Page 81 - Handbooks of Applied Linguistics Communication Competence Language and Communication Problems Practical Solutions

Psychological perspectives 59

1.2. Interpersonal and intergroup approaches to intercultural
communication

After World War II, the interest of researchers in intercultural communication
and miscommunication grew rapidly because of the negative reactions received
by Western sojourners and diplomats. In addition, large-scale immigration and
human rights movements in many countries made communication effectiveness
and prejudice more salient than previously. During this period, researchers con-
centrated on topics like social and display rules and communication effective-
ness between cultures.
Hall (1959, 1966, 1981) proposed that most miscommunication across cul-
tures results from the operation of different rules or norms (e.g. interpersonal
distance, where social norms are tied to values about aggressiveness and sexual-
ity). Interactants miscommunicate by interpreting the behaviour of others using
different rules as if the others were using their own rules. Hall argued that if so-
cial rules could be brought to the surface and made explicit, much of the heat
would disappear from intercultural encounters, and communication would be
more effective and positive. In a similar vein, Argyle, Furnham and Graham
(1981) defined social rules as socially shared expectations about appropriate
and inappropriate behaviour in situations. They argued that, while there are
many cultural similarities in communication, especially nonverbal communi-
cation, the differences still cause a great deal of misunderstanding. Argyle and
colleagues proposed training people to use the social rules of another culture, to
reduce the chance of miscommunication in an intercultural encounter. Triandis
and Schwartz also argue for understanding intercultural dynamics from an in-
terpersonal perspective (e.g. Schwartz 1999; Triandis 1996; Triandis and Suh
2002).
It is hard to overestimate the impact of this approach, particularly for com-
munication skills training (see Matsumoto in this volume for a detailed dis-
cussion of the role of these variables in psychological adjustment in intercultu-
ral contexts). Almost all intercultural communication training conducted by
psychologists takes Hall’s and Argyle’s work as its starting point. Only in very
recent times has a serious critique of this approach appeared, arguing among
other things that both interpersonal and intergroup factors are significant in-
fluences in many or all intercultural encounters (e.g. Gallois and Pittam 1996).

2. Intercultural communication competence (ICC)

The most direct descendant of Hall’s and Argyle’s work in social psychology is
the tradition of intercultural communication competence (cf. Prechtl and David-
son-Lund in this volume). Researchers have posited a measurable level of effec-