Communication Between Cultures

73. Hofstede et al., 2010, 140.


74. “Country overview,”inGlobal Data-
    base of Quotas for Women(Quota
    Project, 2011 and 2013), http://www
    .quotaproject.org/country.cfm?Sort
    Order=Percentage (accessed May 5,
    2014).


75. R. Hausmann, L. D. Tyson, Y.
    Bekhouche, and S. Zahidi,The Global
    Gender Gap Index 2013(Geneva,
    Switzerland: World Economic Forum,
    2013), http://www3.weforum.org
    /docs/WEF_GenderGap
    _Report_2013.pdf (accessed May 5,
    2014).


76. Chinese Culture Connection,
    “Chinese Values and the Search for
    Culture-Free Dimensions of Culture,”
    Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 18
    (1987): 143–64; see also G. Hofstede
    and M. H. Bond,“Confucius and
    Economic Growth: New Trends in
    Culture’s Consequence,”Organiza-
    tional Dynamics16 (1988): 4–21.


77. Hofstede, 2001, 351, 354.


78. Ibid., 351, 355.


79. M. Minkov and G. Hofstede,
    “Hofstede’s Fifth Dimension: New
    Evidence from the World Values
    Survey,”Journal of Cross-Cultural
    Psychology, December 15, 2010, 2,
    DOI: 10.1177/0022022110388567;
    For information on the World
    Values Survey, see http://www
    .worldvaluessurvey.org/wvs.jsp.


80. Ibid., 9.


81. Hofstede et al., 2010, 239, 254.


82. Minkov and Hofstede, 2010, 9.


83. Hofstede et al., 2010, 251.


84. M. Minkov,Cultural Differences in a
    Globalized World(United Kingdom:
    Emerald, 2011).


85. Ibid., 128; see also M. Minkov,
    “Monumentalism versus Flexumility,”
    SIETAR Europa Congress (2007),
    http://www.sietareuropa.org
    /congress2007/files/congress2007
    _paper_Michael_Minkov.doc


86. Ibid., 195.


87. J. F. Embree,“Thailand—A Loosely
    Structured Social System,”American
    Anthropologist52, 2 (1950): 159–80;
    P. J. Pelto,“The Differences Between
    ‘Tight’and‘Loose’Societies,”

Transaction5, 5 (1968): 37–40;M. J.

Gelfand et al.,“Differences Between

Tight and Loose Cultures: A 33-

Nation Study,”Science332 (May 27,

2011): 1100–4; M. J. Gelfand,

“Culture’s Constraints: International

Differences in the Strength of Social

Norms,”Current Directions in Psycho-

logical Science, 21, 16 (2012): 420–24.

88. H. C. Hu,“The Chinese Concepts of
    ‘Face,’”American Anthropologist, 46, 1
    (1044): 45–64.


89. K. Domenici and S. W. Littlejohn,
    Facework: Bridging Theory and Practice
    (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2006),
    10.


90. S. Ting-Toomey,“The Matrix of
    Face: An Updated Face-Negotiation
    Theory,”inTheorizing About Intercul-
    tural Communication, ed. W. B.
    Gudykunst (Thousand Oaks, CA:
    Sage, 2005), 73.


91. R. M. March,Reading the Japanese
    Mind(Tokyo: Kodansha, 1996), 28.


92. G. Gao and S. Ting-Toomey,Com-
    municating Effectively with the Chinese
    (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998),
    54.


93. Smith et al., 2006, 159.


94. J. Oetzel, S. Ting-Toomey, M. I.
    Chew-Sanchez, R. Harris, R. Wilcox,
    and S. Stumpf,“Face and Facework in
    Conflicts With Parents and Siblings:
    A Cross-Cultural Comparison of
    Germans, Japanese, Mexicans, and
    U.S. Americans,”Journal of Family
    Communication3, 2 (2003): 67–93.


95. M. S. Kim,Non-Western Perspectives
    on Human Communication(Thousand
    Oaks, CA: Sage, 2002), 65.


96. S. Ting-Toomey and A. Kurogi,
    “Facework Competence in Intercul-
    tural Conflict: An Updated Face-
    Negotiation Theory,”International
    Journal of Intercultural Relations 22
    (1998): 202.

Chapter 7

1. K. Tracy and J. S. Robles,Everyday
   Talk: Building and Reflecting Identities
   (New York: Guilford Press, 2013), 21.


2. S. Ting-Toomey,“Identity Negotia-
   tion Theory: Crossing Cultural
   Boundaries,”inTheorizing About

Intercultural Communication, ed. W. B.

Gudykunst (Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage, 2005), 212.

3. M. Fong,“Identity and the Speech
   Community,”inCommunicating
   Ethnic and Cultural Identity, ed.
   M. Fong and R. Chuang (Lanham,
   MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004), 6.


4. Ibid.


5. S. Ting-Toomey and L. C. Chung,
   Understanding Intercultural Communi-
   cation(Los Angeles: Roxbury, 2005),
   93.


6. I. E. Klyukanov,Principles of Intercul-
   tural Communication(Boston: Pearson
   Education, 2005), 12.


7. F. Dervin,“Cultural identity, repre-
   sentation, and Othering,”inThe
   Routledge Handbook of Language
   and Intercultural Communication, ed.
   J. Jackson (New York: Routledge,
   2012), 183.


8. J. C. Turner,Rediscovering the Social
   Group: A Self-Categorization Theory
   (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1987), 45.


9. B. J. Hall,Among Cultures: The
   Challenge of Communication, 2nd ed.
   (Belmont, CA: Thomson
   -Wadsworth, 2005), 108–9.


10. W. B. Gudykunst,Bridging Differences:
    Effective Intergroup Communication,
    4th ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage,
    2004), 77.


11. J. S. Phinney,“A Three-Stage Model
    of Ethnic Identity Development in
    Adolescence,”inEthnic Identity: For-
    mation and Transmission Among His-
    panics and Other Minorities, ed. M. E.
    Bernal and G. P. Knight (Albany:
    State University of New York Press,
    1993), 62.


12. K. R. Humes, N. A. Jones, and R. R.
    Ramirez,Overview of Race and His-
    panic Origin: 2010(Washington, DC:
    U.S. Census Bureau), http://www
    .census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs
    /c2010br-02.pdf (accessed
    December 29, 2014), 4, 9–10.


13. A. Brittingham and G. P. de la Cruz,
    Ancestry: 2000, Census 2000 Brief
    (Washington, DC: Census 2000 Brief,
    U.S. Census Bureau), http://www
    .census.gov/prod/2004pubs/c2kbr-35
    .pdf (accessed December 29, 2014)
    3, 9.

Notes 431

Copyright 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).