12. Cultural factors in interpersonal communication.

Some intercultural communication scholars today argue that the essence of the field is the actual dialogue between culturally unalike individuals. "The study of intercultural dialogue should be at the center of intercultural com­munication research and theory" (Hart, 1997). Scholars should record and analyze these conversations as the basic data of intercultural communica­tion, so as to identify where and why miscommunication occurs.

Talk and Silence

The value of talk versus silence in a conversation varies greatly depending on the culture. For example, in comparison to European Americans, Asians are much more reluctant to talk. An Asian is more likely to use indirect expression to convey an intended meaning (remember our discus­sions about high-context cultures?). Silence itself may be a very important message. In Finland, a cultural norm discourages striking up a conversation with strangers in public places.

At the University of New Mexico, a typical class may include several Navajo or Pueblo students. They are unlikely to ask questions during class sessions or to volunteer answers to the teacher's questions. To do so would be culturally inappropriate; it would not be the Native American way. When a teacher calls on one of the Native Americans with a question, there is usu­ally a pause of several seconds. The impatient teacher is likely to call on another student rather than wait for a response. From the Native American student's viewpoint, an important question should not be answered immedi­ately, without carefully thinking out the answer.

For the Japanese, the silence between two utterances in a conversation belongs to the previous speaker, who indicates how long the silence should continue. The listener should show respect to the previous speaker's wish for silence, especially if the speaker is older or of higher status than the listener.

As the examples illustrate, cultural differences in talk versus silence interfere with the effectiveness of intercultural communication. Once again, respect for and knowledge about another culture's values are the keys to avoiding miscommunication.

Turn-Taking

One important and necessary behavior in every face-to-face interpersonal exchange is turn-taking, defined as the process through which the partici­pants in a conversation decide who will talk first, next, and so forth. Have you noticed how individuals in a conversation decide who will talk next? Nonverbal clues may be important, such as when an individual looks at the person who is expected to talk next in a conversation.

When two people who are talking do not share a common culture, they may misunderstand each other's subtle clues as to when each should speak. As a result, both individuals may try to talk at the same time, or their discourse may be interrupted by awkward silences. As a consequence of these difficul­ties with turn-taking, both conversation partners may feel uncomfortable. Again, we see how cultural differences affect communica­tion effectiveness. For instance, when a Japanese and a North American talk in English, a pause of a few seconds' duration may frequently occur before the Japanese speaker responds. This brief delay may be vaguely disconcert­ing to the North American conversation partner.

Self-Disclosure

Cultural factors strongly determine the degree to which self-disclosure is appropriate. Collectivistic and high-context cultures are not very disclosing, while individualistic and low-context cultures are relatively more self-disclos­ing. European Americans disclose more personal details about their health, inner experiences, intimate thoughts, and so forth than do the Japanese or Chinese. Asians believe that self-centered talk is boastful, pretentious, and should be avoided. So when a European American discloses some personal information to an Asian American, the latter feels uncomfortable and does not self-disclose in return. Thus, Sidney Jourard's famous statement must be modified: Self-disclosure begets self-disclosure, if self-disclosure is culturally appropriate.

Face

One of the important functions of interpersonal communication is to form and maintain interpersonal relationships (intimate or distant, friendly ver­sus antagonistic, etc.). Culture defines the nature of these relationships between people and their intercultural interpersonal communication.

Face is particularly important for the Japanese, Chinese, and other Asians and Asian Americans who share a collectivistic culture. These individuals are extremely concerned with how they will appear to others around them. They wish to avoid looking foolish or inept and to avoid making a social error that could lead to guilt or shame. Much attention is given to maintaining positive interpersonal relationships with peers. In order to help another person main­tain face, one should pay compliments, be deferential, and offer frequent apologies for oneself. One should not criticize Asian persons in public situa­tions, as this act might harm the individual's face. For example, a North American teaching English as a foreign language in Japan playfully said in class to a favorite student: "You are a lazy student." This student did not talk to the teacher for the next several weeks and was very hurt by the teacher's joking comment. The student had lost face.

A distinction can be made between maintaining someone else's face versus your own. In collectivistic cultures like Asia, the maintenance of other-face predominates. In individualistic cultures, attention to self-face is more important. Even then, Asians attend to self-face more than do North Amer­icans. Yet, face is not unimportant in an individualistic culture like the United States. Bosses are advised to praise their employees publicly but to offer criticism and suggestions for improved performance in private, in a one- on-one situation.

Listening

Communication is a two-way process; for every person speaking there is usu­ally someone who is listening. The receiving role in the communication pro­cess is just as important as the sending role, although it has received much less attention from communication scholars (at least until recent years). The average individual spends about half of all waking hours listening, and stu­dents spend much more than that.

Most of us are not very effective listeners, because we are passive instead of active listeners. One reason for our inattentiveness while listening is because humans typically speak at about 125 to 150 words per minute, while individuals can listen at a rate of 400 words per minute. During our spare time as a listener, we often let our mind wander to other topics. Such inat­tentive listening often occurs during lecture classes. Twenty minutes after a lecture, listeners can remember only about half of the message content. One hour after the lecture, remembering drops to 40 percent; one day later this figure is 35 percent, and after two days it is 30 percent. One week after the lecture, listeners can remember 27 percent, and after two weeks, 25 percent (Steinfatt, 1997).

The whole question of people using different speech styles and wielding their language in the national manner inevitably leads to misunderstandings not only of expression but also of intent. The Japanese and English may distrust Italians because they wave their hands about, or Spaniards and Arabs because they sound emotional and loud or prone to exaggeration. The French may appear offensive because of their directness or frequent use of cynicism. No one may really know what the Japanese and Finns are thinking or what they actually said, if they said anything at all. Germans may take the English too literally and completely miss nuances of humor, understatement or irony. Northern peoples may simply con­sider that Latins speak too fast to be relied on. Languages are indeed spoken at different speeds. Hawaiian and some Polynesian languages barely get through 100 syllables per minute, while English has been measured at 200, German at 250, Japanese at 310 and French at 350 syllables per minute.