International Journal of Intercultural Relations
26 (2002) 339–361
Japanese communication in intercultural
encounters: the barrier of status-related behavior
Rotem Kowner*
Department of Multidisciplinary Studies, The University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel
Abstract
Many Japanese perceive communication with non-Japanese as an unpleasant experience
and tend to avoid it. To account for this ‘‘foreigner-complex’’, scholars have advanced a
number of explanations based on Japan’s isolation, linguistic barriers, and the interpersonal
shyness of the Japanese people. Using two surveys, this article seeks to provide a
supplementary approach to Japanese communication difficulties with foreigners and
Westerners in particular: That is, the problem of status violation. The present study shows
that in an encounter with foreigners of equal status, Japanese perceive the communication
style of their counterparts not only as highly distinct from their own, but also as similar to the
communication style of high-status Japanese in an encounter with lower-status compatriots.
Based on these findings, it is argued that during intercultural encounters Japanese tend to feel
that their social status is violated, to propagate this feeling through their culture, and
ultimately to dislike and to be apprehensive about such encounters. r 2002 Elsevier Science
Ltd. All rights reserved.
Many Japanese tend to perceive communication with non-Japanese as an
embarrassing and unpleasant, if not frightening experience. Individual Japanese
have expressed this sentiment on numerous occasions since the forced opening of
Japan to the West in 1854. An early example of this attitude can be found in the
autobiography of the prominent educator and entrepreneur, Fukuzawa Yukichi.
Upon his arrival to the United States in 1860, Fukuzawa ‘‘yturned suddenly into a
shy, self-conscious, blushing ‘bride’’’. Years later this memory was still vivid, and the
contrast, he noted, ‘‘was indeed funny, even to myself’’ (Fukuzawa, 1981, p. 114). In
modern times as well, the diplomat Kawasaki Ichiro acknowledged, Japanese
communication difficulties have lingered. The Japanese, Kawasaki wrote, ‘‘are shy
and self-effacing peopley Apart from the language difficulty, the Japanese usually
*Tel.: +972-4953-1879; fax: +972-4824-9155.
E-mail address: kowner@research.haifa.ac.il (R. Kowner).
0147-1767/02/$ - see front matter r 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 1 4 7 - 1 7 6 7 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 1 1 - 1

---

340
R. Kowner / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 26 (2002) 339–361
find the work in such cosmopolitan groups a severe mental strain’’ (Kawasaki, 1969,
p. 58).
1. Accounts of Japanese communication difficulties
The difficulties Japanese experience in communicating with foreigners have not
escaped the eyes of scholars, Japanese and foreigners. Over the years they have
advanced various explanations to account for this phenomenon.
1.1. Geopolitical isolation
Perhaps the most common explanation concerns the fact that Japan is an ‘‘island-
country’’ (shimaguni). Living on an isolated archipelago 180 km distant from the
closest continental shore has evidently affected Japanese history by preventing
extensive contacts with the country’s neighbors. This geographical reality was
enhanced by isolationist political regime, which closed Japan’s border almost
hermetically. During the period of isolation (1640–1854), native patterns of
interpersonal behavior underwent an elaborate institutionalization.
Bennett and McKnight (1966) argued that the formalized rules and codes of
communication developed then were actually tightened after the opening of Japan
and disseminated to the rest of the population. Moreover, the majority of Japanese
had neither been in contact nor even seen non-speakers of Japanese until the end of
the 19th Century, in many cases it was much later. During the formative pre-modern
period, many of them had not been in contact even with their more remote Japanese-
speaking compatriots due to travel restrictions.
1.2. Linguistic barriers
The Japanese language, so remote linguistically from Indo-European languages,
has been viewed as another source of Japanese miscommunication with foreigners.
The fact that most foreigners cannot speak Japanese, the noted Japanese critic Eto
Jun (1977) argued, means that Japanese have to speak a language of which they have
poor command and may even be exposed to a situation where they would be
regarded as different from the people around them. The performance of Japanese in
various language tests seems to prove this notion. Toward the end of the 1990s
Japan’s rank in TOEFL average scores declined to 180th out of 189 nations taking
the test (Inoguchi, 1999).
1.3. National character
Several scholars have looked into the supposedly psychological idiosyncratic
character of the Japanese in search of an answer. Eto (1977), for example, focused on
the shyness (hazukashisa) Japanese feel when approached by foreigners speaking a
foreign language as a major barrier in their communication. This shyness is the result

