COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

Module 6
Intercultural Communication 2

Introduction
The previous module tackled Edward T. Hall’s concept of high-context and low-context cul-
tures in interpersonal and intergroup communication. The current module expands the discus-
sion on intercultural communication to frameworks for addressing issues in intercultural con-
texts. Knowing how to make communication work in an intercultural setting is a crucial
competence that all of us must develop because all communication is, to some degree, inter-
cultural. Even among people coming from the same cultural community, issues in intercultur-
al communication can be observed. The aim of the module is to introduce you to concepts,
cognitive markers, and principles of intercultural communication to help you develop a way
of thinking, being, and acting that is responsive to the complex communicative demands of
intercultural interaction.

Learning Outcomes
After studying this module, you should be able to:
1. Analyze verbal and nonverbal codes in different intercultural communication situations;
2. Discuss how issues in and barriers to effective intercultural communication can be ad-
dressed through intercultural praxis; and
3. Explain the concept of “third space” and its importance in intercultural communicative
settings.

1.0 Verbal and Nonverbal Codes

Often, intercultural communication results in misunderstandings because participants in the
communicative encounter operate on different sets of meanings both with regard to the words
that they speak and the nonverbal signals or expressions that are part of how they communi-
cate. This section deals with verbal and nonverbal communication as aspects of cultural ex-
pression. The discussion focuses on how verbal and nonverbal communication not only dis-
tinguish or differentiate cultures but also connect them to each other.

Page 1
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

1.1 Verbal Communication

Verbal communication refers to the reception, storage, retrieval, manipulation, and generation
of linguistic symbols. Communicative misunderstanding, which is defined as “a potential
breakdown point in conversation, or at least a kind of communicative turbulence” by Maura-
nen (2006, p. 128), is usually perceived as a problem in verbal communication and more
specifically, in the interpretation of what is said by one or the other party. According to Bre-
mer (1996), a problem in communication arises when “the listener achieves an interpretation,
which makes sense to him or her — but it wasn’t the one the speaker meant” (Bremer, 1996,
p. 40). This mismatch between the speaker’s meaning and the hearer’s interpretation is at-
tributed by Hua (2014) to two factors: inadequate linguistic proficiency and pragmatic mis-
match which results in pragmatic failure.

The first factor is linguistic in nature. This means that the misunderstanding is due to a prob-
lem in lexical comprehension, mishearing utterances, and the complexity of syntax or gram-
mar experienced by the communicative actors. The second factor has to do with pragmatics,
or how the speaker uses words in a specific context. Pragmatic mismatch happens when there
are significant differences in the locutionary act or what is actually said and its literal mean-
ing, the illocutionary act or how it is said or delivered (which has to do with the speaker’s
intent), and the perlocutionary act or the effect of what and how something is said (i.e. the
listener's response). All speech acts have these three levels of meaning, and miscommunica-
tion happens when they are misaligned or when there is a disconnection between what is
conveyed and how it is interpreted. For example, someone would say to you, “It’s warm in
here.” and you think that the speaker is referring to the actual temperature in the room. You
respond by opening the windows to let in some cool air, but the speaker is in fact referring to
a feeling of discomfort or tension triggered by a word you said, and s/he is probably calling
you out indirectly.

In a type of pragmatic failure called pragmalinguistic failure, the meaning of an utterance by

a second language speaker does not fit with the meaning that a native speaker has of it. An-
other type of pragmatic failure called sociopragmatic failure happens when the hidden rules
concerning the applicability of ‘pragmatic concepts’ like politeness, face, directness, and sin-

Page 2
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

cerity are not observed because of an incomplete understanding of the degree of social dis-
tance, for example. Hua concluded that pragmatic failure occurs when there is a mismatch in
schemas and cultural stereotypes and in the contextualization and framing of meaning be-
tween the communicative actors.

Baldwin and his colleagues (2014) also attributed misunderstandings in intercultural commu-
nication to differences in the systems of meanings governed by semantics and pragmatics.
Semantics is that area of language studies that is concerned with the meanings of words. Dif-
ferences in meaning systems, including the rules that govern speech acts, result in different
communication styles (see Box 1).

Box 1. Verbal Communication Styles

Low-context vs. As discussed in Module 5, in low-context communication meanings are

high-context conveyed using explicit verbal codes. The speaker expresses her/
verbal himself in direct, detailed, and clear language without having any
communication preconception about the audience. High-context communication uses
styles implicit verbal codes. People talk less and meanings are between the
lines or in what is not said. In this context, direct speech is considered
inappropriate and may offend certain cultural sensibilities.
Direct vs. indirect A direct communication style expresses true intentions, ideas, and
verbal needs in an outright manner. This is in contrast with an indirect
communication communication style, which is characterized by restraint in expressing
styles opposition and use of figurative speech to get the message across. In
indirect communication a series of statements is used to layer intention.
Layering of intentions is a communicative strategy that allows the
communicant to structure an argument in such a way as to soften its
effect. An example of a direct communication style is the dugri
(meaning “straight”) speech of Israeli Jews, which is a type of talk that
goes straight to the point to ensure clarity and is pragmatic and
assertive. An example of an indirect communication style is the Arab
musayra, which is characterized by accommodation or going along
with the person one is conversing with in order to foster a harmonious
relationship. This non-confrontational, elaborately courteous style
stems from ideals of honor, hospitality, and collectivism.

