Help with The Role of Cultural Values and Intercultural Communication

Understanding Intercultural Communication

Stella Ting-Toomey

CHAPTER OUTLINE

The Impact of Nonverbal Communication • Making Sense of Nonverbal Communication • One Code, Countless Interpretations • Verbal and Nonverbal Comparisons • Forms of Nonverbal Communication • Physical Appearance • Paralanguage • Facial Expressions • Gestures • Haptics • Boundary Regulations • Regulating Interpersonal Boundaries • Environmental Boundaries • Psychological Boundaries • Regulating Time • Intercultural Reality Check: Do-Ables

All of us, a thousand times a day, read faces. When someone says “I love you,” we look into that person’s eyes to judge his or her sincerity. When we meet someone new, we often pick up on subtle signals, so that even though he or she may have talked in a normal and friendly manner, afterward we say, “I don’t think he liked me,” or “I don’t think she’s very happy.” We easily parse complex distinctions in facial expression. If you saw me grinning, for example, with my eyes twinkling, you’d say I was amused. But that’s not the only way we interpret a smile. If you saw me nod and smile exaggeratedly, with the corners of my lips tightened, you would take it that I had been teased and was responding sarcastically. If I made eye contact with someone, gave a small smile and then looked down and averted my gaze, you would think I was flirting. . . . The face is such an extraordinarily efficient instrument of communica- tion that there must be rules that govern the way we interpret facial expressions. But what are those rules? And are they the same for everyone? —Malcolm Gladwell, 2002

As you can see in the example above, nonverbal communication is both a conscious and an uncon- scious aspect of our everyday life. We can communicate with people in total silence but still convey many complex emotions. We take for granted the importance of our facial expressions, not realizing the impact a smile can make during an introduction, a sales pitch, or an argument. Nonverbal messages serve many functions in intercultural situations. If our verbal messages convey the literal and content meanings of words, then nonverbal messages carry the undercurrent of strong identity and relational meaning. For example, nonverbal communication has been called a “relationship code” because nonverbal cues are often the primary means of signaling a relation- ship with others. We use nonverbal cues to relate messages that may be too embarrassing or direct to disclose out loud. The use of verbal messages involves human intention, but nonverbal messages can be intentional or unintentional. For example, a popular pair of blue jeans on the market today is a brand called Mavi. Mavi, which means blue in Turkish, is a blue jean company based in Turkey. If you wear these jeans in places where people speak Swahili (Tanzania and Kenya), many people may look at you in horror or laugh out loud. The name of your jeans in Swahili means “cow dung!” Nonverbal communication occurs with or without verbal messages. Nonverbal messages pro- vide the context for how the accompanying verbal message should be interpreted and understood. They can either create confusion or clarify communication. But more often than not, nonverbal messages can create intercultural friction and miscommunication because (1) the same nonverbal signal can mean different things to different people in different cultures, (2) multiple nonverbal cues are sent, and (3) there are many display rule variations to consider, such as personality, gender, relational distance, socioeconomic status, and situation. This chapter is organized in four sections. We first discuss the nature of nonverbal communi- cation. We then address different forms of nonverbal communication with many lively intercultural examples. Third, we discuss an important area of nonverbal communication: boundary regulation of space and time. We conclude with a set of do-ables, reality checkpoints to facilitate better under- standing of nonverbal intercultural communication. THE IMPACT OF NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION Nonverbal communication is a powerful form of human expression. It is everywhere, omnipres- ent, affecting aspects of our lives. Nonverbal messages are often the primary means of signaling our emo- tions, our attitudes, and the nature of our relation- ships with others. These messages can be intentional or intentional, quick to read, or oblivious in meaning. Suppose Miki spots Abdul in a café surrounded by his books and iPad, talking on his cell, and sitting with a friend. As she prepares to walk away, Abdul glances up and nods at Miki. “Oh, I really wanted to come over and say hi, but you look really busy!” Did Abdul send an unintentional nonverbal message? Sometimes we signal messages that were not intended, like “do not disturb me.” On the other hand, if Miki approached Abdul’s table and as soon as she made eye contact Abdul quickly looked away, is this message inten- tional? Miki may interpret this as an “I’m too busy” or “I’m not interested right now” message. Within two seconds, nonverbal messages can oftentimes express what verbal messages cannot express—and they are assumed to be more truthful than verbal mes- sages. Many nonverbal experts estimate that in every encounter, about 65 percent of the meaning of a mes- sage is inferred through nonverbal channels (Burgoon, Guerrero, & Floyd, 2010). Nonverbal messages signify who we are, based on what we wear, how we speak, and how we present ourselves. Just how important is nonverbal communication? Think about our sensitivity to air travel and terrorism attacks in our airports. Around the world, countries are investing in various measures to ensure the safety of their citizens. The failed 2010 Christmas Day attack on a U.S. airliner triggered a new wave of scrutiny of the U.S. government’s approach to aviation security. Air- port screeners are now trained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to look for deception clues during routine questioning. In Canada and the United States, undercover agents are being trained to recognize any suspicious behavior. Vancouver has specially trained airport screeners walking around the airport looking out for suspicious nonverbal behavior (Burritt, 2011). In the United States, thousands of undercover air mar- shals are trained to spot behavioral signs of stress, fear, and deception (Profile: Training of Air Marshals, 2010).

