A Critique of Hall's Contexting Model: A Meta-Analysis of Literature on Intercultural Business and Technical Communication
Citations
[...]
1,213 citations
158 citations
Additional excerpts
...The most common theories informing this work in the 1990s 250and early 2000s were the comparative frameworks of Hall and Hofstede (Cardon, 2008)....
[...]
...250 and early 2000s were the comparative frameworks of Hall and Hofstede (Cardon, 2008)....
[...]
97 citations
90 citations
Cites result from "A Critique of Hall's Contexting Mod..."
...The results of an attempted meta-analysis related to the context-idea (Cardon, 2008) implicitly support this assumption....
[...]
89 citations
References
[...]
38,291 citations
"A Critique of Hall's Contexting Mod..." refers background or result in this paper
...8 and greater considered large (Cohen, 1992), the three hypotheses that were supported had small effect sizes (ranging from .20 to .26). The significant hypothesis that was not supported, however, was the only one that approached having a medium effect size (.39). Gudykunst et al. (1996) concluded that on a cultural level, the results supporting contexting were weak. But self-construals were significant predictors of all of these hypotheses. In other words, contexting was better explained on an individual rather than a cultural level. They concluded that their instrument was a reliable measure of contexting; however, individual-level variables such as independent and interdependent self-construals are better predictors of contexting than are cultural-level variables such as individualism and collectivism. One of the major limitations of Gudykunst et al.’s (1996) work is that it examined only four cultures....
[...]
...8 and greater considered large (Cohen, 1992), the three hypotheses that were supported had small effect sizes (ranging from .20 to .26). The significant hypothesis that was not supported, however, was the only one that approached having a medium effect size (.39). Gudykunst et al. (1996) concluded that on a cultural level, the results supporting contexting were weak....
[...]
...8 and greater considered large (Cohen, 1992), the three hypotheses that were supported had small effect sizes (ranging from .20 to .26). The significant hypothesis that was not supported, however, was the only one that approached having a medium effect size (.39). Gudykunst et al. (1996) concluded that on a cultural level, the results supporting contexting were weak. But self-construals were significant predictors of all of these hypotheses. In other words, contexting was better explained on an individual rather than a cultural level. They concluded that their instrument was a reliable measure of contexting; however, individual-level variables such as independent and interdependent self-construals are better predictors of contexting than are cultural-level variables such as individualism and collectivism. One of the major limitations of Gudykunst et al.’s (1996) work is that it examined only four cultures. Hofstede (2001) explained that in order to identify etic (applicable to all cultures) dimensions of cultural variability, data from a minimum of 10 to 15 societies are necessary. Otherwise, researchers run the risk of treating cultures as individuals, not as wholes. Hofstede argued that cultures “are wholes, and their internal logic cannot be understood in terms used for the personality dynamics of individuals” (p. 17). Kim, Pan, and Park (1998) were the next known researchers after Gudykunst et al. (1996) to attempt developing an instrument that measures contexting. Based on Hall’s (1976) work, they identified five theoretical categories of contexting: social orientation, responsibility, confrontation, communication, and dealing with new situations....
[...]
...8 and greater considered large (Cohen, 1992), the three hypotheses that were supported had small effect sizes (ranging from .20 to .26). The significant hypothesis that was not supported, however, was the only one that approached having a medium effect size (.39). Gudykunst et al. (1996) concluded that on a cultural level, the results supporting contexting were weak. But self-construals were significant predictors of all of these hypotheses. In other words, contexting was better explained on an individual rather than a cultural level. They concluded that their instrument was a reliable measure of contexting; however, individual-level variables such as independent and interdependent self-construals are better predictors of contexting than are cultural-level variables such as individualism and collectivism. One of the major limitations of Gudykunst et al.’s (1996) work is that it examined only four cultures. Hofstede (2001) explained that in order to identify etic (applicable to all cultures) dimensions of cultural variability, data from a minimum of 10 to 15 societies are necessary. Otherwise, researchers run the risk of treating cultures as individuals, not as wholes. Hofstede argued that cultures “are wholes, and their internal logic cannot be understood in terms used for the personality dynamics of individuals” (p. 17). Kim, Pan, and Park (1998) were the next known researchers after Gudykunst et al....
[...]
...8 and greater considered large (Cohen, 1992), the three hypotheses that were supported had small effect sizes (ranging from .20 to .26). The significant hypothesis that was not supported, however, was the only one that approached having a medium effect size (.39). Gudykunst et al. (1996) concluded that on a cultural level, the results supporting contexting were weak. But self-construals were significant predictors of all of these hypotheses. In other words, contexting was better explained on an individual rather than a cultural level. They concluded that their instrument was a reliable measure of contexting; however, individual-level variables such as independent and interdependent self-construals are better predictors of contexting than are cultural-level variables such as individualism and collectivism. One of the major limitations of Gudykunst et al.’s (1996) work is that it examined only four cultures. Hofstede (2001) explained that in order to identify etic (applicable to all cultures) dimensions of cultural variability, data from a minimum of 10 to 15 societies are necessary....
[...]
19,826 citations
16,894 citations
"A Critique of Hall's Contexting Mod..." refers background in this paper
...Culture’s Consequences (Hofstede 1980, 2001) 45 Beyond Culture (Hall, 1976) 34 Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind (Hofstede, 1991) 30...
[...]
...When totaling all of Hall’s work (Hall, 1959, 1976, 1983; Hall & Hall, 1987, 1990), he is cited 75 times, equal to that of Hofstede (1980, 1991, 2001)....
[...]
15,228 citations
13,768 citations
"A Critique of Hall's Contexting Mod..." refers background in this paper
...…best fit), negative case analysis, triangulation, review by inquiry participants, expert audit review, theory triangulation, sampling techniques, bias acknowledgment and credibility of researcher (researcher as instrument), coding schemes, analysis framework, or audit trail (Patton, 2002)....
[...]