Literature Review
Shafazhinskaya et al. (2019) considered global art cultures as one of the ways of cultivating cross-cultural communication skills among students at university. This study is qualitative, and it mainly concentrates on the theoretical background of this approach. The central idea discussed is the treatment of the course “Music Cultures of the World” as a didactic tool that serves the purpose of nurturing cross-cultural knowledge. The authors propose a framework that combines several paradigms: Berlin School of Comparative Musicology, world ethnomusicology, and cultural pedagogy. This approach highlighted the discovery of the ideas of multinational minds, musical principles, and the commonality of music as a tool for exploring the world.
The results underscored the necessity to study cultural aspects of music from non-European civilizations for the development of the global music culture. Authors, on the other hand, claimed that the expansion of the worldview by breaking up the Eurocentric restrictions should become a principle in the field of research of spirituality and art of foreign countries. In an interconnected world, the power of successful intercultural communication lies in a person’s ability to comprehend and appreciate cultural diversity. It is most significant in the framework of intercultural communication, where the ability to understand others and be understood is the key competence of the global education system in songs, applied arts, and teaching, according to Russian Federal Educational Standards.
The authors relied on divergent theoretical frameworks and existing literature to prove their points. In conclusion, the authors state that the task of comprehending the plurality of worldviews by studying various art cultures is the key to developing the universality of knowledge and skills, including cross-cultural communication skills. One flaw of this study is its theoretical nature, which does not provide any empirical data to prove its effectiveness in training cross-cultural communication competence. Finally, the ethical and moral implications within the instruction of cultural traditions can be represented and interpreted more broadly.
According to Tombleson & Wolf (2017), a participatory culture that has evolved has changed the process as well as the outcome of cross-cultural communication campaigns. The central themes of the article are participatory culture, co-creation, hashtag activism, and public relations practitioners’ curatorship instead of intermediaries. The authors argue that social media has made it possible for audiences to take on the co-creating role in the production of content, and, as a result, the traditional distinction between producers and consumers is blurred. The article concentrates on a qualitative case study of the campaign of Facebook’s LGBT in 2015 that aimed at striking the US Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage. Tombleson & Wolf (2017) assessed the reach of the campaign in multiple countries and cultures, measuring the degree of participation and the extent to which it influenced civic engagement. The data collection methods involved a Radian6 analysis of social media posts, news reports, and relevant public discussion.
The findings indicated that the campaign gained an impressive reach across the nations, with action in countries such as Morocco, Australia, Greece, and the Netherlands observed. The authors stated that the campaign resulted in the creation of a participatory culture, with millions of users using rainbow-colored flags in their profile pictures to support the cause. They argued that public relations practitioners must incorporate the job of cultural curators, stimulating not only the co-creation of meaning but also participating in an environment where cultural values are exchanged organically. Aside from delving into the effects of participatory culture on cross-cultural communication, the case study also requires us to look into its drawbacks. Research is narrow in the scope of consideration of one campaign, and hence, the findings may only be generalizable to some cross-cultural communication endeavors. Ethically, the article causes questions clamoring around the possible risks and implications of organizations using organic social media movements for their gains. Similarly, it underlines the aspect of transparency and ethical issues that must be considered when activism hashtags or co-creation campaigns are being used.
Lifintsev et al. (2019) conducted a quantitative study to investigate Gen Z’s attitude toward cross-cultural communication in business. The major topics covered were multicultural communication skills, attitudes toward working in multicultural teams, motivation factors, and perceived barriers to cross-cultural communication. The investigators have come up with seven hypotheses, such as the significance of cross-cultural communication skills for Gen Z and their desire to work abroad. They also have the influence of gender and the nation on their motivation and perception of barriers. The research used an online questionnaire with a sample of 324 university students from Germany, Romania, and Ukraine who are under the age of 23 from Generation Z. The variables analyzed were the agreement levels with statements concerning cross-cultural communication, motives for working in a multicultural environment, and perceived obstacles in cross-cultural interaction.
The evidence validated the proposition that Gen Zers think that intercultural communication skills are vital, with most of the respondents ready to work in a multicultural environment or move abroad for business projects. The differences in gender or country were manifested in motivations and perceived barriers, where their earnings and women drove the men more by opportunities to travel. The study contributes much to the current knowledge on attitudes of Gen Z to cross-cultural interaction. However, its limitations include the relatively small sample and the analysis of only three European countries, which might also limit the generalizability of the findings. Moreover, the use of self-reports in questionnaires allows respondent biases, and the authors did not address the ethical implications explicitly.
Lifintsev & Wellbrock (2019) conducted a quantitative study designed to investigate the extent to which digitalization influences cross-cultural communication processes. The authors suggested that for the Millennials and Generation Z, cross-cultural communication skills are a must because of their ‘digitally globalized’ lifestyle. Digitalization simplifies cross-cultural communication, and language barriers are less of an issue in online communication, not while in person. The researchers utilized an online survey among 393 young adults (under the age of 30 years) from seven countries (Bulgaria, Egypt, Germany, Morocco, Portugal, Romania, and Ukraine). The respondents were exposed to three statements pertaining to hypotheses and asked to rate their level of agreement using a 5-point Likert scale. The results aligned with all three hypotheses, thus showing that cross-cultural communication skills are considered highly important, digitalization assists cross-cultural communication, and language barriers are perceived as less problematic during online communication. The study, however, extensively looks at the perceptions of young adults with respect to digitalization and cross-cultural communication but has some limitations. The sample country selection may not have represented all cultures. In addition, the study made use of self-reported data only that could, however, be distorted. One ethical issue is the privacy-related problems stemming from online data collection, which call for the consent of participants.
