Impact of Culture on Perception and Behavior - Essay Example

Impact of Culture on Perception and Behavior Impact of Culture on Perception and Behavior Introduction Culture momentously influences the manner in which people communicate and this comes because of perception situations and behavior. Culture is a ‘set of shared deep-level assumptions and values, and these assumptions and values influence thoughts and behavior’ (Lane, Maznevski, DiStefano and Dietz, 2009, p.34). Cross-cultural communication is the communication that takes place between two or more individuals of distinct cultures. Often, people from different cultures have expectations, values and norms that differ, and this translates to their differing behavior, decisions and judgments. For instance, the positive outcomes of a decision typically influence Europeans while the negative outcomes of a decision influence Asians (Maude, 2011). This means that a culture can influence the way in which different people interpret, evaluate, perceive, and make decisions on an identical situation (Lane et al., 2009). With the increased globalization, multinational enterprises have become common and it is inevitable for managers of these firms to acclimatize with cross-cultural communication to savor success (Hurn and Tomalin, 2013, p. 208). Additionally, people are increasingly connecting in this modernized era, a situation that calls for a proper comprehension of the impact of culture on behavior and communication. This paper will look on the various factors that bring about the cultural differences, Hofstedes cultural dimensions theory, and analyze and relate the various theories on cross-cultural communication: face negotiation, conversational constraints, expectancy violations, and anxiety or uncertainty management. Dimensions of Analyzing Cultural Differences (Hofstedes Cultural Dimensions Theory) Cultures differ in various aspects. Cultural differences are discernible from six major dimensions, as developed by Geert Hofstede. First is the power distance index (PDI), which relates to the degree with which the members with trivial powers in a family or organization anticipate and accept that it is right for power distribution to be unequal. Democratic cultures, intrinsically, endorse low power distances. The second dimension is individualism versus collectivism, which is concerned with the level of integration among individuals or grouping. Societies that embrace individualism focus on personal and family achievements rather than on cohesive groups, as it is the case with collectivistic societies characterized by loyalty of group members. The third dimension is uncertainty avoidance index (UAI), which regards to the degree with which a given society tolerates uncertainty and anxiety. Cultures of high uncertainty avoidance tend to be emotional and attempt to trivialize the uncertainty by planning and following laws, regulations, and enacting rules. Then again, societies with low uncertainty avoidance have relatively few rules and are often comfortable with situations that are not structured. Fourthly, the dimension of masculinity versus femininity is proposed, which is concerned with the manner in which emotional functions work among the genders. Whereas masculine cultures are competitive, material-based and power-based, feminine cultures seem to value the quality of life and relationships. Next is the long term versus short-term orientations that describe the time horizon of a given culture. Long-term oriented cultures are futuristic whereas the ones that are short term oriented pay more focus to the present and the past. Finally, Hofstede proposes the indulgence versus the restraint dimension, which portrays the degree to which individuals of a given culture are able to put their impulses and desires under control. Restrained cultures are for the idea that natural human desires necessitate regulation rather than granting them free gratification, as it is the case with indulgent culture (Ortenblad and Edward Elgar Publishing, 2013). These dimensions will be of primal importance when looking at the theoretical approaches to cross-cultural communication. Theoretical Approaches to Cross-Cultural Communication Face Negotiation Theory Culture influences the way in which people react to conflict. This assertion is in line with Stella Ting-Toomey’s Face Negotiation Theory. Ting-Toomey uses the term face to refer to what an individual perceives as salient within his/her culture with the effect of respect and reputation enhancement. She asserts that culture plays a key role in the identity of a person since it consists of norms, values, traditions and beliefs that shape an individual. Ting-Toomey continues to explain that conflict can be instanced from either the clashing of these elements of culture or the wrong application of particular behavioral standards and expectations to a given situation. The theory suggests three main issues in which conflict revolves around. First is the content conflict that regards to the issues that a person holds onto with much regard. Second is the relational conflict, which pertains to the way in which an individual defines the relationship with the person on the receiving end of the conflict. Lastly, identity based conflict involves the extent of approval, respect, and identity confirmation of the other party in the conflict. All these issues have a great connection with culture and intend to ‘save the face’. This theory uses the individualistic versus the collectivists dimension to coin the point. Ting-Toomey terms individualistic cultures as ‘self-face’ whereas collectivistic cultures are ‘other face’. For instance, Western cultures tend to be more direct and open when confronting conflicts through direct eye contact while expecting prompt responses whereas eastern cultures have adapted to the obliging and avoidance through addressing issues while excusing the other part’s behavior with an aim of upholding harmony. Perceptibly, western cultures are individualistic whereas Eastern cultures are collectivistic (Ting-Toomey, 2014). Understanding a person’s culture on cultural grounds can help in tackling conflicts effectively. Conversation Constraint Theory Cultural influences on behavior and perception is evident through particular strategies of communication. Endorsing the assertions of Ting-Toomey, Young Yun Kim developed the Conversation Constraint Theory, which explicates the reason there is disparity in the various communication strategies across different cultures. To Kim, there are five general constraints to communication: effectiveness, clarity, consideration of the other party’s’ feelings, the risk of negative evaluation by the receiver, and minimizing of imposition. Effectiveness refers to the degree of wellness through which the message is conveyed to the receiver. Kim, just like Ting-Toomey, uses the dimension of individualism versus collectivism in that collectivistic cultures use effectiveness in a more watered down and diffused, manner to