Skip main navigation
Close Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Articles

A Model of Communication Context and Measure of Context Dependence

    Published Online:28 Oct 2015https://doi.org/10.5465/amd.2014.0018

    Abstract

    In this research, we conceptualize the construct of communication context as the multiplicity of nonverbal, relational, spatial, and temporal cues that can be drawn upon to convey and understand meaning. We developed and validated a four-component measure of context dependence and explored associations of context dependence with individual (a) self-construal and (b) cultural intelligence. Our data reveal that individuals with a stronger interdependent self-construal are more likely to pay attention to and rely on all forms of communication context to convey meaning. Our findings also show that individuals who are more highly context-dependent communicators have higher cultural intelligence. From a global workforce perspective, we discuss the theoretical and empirical implications of these findings for understanding the processes and outcomes of communication among organizational members.

    Have you ever wondered why sometimes words are not enough to get your point across? Although more than half a century ago, Edward T. Hall had alluded to needing to attend to contextual cues in communication; scholars have struggled to transform his ideas into an empirical and measurable construct. Scientists of this paper do just that. They exemplified the quantitative discovery via construct validation (see Bamberger and Ang, 2016). Across multiple adult and student samples, the scientists created a valid measure of context dependence in communication comprising four contextual dimensions: message, relational, spatial and temporal. In further exploring the nomological network of context dependence, the scientists also discovered that context dependent communicators are higher in cultural intelligence. Also, people who are more interdependent than independent in self-construals are more context dependent. We expect this new measure of context dependence to seed future inquiry and further theorizing on cultural differences in communication effectiveness in global work.

    Soon Ang, Action Editor

    Whiteboard Video Abstract

    Download Original Video (20.2 MB)