---

R. Kowner / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 26 (2002) 339–361
341
of the fear of failing in a mode of communication one believes one has to master but
in reality does not. Viewing the level of English education in Japan, it is no wonder
Japanese experience shyness, especially when communicating with foreigners in the
presence of other Japanese.
Eto also associated Japanese homogeneity with communication difficulties. He
contended that because the Japanese are one of the most homogeneous peoples there
is a tacit assumption in their lives that other individuals are an extension of one’s self,
that one’s own perceptions do not differ markedly from those of others, whereas
Westerners base their lives on the premise that others naturally feel differently about
things. Because of this homogeneity there is limited need for explanations during
conversations, and the Japanese ‘‘are able to guess at each other’s feelings from facial
expressions, movements of the eyes and the slightest gestures, and their conjectures
are not mistaken’’ (Eto, 1977, p. 75).
1.4. General incompetence in verbal communication
Scholars have long noted that Japanese people tend to experience difficulties also
when communicating with their compatriots. Hence, the problem of communication
with foreigners is only an extension of a general problem of communication. Several
cross-cultural studies have supported this notion, showing that Japanese exhibit a
high level of communication apprehension also within their own culture. Klopf
(1984) administered the Personal Report of Communication Apprehension (PRCA;
McCroskey, 1970) to students from Japan, China, Korea, Micronesia, the
Philippines, Australia, and the United States. Among the seven national samples,
the Japanese students displayed the highest level of apprehension (see also Keaten,
Kelly, & Pribyl, 1997).
2. Interpreting accounts of Japanese communication difficulties
Although the explanations mentioned above may account for part of the
communication difficulties manifested by Japanese when interacting with foreigners,
they do not touch, we argue, the core of the problem. First, populations of other
island nations, some of them even more isolated than Japan, do not express such
acute stress over contact with foreigners. Moreover, the ‘‘foreigner complex’’ is not
omnipresent. Japanese do not exhibit mounting tension when communicating with
people from Asian countries. As for the isolation policy, this has not existed for
about 150 years, a period long enough to transform Japan into an ultra-modern state
and to alter almost any social custom.
Second, if competence in a foreign language is the issue, one may be puzzled by the
tendency of many Japanese to resort to English even when the foreign speaker’s
Japanese is better than the Japanese speaker’s English. Foreigners staying in Japan
complain frequently about this, as Australian linguist Jiri Neustupny noted: ‘‘One
asks a question in (reasonably fluent) Japanese but the reply comes back in (broken)
English’’ (Neustupny, 1987, p. 87). The tendency to speak English with foreigners