Page 3
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

Self-enhancing The individual with a self-enhancing communication style is assertive

vs. self-effacing and not shy about stating her/his abilities and accomplishments. In
verbal contrast, the person with a self-effacing communication style employs
communication verbal restraint and modest talk. S/He speaks with detectable hesitation
styles when asked to talk about personal achievements.
Elaborate vs. Elaborate verbal communication is characterized by use of expressive
understated and animated language, while understated verbal communication
verbal makes considerable use of silence and understatement.
communication
styles

Given these differences in verbal communication styles, it is not surprising that intercultural
communication is often not an easy task. However, acknowledging that the codes governing
speech are culturally distinctive can facilitate intercultural communication. The differences in
speech codes come from the psychological and sociological uniqueness of cultures. To inter-
pret speech codes, you have to pay attention to and aim for a deeper understanding of the
language and communication patterns of native speakers.

—————————————————————————————————————
Activity 1

Access and read the following articles from the COMM 10 course site on the GE portal in
order to enrich your understanding of communication styles across cultures and their impact
on meaning-making:

Gudykunst, W. B., Matsumoto, Y., Ting-Toomey, S., Nishida, T., Kim, K., & Heyman, S.
(1996). The influence of cultural individualism-collectivism, self-construals, and in-
dividual values on communication styles across cultures. Human Communication Re-
search, 22, 510–543.

Lee, H.E., & Park, H.S. (2011). Why Koreans are more likely to favor “apology”, while
Americans are more likely to favor “thank you”. Human Communication Research,
13(1), 125-146.

Use the following study questions as a guide for reading. You should be able to answer these
questions based on what you understood from the readings.

Page 4
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

1. What is individualism and/or collectivism? What is the difference between individualism

and collectivism?
2. What are self-construals? What are examples of self-construals?
3. How does individualism-collectivism impact on behavior?
4. What did the authors hypothesize and find out about the relationship between individual-
ism-collectivism, self-construals, and communication styles?
5. What practical applications might these results have for cultural groups who are not men-
tioned in the study?
6. In the second article, what is a speech act?
7. How do specific cultures use “apologies” and “thank yous”?
8. What did the authors hypothesize about the use of apology and thank you between Amer-
icans and Koreans?
9. How did the author observe these differences? What does the result of the study say about
the two cultural groups’ propensity to apologize and express gratitude? What are the im-
plications of the result?
—————————————————————————————————————

—————————————————————————————————————
Activity 2

The previous discussion emphasized the importance of understanding the different verbal
communication styles practiced by people from different cultures. In this in-class activity,
you will look at your own communication style and how your way of communicating affects
your interaction with other people.

The following materials will be provided by your teacher: meta cards, manila paper and
marker.

Procedure
1. Divide yourselves into four groups of equal number. (Count from one to four.)

Page 5
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

2. Each group will be assigned a communication style, thus:

Group 1- Low-context vs. high-context
Group 2- Direct vs. indirect
Group 3- Self-enhancing vs. self-effacing
Group 4- Elaborate vs. understated
3. In five minutes, discuss the assigned communication style within your group.
4. Choose from one of two options below for presenting the results of your group discus-
sion.

Option A (Group Discussion and Presentation)

1. Answer the questions below after discussion.
a) What words, tone of voice, and body language would people with the speech style
assigned to you use?
b) Why do you think would people communicate this way?
c) What is the effect on you when someone communicates to you using this style?
d) Individually, what verbal communication style do you often use in your day to day
interaction with people? Why?
e) How do you address the communicative issues that are inherent to your verbal com-
munication styles?
2. Write your answers on the manila paper and/or meta cards provided. You have 10 minutes
to accomplish the task.
3. Share your answers in class in 5 minutes.

Option B (Role Play)

1. Choose a cross-cultural scenario where the communication style assigned to your group is
likely to manifest.
2. Flesh out the possible implications of this communication styles to the communicative
encounter. Find ways to address the negative implications in order to improve the inter-
cultural communicative outcome(s).
3. Enact this in a 5-minute role play.
4. After the role play presentation, share your group’s reflections on the following questions:

Page 6
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

a) Why did you chose to resolve the issues involved in your assigned communication
style in that manner?
b) Individually, have you experienced a similar situation before? How did you address
it? Do you wish you could have handled that situation better? How would you have
improved your communicative experience?
—————————————————————————————————————

1.2 Nonverbal Communication

Although language is an effective and efficient means of communicating explicit messages, a
full appreciation of the communication process especially in intercultural interactions re-
quires consideration of nonverbal communication behavior. Nonverbal behaviors include all
actions that take place during communication which do not use words, such as facial expres-
sions, eye gaze, posture, use of space, and even tone of voice.

Nonverbal communication has at least five basic functions (Samovar et al., 2013; Matsamuto
& Hwang, 2012):
1) To express internal states — i.e. to signal emotions, attitudes, and physiological and other
mental states;
2) To construct identities as physical appearance, comportment, and even clothing often-
times serve as basis for judging people;
3) To regulate interaction — for example, nodding to indicate agreement;
4) To repeat the message — i.e. using gestures to emphasize a point; and
5) To substitute for words as when we refer to an object by pointing our lips to a specific
direction or when we fall silent to signify discomfort.

