respect. The
Chinese have a saying ‘Silence is golden …’ In Australia, silence can often be
interpreted as either shyness or lack of interest.
(5) Touch has different meanings in
different cultures. Jandt gives an example from Thailand
and Laos Australia
12.4 Culture Shock
Almost
everyone who studies, lives or works abroad experiences some degree of
difficulties in adjusting to the new culture. This response is commonly
referred to as “culture shock”. Culture shock can be defined as the physical
and emotional discomfort a person experience when entering a culture different
from his or her own (Weaver, 1993). This period of cultural adjustment involves
everything from getting used to the food and language to learning how to use
the telephone, banking machines and so forth. At home, we often take many of
these things we do for granted as they are automatic and require little
thought. Abroad, the reverse is true and simple tasks become difficult because
we don't understand or know how to behave or respond to the messages we are getting.
Everything is different and the way that we are used to doing things may not be
accepted as or considered as normal in our new environment.
As
we are confronted with new ways of thinking, valuing, and doing things, this
can cause feelings of disorientation and anxiety resulting in culture shock. Fortunately,
while culture shock is an inevitable process of cross-cultural adjustment, it
is important to keep in mind that it is also manageable and can be overcome
with conscious awareness of one’s own reactions. Kohls (1996) provides a
conceptual model for understanding culture shock as a process of adjustment
marked by four basic stages: euphoria, rejection, adjustment and adaptation.
While these stages provide useful insights for understanding the experience of
culture shock, it is important to note that not everyone will experience all
four stages. Each stage can be ongoing or appear only at certain time.
Therefore, the length and severity of each stage will also vary greatly for
different individuals.
(1) The first stage of culture shock is
one of euphoria, in which a person, the new arrival, is excited to be in a new
place. Like a tourist, the newcomer is intrigued by all the new sights and
sounds, new smells and tastes of his or her surroundings. He or she may have
some problems, but usually accepts them as just part of the newness. At this
point, it is the similarities that stand out and it seems to the newcomer that
people everywhere and their way of life are very much alike. Often referred to
as the "honeymoon" stage, this period of euphoria may last from a
week or two to a month, but the letdown is inevitable.
(2) During the second stage of culture
shock, known as the rejection stage, the initial excitement is over and the
person starts to experience difficulties due to the differences between the new
culture and the way he or she was accustomed to live. The initial curiosity and
enthusiasm turn into irritation, frustration, anger, and depression. These
feelings may lead the person to reject the new culture, complaining about and
noticing only the things that bother them. In addition, he or she may feel
homesick, bored, withdrawn, irritable as well as other distress during this
period of adjustment. This stage of culture shock” is often a difficult period
which may last for some time.
(3) Fortunately, most people gradually
learn to adapt to the new culture and move into the third stage known as
adjustment and reorientation. In this stage a transition occurs from the
negative attitude one has during the prior stage, to a new optimistic attitude.
As the newcomer begins to understand more of the new culture, he or she is able
to interpret some of the subtle cultural clues and cues which passed by
unnoticed earlier. Now things make more sense and the culture seems more
familiar. As a result, the newcomer will develop the skills to solve problems
and feelings of disorientation and anxiety are longer experienced as in the
previous stage.
In Kohls’
model, the fourth stage of culture shock is the adaptation, resolution, or
acculturation. In this last stage, one has settled into the new culture and
this results in a feeling of direction and self-confidence. The newcomer has
accepted the food, drinks, habits and customs of the new culture and may even
find themselves enjoying some of the very customs, ways of doing and saying
things that had bothered them so much in the previous stages. In addition to
being able to function comfortably in the new culture, the person also realizes
that the new culture has good and bad things to offer and that no way is really
better than another, just different.
0 comments:
Post a Comment