Making Sense of Nonverbal Communication

Nonverbal communication is defined as the message exchange process involving the use of nonlinguistic and paralinguistic cues that are expressed through multiple communication channels in a particular sociocultural setting. Nonlinguistic cues can include nonverbal eye contact, smiles, touch, hand gestures, or even silence. Paralinguistic cues refer to the tone of voice, pitch, or volume of the sounds that accom- pany a verbal message. Multiple channels refer to how the meaning of nonverbal messages can be simulta- neously signaled and interpreted through various outlets such as facial expressions, body movements, voice characteristics, hand gestures, spatial relation- ships, and the temporal and physical environment in which people are communicating. Sociocultural setting emphasizes the importance of how cultural norms and expectations shape the standards by which we evaluate nonverbal appropriateness or inappropriateness in a particular cultural situation (Santilli & Miller, 2011). In essence, nonverbal communication transcends spoken or written words (Hickson, Stacks, & Moore, 2004). Our culture shapes the display rules of when, with whom, what, where, and how different emotions should be expressed or suppressed. Nonverbal display rules are learned within a culture. Cultural value ten- dencies, in conjunction with many relational and situational factors, influence cross-cultural nonverbal behaviors. A recently graduated Mexican student, Lalo, recalls, “When I was younger and with my sister, we used to turn off the sound of the telenovela [limited-run televised dramas popular in Latin America] and make up our own dialogue. We always based it on the body language and the facial expressions; it was so funny!” Nonverbal cues are the markers of our identities. The way we dress, the way we talk, our nonverbal gestures—these tell something about who we are and how we want to be viewed. We rely on nonverbal cues as “name badges” to identify what groups we belong to and what groups we are not a part of. All of these cues are interpreted through the mediation of stereo- types. Our accent, posture, and hand gestures further give our group membership away. For example, many Latinos who were born in the United States are used to people assuming that they do not speak English fluently. Eduardo, who worked at a steak restaurant, remembers a customer who refused to order from him because “he would not understand what I wanted.” Eduardo had many experiences dealing with prejudiced attitudes and presumptions, but is also quick to point out that “this does not happen all the time. When it happens I try not to let it piss me off.” It takes astute observation and deep understanding of a culture to decode nonverbal cues or messages accurately. Just imagine the difficulty interpreting a five-minute conversation between an Italian friend and a Nigerian friend, with variations in their body and hand movements, facial expressions, eye contact, tones of voice, and even the amount of space between the two. Many misunderstandings occur when trying to infer meanings behind nonverbal codes, especially if it is someone who comes from a different cultural background than your own. Nonverbal communication is a powerful communication system. It is, in a nutshell, the heartbeat of a culture. Language may be the key to the heart of a culture, but it is nonverbal communication that embodies the rich and nuanced meanings of a culture. Nonverbal communication is fascinating: we become curious about how some cultures think about and interpret their world through their nonverbal ways of being. Nonverbal communication includes very subtle microcues to even concrete features such as winking, eyebrow raising, body postures, fashions, accessories, and object displays on a desk that communicate a message during an interaction. Most important, nonverbal communication always has some form of social meaning, although no words may be spoken. Nonverbal messages can be used without words, can provide the backdrop to interpret the verbal message, and can create miscommunication. Although nonverbal gestures can sometimes clarify a verbal message, most of the time, nonverbal messages also can create tremendous intercultural confusion. There are no set nonverbal “dictionary rules” to follow in sending and interpreting nonverbal cues or messages. Instead, nonverbal communication is oftentimes ambiguous, but at the same time more believable or convincing than words. For example, many global cities offer dance festivals, featuring modern and traditional dances from across the world. You can watch Balinese legong, Latin rhumba, and Filipino tinikling, to name a few. Each dance type offers us a unique way of expression, with intricate and complicated movements. Each dance has hand gestures that represent or complement the verbal message. Gestures for love and various types of water and fish are all accompanied by particular nonverbal codes. However, some of these codes are communicated without the use of words. If you are not familiar with the local cultural code, interpreting the meanings of the gestures will be almost impossible and will allow plenty of room for inaccurate judgments.