The study by Lou & Noel (2019) examined the role of language mindsets and language-based rejection sensitivity in migrants’ intercultural communication and adaptation during the migration process. The underlying ideas discussed in this research were language mindsets (entity beliefs vs. language anxiety, which is further caused by foreign language proficiency (perception of language ability) and language-based rejection sensitivity (anxious expectations of being rejected by native speakers due to language proficiency). The study hypothesized that migrants would feel more language-based rejection sensitivity if they had entity beliefs about language ability, that this would lead to stronger intergroup anxiety, not belonging to a place, and not cross-cultural adaptation. Language mindset, language-based rejection sensitivity, intergroup anxiety, perceived connectedness with the host culture, and cross-cultural adjustment were among the variables that were measured.
The study used a mixed-methods research design involving a cross-sectional survey (Study 1) and an experimental study (Study 2). The empirical group was international and first-generation immigrant students who were second-language users of English and lived and studied in Canada. Study 1 focused on the relationships among the variables, and Study 2 explored the effects of language mindset manipulation and assessed its impact on language-based rejection sensitivity and consequent outcomes. The results confirmed the hypotheses, showing that entity beliefs regarding language proficiency were related to more language-based rejection sensitivity. Finally, this was associated with greater intergroup anxiety, lower perceived connectedness with Canadians, and poorer cross-cultural adjustment. Additionally, forming an entity belief provides experimental evidence of the role of language-based rejection sensitivity in indirectly affecting intergroup anxiety and cultural adjustment expectations.
The research is valuable in terms of the study of the psychological mechanisms that are involved in intercultural communication and adaptation, but some limitations should be noted. It is important to note that the sample mostly included university students. Hence, the findings may not be applied to all migrant groups. Moreover, the study was based on self-report measures, which might be liable to biases. Furthermore, researchers admitted that further research is needed to examine the possibility of bidirectional effects of language mindsets, rejection sensitivity, and cross-cultural encounters longitudinally. As a part of ethical considerations, the researchers took proper measures to protect participant anonymity and obtain informed consent. However, Study 2 might evoke ethical questions about participants’ potential negative emotions due to the distortion of subject beliefs, and thus, such concerns should be attentively analyzed.
Adler & Aycan (2018) gave a complete overview of the present state of the research on cross-cultural interaction in the context of exile, negotiation, and multicultural teams. The authors were aware of the importance and inevitable cross-cultural contact in our globalized society and the need for a deeper comprehension of how to deal with cultural diversity. They spotlighted the shortcomings of the old value or cultural differences theories, such as those of Hofstede and GLOBE, which viewed culture as country-based and static. Adler & Aycan (2018) discussed new theoretical approaches that go beyond value-based dimensions, delineate intranational diversity, and recognize the dynamic and context-specific nature of cultural expression.
The authors looked at evidence-based studies on cross-cultural interaction among expatriates and host country nationals while arguing the importance of local host support and local hosts in expatriate adjustment and success. The research also scrutinized cross-cultural negotiation studies, emphasizing going beyond cultural differences and looking for those moments and techniques that can be used to improve the process. Adler & Aycan aggregate study results on the role of team diversity, longevity, and leadership on team performance but also call for more research on managing diversity in both virtual and co-located teams. One shortcoming of the research evidence is the fact that most studies are quantitative, involving student samples or hypothetical situations, rather than qualitative or longitudinal studies involving real organizational employees and managers. Besides, the ethical concerns of cross-cultural research that may involve some biases or power asymmetries are not taken into account.
Conclusion
The literature review emphasizes the role of cross-cultural communication skills in today’s globalized world, which requires people to embrace cultural diversity and develop the ability to understand and respect differences. The studies focused on a wide range of methods of cross-cultural competence building, which included the analysis of arts around the world, the use of social media as a participatory culture, and the impact of language mentality and digitalization.
Potential research questions arising from this review include:
How can educational institutions incorporate cross-cultural communication training into different curricula across several disciplines, and what are the most effective methods for assessing students’ development of these competencies?
To what degree do corporate policies and practices hamper or support cross-cultural communicative skills among workers, and what interventions can be done to make the workplace more inclusive and culturally sensitive?
References
Adler, N. J., & Aycan, Z. (2018). Cross-cultural interaction: What we know and what we need to know. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5, 307-333.
Lifintsev, D., & Wellbrock, W. (2019). Cross-cultural communication in the digital age. Estudos em Comunicação, 1(28).
Lifintsev, D., Fleșeriu, C., & Wellbrock, W. (2019). A study of the attitude of Generation Z to cross-cultural interaction in business. Information & Media, 86, 41-55.
Lou, N. M., & Noels, K. A. (2019). Sensitivity to language-based rejection in intercultural communication: The role of language mindsets and implications for migrants’ cross-cultural adaptation. Applied Linguistics, 40(3), 478-505.
Shafazhinskaya, N. E., Shcherbinina, V. M., Ivanova, E. Y., Belyakova, T. E., & Pereverzeva, M. V. (2019). Learning about world art culture as a method of forming a universal cross-cultural communication competence. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews, 7(6), 1225-1229.
Tombleson, B., & Wolf, K. (2017). Rethinking the circuit of culture: How participatory culture has transformed cross-cultural communication. Public Relations Review, 43(1), 14-25.
write