---

342
R. Kowner / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 26 (2002) 339–361
may account for McCroskey, Gudykunst, and Nishida’s (1985) findings of no
significant difference in the level of communication apprehension Japanese report
when speaking Japanese and when speaking English (see also Gudykunst, Nishida,
Koike, & Shiino, 1986). In fact, one study even found the opposite reaction. When
speaking English, Japanese sit closer to each other than when speaking their native
language (Sussman & Rosenfeld, 1982).
Finally, communication apprehension probably impedes a relatively higher
proportion of individuals in Japan when communicating with their compatriots
than is the case in many other countries. Nevertheless, the level of apprehension
seems much higher and more prevalent when Japanese communicate with foreigners
than with their compatriots, so this explanation does not seem to provide a full
account of the problem.
3. Status violation as a supplementary cause
While previous explanations of Japanese difficulties in contact with foreigners
hold a certain kernel of truth, the main contention of this article is that the essence of
the problem lies in non-verbal as well as verbal differences concerning status
recognition. The Japanese code for communicating social status differs substantially
from the codes common in foreign countries, of the West in particular, to the extent
that Japanese perceive foreigners as violating their status during intercultural
encounters. Generated by real or imagined behavior, this perception causes Japanese
to dislike communication with foreigners and to perpetuate the feeling of
inconvenience to fellow Japanese. The ultimate outcome is the development of
cultural apprehension for communication with foreigners, especially among people
who have never experienced an intercultural encounter. This apprehension affects
future encounters with foreigners and becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy regarding
the negative nature of intercultural communication.
Concern for social status, of course, is not unique to Japanese. Status denotes
one’s social dominance and reflects one’s relative position in any social hierarchy
(Patterson, 1983). Status is displayed and recognized during human interaction,
whether in large groups or in dyads, and the perception of its presence is one of the
cornerstones of the social order in any society (Asch, 1946). People’s status leads not
only to specific expectations related to their ability to perform tasks, but also to
general expectations unrelated to tasks. People express their status especially within
hierarchies, where the basic relation is the dyadic one between superior and
subordinate. The value system of the two members of a dyad, their perceptions of
their relative power and role as partners in a social interaction, and the range of
behaviors they are used to displaying, determine their behavior during interactions.
Culture has much to do with these factors. Communication takes place mainly
within the borders of a homogeneous society, where status cues are more or less
salient. Members of the same culture have the advantage of recognizing subtle
linguistic and non-linguistic signs, which ease communication and facilitate
functionality. Cultures may also differ significantly on what conversational patterns,

---

R. Kowner / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 26 (2002) 339–361
343
non-verbal behavior, and verbal choices are considered appropriate in a given
interaction. Indeed, to compare societies it is necessary to grasp the concept and
practice of hierarchy that exists in different cultures (Dumont, 1986).
Status differences are considered as one the central factors in intercultural
miscommunication (e.g., LaFrance & Mayo, 1978), but inquiry into this factor has
usually focused on a single dimension or anecdotal examples rather than being based
on thorough analysis. Many studies have demonstrated the existence of differences
between ritual followed and non-verbal rules observed by Japanese and non-
Japanese, usually Americans, when communicating within the culture. Such studies
examined a wide array of topics, such as ways of self-presentation (Morsbach, 1973),
sitting distance (Taylor, 1974), apology style (Barnlund & Yoshioka, 1990;
Sugimoto, 1998), and embarrassment remediation (Sueda & Wiseman, 1992), as
well as the extent of physical contact (Barnlund, 1975; for a review of comparative
studies of Japanese vs. Americans communication see Gudykunst and Nishida,
1993).
The most extensive study to date to explore cultural differences in status-related
behavior was conducted by Kowner and Wiseman (in press). Using 105 behavioral
(including verbal) scales, the study compared Japanese and American perceptions of
verbal communication and non-verbal behavior in an interaction between lower- and
higher-status people in asymmetric dyadic interaction. The choice of Japan and the
USA stemmed from earlier indications that these two cultures represent two poles of
several behavioral and communicative continua relevant to status-related behavior.
In recent decades, the continuum of individualism–collectivism has become a
central dimension of supposed cultural variability. Whereas individualistic cultures
favor individual goal over group goals, collectivistic cultures prefer the latter
(Hofstede, 1980). The continuum of tightness vs. looseness is another important
dimension, which depicts the extent to which a culture allows deviation from
behavioral norms. Tight cultures do not permit their members much deviations from
what constitutes correct action, whereas loose cultures do not encourage such a
consensus (Pelto, 1968). The high–low context continuum describes the amount of
information available in communication. High-context communication is one in
which most of the information exists in the context or is internalized in the people
communicating, whereas in low-context communication most of the information lies
in explicit codes (Hall, 1976, 1983).
As predicted, Kowner and Wiseman (in press) found similar patterns of behavior
and communication style of lower- and higher-status people in both Japan, a
hierarchical, collectivist and tight culture that embraces high-context communica-
tion, and the USA, the quintessential individualist and loose culture that embraces
low-context communication. Nevertheless, respondents in Japan perceived greater
differences between the behavior of lower- and higher-status people in their own
culture than American respondents perceived in the United States.
But what happens when people of a culture such as Japan interact with people
from a culture extremely different on the above dimensions such as the United States
or probably other Western nations? We may expect members of the relatively more
strict culture to perceive their status boundaries as being violated by members of the