Whether nonverbal communication behaviors are universal or are culturally conditioned was
the subject of debate in the 1960s. Early studies pointed out that various cultural groups share
the same facial expressions of happiness, sadness, anger, and grief. However, culture plays a
significant influence on nonverbal behavior by establishing expectations and norms that dic-
tate the appropriateness of specific nonverbal displays. Differences in nonverbal behaviors,
also called “cultural displays”, among different groups of people are facilitated by rules about

Page 7
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

how to manage and modify emotional expressions according to the situation that people learn
from childhood.

Nonverbal communication can be intentional as well as unintentional. It serves as a vehicle of

expression or impression. The expressive use refers to when we use substitutes of verbal
symbols to deliver information. As a vehicle of impression, nonverbal behaviors become per-
ceptual, with meanings that they are outside of what is being conveyed directly but they are
nonetheless indicative of the communicative actor’s motivations. Thus, Edward T. Hall re-
ferred to nonverbal behavior as the “hidden dimension” of communication and he argued that
to miss its nuances during interactions takes a significant amount of the message away from
us.

Nonverbal communication is a challenging phenomenon to decode. Firstly, nonverbal behav-

iors can be ambiguous, meaning they do not have fixed meanings. A nonverbal behavior that
we may have perceived to mean something may mean another thing for the actor or the doer
of the action. This ambiguity has to do with the contextual nature of nonverbal actions. Sec-
ondly, nonverbal behavior is shaped by multiple factors that are not limited to cultural back-
ground, such as education, gender, age, and personal preferences and idiosyncrasies. Thirdly,
as mentioned, nonverbal communication includes cultural universals and expressions or ac-
tions that are culturally distinctive or unique.

Given these conditions, we are advised to evaluate nonverbal actions carefully before draw-
ing generalizations about them. Assessing nonverbal behaviors without recognizing that they
are rooted in different cultural frameworks and occur in different cultural spaces leads to neg-
ative stereotyping, prejudiced notions, and discrimination. These aversive reactions, which
are caused by using cultural filters that are not situated in the other’s cultural framework, are
issues in intercultural communication. Understanding nonverbal codes can help mitigate this
problem. Nonverbal codes serve as markers of important nonverbal displays that may serve
to highlight similarities and differences, thereby allowing us to adjust our actions in order to
nurture a positive relationship and foster understanding during intercultural encounters. Box

Page 8
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

2 includes nine nonverbal codes: appearance, proxemics, chronemics, gestures, haptics,

oculesics, vocalics, olfactics, and silence.

Box 2. Nonverbal Codes

Appearance Physical appearance is the most externally obvious code of nonverbal

behavior. It may indicate age, gender, nationality, ethnicity, education,
economic status, lifestyle, and attitude. Appearance also carries certain
universal elements. Across cultures, appearance is the basis for judging
beauty, and different cultural groups decorate their body with various
adornments (e.g. tattoos). How we perceive the other’s physical
appearance influences our actions towards them.
Proxemics This refers to the use of interpersonal space and distance in
communication. Cultures differ in their use of personal space, concept
of territory, and the meanings assigned to proxemic behavior. The
amount of personal space we maintain between ourselves and the
people we interact with shows the depth of our relationship with them.
In sum, how space is used communicates different ways of regarding
others. It could mean familiarity or strangeness, openness or closed-
ness, collaboration or indifference, and submission or aggression,
among many others. That said, proxemics is relational, contextual, and
negotiated.
Chronemics This refers to the study of meanings, usage, and communication of
time. Different cultures have different concepts of time manifested in
terms of punctuality and pace. There are two ways of looking at time:
monochronic (M-time) and polychronic (P-time). The monochronic
concept of time is linear, sequential, and segmented, such that time is
understood to be scarce and must therefore be spent wisely on
achieving tasks. The polychronic concept of time results in a leisurely
pace.
Kinesics Kinesic behavior, which includes posture, gestures, and facial
expressions, differs from culture to culture. Gestures are hand
movements used to signal speech and to convey verbal meanings.
Gestures differ dramatically in meaning, extensiveness, and intensity.
With regard to facial expressions, there are three types of face that
should be taken into account: our assigned face, our regulated face, and
our reflexive face. Ekman and Friesen (1969) noted six ways in which
we manage our facial expressions: outright expressing, amplifying,
demulsifying (minimizing), masking, combining expressions, and
neutralizing.