    REFERENCES

    • Adair W. L., Buchan N., & Chen X. P. 2009. Bringing views of culture as communication and social interaction into management and marketing research. In C. Nakata (Ed.), Beyond hofstede: Culture frameworks for global marketing and management: 146–180. New York, NY: Macmillan Palgrave. Google Scholar
    • Adair W. L., Hideg I., & Spence J. R. 2013. The culturally intelligent team: The impact of team cultural intelligence and cultural heterogeneity on team shared values. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44: 941–962. Google Scholar
    • Adair W. L., Okumura T., & Brett J. M. 2001. Negotiation behaviors when cultures collide: The U.S. and Japan. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 371–385. Google Scholar
    • Adair W. L., Taylor M. S., & Tinsley C. 2009. Starting out on the right foot: Negotiation schemas when cultures collide. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 2: 138–163. Google Scholar
    • Ang S., & Van Dyne L. 2008. Conceptualization of cultural intelligence: Definition, distinctiveness, and nomological network. In S. AngL. Van Dyne (Eds.), Handbook of cultural intelligence: 3–15. New York, NY: M.E. Sharpe. Google Scholar
    • Ang S., Van Dyne L., & Koh C. 2005. Personality correlates of the four-factor model of cultural intelligence. Group & Organization Management, 31: 100–123. Google Scholar
    • Ang S., Van Dyne L. V., Koh C., Ng K. Y., Templer K. J., Tay C., & Chandrasekar N. A. 2007. Cultural intelligence: Its measurement and effects on cultural judgment and decision making, cultural adaptation and task performance. Management and Organization Review, 3: 335–371. Google Scholar
    • Beamer L., & Varner I. I. 2008. Intercultural communication in the global workplace. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar
    • Bentler P. M., & Chou C. P. 1987. Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociological Methods & Research, 16: 78–117. Google Scholar
    • Birdwhistell R. L. 1955. Background to kinesics. ETC: A Review of General Semantics, 13: 10–18. Google Scholar
    • Bluedorn A. C. 2002. The human organization of time: Temporal realities and experience. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Google Scholar
    • Bluedorn A. C., & Denhardt R. B. 1988. Time and organizations. Journal of Management, 14: 299–320. Google Scholar
    • Bluedorn A. C., Kalliath T. J., Strube M. J., & Martin G. D. 1999. Polychronicity and the inventory of polychronic values (IPV). The development of an instrument to measure a fundamental dimension of organizational culture. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 14: 205–230. Google Scholar
    • Bluedorn A. C., & Standifer R. L. 2004. Groups, boundary spanning, and the temporal imagination. In S. Blount (Ed.), Time in groups: Research on managing groups and teams, 6: 159–182. England, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Google Scholar
    • Brislin R. W., & Kim E. S. 2003. Cultural diversity in people’s understanding and uses of time. Applied Psychology, 52: 363–382. Google Scholar
    • Brislin R. W., & Lo K. D. 2006. Culture, personality, and people's uses of time: Key interrerlationships. In J. C. ThomasD. L. DegalM. Hersen (Eds.), Comprehensive handbook of personality and psychopathology: 44–61. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar
    • Buhrmester M., Kwang T., & Gosling S. D. 2011. Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6: 3–5. Google Scholar
    • Burgoon J. K., Buller D. B., & Woodall W. G. 1996. Nonverbal communication: The unspoken dialogue. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar
    • Chen X., Liu D., & Portnoy R. 2012. A multilevel investigation of motivational cultural intelligence, organizational diversity climate, and cultural sales: Evidence from U.S. real estate firms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97: 93–106. Google Scholar
    • Chiu C. Y., Lonner W. J., Matsumoto D., & Ward C. 2013. Cross-cultural competence theory, research, and application. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44: 843–848. Google Scholar
    • Clogg C. C., Petkova E., & Haritou A. 1995. Statistical methods for comparing regression coefficients between models. American Journal of Sociology, 100: 1261–1293. Google Scholar
    • Cohen R. 1997. Negotiating across cultures: International communication in an interdependent world. Washington, DC: US institute of Peace Press. Google Scholar
    • Cross S. E., Bacon P. L., & Morris M. L. 2000. The relational-interdependent self-construal and relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78: 791–808. Google Scholar
    • Cross S. E., Hardin E. E., & Gercek-Swing B. 2011. The what, how, why, and where of self- construal. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15: 142–179. Google Scholar
    • Crowne K. A. 2008. What leads to cultural intelligence? Business Horizons, 51: 391–399. Google Scholar
    • DeVellis R. F. 1991. Scale development: Theory and applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
    • Earley C., & Ang S. 2003. Cultural intelligence: Individual interactions across cultures. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. Google Scholar
    • Earley P. C., & Mosakowski E. 2005. Cultural intelligence. Harvard Business Review, 82: 139–146. Google Scholar
    • Gesteland R. R. 1999. Cross-cultural business behavior: Marketing, negotiating, and managing across cultures. Copenhagen, Denmark: Copenhagen Business School Press. Google Scholar
    • Gudykunst W. B., Matsumoto Y., Ting-Toomey S., Nishida T., Kim K., & Heyman S. 1996. The influence of cultural individualism-collectivism, self construals, and individual values on communication styles across cultures. Human Communication Research, 22: 510–543. Google Scholar
    • Haberstroh S., Oyserman D., Schwarz N., Kühnen U., & Ji L. J. 2002. Is the interdependent self more sensitive to question context than the independent self? Self-construal and the observation of conversational norms. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38: 323–329. Google Scholar
    • Hall E. T. 1959. The silent language. New York, NY: Random House. Google Scholar
    • Hall E. T. 1960. The silent language in overseas business. Harvard Business Review, 38(3), 87–96. Google Scholar
    • Hall E. T. 1966. The hidden dimension. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Google Scholar
    • Hall E. T. 1976. Beyond culture. New York, NY: Random House. Google Scholar
    • Hall E. T. 1989. Beyond culture. New York, NY: Anchor Books. Google Scholar
    • Hall E. T., & Hall M. R. 1990. Understanding cultural differences: Germans, French and Americans. London, UK: Nicholas Brealey Publishing. Google Scholar
    • Heller D., Komar S., & Lee W. B. 2007. The dynamics of personality states, goals and well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33: 898–910. Google Scholar
    • Hinkin T. R. 1995. A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations. Journal of Management, 21: 967–988. Google Scholar
