InterCult Exam 3

Mindful Reframing Tips

--restatement of polarized conflict positions into common interests --neutralize or detoxify defensive/evaluative language to descriptive language use --change complaints to requests --move blaming statements to mutual-oriented problem solving statements --reframe win-lose viewpoint to win-win process and win-win outcome --ability to see the complexity of group membership and personal identity issues in cultural context frame

individualists need to do the following w/ collectivistic culture in conflict

1. Be mindful of other-face & mutual face-saving premises, especially balancing respect and disrespect, and shame and honor issues esp. in public arena. 2. Practice mindful observation and limit the frequency of overt & pointed "why?" questions. Learn to observe reflectively and patiently. Find a "cultural bridge" to guide you in the unfamiliar culture. 3. Practice mindful listening skills, attend to other's identity, nonverbal, and relational expectation issues. *Remember listen can become silent and vice versa by rearranging the letters.*

collectivists need to do the following w/ individualists culture in conflict

1. Use assertive conflict behavior and state a clear thesis (i.e., speech act intention), then systematically develop key points in a linear, well-organized and persuasive fashion with facts & evidence. 2. Use "I" responsible statements and ask "why?" or "please clarify or be specific?" questions if confused. 3. Engage in active listening skills (rephrasing and perception checking); do not rely solely on nonverbal signals or count on other people to gauge your nonverbal gestures.

3 states of enthorelativism (DMIS MODEL)

1. acceptance: one's own culture is experienced as one of many possible diverse and complex cultural experiences, individuals are curious, respectful, of cultural diff. on a cognitive level 2. adaptation: experience of another cultural yields perceptual shifting seeing things from other cultural angle, also behavioral adaptations to diff. cultural frame of reference (ex. viewing lateness diff. in latin amer.) 3.integration: individuals intentionally (cognitively/ behaviorally) incorporates diverse cultural world views into ones identity and is able to transform polarized views

suggest some concrete ways to deal with nonverbal comm. effectively across cultures

1. be flexible when you observe/ identity nonverbal cultural display rules 2. attempt deeper-than-surface explanation for the behavior 3. monitor your own behavior 4. be adaptive/ sensitive to appropriate nonverbal display rules for emotions in a particular culture 5. be less judgmental/ are tentative in interpreting others' nonverbal signals 6. observe a variety of samples in different cultural regions

3 states of ethnocentrism (DMIS MODEL)

1. denial: one's own cultural difference is experienced as the only real one. avoid other cultures, maintaining psychological/ physical isolation, may act aggressively toward out-groups 2. defense: one's own culture is viewed at the only "good one", we vs. them, we are superior they are inferior, individuals in this stage are highly threatened by out-group, hypercritical 3. minimization: one culture is viewed as "universals" proclaim that beyond food, holidays etc we are all the same and thus like in-groups preferred behavior or values

ethnocentric distances

1. distance of indifference: [low ethnocen.] reflects lack of sensitivity in our verbal/ nonverbal interactions in dealing w/ dissimilar ppl. (speaking too loud to foreigners as if deaf or dumb) 2. distance of avoidance: [moderate enthnocen.] reflects attempted linguistic or dialect switching in the presence of out-group members as well as displayed nonverbal inattention. (maintaining eye contact only w/ in-gruop ppl) 3. distance of disparagement: [high ethnocen.] use of racist jokes or hate speech used to downgrade out group members

recognize the rewards & the obstacles/conflicts facing IC-intimate couples & their counter-racism coping strategies

1. ignoring/dismissing- esp w/ minor offenses, staring or nasty comments 2. normalizing- thinking of themselves/ appealing to others to treat them as "normal"couples w/ marital ups and down 3. withdrawing- avoiding places/ groups of ppl who are hostile to interracial couples 4. educating- outreach efforts to help others to accept interracial couples 5. confrontation- addressing directly ppl who insult or embarrass them 6. prayer- relying on faith to solve problem 7. humor- adding levity to distressing situations, laugh it of life is to short to care about what others think

proxemics & its four zones and culture-based "privacy" issues

1. intimate zone: 0-18in. closet ppl we know family, partner 2. personal zone: 18"-48in. closer friends, colleagues, some acquaintances 3. social zone: 48"-12ft. larger events, parties 4. public zone: 12ft - > ** 12" average Euro American conversation distance 14"-15" Latin America/ Caribbean 9"-10" Saudi Arabia

bicultural children identities

1. majority-group identifiers- these children identify w/ the parent from the dominant culture or religion and may not publicly acknowledge the identity of the other parent minority-group identifier- identify w/ parent who is a minority, deny or minimize their dual heritage synthesizers- acknowledge influence of both parents backgrounds and integrate into their identity disaffiliates- none of the above these children distance themselves from parents background and do not claim either, not into labels or particular racial group

explain the three-step processes of human perception and the formation of filtered lenses