---

344
R. Kowner / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 26 (2002) 339–361
culture that stresses looser codes of status-related behavior. Once certain behavior is
recognized as violating expectations, argued Judee Burgoon (1993), it heightens
attention to the characteristics of the communicator and the meaning of the violating
act. This state of alert is distressing and followed by feeling of discomfort if the
violation is interpreted as a threat to one’s status.
Overall, it is contended that social structure and cultural values make Japanese
highly sensitive to behavior they perceive as a violation of their status.
Communication with foreigners in general, and Westerners in particular, who are
unaware of Japanese definition of status boundaries, is a likely situation where
violations occur and, therefore, should be avoided.
4. Overview
The primary goal of this study was to examine Japanese perceptions of their own
and foreigners’ status-related behavior during an intercultural interaction. Within
this framework the following hypotheses were examined:
Hypothesis 1. Japanese tend to perceive their own communication style during an
intercultural encounter as profoundly different from the communication style of
non-Japanese. Hence, we expected to find a significant difference between the
perceived status-related behavior of Japanese and foreigners, whether Westerners or
Asians.
Hypothesis 2. Japanese tend to view their own communication style in an
intercultural encounter as humble and meek but foreigners’ communication style
as obtrusive and inconsiderate. Hence, we expected to find a positive correlation
between various measures of perceived status-related behavior of Japanese during an
encounter with foreigners and similar measures of low-status people in an encounter
with Japanese of higher status. We also expected to find similar correlation between
various measures of perceived status-related behavior of foreigners in such an
encounter and similar measures of high-status Japanese in an encounter with
Japanese of lower status.
Hypothesis 3. Japanese tend to be uneasy about communication with foreigners and
to dislike it. Hence, we expected to find that communicating with foreigners would
be less pleasant than communicating with fellow Japanese.
Hypothesis 4. Due to their perceived distinctive communication style, Westerners’
communication pattern tend to be associated more than that of Asians with the
communication pattern of high-status Japanese in an intracultural encounter. This is
because of Westerners’ perceived greater tendency to violate Japanese codes of
behavior as well as their positive image in Japanese society. Therefore, we expected
to find greater correlation between high-status Japanese and Westerners than Asians.
Similarly, we expected to find significant differences in the ratings of these two

---

R. Kowner / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 26 (2002) 339–361
345
foreign groups, which indicate the hypothetical high-status like communication
pattern of Westerners. Finally, we expected that communicating with Westerners
would be less pleasant than communicating with other Asians. This difference stems
from expectations that Westerners may commit greater violations than Asians due to
larger cultural differences and Westerners’ (baseless) feelings of superiority.
5. Study 1
The first study sought to examine Japanese perceptions of communication
patterns between Japanese and foreigner counterparts of equal status using the
hypotheses listed in the overview. Study 1 is based on a survey of a large group of
undergraduates, the majority of them with limited experience communicating with
foreigners.
5.1. Method
Subjects and design: The subjects were 219 undergraduates (107 males and 112
females; mean age7SD=21.072.8 years) enrolled at the University of Tsukuba,
Japan. All were Japanese nationals who participated at the request of their
instructors. The design consisted of two dependent variables: A repeated within-
subjects variable of their evaluation of Japanese and foreigners on 98 behavioral
scales, and a between-subjects variable of their experience abroad.
Testing material: The questionnaire was based on two measures used in an above-
mentioned study that sought to examine the pattern of status-related behavior in the
United States and Japan (Kowner & Wiseman, in press). This study compared
perceptions of verbal and non-verbal behaviors of lower- and higher-status people in
asymmetric dyadic interaction and consisted of measures that allow comparison
between two groups on the same scale.
The first measure in Kowner and Wiseman’s study, the Status and Behavior
Questionnaire, examines differential behavior of people of higher and lower status
(e.g., superior and subordinate at a workplace, teacher and student) in dyadic
interaction (conversation, interview, etc.). This questionnaire contains 105 bipolar
9-point scales, which reflect various domains of verbal and non-verbal behavior and
impression formation. Each scale was designed to be rated simultaneously for both
lower- and higher-status partners/interlocutors in an interaction. These interlocutors
were carefully defined to avoid diffuse status characteristics, such as sex, race, and
physical attractiveness (on this concept, see Berger, Fisek, & Zelditch, 1977;
Humphreys & Berger, 1981). In their study, Kowner and Wiseman (in press) found
91 of those scales to distinguish behavior of lower- vs. higher-status Japanese. The
second measure was the Status and Affect Questionnaire, which consists of three
9-point scales. Kowner and Wiseman (in press) found the three scales to distinguish
between respondents’ affective attitude toward communication with lower- and
higher-status Japanese.