One Code, Countless Interpretations

People send a variety of nonverbal cues during each interaction. This creates an interpretive ambiguity. The same nonverbal cue can mean different things to different people in different cultures. One example of a situation in which this may happen is giving the thumbs up sign (i.e., thumb up and fingers in a fist), which means “all right” or “OK” in the United States and Britain but can signal a condemnation meaning in Thailand and a downright insulting meaning in Afghanistan, Iran, Nigeria, and parts of Italy and Greece. Misunderstandings occur because of the mis- matched bumps between the original cultural gesture’s intention and a variety of cultural decoding possibilities. Many nonverbal communication situations carry a variety of messages and meanings. If a friend gives you a “high five” after you make a basket (as in basketball) in the United States, your friend is congratulating you on your shot. This nonverbal code is purposeful, and the meaning is intended to congratulate you. During an intercultural encounter, conflict and confusion may occur for two simple reasons. First, the same nonverbal signal can mean different things to different people in different cultures. For example, the “OK” sign in the United States can mean the number zero in France, can mean “$” in Japan, and can be interpreted as an obscene gesture in Spain. Second, a variety of hand signals can also carry the same meaning. For example, the beckoning or “come here” gesture is done in the United States by curling one’s index finger and waving it toward oneself. However, in Italy, Japan, the Philippines, and South Korea, the “come here” hand gesture sign is conveyed via placing the palm downward and making a cupping or sweeping motion with the fingers. Verbal and Nonverbal Comparisons Although the use of a verbal message is an intentional communicative act from the sender, nonverbal messages are constantly being interpreted by eyewitness others—even if the gesture has no particular intentional meaning from the sender. Whereas verbal messages emphasize content meanings, nonverbal messages stress analogical or relational meanings via the tone of voice or other body expressive cues. Whereas the use of a verbal message can be very strate- gic, the use of nonverbal behaviors can be both inten- tional (e.g., by the clothes that we wear and how we want to present ourselves) and unintentional, as inter- preted by the perceiver. Nonverbal cues can also be used independently or together with a verbal message. When used with verbal messages, they relate to verbal messages in five differ- ent ways. Nonverbal cues can repeat, contradict, substi- tute, complement, and accent verbal messages (Knapp & Hall, 2009). We will briefly use some examples to illustrate these concepts. Nonverbal communication can simply repeat the verbal message. If you are going to get your hair cut, oftentimes the barber or stylist will ask you how much hair you want cut. You will most likely tell him or her the number of inches followed by a confirmation with your fingers. In this example, a nonverbal gesture repeats the verbal message. Another common example you can try is to ask a friend what a “goatee” or “soul patch” is. They will likely tell you that it is hair on a person’s face—while stroking their face at the same time. Nonverbal communication can contradict the ver- bal message. You can contradict a message, or you can enhance it. When Nevaeh plays poker, if she thinks she has a winning hand, she complains out loud that she has a poor hand, but she always fiddles with her hair and avoids eye contact. Unfortunately, her friends are able to see through her bluff immediately. Contra- dicting a verbal message is a form of leakage, show- ing our true feelings when we try to hide them. Adults rely more heavily on nonverbal cues for indications of feelings and verbal cues for information about other people’s beliefs or intentions. Nonverbal communication can substitute for the verbal message. If you are driving through any border patrol area at an international border crossing, offi- cers will use specific hand gestures to tell you if you need to stop or continue driving. Using a horizontal hand gesture across your neck signals that you want to someone to stop what they are doing. Water skiers usually use a set of hand gestures to indicate whether they want the boat driver to speed up, slow down, or cut the motor off completely. The nonverbal message is clear, and no verbal message is needed to clarify the meaning. Nonverbal communication can complement the verbal message. Patting a teammate on the back and saying “Epic! What an awesome job!” complements the words that are spoken. The nonverbal look in your teachers’ eyes or downward facial expressions that accompany their verbal reprimands can clearly illus- trate the verbal messages and signal their disappoint- ment. These nonverbal messages function to support the meaning of the verbal messages. Nonverbal communication may also accent, or emphasize, parts of a verbal message. If you like to bold some words on a paper or use italics, these are accents. Slamming your hand down on the table dur- ing a meeting and saying “Focus!” will accent the importance of paying attention. We learn how to use nonverbal communication very early on. Although some similarities in nonverbal messages and meanings cut across different groups, flexible intercultural communicators can learn that different nonverbal cues are sometimes appropriate and sometimes inappropriate in different cultural set- tings and with different identity groups (Andersen, Hecht, Hobbler, & Smallwood, 2003). FORMS OF NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION To fully understand the significance of nonverbal com- munication for our communication behavior, we must examine the variety of nonverbal behaviors used by people in our daily life across cultures. There are seven different forms of nonverbal communication: physical appearance, paralanguage (vocal cues), facial expres- sions, kinesics (body movements), haptics (touch), oculesics (eye contact), and proxemics (space). In this and the next main sections, we will now illustrate each and note their diverse nonverbal functions. Physical Appearance Our physical appearance affects our daily interac- tions with others. Physical appearance includes body type, height, weight, hair, and skin color. Along with our appearance, we wear clothing, and we also gen- erally display artifacts. Artifacts are ornaments or adornments we use to communicate just by wearing the actual item. Both artifacts and clothing serve as markers of our unique or subcultural identity. Jew- elry, shoes, glasses, gloves, nail polish, tattoos, tongue, facial, and body piercings, and face painting com- municate our age, group membership, socieconomic status and class, personality, and gender. We rely on nonverbal cues as a form of comparing ourselves with other groups (Burgoon, Buller, & Woodall, 1996). They can reflect both cultural trends and unique per- sonalities. Famous singers, such as Usher, Pink, Fergie from the Black Eyed Peas, and Eminem sport multiple piercings. Nonverbal cues can provide clues for us to deter- mine the specific time in history. You may remember that leg warmers or jheri curls were trends in the 1980s and baggy jeans were very fashionable in the 1990s, as were emo hairstyles in the 2000s. Tattoos and body piercings (e.g., eyebrows, lip, and navel) have been used at various times in history. Traditional Polyne- sian cultures (e.g., Samoa, Tonga, Maori of New Zea- land) have used tattoos and piercings as indicators of class, status, and roles. Trendy now, these traditional tattoos and piercings are common and adopted to express individual difference. These cues serve as identity markers of the indi- vidual and also the practices of the larger culture. For example, rap singer Lil Wayne takes pride in his Louisiana roots, so much so that he has a map of the state on his back and the number 17, from the 17th ward in New Orleans. Sporting more than one hundred tattoos, each significant symbol represents his life history for others to view. At the same time, traditional tattoos (e.g., in Hawaii) have been used to signal pride in the rich history that “represents” past ancestors. We (the authors) polled our students informally in two classes (approximately 140 stu- dents) and found that the female students had more tattoos than the male students. Interestingly, tattoo artist Kahiki reports that once a person gets a tat- too, they are more likely to get another. Indeed, tat- toos reinforce identity belonging among members of tight-knit groups, such as gangs, fraternities, and sororities. Artifacts can also place a person in a particular sta- tus or class. Visit any hospital and you can tell a doc- tor from a nurse. The doctor typically wears a white coat; nurses wear scrubs. Uniforms in Japan are worn to differentiate among entertainers, students, work- ers, and supervisors. A funny thing about artifacts: we make so many judgments about what a person decides to wear. Chee Ling, for example, a former interna- tional student in Oklahoma, was shocked when she went back home to work in Malaysia. She noticed the pressure for more women to keep up with the latest designer trends. Although she lives paycheck to pay- check, she is a consumer of designer labels—Loubou- tin heels, Tiffany jewelry, and a Chanel bag—to keep up with fashion trends. The status issue surrounding nonverbal display accessories is common throughout big cities in Asia. Adornment features, such as clothing, jewelry, cosmetics, and accessories, in different cultures also reflect complex cultural and personal identities. Based on our stereotypic knowledge of a particular group, we look for validation of our expectations via nonverbal cues and surface adornment features. We also engage in stereotypic attitude and even in using direct dis- criminatory gesture such as the Ashish’s tikka story in Blog Post 7.1. Traditional face painting techniques are surface adornment features that are thought to be the foun- dation of modern cosmetics. In our world today, the cosmetics industry makes a large amount of money marketing traditional styles worn in specific cultures. For example, Indian women traditionally henna their hands on special occasions, such as marriage, birth, and death. But pop stars, such as Madonna and Prince, use henna as an enhancement to their looks. One last aspect of artifacts and clothing is impres- sion management. As we become an international community, the need to look global (or, actually, Hol- lywood Western) has some interesting implications. As the winds of globalization sweep through, beauty is not only a trend in the United States. For example, we can find aspects of selling and marketing plastic surgery around the world. According to the Biennial Global Survey (2009), Japanese and Korean women have increasingly used plastic surgery to widen their eyes in a relentless drive to attain the Western image of beauty. In South Korea, calf slimming is quite popular. But the most controversial procedure is leg lengthening. Young Korean, Russian, Chinese, and Iraqi women desire leg lengthening surgery to grow taller in hopes that they can compete globally and stand as tall as their Western counterparts. According to a 2006 documentary, “Nose, Ira- nian style” filmmaker Mehrdad Oskouei considers contemporary Iran in the midst of an epidemic of nose jobs. In fact, Iran is called “the nose job cap- ital of the world” (Oskouei, 2006). This may seem shocking in a place where women are required to cover their hair and conceal the shape of their bod- ies with a hijab. Unfortunately, with the Western (or U.S.-centric) facial beauty standard in mind, some beautiful Iranian women are still not con- tent with their noses. Body alterations definitely serve the nonverbal function of intentional identity management. If used successfully, artifacts and body alterations can enhance an individual’s self-esteem and appear- ance. However, if used haphazardly or if the operation fails, they can also strip away an individual’s remaining self-confidence or distinctive personality. One would do well to proceed with caution when thinking of body alteration techniques or operations to enhance one’s face or body image. At the same time, if a safe operation can raise someone’s self-image, others may need to learn to accept that person’s choice or decision and give any needed support. my classmate, but she did not wait to hear my side of the story. She sent me to the school counsellor who talked to me then took me home. My parents were angry that I had misbehaved and beat up another kid. I tried explaining to them that I was made fun of for my clothes and tikka. Then the counsellor then suggested to my parents that they should “dress me in more Western clothes, so that I don’t stand out.” She also suggested that I try to fit in more and not display the ‘red dot’ in school, so that my adjustment can go easier. Within a year, we moved back to India. My parents found it too hard to adjust and did not want us to forget our cultural tradi- tions. Thirteen years later my sister and I migrated back to Califor- nia . . . She continues to tie me a raakhi every year, but she makes sure that it does not have fancy decorations and it is less colorful. And I continue to wash off my tikka before I go to work. —Ashish, college student Paralanguage Beyond artifacts, another form of nonverbal com- munication that gives away our cultural, ethnic, and gender identity is paralanguage. Paralanguage is the sounds and tones we use in conversation and the speech behavior that accompanies the message. Sim- ply put, it is how something is said, not what is said. The nonword sounds and characteristics of speech are called paralinguistic features. Aspects of paralinguis- tic features include a variety of voice qualities, such as the following: • Accent: how your words are pronounced together;