Page 9
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

Haptics Also called tactile communication, haptics varies in amount, location,

type, and public or private manifestation. Haptics or touch
communicates specific emotions like anger, fear, disgust, love,
gratitude, and sympathy (Matsumoto & Hwang, 2012). A touch can be
accidental, professional, socially polite, friendly, loving, or sexual
depending on context and relationship. In a workplace setting, the
exchange of touches between colleagues is characterized by
professionalism. A handshake proffered during introductions is a sign of
social politeness. Some cultures like the French offer their cheeks for a
peck (la bise) during social introductions. Recoiling from this gesture
of welcome is considered a social faux pas. In the Philippines, the beso
is the equivalent of this. As norms regulate the appropriateness of
specific types of touch, violations of these norms produce aversive and
unpleasant consequences.
Oculesics Oculesics is the study of messages sent by the eyes, including eye
contact, blinks, eye movements, and pupil dilation (Samovar et al.,
2012). Eye contact and gaze serve a number of functions like
expression of thought, monitoring of feedback, indication of attention,
and regulation of conversation. There are cultures that value direct eye
contact while others practice nominal eye contact. For example,
Americans in general would prefer that the person they are interacting
with look them in the eye. Evasion of eye contact may be perceived
negatively (for example as a sign of dishonesty). On the other hand,
some cultures are offended by direct eye contact because it signifies
aggression. In Arab countries, one is not expected to look people,
especially women, in the eye.
Vocalics or Vocalics or paralanguage refers to the nonverbal elements of the voice,
Paralanguage or the tone of the human voice (Samovar et al., 2013). Paralanguage has
three categories: vocal qualities, vocal characterizers, and vocal
segregates. Vocal qualities include volume, rate, pitch, tempo,
resonance, pronunciation, and tone. Vocal characterizers include
laughing, crying, moaning, whining, and yawning. Vocal segregates
include mono- or poly-syllabic sounds like “uh-huh”, “ssh”, “uh”,
“ooh”, “um”, “mmmh”, and “hmmm”. These segregates, which are
sometimes imitative of verbal sounds or ambient sounds, could signal
disbelief, frustration, amazement, noncommittal agreement, being lost
in thought, and interest, among others. They also vary from culture to
culture.

Page 10
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

Olfactics Olfactics is the study of interpersonal communication via smell.

Olfactics are cultural in two ways: first, certain smells are connected to
diet, bodily rituals, and geography; and second, the ability to smell and
give valence to certain types of smell are also culturally conditioned.
An interesting example is the use of perfumes, which varies among
cultures.
Silence Often considered as a mere background of speech, silence is a complex
and powerful element of human interaction that is culturally determined
and which communicates certain aspects of a culture (Nakane, 2007).
Although silence acquires significance and meaning only within the
communicative encounter its varying degrees of intensity in the
interaction are as meaningful as language. For example, in developing
relationships, silence communicates awkwardness and can make people
feel uncomfortable. Across cultures, silence plays cognitive, discursive,
social, and affective functions. As a social phenomenon, it regulates
social distance, impression-formation, social control, and role and
power negotiation.

—————————————————————————————————————
Activity 3

To enhance your understanding of the nature and implications of non-verbal communication

across cultures, read the first article in the list below and one of the two works by Hall. All of
the readings are available at the COMM 10 course site on the GE portal.

Ekman, P. and Friesen, W.V. (1969) The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, ori-
gins, usage, and coding, Semiotica, 1, 49–98.

Hall, E.T. (1966). The hidden dimension, (113-188). New York, New York: Doubleday and
Company.

Hall, E.T. (1959). Space speaks. The silent language (187-209). Garden City, New York:
Doubleday and Company.

Use the following study questions as a guide for reading. You should be able to answer these
questions based on what you understood from the readings.
1. What did Ekman and Friesen say about the usage and origin of nonverbal behavior? How
did they elaborate on the cultural origins of nonverbal behavior?

Page 11
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

2. How did they categorize nonverbal behavior?

3. What did Hall say about space? How does space take on different meanings across cul-
tures?
4. How does space impact on the other categories or forms of nonverbal behaviors? In Hall’s
treatise, it appears that space is the thread that shapes and links the other nonverbal behav-
iors. What is your stand on his proposition?
5. Ekman et al. and Hall wrote their treatise on nonverbal behavior and their communicative
implicatures in the 1960s. Society has changed since then. Given the fact that culture is
dynamic, do you think that their conceptualizations of nonverbal communication is still an
adequate framework of analysis in the present time? Why do you say so? If no, which part
needs to be re-examined today?

The following readings are suggested to help expand your understanding of specific nonver-
bal communication displays in certain cultures and the challenges they pose in intercultural
settings. They are accessible at the COMM 10 course site at the GE portal.

Appearance, Proxemics, Chronemics, Gestures

Matsumoto, D., & Hwang, H.S. (2012). Nonverbal communication: The messages of emo-
tion, action, space, and silence. In J. Jackson (Ed.), The handbook of language and
intercultural communication (pp. 130-147). Oxon, OX: Routledge
Moulin-Doos, C. (2013). Intercultural gardens: The use of space by migrants and the practice
of respect. Journal of Urban Affairs, 36(2), 197-206.

Haptics
Shuter, R. (1976). Nonverbal communication: Proxemics and tactility in Latin America.
Journal of Communication, 26, 46-52.

Oculesics
Gobel, M.S., Chen, A., and Richardson, D.S. (2017). How different cultures look at faces de-
pends on the interpersonal context. Canadian Journal of Experimental Pscyhology,
71, 258-264.
Uono, S., and Hietanen, J.K. (2015). Eye contact perception in the West and East: A cross-
cultural study. PLoS ONE, 10, 1-15. Retrieved from: journals.plos.org/plosone/article/
file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0118094&type=printable.