---

346
R. Kowner / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 26 (2002) 339–361
In the present study, we integrated pertinent items from the two measures into one
questionnaire of 94 scales. Further, we used two versions of the questionnaire. In one
version (‘‘Western version’’) respondents were asked to imagine an encounter
between a Japanese and a Westerner, while in the other version (‘‘Asian version’’)
they were asked to imagine an encounter between a Japanese and another Asian. We
used general labels (‘Westerner’, ‘Asian’) rather than specific national labels (i.e.,
‘American’, ‘Chinese’) for two reasons. The general labels are less volatile to fleeting
impacts of current international relations and so they have more valid and lasting
implications. Second, Japanese share a very clear and generalized perception of these
labels, and, thus, they are often used in surveys and national polls in Japan (Kowner,
1999).
Procedure: The survey was conducted in a classroom and presented as ‘‘a survey
on international communication’’. Respondents randomly received either the Asian
version or the Western version, and were asked to imagine an interaction between a
foreigner (a Westerner or an Asian) and a Japanese. The respondents were told
explicitly that the two people in the encounter were of equal status, and of the same
age, sex, and role. The respondents were asked to evaluate the communication style
of each of the two people imagined on the 94 scales and to rate them simultaneously.
5.2. Results
Japanese and foreign communication style: To examine the first hypothesis
regarding differences between the perceived status-related behavior of Japanese
and foreigners, a two-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was
conducted separately for differences between Japanese and Westerners (Western
version) and Japanese and Asians (Asian version). The two independent variables
were group (Japanese and either Westerner or Asian) and experience abroad (yes or
no) and the dependent variable was the scores on the 91 status and behavior scales
for each group. MANOVAs on both the Western version and the Asian version
yielded a significant main effect for group (Pillai’s criterion=0.90; F ð91; 82Þ ¼ 7:8;
po0:0001; Pillai’s criterion=0.90; F ð91; 80Þ ¼ 7:7; po0:0001; respectively). Thus, it
indicated significant differences between the perceived status-related behavior of
Japanese and either Westerners or Asians.
Moving to univariate ANOVAs, with group as the independent variable and scores
of status-related behavior as dependent variable, the difference in the scores for each
of the 91 scales was examined separately in both the Japanese–Western comparison
and the Japanese–Asian comparison. As for the Japanese–Western intercultural
encounter, significant differences between the two groups in the predicted direction
were found in 56 scales. Only in 9 scales Japanese were perceived in contrary to the
prediction, namely, behaving in the pattern of high-status Japanese in an
intracultural encounter. In the remaining 26 scales no significant differences between
the two groups were found. Similarly, in the Japanese–other Asians’ intercultural
encounter, significant differences between the two groups in the predicted direction
were found in 48 scales. Only in 17 scales Japanese were perceived as behaving in the
pattern of high-status Japanese (in an intracultural encounter) and on 26 scales no