• Pitch range: your range of tone from high to low;

• Pitch intensity: how high or low your voice carries;

• Volume: how loudly or softly you speak;

• Articulation: if your mouth, tongue, and teeth coordinate to speak precisely or to slur your words;

• Rate: the speed of sound or how quickly or slowly you speak.

Each of these characteristics may be represented on a continuum. For example, U.S. Americans often interpret and mimic the sounds of Cantonese speakers, a dialect of Chinese, as “whiny” and “loud and screaming,” typically associating their sounds with old kung fu movies. In contrast, Arabs oftentimes unexpressive, cold, distant, and harsh. Whatever the perspective, members of different cultures use their own cultural nonverbal standards as guidelines for proper or improper ways of speaking and for evalu- ating others. Through the use of paralanguage, we encode a sense of self via different nonverbal features and behaviors. People tend to use their own standards to judge others through nonverbal markers. Some of these markers can be intentionally sent, but others can be unintentional. If you raise your voice during a conversation, the interpretation is that you must be irritated or angry. However, ethnic or cultural groups raise their voices because it indicates sincerity or authenticity. For example, some African Americans tend to have emotionally expressive voices and are passionate about their conversation points (Orbe & Harris, 2008). This is commonly mistaken for anger. This is also true in other cultural groups. Fatima, a col- lege sophomore from Iran (or Persia, as some Iranian Americans prefer to call their country), recalls that the norm in her culture is to speak in a loud voice, repeat points, and pound on the table for emphasis. In her house, both the men and the women speak in an emo- tionally expressive, loud voice that might be misinter- preted as a display of anger. If someone who does not understand Farsi observes a conversation between two Persians, he might think that the two people talking sincerely about something are actually mad at each other. Fatima says, “My stepfather is constantly think- ing that my mother and grandmother are arguing about something, but they are actually carrying on a normal conversation.” Paralanguage can change the meaning of a sen- tence simply by accenting different words, depending on the way you say them: What’s up with that? What’s up with that? What’s up with that? What’s up with that? Or, try the statement “Are you serious?!” by varying the sounds with a classmate. In hearing or conversing in a foreign language, we often cannot pick up subtle vocal changes that may help us understand that either playfulness or sarcasm is intended by the speaker. If you don’t pick up the nuances of playfulness or humor in the voice, for example, misunderstandings will affect your relationship with the speaker. You can unintentionally offend, frustrate, or hurt someone without realizing how powerful your voice sounds. Additionally, your vocal message may be misunder- stood and inappropriately judged. Facial Expressions We sense the feelings and attitudes of strangers from the nonverbal messages we receive during an inter- action. One important form of nonverbal communi- cation that conveys feelings and attitudes is kinesics. Kinesics comes from the Greek word kinesis, meaning “movement.” Kinesics is the study of posture, body movement, gestures, and facial expressions. The face is capable of producing about 250,000 different expres- sions. Nonverbal researchers generally agree that there is relative universality in the decoding of basic facial expressions (Matsumoto, Olide, Schug, Willingham, & Callan, 2009). It appears that there is consistency across cultures in our ability to recognize at least seven emotions in an individual’s facial expressions. We can refer to these recognizable facial emotions by the acronym SADFISH: Sadness, Anger, Disgust, Fear, Interest, Surprise, and Happiness (Richmond & McCroskey, 2000). People are able to recognize not only the emotion but also the intensity of emotion and often the secondary emotion being experienced. On a general level, different cultural groups have interpreted these various facial expressions with a high degree of accuracy. However, the ability to recognize specific emotions on the SADFISH list may vary from one specific culture to the next. For example, studies indicate that students in the United States are better at identifying anger, disgust, fear, and sadness than are Japanese students (Matsumoto & Juang, 2003; Safdar et al., 2009). The reason is that Japanese students learn at a very young age to suppress their facial emotions because this display can be threatening to others and also create disharmony in their everyday relationships. In another study, East Asian participants inadequately distinguished the universal facial expressions of fear and disgust (Jack, Blais, Scheepers, Schyns, & Caldara, 2009). Rather than distribute their observations evenly evaluate the speaking style in the United States as across the face as Westerners do, East Asians persis- tently fix their gaze in the eye region. As you can see, identifying facial expressions through a photograph is actually quite difficult. What is more interesting is that children, when asked, have trouble displaying these emotions on their faces when prompted. The special difficulty in interpreting the two facial emotions of disgust and anger only fuels the problem of having the “correct” answer of what the expression looks like. Part of this problem has to do with cultural display rules. There are cultural differences in the display rules we use for expressing emotions. Cultural display rules are the procedures we learn for managing the way we express our emotions (Andersen, 2007; Ekman & Friesen, 1975; Matsumoto, 2009). The rules tell us when it is or is not acceptable to express our emotions. For example, in individualistic cultures, it is acceptable to express anger or disgust alone or in the presence of others. In collectivistic cultures, anger and disgust are not expressed in public, especially in front of indi- viduals with higher status. For example, in Indonesia, people will be quiet and hide their feelings if they are angry with their boss, but those in Australia (an individualistic culture) will openly express their anger toward their boss. Cultural display rules have changed with advances in technology and the Internet. As we progress with our advanced technology, sending messages via Twit- ter, text, and Facebook has resulted in a more efficient way to communicate, affecting how we express emo- tions. The use of icons in text messages became popu- lar because of the great need to replace long sentences, words, and expressions of our feelings with quick keyboard symbols. Universal icon expressions have become a significant way to converse without face- to-face interaction. These give senders everywhere the ability to talk with others without having to explain in detail the weight of their feelings. Can you guess what some of these symbols or sounds represent? Chrchrchr or xa-xa-xa? These express laughter. Expressing laugh- ter online (e.g., LOL) has a variety of differences. How laughter is expressed in writing varies by the sound and interpretation of the laugh. How about cultural differences in the use of emoticons? South Koreans and Japanese tend to use emoticons with expressive eyes and a neutral mouth (^_^), whereas U.S. Americans vary the direction of the mouth, :) and :( for example. One study (Yuki, Maddux, & Masuda, 2007) showed that students in the United States are not as sensitive to cues in the eyes and mouth because they badly misinterpreted the meaning assigned to popular emoticons from Jap- anese culture. Do you know what the most popular emoticons are in Japan? Research regarding the use of emoticons is var- ied. Asians also tend to use more emoticons than U.S. Americans (Kayan, Fussell, & Setlock, 2006). Elderly Japanese men regard emoticons as a means to overcome the restrictions that computer-mediated communication places on interpersonal communi- cation (Kanayama, 2003), and Indian Web forums also use more emoticons than their German coun- terparts (Pflug, 2011). Remember in Chapter 6 we discussed the differences between LCC and HCC patterns. Both Korean and Indian cultures are considered HCC cultures, whereas the U.S. culture is considered a LCC culture. It seems logical to infer that high-context folks have a stronger urge to fill in the nonverbal contextual gaps than their Western U.S. counterparts. Despite the popularity, frequency, and success of the use of emoticons, there are some clear disadvantages to text messaging and icons in general. First, any people who use icons and text messages on a daily basis can talk about an exact time and place in which they were misunderstood or their words were taken the wrong way after sending out a message. Reading emoticons in a message does not replace the depth of feelings a person has tried hard to con- vey. Second, joking around and sarcasm are difficult to interpret. Many people complain that they spend much time putting out the flame of a potential conflict because a sentence was misrepresented. For example, by writing WTF or wtf without contextual cues, or a smile to infer a joke, as a result, your friend may “dis- like” you on Facebook. The crossover effect between reading an emoticon versus decoding a real-life facial expression can cause further intercultural confusion. This discussion also takes us back to the importance of understanding paralanguage and how misunderstandings can take place because of sarcasm or joking as inferred through the tone of voice more so than facial expression Gestures are culturally specific and significant forms of nonverbal communication. In fact, they are much