Olfactics

Page 12
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

Hastings, S.O., Musambira, G.W., and Ayoub, R. (2011). Revisiting Edward T. Hall’s work
on Arabs and olfaction: An update with implications for intercultural communication
scholarship. Journal of Intercultural Communication and Research, 40, 3-20.

Silence
Nakane, I. (2007). A review of silence in intercultural communication. Silence in intercultural
communication, Perceptions and performance (pp. 5-39). Amsterdam, The Nether-
lands: John Benjamins B.V.
Yates, L., and Nguyen, TQT. (2012). Beyond a discourse of deficit: The meaning of silence
in the international classroom. The International Education Journal: Comparative
Perspectives, 11, 22-34.
—————————————————————————————————————

—————————————————————————————————————
Activity 4

This in-class activity1 teaches you to recognize nonverbal cues and reflect on the nonverbal
messages that you send to others. You will consider whether your interpretation of nonverbal
information is affected by the race/ethnicity or gender of the person with whom you are inter-
acting.

Procedure
1. You will be assigned a specific worksheet to answer. There are three worksheets for this
activity but you will answer only one worksheet. The worksheet assignment is done by
counting from one to three.
1 - body language
2 - facial expression
3 - personal space
2. Your teacher will provide you with a printed copy of the worksheet. The worksheets are
also available through the following links:
Body language worksheet - http://breakingprejudice.org/assets/AHAA/Activities/Non-
verbal%20Communication%20Folder/Body%20Language%20Worksheet.pdf

1 Adopted from Johnson, S.B. (2014). Non-Verbal Communication Activity. Available at http://break-
ingprejudice.org/teaching/group-activities/non-verbal-communication-activity/

Page 13
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

Facial expression worksheet - http://breakingprejudice.org/assets/AHAA/Activities/Non-

verbal%20Communication%20Folder/Facial%20Expressions%20Worksheet.pdf

Personal space worksheet - http://breakingprejudice.org/assets/AHAA/Activities/Nonver-

bal%20Communication%20Folder/Proxemics%20Worksheet.pdf

3. Answer the worksheet in 10 minutes and prepare to share your answers with your class-
mates.
—————————————————————————————————————

Synthesis
Understanding the verbal and nonverbal communication codes that differentiate cultures from
each other is important in developing intercultural communication competence. They help
individuals recognize the diversity among cultures and guide their actions in order to promote
intercultural understanding. However, culture should not be understood as a monolithic con-
cept. Cultural variations, or co-cultures, exist within nations and the aforementioned verbal
and nonverbal communication behaviors manifest differently among ethnolinguistic groups
within a national boundary. Analysis of communication across cultures should be sensitive to
these inter- and intra-cultural nuances.

2.0 Towards Intercultural Praxis

Aside from the clashes of meanings brought about by different cultural frameworks, there are
bigger issues in intercultural communication that stem from a lack of understanding of other
cultures. These include anxiety, ethnocentrism, stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination. We
consider these to be bigger issues as they do not only stem from and result in misunderstood
meanings; rather they impact negatively on relationships between cultures and, at their worst,
may be the source of intercultural conflicts with serious socio-political consequences. These
issues are discussed briefly below.

Anxiety. This is a state characterized by light to extreme feelings of worry, fear, and insecuri-
ty about meeting and interacting with individuals from a different cultural background. It is
brought about by the uncertainty in intercultural encounters. Internally, it manifests in light to

Page 14
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

excessive mental rehearsals over the quality and the outcome of the interaction. As a result,
the individual is not totally present in the communication transaction; s/he becomes too con-
scious about “making it right,” that s/he is unable to listen and respond appropriately and in-
stead acts in an awkward manner.

Assuming similarity instead of difference. When you assume similarity between cultures
you can be caught unaware of important differences. When you have no information about a
new culture, it might make sense to assume there are no differences and to behave as you
would in your home culture. But each culture is different and unique to some degree. Assum-
ing that other cultures are similar to ours sometimes drive us to impose our way of thinking
and doing things on others. This robs the interaction of its potential to develop into an inter-
esting relationship.

Ethnocentrism. This refers to negatively judging aspects of another culture by the standards
of one’s own culture. To be ethnocentric is to believe in the superiority of one’s own culture.
In fact, superiority or inferiority is relative. All aspects of a particular culture would make
sense if you understood that culture. For example, resting under a shade at mid-day makes
sense in tropical and subtropical countries. It is not a sign of laziness, as some people from
temperate countries might assume.

Stereotyping. Stereotypes “are widely held beliefs about a group of people” (Jandt, 2017)
and are a form of generalization or a way of categorizing and processing information we re-
ceive about others in our daily life. Normally, stereotypes help us to organize and make sense
of new experiences. However, there is tendency to overgeneralize a group of people as if a
culture and its people have uniform attributes. Jandt reminds us not to ignore nuances in the
individualities and identities of people.

Prejudice. Prejudice is a negative attitude toward a cultural group based on little or no expe-
rience of it. It is a prejudgment of sorts. Whereas stereotypes are generalizations about a
group of people, prejudice is a negative feeling about that group arising from these general-
izations.

Page 15
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

Discrimination. The behavior that results from stereotyping or prejudice, specifically overt
actions to exclude, avoid, or distance oneself from other groups, is called discrimination. Dis-
crimination may be based on racism or any of the other “isms” related to belonging to a cul-
tural group (e.g., sexism, ageism, elitism). One way of thinking about discrimination is that it
is the exercise of power based on prejudice, or simply power plus prejudice equals “ism.”