1. selective attention: we pick our cues quickly from our cultural landscape, selectively choose the data we take in in an overloaded environment so we pay attn. to cues that match our own identities (skin color, accent) 2. selective organization: our culture/ language guide us to aspects of our environment that we consider relevant, organ. perceptions by grouping similar objects, ppl etc./ labeling (white lady & servers = blk dean ex., blue or periwinkle ex.) 3. elective interpretation: allows us to attach meaning to the data we receive/ this includes our expectations (filters) bc they involve what we anticipate/ predict about how others will comm. w/ us during interactions. expectations = filters our perception of others, we are caught of guard when we may incorrect choices based on original perception.

define ethnocentrism tendencies

1. we tend to define what goes on in our own culture as NATURAL/CORRECT and what goes on in other cultures as unnatural and incorrect 2. we tend to perceive in-group values, customs, norms, and roles as universally applicable 3. we tend to experience distance from out, especially when our group identity is threatened or under attack (ethnocentric distance) *privilege is an "invisible package of unearned assets"

A meta-ethical decision

A meta-ethical decision is a systematic discovery process—into our own values & biases—and prompts us to gather multiple-level information also about the other's values, standpoints, or lens. On a case-by-case basis. Can you think of creative solutions other than the ones investigated? Is there a way to prevent similar ethical dilemmas or pressures from arising in the future in this culture?

Stereotype Content Model

According to research, international stereotypes often formed along two implicit dimensions: Perception of warmth dimension: is guided by whether our nation (or group) is in competition or cooperation w/ another nation [low-warmth would be countries that have completion between them] Perception of competence dimension: whether we perceive a particular nation w/ low or high status [nordic countries are most competent in graph]

inflexible stereotyping

Automatic pilot reaction Rigid categories Premature closure Polarized evaluations Information distortion Unwilling to change categories

ICC Do-Ables

Be honest about your own biases. Understand where you learn your stereotypes. Dig deeper about your attribution biases. Seek accurate identity membership knowledge. Cultivate constructive, intergroup contacts with diverse identity communities. Foster an inclusive mindset & social justice climate. Work on positive, interdependent task goals. Personalized the relationships & build trust. Learn to listen and share and see the shared common humanity behind the differences...

understand the research findings on cultural/ethnic differences on various conflict communication styles

China, Hong Kong, Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan, Mex/ U.S. tend to use more self-defensive, dominating, and competitive conflict styles Collectivists tend to use more obliging & avoiding styles

collectivistic/interdependent conflict lens & characteristics

Collectivistic or Interdependent-self Conflict Lens Relational process lens Win-win relational approach "Being"/Relational + Content Relational compromising High-Context Style: Indirect, Analogic, Emotive or Understated, Accommodating

Defining FACE

Communication-related identity images. Protecting own social self-image and also consideration or rejection of the other person's social self-image emphasis. On deeper level: embarrassment, shame, honor, family name, reputation, prestige, status, honor, pride, credibility, & competence issues. Facework: Verbal & nonverbal comm. strategies used to maintain or defend or "save" our social self-image & attack (or defend) social images of others. Saving Face: defending or protecting self-face, other-face, mutual-face; ingroup membership vs. outgroup face. Giving Face means uplifting, honoring, or protecting the identity images of others from hurts or embarrassment and not humiliating them in public in an overt manner.

explain core concepts & research results in cross-cultural self-disclosure topics

Cross-Cultural Self-disclosure Comparisons Self-disclosure: intentional process of revealing exclusive information about ourselves to others that other individuals do not know.

discuss the three conflict skills: mindful listening, cultural empathy, & mindful reframing

Cultural Empathy - perspective-take as accurately as possible the self-experiences of others and convey your understanding responsively with resonation. Mindful Reframing - How you "frame" conflict via neutrally-toned language may soften conflict defensiveness. Adaptive Code-Switching - Purposefully modifying one's verbal and nonverbal behaviors in conflict interaction e.g., from LCC to HCC and vice versa.