---

R. Kowner / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 26 (2002) 339–361
347
significant differences between the two groups were found. The majority of the
differences in contrary to the prediction found in the Japanese–Asian comparison
are classified as self-related non-verbal activity (see Table 1).
Perceived status of communication style in intercultural encounters: To examine the
second hypothesis regarding a link between patterns of intercultural communication
and patterns intracultural status communication in Japan we calculated the
correlation between the scores of perceived status-related behavior of either
Japanese or foreigners on the 91 scales and the scores of low- or high-status
Japanese in an intracultural encounter obtained from Kowner and Wiseman’s (in
press) study. We found that the scores of foreigners, either Westerners or Asians, in
an intercultural encounter with Japanese were positively correlated with scores of
high-status Japanese in an intracultural encounter. By contrast, the scores of
Japanese when communicating with foreigners, either Westerners or Asians, were
positively correlated with scores of low-status Japanese in an intracultural
encounter. In addition, the scores of both Westerners and Asians were negatively
correlated with the scores of the specific group of Japanese they communicated with.
By contrast, we found a positive correlation between the scores of Westerners and
Asians in an intercultural encounter with Japanese, and a similar correlation between
the scores of Japanese during an intercultural encounter with Westerners and
Japanese during an intercultural encounter with Asians (see Table 2).
Japanese affect in intercultural encounters: To examine the third hypothesis
regarding the affect expressed toward intercultural communication, we conducted
univariate ANOVAs, with group as the independent variable and scores of affect as
the dependent variable, on the three status and affect scales. The differences in the
scores for each of the three status and affect scales were examined separately in both
the Japanese–Westerners comparison and the Japanese–Asians comparison. In
comparison there were significant differences in two scales: feeling nervous and
feeling resistance during communication. Both scales indicated preference for
communication with Japanese as opposed to foreigners, similar to the preference for
communication with low-status Japanese in the study of Kowner and Wiseman (in
press) (see Table 3).
Differences between communication with Westerners and other Asians: To examine
the hypothesis that Westerners’ communication pattern tend to be associated more
than that of Asians with the communication pattern of high-status Japanese in an
intracultural encounter, we conducted univariate ANOVAs, with group as the
independent variable and scores of status-related behavior as dependent variable, on
the difference between Westerners and Asians for each of the 91 scales, with group as
the independent variable (note that each group was rated by different subjects).
Significant differences between the two groups in the predicted direction were found
on 42 scales. Only in 5 scales Asians were perceived as behaving in the pattern of
high-status Japanese and in 44 scales no significant differences between the two
groups were found (see Table 1).
Moreover, when calculating the correlation between the scores of perceived status-
related behavior of either Japanese or foreigners on the 91 scales and the scores of
low- or high-status Japanese in an intracultural encounter, above correlations were