    • Hinkin T. R. 1998. A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 104–121. Google Scholar
    • Holtgraves T. 1997. Styles of language use: Individual and cultural variability in conversational indirectness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73: 624–637. Google Scholar
    • House R. J., Rousseau D. M., & Thomas-Hunt M. 1995. The third paradigm: Meso organizational research comes to age. Research in Organizational Behavior, 17: 71–114. Google Scholar
    • Imai L., & Gelfand M. J. 2010. The culturally intelligent negotiator: The impact of cultural intelligence (CQ) on negotiation sequences and outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 112: 83–98. Google Scholar
    • Kaufman-Scarborough C., & Lindquist J. D. 1999. Time management and polychronicity: Comparisons, contrasts, and insights for the workplace. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 14: 288–312. Google Scholar
    • Kim M. S., & Wilson S. R. 1994. A cross-cultural-comparison of implicit theories of requesting. Communication Monographs, 61: 210–235. Google Scholar
    • Kittler M. G., Rygl D., & Mackinnon A. 2011. Beyond culture or beyond control? Reviewing the use of Hall’s high-/low-context concept. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 11: 63–82. Google Scholar
    • Lam S. K., Chen X. P., & Schaubroeck J. 2002. Participative decision making and employee performance: The moderating effects of allocentrism and efficacy. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 905–915.Link , Google Scholar
    • Lebra T. S. 1987. The cultural significance of silence in Japanese communication. Multilingua, 6: 343–358. Google Scholar
    • Lewis R. D. 2006. When cultures collide: Managing successfully across cultures 3rd ed.. London, UK: Nicholas Brealey Publishing. Google Scholar
    • Liu D., & Chen X. P. 2014. Learning from cultural shocks: A cross-cultural longitudinal study of expatriate creativity. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Philadelphia, PA. August 1–5, 2014. Google Scholar
    • Livermore D., Van Dyne L., & Ang S. 2012. Cultural intelligence: Why every leader needs it. Intercultural Management Quarterly, 13: 18–21. Google Scholar
    • Macduff I. 2006. Your pace or mine? Culture, time, and negotiation. Negotiation Journal, 22: 31–45. Google Scholar
    • Markus H. R., & Kitayama S. 1991. Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98: 224–253. Google Scholar
    • Markus H. R., & Kitayama S. 1994. A collective fear of the collective: Implications for selves and theories of selves. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20: 568–579. Google Scholar
    • Masuda T., & Nisbett R. E. 2001. Attending holistically versus analytically: Comparing the context sensitivity of Japanese and Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81: 922–934. Google Scholar
    • Matsumoto D. 1996. Unmasking Japan: Myths and realities about the emotions of the Japanese. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Google Scholar
    • Nisbett R. E., Peng K., Choi I., & Norenzayan A. 2001. Culture and systems of thought: Holistic vs. analytic cognition. Psychological Review, 108: 291–310. Google Scholar
    • Reardon J., & Miller C. 2012. The effect of response scale type on cross-cultural construct measures: An empirical example using Hall’s concept of context. International Marketing Review, 29: 24–53. Google Scholar
    • Rockstuhl T., & Ng K. Y. 2008. The effects of cultural intelligence on interpersonal trust in multicultural teams. In S. AngL. Van Dyne (Eds.), Handbook of cultural intelligence: Theory, measurement, and applications: 206–220. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe. Google Scholar
    • Rockstuhl T., Seiler S., Ang S., Van Dyne L., & Annen H. 2011. Beyond general intelligence (IQ) and emotional intelligence (EQ): The role of cultural intelligence (CQ) on cross-border leadership effectiveness in a globalized world. Journal of Social Issues, 67: 825–840. Google Scholar
    • Schmitt N., & Stults D. M. 1985. Factors defined by negatively keyed items: The result of careless respondents. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9: 367–373. Google Scholar
    • Shannon L. M., & Begley T. M. 2008. Antecedents of the four-factor model of cultural intelligence. In S. AngL. Van Dyne (Eds.), Handbook of cultural intelligence: Theory, measurement, and applications: 41–55. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe. Google Scholar
    • Singelis T. M., & Brown W. J. 1995. Culture, self, and collectivist communication linking culture to individual behavior. Human Communication Research, 21: 354–389. Google Scholar
    • Tabachnick B. G., & Fidell L. S. 2013. Using multivariate statistics 6th ed.. Boston, MA: Pearson. Google Scholar
    • Tanaka J. S. 1987. How big is big enough? Sample size and goodness of fit in structural equation models with latent variables. Child Development, 58: 134–146. Google Scholar
    • Templer K. J., Tay C., & Chandrasekar N. A. 2006. Motivational cultural intelligence, realistic job preview, realistic living conditions preview, and cross-cultural adjustment. Group and Organization Management, 31: 154–173. Google Scholar
    • Thomas K. W., & Kilmann R. H. 1974. Thomas-Kilmann conflict mode survey. Tuxedo, NY: Xicom. Google Scholar
    • Ting-Toomey S. 1997. Intercultural conflict competence. In W. R. CupachD. J. Canary (Eds.), Competence in interpersonal conflict: 120–147. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar
    • Triandis H. C. 1972. The analysis of subjective culture. New York, NY: Wiley. Google Scholar
    • Triandis H. C. 1989. The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts. Psychological Review, 96(3), 506. Google Scholar
    • Triandis H. C. 1994. Culture and social behavior. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar
    • Triandis H. C. 1995. Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Google Scholar
    • Triandis H. C., Marin G., Lisansky J., & Betancourt H. 1984. Simpatia as a cultural script of hispanics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47: 1363–1375. Google Scholar
    • Trompenaars F., & Hampden-Turner C. 2012. Riding the waves of culture. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar
    • Van Maanen J., & Barley S. R. 1984. Occupational communities: Culture and control in organizations. In B. M. StawL. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, 6: 287–366. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Google Scholar
    • Yamagishi T., & Yamagishi M. 1994. Trust and commitment in the United States and Japan. Motivation and Emotion, 18: 129–166. Google Scholar
      Academy of Management
      555 Pleasantville Road, Suite N200
      Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510-8020, USA
      Phone: +1 (914) 326-1800
      Fax: +1 (914) 326-1900
    Academy of Management
    © 2023 Academy of Management
    Powered by Atypon® Literatum