avoid offense and negativity. In contrast, individualistic cultures emphasize on punctuality in their effectiveness through being frank, straightforward and direct; the feelings of the listener are of are not preferred over effectiveness. Clarity denotes the ability of an utterance making clear the intention of a person. Kim asserts that masculine cultures pay more emphasis to clarity as opposed to feminine cultures. Considering the feelings of the hearer concerns how the speaker intends to make the receiver feel from his utterance. Feminine, low power distance and collectivistic cultures put more emphasis on the feelings of others as compared to the masculine, high power distance and individualistic cultures. Minimizing imposition through communication denotes the avoidance of being forceful, and collectivistic, feminine, and low power distance cultures endorse this practices as opposed to the cultures that are otherwise. Finally, avoiding negative evaluation by the hearer means that the speaker is avoiding devaluation and wants to create a good reputation. For instance, during interviews, one may want to create a good first impression, a practice that is embraced by collectivistic cultures and despised by individualistic ones (Littlejohn and Foss, 2009). Communication strategies play an important role in explicating the influence that culture has on behavior and perception. Expectation Violation Theory In addition, culture shapes the way that different individuals respond to the violation of their expectations. As Judee Burgoon maintains through the Expectation Violation Theory, individuals from different cultures react differently in the violation of their expectations. She continues to profess that each culture has its distinct guidelines on how conduct of humans that give rise to the expectations on how others ought to behave. The disparity in culture is evident from the evaluation, rigidity and content dimensions. She argues that members of individualistic cultures tend to anticipate high verbal directness, less politeness, and immediacy as compared to the collectivistic cultures, an allusion of Ting-Toomey’s propositions. Besides, she predicts that low uncertainty avoidance cultures are characterized relatively few norms and rules that regulate behavior as compared to cultures that embrace high uncertainty avoidance, who are against deviations from the set rules. Additionally, cultures characterized by high power distance, according to her, consider violation of behavior by a person of high status as a violation of authority, and in consequence, the occurrence of anxiety and stress, which is detrimental. Burgoon also predicts that individual in all the cultures have the tendency of judging behaviors that are not expected in a relatively negative manner if the source of the message is not attractive to them(Esser and Hanitzsch, 2012). Indeed culture shapes expectations and the violation thereof is different across the individuals of various cultures. Anxiety or Uncertainty Management Theory Additionally, culture affects the degree of anxiety in individuals, which directly affects the way in which they interact with strangers. According to William Gudykunst, in his Anxiety or uncertainty management theory, people have to strike a balance of anxiety and certainty for effective communication to take place between two or more individuals of varying cultures. A person from a different culture is perchance a stranger. Uncertainty, as per the assertions of Gudykunst, refer to the lack of certainty in predicting and explain the behavior of the other party whereas anxiety denoted the fear of various things that may occur in the course of the interaction, for instance, getting rejected or looking stupid. Just like Kim, Gudykunst refers the proper balance of these two factors to as effectiveness. To him, managing uncertainty and anxiety provides a better mutual understanding and ease of adaptation. He further performs a cultural analysis because of the belief that some anxieties are more in a particular culture than in others. People from different cultures exhibit different behaviors when interacting with strangers. Collectivistic cultures for instance, seem to distinguish between members of a different culture whereas those of individualistic cultures only draw a distinction between members of an ethnic group (Solomon and Theiss, 2013). Managing anxiety and uncertainty can be beneficial for a person who intends to communicate effectively in the cross-cultural arena. Conclusion Culture has the ability of molding the way in which individuals perceive situations and in how they conduct themselves. Individuals from different cultures exhibit different behaviors and perceptions in a given situation. These differences are discernible as individualism versus collectivism, power distance index, uncertainty avoidance index, masculinity versus femininity, long term versus short-term orientations and indulgence versus the restraint. Different academicians have coined theories that have supported this assertion. Ting-Toomey argues that culture affects the way in which an individual responds to conflicts when they erupt. Kim uses the various communication strategies to bring out the impact of culture on behavior. Burgoon coins that culture shapes an individual’s expectations about human behavior and subsequent judgment on behavior of others pegs on this expectation. Finally, Gudykunst makes a potent assumption that different cultures vary in the emphasis they put on different anxieties and uncertainties and this affects the way in which individuals behave. Without doubt, culture is innate and people ought to comprehend the disparities that exist in cultures to communicate properly and with much consideration, given the contemporary globalization era. . References Esser, F. & Hanitzsch, T. (2012). The Handbook of Comparative Communication Research. Milton Park, Sabingdon, Oxon: Routledge, p126. Hurn, B. J., & Tomalin, B. (2013). Cross-cultural communication: Theory and practice. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan Lane, H. W., Maznevski, M. L., DiStefano, J. J., & Dietz, J. (2009). International management Behavior (6thed.). West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, p. 34 Littlejohn, S. W., & Foss, K. A. (2009). Encyclopedia of communication theory. Los Angeles, Calif: Sage, P.248 -249 Maude, B. (2011). Managing Cross-Cultural Communication: Principles and Practice. Houndmills Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Ortenblad, A., & Edward Elgar Publishing. (2013). Handbook of research on the learning Organization: Adaptation and context. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pub. Ltd., P. 94-100 Solomon, D. & Theiss. (2013). Interpersonal Communication: Putting Theory into Practice. Milton Park, sabingdon, Oxon: Routledge, p.59-60. Ting-Toomey, S. (2014). Face Negotiation Theory. In Benet-Martínez, V., & In Hong, Y. (2014). The Oxford handbook of multicultural identity, P. 491 – 496   Read More