more elaborate and more frequently used in Italian culture than in U.S. culture. The four basic categories of hand gestures and body movements (Ekman & Fri- esen, 1975) have been categorized as emblems, illustra- tors, regulators, and adaptors. Emblems are gestures that substitute for words and phrases. The nonverbal gesture replaces the need to speak. For example, when you shrug your shoulders to say “I don’t know,” this is an emblem. An emblem for Filipinos is using the lips to point to an object, a direction, or a person. Emblems are usually gestures or movements that are displayed with clear intent and are recognized by members of your ingroup. Greeting rituals, gestures to call someone over, peace or insult gestures, and head bobs indicating “yes” or “no” are emblems. Every culture has a large variety of emblems with specific meanings and rules of their displays. However, emblems can contribute to intercultural misunderstandings or conflicts. For example, emblems may hold contradictory meanings in different cultures. A “fist” among African Ameri- cans signified “Black Power” in the 1970s. But a fist can also trigger a fighting stance. Putting your thumb and index finger together and making a circle with your other three fingers straight can mean “OK.” In Japan, this means money, in France it means “zero” or “worthless,” and in Venezuela and Turkey, gesturing to someone in this way implies that they are a homosexual. Joe Whitecotten, an anthropologist, tells a color- ful nonverbal story that highlights potential misun- derstandings. Illustrators are nonverbal hand gestures that we use along with the spoken message—they literally illustrate the verbal message. When you are describ- ing a shape, such as a heart, you are likely to make round angles with your thumbs and touch your fingers together. If you “talk with your hands” and use mostly hand gestures, then you are a person who enjoys expressive illustrators. Egyptians and Italians generally use broad, full arm gestures to illustrate points when they are speaking, more so than the reserved British and Asian groups. We are so used to making these spontaneous non- verbal movements that it is very difficult to reverse them or make inappropriate gestures. Many people wonder why Asian groups don’t use more illustra- tors. The answer is that Asians prefer to focus more on the interaction process and consider the use of too many hand gestures distracting, rude, and even undisciplined. Regulators are nonverbal behaviors we use in con- versation to control, maintain, or “regulate” the pace and flow of the conversation. When we are listening to someone, we acknowledge the speaker by nodding our head and adjusting or maintaining eye contact, and we make paralinguistic sounds (e.g., “mm-hmm,” “really,” “no kidding!”). Next to emblems, regulators are considered culturally specific nonverbal behaviors. These are also the most rule-governed kinesic behav- iors. Regulators act as the nonverbal traffic signal to control the dynamics of a conversation. For example, in the United States, when we interrupt a speaker with “Really?” we are in agreement, we are assisting them with their story, or we are showing them that we are paying attention to their story. If we are in China, To the Italian, these gestures would have very different meanings. The index finger means “Up yours,” like the middle finger in American culture, and the simultaneous index finger and little finger signifies “You are a cuckold.” This is one of the worst insults you can give to an Italian male, because it means that his wife (or girlfriend) has cheated on him because he is sexually inadequate. —Joe, college instructor Blog Pic 7.5 Thumbs up. saying “Really?” while a person is talking is considered rude and inappropriate. We learn regulators at a very young age. We use them at lower levels of consciousness. Depending on what region you are visiting, vocal segregates, such as “Sure, you’re right” in the U.S. South and “Neh neh” among Korean elders can be classified as nonverbal regulators. These agreement words mean “I am hear- ing you,” but the literal translation in English of the latter is “yes” to those who do not speak Korean. Adaptors are habits or gestures that fulfill some kind of psychological or physical need. Some adaptors are learned within a culture (e.g., covering the mouth when we sneeze or covering the mouth when we laugh aloud). Others are more automatic (e.g., scratching an itch on your head, picking your nose). Most adap- tors are not intended to communicate a message. However, some of these habits can be considered rude in the context of another culture. For example, in a meeting, when you are listening with your arms folded across your chest, some people may assume that you do not want to talk with others, but you may actually feel cold. In the library, you may notice that while studying, some people consistently play with a pen or pencil with their fingers. You may think they are nervous, but they are merely concentrating. In today’s iPhone world, some individuals can be texting and Googling and at the same time conversing with their friends. Some of their friends may accept their behavior and even respond in kind; others may be irri- tated and frustrated at such rude nonverbal inattentive behavior. Haptics The nonverbal function of haptics examines the per- ceptions and meanings of touch behavior. Different cultures encode and construe touch behavior to be either appropriate or inappropriate. Past research indi- cates that touch behavior is used to fulfill five com- municative functions: as a greeting ritual, to express affection, to be playful, to have controlling behavior, and to have task-related functions (Andersen, 2007). Different cultures have different rules about touch. For example, same-sex touch and handhold- ing in Malaysia, China, Sudan, Japan, Nepal, and Saudi Arabia are considered acceptable and part of daily life because contact among the opposite sex is inappropriate. This is better known as “PDA,” or the public display of affection. In the United States, same-sex handholding pertains to the gay/lesbian/ bisexual community. However, opposite-sex hand- holding is an appropriate PDA in the United States. Latino/as from Latin American cultural regions tend to engage in more frequent touch behaviors than do U.S. Americans and Canadians. But it is important to remember that the touch behaviors in both the Arab and the Latin American cultures are usually confined to same-sex touching, not opposite-sex touch. There are also differences among high-, moderate-, and low-contact cultures (Ting-Toomey, 1999). French, Russians, Latin Americans, and Italians are members of high-contact cultures. High-contact cultures often look each other in the eye directly, face each other, touch and/or kiss each other, and speak in rather loud voices. East Asians and Asian Americans, such as Chinese, Japanese, and Indians, are members of low- contact cultures. Low-contact cultures often engage in little if any touching, preferring indirect eye gazes and speaking in a lower tone. The United States, Canada, and Australia are moderate-contact cultures, which is a blend of both. Research (Remland, 2003; Remland, Jones, & Brinkman, 1995) also reveals that southern Europeans touch more than northern Europeans. After observing one thousand couples at many train stations in different countries, nonverbal researchers found that the highest frequency of touching—from the most frequent to the least frequent touch cultures—occurs in descending order as follows: Greece, Spain, Italy, Hungary, Germany, Belgium, England, Austria, and the Netherlands. The researchers also pointed out that much of the intercultural haptics or touch research depends heavily on gender, age, context, duration of the relationship, and personality factors. In addition, individuals from high-contact cultures can also bother those from a low-contact culture to a great extent. Let’s also briefly examine nonverbal situational appropriateness. The “buttock pat” is an excellent example of a situational touch cue. This is used in many professional male sports teams across the globe. The pat is a sign of encouragement, team bonding, and congratulations for a job well done, and it has spread to European sports. Outside the sports context, the fear of touch among U.S. males is high. Therefore, knowing the appropriate context, individual likes and dislikes, and appropriate relationship is vital in inter- cultural nonverbal communication. BOUNDARY REGULATIONS How do you deal with space? For example, when you enter a classroom for the very first time, do you “claim” your area? Do you park yourself on the seat, put your bag down, and own it from this moment on? When the class meets again, do you sit in the identical seat? How do you feel if someone else is sitting in your seat? Space and time are boundary regulation issues. As human beings, we are territorial animals. We claim and mark our territory. When someone or something invades our territory, we become much more sensitive to the invasion. It is a feeling of vulnerability and a threatening experience. Marking our territory has more to do with psychological ownership than physical ownership. This is the feeling we have of owning a particular spot. If our territory becomes a precious commodity, we react without taking a moment to think about our behavior and our actions, because we feel violated. Friends and colleagues in San Francisco will complain when someone “parks in their spot.” Although parking is free, finding a space is sometimes impossible, so the violation feels even stronger if one’s psychologically owned spot is invaded. In the next section, we discuss four broad themes of boundary regulation issues: interpersonal boundar- ies, environmental boundaries, psychological bound- aries, and temporal regulation.