---

348
Table 1
Differences in perceived communication style during an intercultural encounter
Questionnaire
Status questionnairea
Western version (N ¼ 111)
Asian version (N ¼ 107)
Westerner
R.
vs. Asian
Partner in encounter
Japanese
Japanese
Westerner
Japanese
Asian
Kowner
Low status
High status
Item (1–9 points)
M
M
M
SD
M
SD
F
M
SD M
SD
F
F
/
Internation
Verbal activity (form)
1
Speaks a lot (1)—speaks a little (9)
5.7
3.8
5.2
1.6
3.4
1.6
73z
5.6
1.8
4.1
1.6 35.7z
12.5w
2
Speaks eloquently (1)
5.5
4.3
6.0
1.5
4.0
1.5
95.2z
5.7
2.0
4.7
1.7 19.8z
9.9w
al
3
Speaks in loud voice (1)
5.5
3.6
5.4
1.5
3.4
1.5 102.9z
5.5
1.7
4.0
1.6
44z
8.9w
Journal
4
Speaks aggressively (1)
6.5
4.1
5.9
1.5
4.2
1.6
58.3z
5.7
1.8
4.7
1.7
19z
4.1*
5
Speaks politely (1)
2.4
5.7
4.0
1.6
4.7
1.3
12.6w
4.2
1.9
4.5
1.7
2.1
o1
6
Speaks casually (1)—respectfully (9)
7.1
4.7
5.9
1.4
5.4
1.4
5.9*
5.6
1.6
5.4
1.8
o1
o1
of
7
Speaks fast (1)
4.9
5.5
5.6
1.6
3.9
1.6
68.3z
4.8
1.6
4.4
2.0
1.5
5.6*
Intercultu
8
Tone of voice often changes (1)
4.8
5.6
5.8
1.6
3.3
1.8
116z
5.3
2.2
4.5
1.97 8.1w
21z
9
Often stays silent (1)
4.7
5.4
4.2
1.9
6.4
1.8
84.4z
4.0
2.0
5.7
1.8 43.3z
9.5w
10
Uses negative words (9)
3.6
6.2
4.4
2.2
5.6
1.9
20.7z
4.6
2.3
5.2
1.8
4.6*
2.9
ral
11
Speaks while eating (1)
6.7
4.1
5.3
2.0
4.5
2.1
10.2w
4.8
2.2
4.5
1.9
o1
o1
Relations
12
Stutters occasionally (1)—never (9)
4.2
6.6
4.5
1.8
6.4
1.5
72z
4.8
2.0
5.6
1.7 10.6w
12.4w
13
Cuts conversation abruptly (1)
6.8
4.4
5.1
2.0
5.7
1.7
5.2*
5.1
1.9
5.2
1.8
o1
4.3*
Verbal activity (content)
26
14
Speaks rationally and coldly (1)
5.4
4.5
5.1
1.6
5.2
1.7
o1
4.3
1.6
5.8
1.5
50z
9.8w
(2002)
15
Gives compliments (1)
2.4
7.0
3.0
1.7
5.9
1.8
157z
3.3
2.3
5.7
1.8 70.5z
o1
16
Uses humor (1)
5.2
3.9
5.2
1.8
2.7
1.7
113z
5.5
1.9
4.1
1.9 26.3z
32.8z
339
17
Expresses own opinion (1)
4.9
3.2
5.7
1.8
2.3
1.6
227z
6.2
1.7
3.3
1.6
182z
19.2z
18
Determines topic of conversation (1)
6.0
3.0
5.7
1.9
4.5
2.0
20.3z
5.3
2.0
4.9
1.8
1.8
2.2
–
361
19
Seldom makes decisions (1)
2.8
7.6
3.3
1.9
6.7
1.7
187z
3.3
1.6
5.9
1.8
118z
11.5w
20
Often talks about oneself (1)
5.1
4.2
5.4
1.7
3.7
1.9
51.4z
5.4
2.2
3.9
1.7 32.8z
1
21
Speaks about partner (1)
4.5
5.1
4.4
1.7
4.5
1.7
o1
4.7
1.9
4.7
1.6
o1
o1
22
Talks about the weather (1)
4.4
5.0
4.3
2.2
4.0
2.1
1.3
3.8
2.2
4.8
2.0
12w
7.8w
23
Asks about private matters (9)
3.0
5.9
5.1
2.2
4.0
2.0
14.6z
4.6
2.4
5.0
2.0
1.8
14.1w

---

Document Outline

• Japanese communication in intercultural encounters: the barrier of status-related behavior
  • Accounts of Japanese communication difficulties
    • Geopolitical isolation
    • Linguistic barriers
    • National character
    • General incompetence in verbal communication
  • Interpreting accounts of Japanese communication difficulties
  • Status violation as a supplementary cause
  • Overview
  • Study 1
    • Method
    • Results
  • Study 2
    • Method
    • Results
  • General discussion and conclusions
    • Status violation or merely actual status
    • Differences in attitude toward communication with Westerners and Asians
    • The development of status-violation sense
    • Implications for Intercultural Communication
  • Acknowledgements
  • References

---