identify the three approaches to studying conflict styles

Defining Conflict Styles: patterned verbal and nonverbal responses in a variety of frustrated conflict situations. Three approaches to studying conflict styles: 1.Dispositional approach - personal or cultural consistency/stability of using certain conflict styles 2.Situational approach - depnding on situation, people conflict goals 3.Systems approach -- a combo of the two above

explain the five conflict styles

Dominating/ competing style: push for one's own position above/ beyond the others (aggressive, controlling, intimidating tactics) SHARK avoiding style: dodging the topic, the other person, or situation, glossing over topic and denying conflict exists TURTLE compromising style: give-take concession, reach a mid-point, fairness appeal, (trade off suggestions, quick short-term solutions) FOX integrative/ collaborative style: commitment to find mutual-intreat solution high concern for self/others interest (non evaluative descriptive msgs, clarifying OWL obliging/ accommodating style: high concern for the other person's conflict unrest above your own, used when they value relationship over conflict issues (give in or smooth over) TEDDY BEAR

discuss the key meta-ethics questions to ponder, decision points, and ethical reflection questions

Emphasizes importance of deriving inclusive universal ethical standards and then placing ethical judgments against these derived, all-encompassing diversity-inclusive standards. Judgments require knowledge about underlying similarities across cultures and about the unique features of a culture and involve collaborative dialog, open attitudes, and hard work from all cultural/ethnic and marginalized groups and voices.

ethical absolutism

Emphasizes principles of right and wrong (good and bad behavior) in accordance with a set of absolute, narrow-range fixed standards regardless of cultural differences. Imposed Ethnocentric Standards as "Assumed Universal Standards": one set of consistent standards should guide behavior on a global level, and cultural context is minimized. The standards, however, are often reflective of dominant or power-holder cultural group lens and disregard other co-culture identity voices.

ethical relativism

Emphasizes the importance of understanding cultural context and its underlying traditions, beliefs, and value patterns in judging conduct. Relativists emphasize that ethical/unethical practices should be understood from cultural insiders' viewpoint. Stresses the importance of "relative standards" in accordance to indigenous cultural norms, values, and contexts.

compare mindless listening characteristics

Ethnocentric lens Reactive approach Selective hearing Evaluative language Defensive posture "Struggle against" Judgmental attitude Emotional outbursts Coercive power Positional differences Fixed objectives Win-lose/lose-lose outcome

mindful listening characteristics

Ethnorelative lens Proactive/choice approach Attentive listening Inquiry language Supportive posture "Struggle with" Mindful reframing Vulnerability shared Shared power Common interests Creative options Win-win synergy

discuss the four theories that shape the development of prejudice

Exploitation theory: views power as a scare resource, to maintain higher status/ power one restrains those of lower status to improve ones own group position/ security [no minority has = opportunity @ high ranking positions] Scapegoating theory: suggests prejudice individuals believe they are the victims of society, if something is not going well in their life they blame a minority group instead of accepting basic responsibility for some of the failure [Mexicans are stealing all our jobs] Authoritarian personality approach: emphasizes personality features of the individual, including rigid observance or adherence to conventional norms, complete acceptance of authority and a high concern for those in power Structural approach: [Institutional level/Climate] to prejudice stresses the climate in one's society whereby institutions promote a "pecking order" among group members [Japan if born abroad no voting rights]

compare individualistic/independent

Individualistic or Independent-self Conflict Lens Content conflict goal lens Win-lose conflict "Doing" / Compartmentalize Outcome-driven mode Low-Context Style: Direct, Digital, Confrontational, or Competing

explain: ingroup favoritism

Ingroup Favoritism: due to perceived similarity, familiarity, & expected conformity, loyalty, & solidarity, positive attachments to predisposed norms Outgroup Negative Bias: due to perceived differences and unfamiliarity, ignorance + perceived threat & FEAR of the unknown Be aware of Negative Self-Fulfilling Prophecy due to repeated negative biased exposure via surrounding social setting

outline the procedures in developing a meta-ethics contextualism perspective

Meta-ethics: ethical way of thinking that transcends particular ideologies; the application of ethics is understood only through systematic analysis of the multiple layers of the ethical dilemma case. Strength: emphasizes fact-finding and layered interpretations, takes into serious consideration importance of culture, context, persons, justice/injustice issues. Overall: a time-consuming, energy-vested, inclusive voice, power-sharing, dialogue, listening, truth-telling, social ecological, and social justice & social action approach.

flexible stereotyping

Mindful of categorization Open-ended categories First best-guesses Loose interpretations Information openness Willingness to change categories

define stereotypes

Overgeneralized and exaggerated pictures about a group of individuals on the basis of inflexible or mindless categorizations, beliefs, and expectations about the traits or behaviors of the group.