Regulating Interpersonal Boundaries Edward T. Hall was one of the first anthropologists to write extensively about how we “mark” and define our territory. This is the study of proxemics. Proxemics is the study of space between persons, physical con- tact, and the inner anxiety we have when people violate our space. In the United States, according to Hall, we have four spatial zones: intimate, personal, social, and public (Hall, 1959, 1966). The intimate zone is zero to eighteen inches. This space is reserved for those who are closest to us, such as family, an emotional situation, and our close friends. The personal zone is from eigh- teen to forty-eight inches, reserved for closer friends, some acquaintances, and colleagues. Social zones occur in a larger event, such as a party, at forty-eight inches to twelve feet. Finally, the public zone is any distance that is twelve feet or more. Any violation of these zones can result in feelings of anxiety or discomfort. What constitutes appropriate personal distance for one cultural group can be perceived as crowding my.blog 7.1 by another group. The average conversational distance of personal space for European Americans is approx- imately twenty inches. The average personal space of many Latin American and Caribbean cultures is fourteen to fifteen inches. In Saudi Arabia, the ideal conversational distance is only nine to ten inches. Per- sonal space serves as a hidden dimension of intercul- tural misunderstanding and discomfort. Personal space is our unconscious protective territory that we carry around with us and deem sacred, nonviolable, and nonnegotiable. Although members of all cultures engage in the claiming of space for themselves, the experience of space and space violation varies across cultures and gender groups. Many of our U.S. students agree: in a movie theater with plenty of open seats, most male friends will leave an empty seat between them. But females will watch the movie together, sitting right next to each other.