Anxiety brought about by the prospect of and actual intercultural encounters can be addressed
relatively easily compared with the other issues in intercultural communication. For example,
Gudykunst (2005) posited, in his Anxiety-Uncertainty Management Theory (AUMT), that
intercultural communication is not really characterized by differences but by the degree of
strangeness between the communicative actors and this degree of strangeness can be navigat-
ed by being mindful of the “stranger’s” perspective. Mindfulness includes openness to the
novelty of experiencing a new culture, awareness of the distinctions between cultures, sensi-
tivity to different contexts, awareness and acceptance of multiple perspectives, and a sense of
grounding in the present.

In the case of ethnocentrism, stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination, mindfulness takes a

more serious cast. Where conflict is at stake we need to re-examine our positions with regard
to the other culture and locate these positions within the constellation of socio-political fac-
tors that has framed our interpretations of reality, such as history, power, and ideology. Sor-
rells (2016) unpacked the idea of mindfulness in her concept of intercultural praxis and traced
the roots of our perceptions of cultures to our social positionings. She describes intercultural
praxis as a way of life, a thought process, analysis, and taking action that allows us to negoti-
ate within and across complex intercultural paths.

2.1 Overcoming the Barriers to Intercultural Communication

Sorrells (2016) put forward six entry points for intercultural praxis, which might help indi-
viduals enhance their intercultural communication competence. These entry points are in-
quiry, framing, positioning, dialogue, reflection, and action.

Page 16
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

Inquiry includes taking an interest in and making a commitment to learn about other cul-
tures, which motivate engagement with other people.

Framing is a continuum of perspective-taking options. Our tendency is to consider, first and

foremost, our perspectives and orientations when confronting the world. But Sorrells suggests
that it might be better for us to acknowledge that our perspectives are constrained by our
frames. To remedy this, we need to educate ourselves about the local and global forces that
influence intercultural interactions, like the histories of peoples, for example.

Positioning – Our geographic positions are closely associated with our social and political
positions. Some of us may be in a geographic location that affords us direct access to the ma-
terial and symbolic resources in society. If we acknowledge this central-periphery dichotomy
of political, social, and economic reality, we may be in a better position to recognize that
people have different levels of access to resources and lack of access impacts on people’s
lived realities. We may be able to acknowledge whose voices are dominant, whose voices are
silent.

Dialogue – In Sorrells’ words, dialogue offers us opportunities “to stretch ourselves—to

reach across—to imagine, experience, and creatively engage with points of view, ways of
thinking and being, and beliefs different from our own while accepting that we may not fully
understand or come to a common agreement or position” (p. 20).

Reflection refers to the capacity for introspection and being able to modify one’s views and
behavior based on that reflection.

Action – Sorrells argues that it is not enough that we modify our thoughts and feelings in ac-
cordance with the ideals of cultural and political inclusiveness. We must also take action to
help promote a socially just, equitable, and peaceful world.

Page 17
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

—————————————————————————————————————
Activity 5

To deepen your understanding of Sorrell’s framework for intercultural praxis, read the book
chapter listed below. The reading is available at the COMM 10 course site on the GE portal.

Sorrells, K. (2016). Opening the conversation. Intercultural communication: Globalization

and social justice (pp. 1-24). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

Answer the following study questions:

1. Sorrells proposes a re-imagination of intercultural communication in the age of globaliza-
tion. How is it a re-imagination and why is it necessary to propose it?
2. What did she say about intercultural praxis? What are the important considerations in in-
tercultural praxis?
—————————————————————————————————————

—————————————————————————————————————
Activity 6

In class, watch “The Lunch Date,” a 10-minute short film that you can access through this
link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epuTZigxUY8&t=5s.

After watching the short film, answer the questions below and be ready to share your per-
spectives in class.
1. What does the short film suggest the older White woman had been taught about Black
American men? And what does the short film suggest the Black American man had been
taught about White Americans?
3. What assumptions did the white woman make about the Black American in the diner?
What assumptions did the Black American make about the woman? What actions did each
of them take based on their assumptions about each other? How did the characters’ as-
sumptions about each other affect their ability to communicate their internal states?

Page 18
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

4. Consider the man behind the counter who watched the event unfold. What do you think
does he stand for in that example of a cultural clash that is reflective of the bigger cultural
collisions in our society?
5. What barriers in intercultural communication are evident in the interaction between the
two characters in the short film?
6. Choose one of the two main characters and propose how Sorrells’ framework for intercul-
tural praxis can be applied to improve the character's communicative encounter.
—————————————————————————————————————-