ethical absolutism PROS/CONS

PRO Fixed standards for all practices CON Culturally imposed perspective by dominant culture, & nondominant cultures are marginalized. One-size ethnocentric

ethical relativism PRO/CON

PRO Takes role of culture seriously CON Encourages too much cultural flexibility, may perpetuate intolerable cultural practices by being too culturally

ethical universalism PRO/CON

PRO involves collaborative dialog, open attitudes, long-term CON Most using this position now rely heavily on Eurocentric moral philosophies or reflect "first-world" countries' lens. Need inclusive voices from ALL identity groups. Not there yet......

recommend specific guidelines to manage diverse IC-intimate relationships pos

Pay attention to culture-based & identity-based challenges. Be mindful that individualists and collectivists may hold different relationship expectations. Be sensitive to your partner's family reaction issues. Be validating when your partner discloses about racism issues—practice empathetic response. Be flexible in learning your partner's cultural codes, communication styles, & conflict styles. Be adaptive & learn to give-and-take on both relational & task compromises--remember the rewarding "big picture"--an enriching mindset, multidimensional heart-song, and an interwoven soulful experience due to all the ups and downs and ups again...... in sickness and in health.

Intercultural-Intimate Relationship Attraction: Facilitating Factors (Anxiety/ Uncertainty Management Theory AUM)

Perceived Attractiveness AUM & Perceived Attitudinal Similarity Social Penetration & Self-Disclosure Managing Intercultural-Interracial Romantic Development Strategies Identity Support & Sensitivity Relational Karma or "Fate"

discuss the research findings concerning facilitating factors on IC interpersonal attraction

Perceived Physical Attractiveness Physical attractiveness critical to initial attraction; cultural differences regarding what is attractive. For example, U.S. individuals attracted to: high energy, enthusiasm.; Korean individuals attracted to: high integrity, concern for others. AUM & Perceived Attitude Similarity Similarity-attraction hypothesis: cognitive consistency Intergroup-interpersonal attraction: attitudinal issues Balancing with Opposite Attracts

define "parallel thinking" process

Practice parallel thinking—imagine a close, ingroup individual experiencing a similar situation or manner -- will you render the same interpretation, attitude, judgment ? Or would you spend more time in paying focused attention, engaging in multiple fact-finding, multiple perspectives, and fight for a socially just process & outcome??? Dynamic flexibility: integrating knowledge, ethnorelative attitude, culture-sensitive interaction skills, and communicating ethically and respectfully with culturally dissimilar others.

internalize the final IC communication flexibility passport do-able ideas

R- respect differences E- ethnorelative attitude S- sensitive to LCC/HCC styles P- patience to observe E- education C- compassion T- teaching others

recommend specific ways to reduce prejudice-discrimination and be a constructive change agent

Social Justice: the process of social justice involves an equitable distribution of resources, and full participation of members from diverse identity groups in a society. Goal: to listen to all identity group "voices" and "stories" and create inclusive equitable participation opportunity for all identity group members to excel and meet their respective interests, needs, & dreams. Global Citizenship: Individual & collective action for positive change and strive for equal treatment & respect for ALL on a global level. Practice & activate global-collaborative "Integrative Power" synergy. [ ---- as versus "Distributive Power" mentality ----]

A Meta-Ethics Inquiry Process:

Who or which group perpetuates this practice within this culture and with what reasons? Who or which group resists this practice and with what reasons? Who is benefiting? Who is suffering? Does the practice cause unjustifiable suffering to an individual or a selected group of individuals at the pleasure of another group? How should I serve as an effective change agent in the local cultural scene and the global advocacy arena? What is my role and what is my deeper "voice" in this ethical dilemma? Should I condemn/reject this practice publicly and withdraw from the cultural scene? Or Should I stay actively engage? Who are my allies and who are my opponents?

compare monochronic and polychronic time schedule features

[mono = strict] pay close attention to clock time and do one thing at a time, use linear way, employ segments to break up time and divide it into allotments (U.S., Germany Switz.) [poly = relaxed] pay close attention to relational time (involvement w/ ppl) emphasize on completing human transactions than holding onto schedules (Arabs, African, Latin Americs, Asian, Med.)

favorable self-bias principle

arises from positive events concerning our own behavior vs. a strangers favor ourselves/ our in-group in explaining our success and using derogatory explanations for other (out-groups)

use clear examples to illustrate different conflict goals: content, relational, & identity

content: practical issues that are external to the individuals involved (affect perception of relational/identity goals) relational: refers to how individuals define the particular relationship (intimate or not, cooperative or competitor) mismatched relationship expectations issues in regards to independence, interdependence, privacy, openness etc. identity: face-saving and face-honoring issues Spanglish clip

ethical universalism (derived)

emphasis on deriving universal ethical guidelines by placing ethical judgements w/in the proper cultural context. highlight an integrative culture-universal & cultural-specific interpretive framework most ideal, but easier said than done

define ethnocentrism

ethnocentrism: considering the views/ standards of our own in-group as more important than those of out-group, used implicitly & explicitly dis-advan. of out-group is that they are always being judged based on the other groups standards etc. (ex. correct religion, def of respecting others, voting) our valued in-group is the core and all out-groups are peripheral [outside] used as a defensive mechanism to view our own culture as superior to others learned through cultural socialization process

identify some contemporary issues on the topic of IC communication ethics

global warming, political view on presidency candidates

chronemics

how ppl in different cultures structure, interpret, and understand time dimension.