Environmental Boundaries In addition to our interpersonal space, we also have boundaries related to our environment. Environ- mental boundaries are defined as the claimed sense of space and emotional attachment we share with others in our community. Concepts of territory and identity are interconnected because we usually invest time, effort, emotion, and self-worth in places that we claim as our primary territories. Our home territory or immediate environment asserts a strong influence on our everyday lives. Lewin (1936) addressed the significance of how the environment influences our behavior with the fol- lowing formula: B = f (P, E) in which B = behavior, P = person, and E = environment. This means that our behav- ior is defined by the persons interacting as well as the environment in which the communication takes place. For example, middle-class neighborhoods in Can- ada and the United States are very different from the middle-class neighborhoods in many Latin American, Middle Eastern, and Asian cultures, and these environ- ments influence how people in those cultures behave. In the United States, a home in a typical mid- dle-class neighborhood is physically separated from the community by a fence, a gate, a yard, a lawn, or some combination of these. Homes often symbol- ize an individual identity related closely with the owner. Environmental boundaries within the home are exercised through the use of separate bedrooms, private bathrooms, and many locks. In contrast, the middle-class neighborhood in Mexico is designed so that houses are integrated with a central plaza, pos- sibly containing a community center and a church. Homes do not have many locks inside the house and many family members share bedrooms and bath- rooms. U.S. middle-class homes appear to reflect individualistic qualities, and Mexican middle-class homes appear to promote collectivism and group- based interaction. Cultural groups have different expectations con- cerning the specific functions of different rooms in the house. For example, in cultures such as China, Korea, and Japan, the proper way to entertain guests is in a formal restaurant, because the home is “not worthy” of entertaining guests. In contrast, many Arabs, like U.S. Americans and Canadians, do not mind entertaining guests in their homes. Many Arab homes reserve a spe- cific formal room to entertain guests, and the guests may not see any other part of the house until trust is established in the relationship. Many U.S. American hosts showcase the house with a grand tour. This infor- mal tour happens within the first minutes of arrival, before settling in. In many Arab homes, separate quar- ters are also reserved for male and female activities. This is also true in many traditional Korean homes. In other related room functions, traditional Japa- nese and Korean homes do not make clear distinctions among the living room, dining room, and bedroom. Thus, when close friends are invited over, it is critical for them to remove their shoes before entering the multipurpose space, the floor of which is covered with straw mats used for sitting and sleeping. This practice is also common among homes in Hawaii. Removing your shoes and slippers before entering an apartment, condo, or home is a norm. Countries such as Japan and Indonesia have clear distinctions between the bathroom and the toilet. The bathroom is used strictly for bath- ing. From this cultural perspective, to mix up bathing (a cleaning function) and toileting (a dirtying function) is against their code of civility and personal hygiene. Many individualistic cultures encourage a home environment that is unique to the owner, but many collectivistic cultures encourage communal-type home settings. These cultural norms have been gained from early childhood, where individuals learn via obser- vation, how to manage space and boundary issues through social roles, furniture setting, and proper interaction rules to be performed in each room. We turn now to psychological space and privacy regula- tion issues. Psychological Boundaries How do you feel when someone breaks an unspoken rule about nonverbal space invasion—stands close to you in an empty elevator? Sits in front of you in an empty theatre? These small examples can be defined as psychological space. If you have ever lived or vis- ited densely populated cities such as Hong Kong and Mumbai and Bangkok, you have probably dealt with psychological space crowding issues. Crowded conditions make it almost impossible for people in many major Asian or Latin or Middle East cities (e.g., Shanghai, Seoul, Sao Paulo, Buenos Aires, Cairo, Istanbul, etc.) to experience privacy as it is known in the United States (i.e., being alone in a room). Intra- personal space refers to the need for information pri- vacy or psychological silence between the self and others. Let’s do a quick my.blog 7.2 poll and explore your need for privacy. Although privacy regulation is a major concern in many Western social environments, the issue may not be perceived as critical in collectivistic-oriented cul- tures. In fact, even the concept of privacy is construed as offensive in many collectivistic cultures (see Blog Pic 7.9). For example, the Chinese words that closely cor- respond to the concept of privacy are those for secretive and selfishness. These words imply that many Chinese feel that relational interdependence comes before the need for personal privacy in everyday interactions. Another aspect of psychological space is creat- ing the mood or atmosphere of a room. Many peo- ple will invest money on the practice and art of feng shui. Feng shui literally means “air” and “water” in Chinese. Used for thousands of years, feng shui is the philosophy of combining elements to attain good energy within a room, a building, or an area. For example, many feng shui experts believe that if your bed directly faces a door, all of your good energy and luck will flow out of the room. This basic exam- ple is one of many used to design harmony within a house or room. Currently, there are feng shui design- ers, architects, and counselors in the United States and worldwide. Some may spend a few years in Hong Kong to take feng shui lessons to best serve clients who believe in this art of geomancy (which means the art of making predictions based on patterns of spatial locations and directions). Feng shui lessons include the serious study of the chi, or the flow of energy as perceived in Taoism, to build suburban houses. Creating this form of psychological space promotes a more harmonious living condition. There are even feng shui magazines online, for example, http://www.fengshuiprophet.com. The magazine offers categories of religion, classical versus traditional feng shui, and articles such as “Why feng shui can’t be considered a science.” If cultural groups do not emphasize categories for “privacy” and “solitude” to guide everyday interac- tions, then such categories may not be a critical part of their everyday social reality. Language, in conjunction with multiple nonverbal cues, directs our perceptions and attitudes toward the functions of space and time. Psychological and physical boundaries protect our lev- els of comfort and safety. Space is a powerful way to mark and define our ingroup and outgroup boundar- ies in this regard. Regulating Time Let’s do the my.blog 7.3 survey on time orientation. Are you a monochronic-time person, a polychronic-time per- son, or a bichronemic-time individual? Please read on. Temporal regulation is defined as the attitudes we have about time. The study of time is known as the study of chronemics. Chronemics concerns how peo- ple in different cultures structure, interpret, and under- stand the time dimension. We are in a constant struggle with time. The faster we go, the faster we want to go. The faster we go, the more impatient we become. Modern computer gadgets take advantage of our need for time by producing faster results. Do you have no time to make dinner? Mod ern appliances can chill a can of soda in one minute, a bottle of wine in ten, or cook a whole roasted chicken in four minutes. E-mails and texts are faster than send- ing hand-written letters. The efficiency of receiving e-mails results in an urgency to reply. Our life stages (birth, development, aging, sickness. death) are closely tied in with the sense of time. Our religious or spiritual beliefs, in terms of where the universe begins and ends and where life begins and ends, are two time-related worldview considerations. Cultural patterns of time designate when and how we should start the day; when we should eat, take a break, work, play, sleep, and die; and whether and how we will reincarnate. We are all affected by the norms and values of time from our own culture. More often than not, we don’t realize this until a norm or value has been violated in some way. For example, if you are doing business in Madrid and you are not familiar with the working hours there, you will be completely thrown off by the pattern of the day. Spaniards often start work at 10:00 a.m., have lunch at 3:00 p.m., get back to work at 5:00 p.m., work until 8:00 