3.0 Creating a “third space”

Intercultural communication can be understood in terms of the same variables and processes
that we use in examining other communication phenomena. That is, we can look at the
sender, receiver, message, channel, feedback, effect, and context of the communication in try-
ing to make sense of our intercultural experiences. What is unique to intercultural communi-
cation, however, is that it “involves interaction between people whose cultural perceptions
and symbol systems differ enough to influence the communication event” (Samovar et al.,
2013, p. 8). In fact, according to Pratt (1992), intercultural encounters can be viewed as “con-
tact zones” or “social spaces where disparate cultures meet, clash, and grapple with each oth-
er, often in highly asymmetrical relationships of dominance and subordination” (p. 12). In-
deed, due to power differences between groups, intercultural experiences could lead to inclu-
sion or exclusion. Communicating with someone from another culture is often fraught with
tension, oscillating between differences and similarities, strangeness and familiarity, and
dominance and subordination. Thus, Ting-Toomey and Chung (2012) explain, actors in inter-
cultural interactions find the need to constantly negotiate a common meaning which serves as
an orienting grid upon which to pattern their responses and actions. It is this of negotiation of
a common ground for meaning-making between people from different cultures or people who
have different cultural orientations that is the basis for the concept of “third space” or “third
culture” (Casmir, 2016) in intercultural communication.

Page 19
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

The term “third space” was coined by Homi Bhabha (1994) to refer to the “in-between” space
in the clash between cultures where meaning and representation are negotiated and cultural
identity can be re-imagined. Individuals from different cultures who interact with each other
make adjustments to their own sense of cultural identity in order to explore new ways of
building relationships. This calls for individuals to be empathetic and attentive to other per-
spectives, to consider the other’s need to understand and be understood, and to co-create a
space where these needs can be fulfilled. The concept of third space therefore challenges the
tendency for “othering” or looking at the world in terms of “us versus them”, by emphasizing
finding commonality and building “ours”. Simply put, the third space is what happens when
people from different cultural backgrounds negotiate meanings when in the same setting
(Kramsch & Uryu, 2012).

—————————————————————————————————————
Activity 7

Read the following essays about intercultural communication and “third space” as a frame-
work for fostering strong intercultural relationships. Use the study questions below as a guide
in making sense of the ideas discussed in the readings.

Kramsch, C., & Uryu, M. (2012). Intercultural contact, hybridity and third space. In J. Jack-
son (Ed.), The handbook of language and intercultural communication (pp. 211-226).
Oxon, OX: Routledge.

Casmir, F.L. (2016). Third-culture building: A paradigm shift for international and intercul-
tural communication. Annals of the International Communication Association, 16(1),
402-428.

Study questions:
1. What does the concept of “third space” mean?
2. How does the co-creation of a “third space” impact an intercultural encounter between
individuals or between groups? In answering this question, refer to a specific example of
such an encounter that has been featured in the news lately (e.g. a meeting between lead-

Page 20
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

ers or representatives of governments that do not see eye-to-eye, interaction between mi-
grants and locals).
3. What qualities or competencies are needed from actors or participants of an intercultural
interaction to successfully create a “third space”?
—————————————————————————————————————

Conclusion
To sum up, the way we communicate (verbally and nonverbally) is affected by cultural fac-
tors. Understanding cultural differences in how we communicate will help us to be more open
to others and more flexible when communicating interculturally, with the aim of finding a
common ground for meaning-making.

—————————————————————————————————————
Summative Assessment

Task
Case Study of Communication Competence

Objective
The purpose of this case study is to give you an opportunity to study an existing organization
or group’s intercultural communication competence (ICC) using qualitative observation
methods. The case study will use a framework for ICC that you develop in assessing your
chosen subject entity or organization and it must demonstrate your ability to use two to three
verbal and non-verbal codes as units of analysis for communicative behavior. This case study
will help you apply what you have learned about communication and culture in Modules 5
and 6. The case study will allow you to analyze and investigate both the challenges and best
practices in intercultural communication among organizations in the Philippines. This experi-
ence in observing and analyzing ICC is also envisioned to help you develop a mindful inter-
cultural communication practice as a lifelong framework.

Page 21
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

Procedure
1. Form a group of three to four members. Your grouping will be done through drawing of
lots. The limited number of group members will allow each member of the group to fully
participate and be involved in the case study.
2. Choose the organization where you will conduct your case study. The organization must
be a local organization that has been in operation for at least three years. Each group must
study one organization. Groups cannot study the same organization.
3. Secure permission from the organization to conduct your observation through a formal
written request signed by the group leader and noted by the course instructor. Your letter
should emphasize confidentiality of data and participant anonymity. For a deeper appreci-
ation of research ethics, read the article at http://psc.dss.ucdavis.edu/sommerb/som-
merdemo/ethics/protect.htm.
4. While awaiting approval of your request from your chosen organization, develop the con-
ceptual framework and research instrument for your study. Read the more detailed guid-
ance on this below.
5. Once your request is approved, proceed with the case study. Gather data through field ob-
servation, interviews, a survey, or a combination of these. Remember to ask permission if
you need to use a recorder during interviews or take a photo or video of people.
6. Write your case study report. Refer to the guidelines on the format of the report below.
7. Submit your case study report to the course instructor on the date s/he stipulates. NOTE:
The timeline for this assignment will be determined by your teacher.