define the four approaches to the study of global workplace values' conflict

impartial conflict-approach: treat all ppl =, all rules apply to all [nordic countries] small power dist./individualistic communal conflit-approach: least practiced approach worldwide, ask consensus, take > estimated amt. of time, non profit or start-up co. [small power dist./collectivist status-achievement conflict-approach: U.S. organization, work leads to entitlement, > awareness of status difference , assertive, earn status, wit upper mngmnt. roles, > demanding & scolding tone [individualistic/ large power dist.] benevolent conflict-approach: boss acts like coach, parental way, most practiced [large power dist./ collectivist

relate individualism-collectivism orientations to personal relationship themes

individualistic orientations- "I" identity relationship expectations, couples privacy/ autonomy, voluntary or personal commitment, LOW CONTEXT digital or linear logic "fall in love" passionately collectivist orientations: "we" identity, in-group pressure, in-group's (we) connection, family reactions, structural commitment, family ties & obligation, HIGH CONTEXT emotive or understanding of Ma, value companionate (friendship, loyalty) love [arranged marriages]

understand thoroughly: intergroup attribution theory esp. ingroup & outgroup attribution differences

intergroup attribution theory: attributions are the explanations (the meaning of) why ppl behave the way they do we use assumptions based on our in-group social categories to explain behaviors or events occurring w/ others (out-group). we make sense of our encounters by interpreting/ evaluating out-group behavior

Social penetration theory:

interpersonal information progresses from superficial nonintimate to more deep-layered intimate self-disclosure along different topics. Breadth & Depth of Self-Disclosure (Altman & Taylor).

suggest ways to boost security in biracial/bicultural children

listen to their "identity voices" HAFU Japan video clip Work out identity plan early - communicate with your partner (e.g., religious faith, language, customs). Listen to your children's identity experiences. Provide cultural enrichment opportunities. Be truthful about prejudice & racism issues. Nurture & support different identity facets. Provide safety net & maturation challenges. Realize that children will grow up & choose their own identity path....... Teach children to double-swing flexibly and feel the double-dose identity pride, security, & confidence...

compare characteristics in mindless/inflexible vs. mindful/flexible stereotyping

mindless/inflexible: holds onto negative stereotypes by operating on automatic pilot - - reflecting a closed and rigid mindset. mindful/flexible: "mindfully minding our mind" -- a high degree of self-monitoring in our thinking, affective tendency, and communicative practice.

Johari Window

open window- most self disclose hidden window- info is known to self but w/held from others Blind window- info is know to others, but you are oblivious unknown window- is an "unconscious dream" Not known to self or others

individualistic conflict lens

outcome-focused content goal-oriented doing-centered use personal equity norms self-face concern low-context conflict style competitive/ dominating behaviors conflict effectiveness

principle of negativity

place more emphasis on neg. info. concerning our competitors or out-group members, bad news grabs our attn more than good news, when describing ppl will tell of neg. experiences

collectivists conflict lens

process-focused relational goal-oriented being-centered use communal norms other-face concern high-context conflict style avoiding/ obliging behaviors conflict appropriateness

define "parallel thinking"

substituting any global or local event w/ ppl in your connected in-group or intimate network and then cross-check whether you still arrive at a similar attribution process or emotional reaction

proxemics

the study of of space between persons, physical contact, and the inner anxiety we have when ppl violate our space. ex: personal space is different in individualistic/ collectivist countries U.S. we prefer more space vs. Japan b/c they accept less space between them to keep things socially harmonized (train)

fundamental attribution error

w/ competitors or strangers we tend to engage in negative attributions by overestimating NEG personality factors in explaining a stranger's negative event and underestimating situational factors ex. he didn't get the job bc he's lazy vs. maybe he was nervous and ans. poorly w/ ourselves we protect self-image / will blame situational factors over personality factors

culture based "privacy issues"

western culture privacy is a major concern (individ. cult) offensive in collectivistic culture seen as secretive or selfish intrapersonal personal space is the need for information privacy