p.m, and have a light dinner at 10:00 pm. In 2009, French workers averaged fewer hours per week than workers in most developed nations, which is thirty-five (Fleck, 2009). Many workers in France complain that the country’s thirty-five-hour workweek, adopted in January 2000, makes it too hard to work. What other countries do you think work the shortest hours per week and the longest hours per week? Take a guess and check out Jeopardy Box 7.1. As you can see, workers in South Korea average around a forty-seven-hour workweek (while Tur- key topped the chart at a forty-nine hour workweek) despite legislation in 2004 imposing a forty-hour, five- day work week. This includes employees of govern- ment corporations, banks, and all large corporations. The pressure to work lengthy hours with short vaca- tions is part of the South Korean hard work Confucius ethics’ practice (Olson, 2008). Hall (1983) distinguished between two patterns of time that govern different cultures: the monochronic- time schedule (MT) and the polychronic-time schedule (PT; see Table 7.1). According to Hall and Hall (1987), MT and PT are polar opposites. People in monochronic-time (MT) cultures pay close attention to clock time and do one thing at a time. In MT cultures, people use time in a linear way, employing segments to break up time into scheduled and divided allotments so a person can concentrate on one thing at a time. The schedule is given top priority. The United States, Germany, and Switzerland are classic examples of MT-time cultures. Students attending college or a university belong to an MT culture as well. For example, a college student, Kris, has a thoughtful view of time: “I think that my gener- ation in particular has an interesting view of time. I think that we idealize the past, seeing it as being far much more fun and happy than it probably was. We tend to de-value the present, making it seem worse than it is...because when you’re in it, it is harder to see the bigger picture. We also tend to view the future as being scarier than it will be. Like: What will we do after graduation? What’s next? seems to be the current theme of our lives. My mom commented on it once, telling me that I do not know how to just do noth- ing. I constantly have to be doing something. In fact, this weekend, I could not fully enjoy hanging out with friends because I was thinking about all of the home- work I’m going to be doing all day on Sunday.” People in polychronic-time (PT) cultures pay attention to relational time (involvement with peo- ple) and place more emphasis on completing human transactions than on holding to schedules. For exam- ple, two polychronic Spaniards conversing on a street corner would likely opt to be late for their next appointment rather than abruptly end the conversa- tion before it came to a natural conclusion. For Hall and Hall (1987), Arab, African, Latin American, Asian, and Mediterranean cultures are representative of PT patterns (see Blog Post 7.5). One example of a place with PT cultural patterns is countries in Africa. For many Africans, time creates group harmony and par- ticipation among the members (Pennington, 1990). Group connectedness can be seen in the dances and drumming. Time for traditional Africans is viewed as organic rather than mechanical. When PT and MT people hang out together, dis- agreements and misunderstandings often occur, for example, in planning a road trip. An MT traveling companion will feel comfortable if the car has GPS installed, if hotel or hostel rooms are confirmed, if a daily schedule is planned, and so on. The PT person will respond by waiting to do these things just prior to departure. As Joyce from Singapore says, “This drives me crazy. I hate waiting until the last minute to do things, and he hates to do too many things in advance. We plan trips around our e-fares to save money so that means sometimes we don’t even know where we are going until a few days before we leave.” To be flexible, we must work toward living with both types of time orientations. This adds a lot of spontaneity to life. To quote from Ralph Waldo Emer- son, “Finish each day and be done with it. You have done what you could. Some blunders and absurdities no doubt crept in; forget them as soon as you can. Tomorrow is a new day; begin it well and serenely and with too high a spirit to be encumbered with your old nonsense.” Studies indicate that members of individualistic cultures tend to follow the MT pattern, whereas mem- bers of collectivistic cultures tend to follow the PT pat- tern (Hall, 1983). Members of individualistic cultures tend to view time as something that can be controlled and arranged. Members of collectivistic cultures tend to view time as experientially based (i.e., living and experiencing time fully rather than mechanically mon- itoring clock time). Now let’s do a quick my.blog 7.4. Hall (1959) made distinctions for arriving late in the United States in accordance with chunks of time within five minutes. Therefore, in the above ques- tion, if you are five to ten minutes late, you are in the “mumble something” time, and you offer a small statement. “Slight apology” time is ten to fifteen min- utes late, and therefore you are required to apologize. “Mildly insulting or serious apology” time is fifteen to thirty minutes late, so you are expected to offer a per- suasive reason for your tardiness. The last two, “rude” time (thirty to forty-five minutes) and “downright insulting” time (forty-five to sixty minutes), are both unacceptable. Time is omnipresent. Chronemic cues allow us to manage our intercultural interactions and facilitate clearer understandings regarding this form of nonverbal communication. Studying chronemics gives us a better understanding of the rhythmic dance of time. In sum, it is so easy to draw conclusions about people without understanding their culture. When someone from a different culture does not look you in the eye, it is easy to jump to the conclusion that he or she disrespects you, is shy, or is not interested. However, some cultural groups believe that look- ing someone in the eye is disrespectful. Before draw- ing any conclusions from watching people’s actions, engage in a conversation and find meaning behind the gestures. Nonverbal cues communicate status, power, ingroup and outgroup differences, and unique iden- tities. In attempting to understand within-culture and across-culture nonverbal variations, look to interper- sonal sensitivity, respect, and open-minded attitudes as good first steps in gaining nonverbal entrance to a culture. INTERCULTURAL REALITY CHECK: DO-ABLES In this chapter, we have discussed the importance of nonverbal communication across cultures. More specifically, we have explored artifacts and clothing, paralanguage, facial expressions, various nonverbal hand gestures, haptics or touch, and cross-cultural reg- ulation of space and time (see the answers to Blog Pics 7.2 and 7.3). Each form of nonverbal communication reflects our larger cultural values and also expresses our unique personalities and identities. More impor- tant, the situation in which the nonverbal behavior takes place is quite critical in adding meaning to our accurate interpretation. To be a flexible nonverbal communicator across cultures, be mindful of your own nonverbal behaviors and signals that you send, intentionally or not. Be cau- tious when you interpret unfamiliar gestures and non- verbal behaviors in a new culture. We present you with a set of nonverbal points to consider in communicat- ing across cultures: • Be flexible when you observe and identify non- verbal display rules. Your observation and initial reaction may not match the rules across cultural groups. Flexibility allows you to be patient when you observe and match identities, status, distance, expectations, and appropriate nonverbal behav- iors in various situations. • Go deeper: different meanings and expectations of nonverbal norms and rules are more than what one sees; there is typically a deeper-than-surface explanation. This may help you move toward an alternative explanation and a clearer picture. • Remember that what someone says is not as im- portant as how it is said. It is important to be aware of one’s actions when expressing feelings in words. Sometimes a person can portray a more se- rious and unfavorable tonal presence than the in- tended meaning. • As a flexible nonverbal communicator, express emotions and attitudes that correspond to your comfort level but, at the same time, be adaptive and sensitive to the appropriate nonverbal display rules in a particular situation and within a particu- lar cultural community. • Because nonverbal behavior is oftentimes so am- biguous and situation dependent, learn to be less judgmental and more tentative in interpreting oth- ers’ unfamiliar nonverbal signals. We form impressions of others oftentimes based on superficial nonverbal cues and stereotypes that we derived from our media images. The next chapter will move us to a discussion on the ethnocentric viewpoints that we form and the stereotypic images we bring to bear when we encounter culturally unfamiliar others.