Developing the Conceptual Framework & Research Instrument

1. Specify the types of verbal and nonverbal elements that you will use in analyzing the in-
tercultural communication competence of your chosen organization. The requirement for
this study is 2-3 verbal or nonverbal codes.
2. Draw the conceptual framework of your study integrating the verbal communication
styles, non-verbal displays, and Sorrell’s six entry points to intercultural praxis. To learn
more about how to develop a conceptual framework for research, refer to the following
online resources:
https://www.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/48274_ch_3.pdf

Page 22
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

https://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/Fulltext/2001/09000/
Problem_Statement,_Conceptual_Framework,_and.21.aspx
3. Prepare your research instrument (i.e., observation guides for naturalistic observations,
interview schedule, or survey questionnaire) based on your conceptual framework. For a
background on these data gathering techniques, refer to the following online resources:
https://atlasti.com/qualitative-research-methods/
https://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/31/3/498/2384737

Case Study Report Format

The case study report should have the following parts:
1. Cover Page – Include a running head, students’ full name, name of the CU, and date of
submission.
2. Introduction - Provide a background of the organization, the purpose or focus of your
case study and its significance, a thesis statement, and a summary of the outcome of your
analysis in one to two sentences.
3. Literature Review (which should be throughout the paper) - Refer to/Cite the relevant
theoretical literature and related studies in your introduction and discussion of findings.
4. Research Methodology - Describe the methods used in conducting the case study.
5. Discussion – Present your findings and provide an analysis.
6. Conclusion and Recommendations – State the implications of your findings on intercul-
tural communication, the strengths and limitations of your case study, and recommenda-
tions.
7. References – List all of your references using the APA referencing style.
8. Appendices – Append your research instrument if necessary.

Examples of case study reports in communication can be found at http://cssc.uscannen-

berg.org/cases/v1/v1art6/ and http://cssc.uscannenberg.org/cases/v2/v2art2/

Other Guidelines
1. Font and line spacing - Font should be Times New Roman (size 12). Line spacing should
be 1.5 and the margin should be 1 inch on all sides of the paper.

Page 23
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

2. Printing - Print your case study report in A4 size, substance 20 bond paper. Collate and
staple on the top left side.
3. Number of pages - The case study must be 5-7 pages long, excluding the title page and
references.
4. Number of copies - Each group must submit one final copy of the case study to the in-
structor

Grading
Grading for the case study will be based on the following criteria:
a. Introduction and Methodology (25%) – Sufficient background of the organization; clear
statement of the problem; clear statement of purpose; clear statement of significance to
intercultural communication theory and practice; concise description of the method of
inquiry (e.g., focus group discussion, in-depth interview, overt observation, or a combina-
tion of these); and concise summation of the study
b. Literature Review (15%) – Effective weaving of credible, appropriate, and recent sources
throughout the paper to strengthen the arguments and theoretical grounding
c. Discussion (30%) – Incisive discussion of findings; identification of observed communi-
cation competence categories and themes; elaboration of themes (i.e., citing the support-
ing observations using the verbal and non-verbal codes discussed in the readings and in
class); clear implications of the results for intercultural communication and the presence/
absence of intercultural competence in the organization; and logical flow of ideas
d. Conclusion and Recommendations (25%) – Incisive concluding statements on insights
from the study; elucidation of the strengths and limitations of the case study; on-point
recommendations to improve intercultural communication competence of the organiza-
tion
e. References (5%) – Correct use of the APA referencing style

—————————————————————————————————————

Page 24
! of !25
COMM 10 – Critical Perspectives in Communication

References
Baldwin, J.R., Means Coleman, R.R., Gonzales, A., & Shenoy-Packer, S. (2014). Intercul-
tural communication in everyday life. West Sussex, UK: Wiley Blackwell.
Bhaba, H. (1994). The location of culture. London: Routledge.
Burgoon, J.K. (2015). Expectancy violations theory. The international encyclopedia of inter-
personal communication. 1-9.
Hua, Z. (2014). Intercultural communication, language in action. Oxon, OX: Routledge.
Kramsch, C., & Uryu, M. (2012). Intercultural contact, hybridity and third space. In J. Jack-
son (Ed.), The handbook of language and intercultural communication (pp. 211-226).
Oxon, OX: Routledge.
Liu, M. (2016). Verbal communication styles and culture. Oxford research encyclopedia of
communication. Retrieved from http://communication.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/
acrefore/9780190228613.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228613-e-162
Martin, J., & Nakayama, T. (2010). Intercultural communication in context (pp. 212-302).
New York, NY: Mc-Graw Hill.
Matsumoto, D., & Hwang, H.S. (2012). Nonverbal communication: The messages of emo-
tion, action, space, and silence. In J. Jackson (Ed.), The handbook of language and
intercultural communication (pp. 130-147). Oxon, OX: Routledge.
Pratt, M.L. (1992). Introduction: Criticisms in the contact zone. Imperial eyes: Travel writing
and transcultural communication. London: Routledge.
Samovar, L.A., Porter, R.E., McDaniel, E.R., & Roy, C.S. (2013). Intercultural communica-
tion: Interaction in a multi-cultural world. Communication between cultures (8th ed)
(pp. 1-26). Boston, MA: Wadsworth.
Sorrells, K. (2016). Intercultural communication: Globalization and social justice (pp. 1-24).
Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Ting-Toomey, S., & Chung, L.C. (2012). What is intercultural communication flexibility?
Understanding intercultural communication (2nd ed) (pp.20-35). Cary: North Caroli-
na: Oxford University Press.

Page 25
! of !25