|
|
|
|
One of the most studied areas in the area of intercultural communication concerns how people adapt to new cultures, either in short-term visits of about two years or less (sojourners), or as immigrants. Many theorists have proposed models of culture shock or cultural adjustment; we will consider two of these. Young Yun Kim (1995) pioneered much of the early adaptation work in the field of communication, producing a cross-cultural adaptation theory with an array of personal and media communication variables. Kim defines intercultural adaptation in terms of acculturation, as “the process of learning and acquiring the elements of the host culture” (p. 176). [Note: Someone might critique this definition, as many immigrants to a culture might adjust psychologically and professionally to being in the new culture, but might never fully adopt the ways of thinking of that culture. The theory assumes that assimilation is good, a contention with which many modern writers might disagree.] Your adjustment to your university or to a new job setting serves as type of adaptation to a new culture. Maybe you moved to a suburban university from a small town or from a big city. Early researchers of culture shock would expect you to go through a series of stages as you come to the new university, such as an initial honeymoon period; a stage of stress; adjustment through fighting against the new culture, fleeing from it through isolation, or being flexible to the new culture; and final adjustment. Some call this a U-curve pattern of adjustment, as you start “high,” then “dip,” and return to adjustment (Church, 1982; Ady, 1995). Many early writers saw culture shock as something to be dreaded; Kim argues that it is a source of growth. As we meet stresses, our personal system adapts to them. They then lead to personal growth. The more intercultural experiences we have and the greater the difference between cultures, the more our potential growth (though, also, the more stress in getting there!). These cultural experiences lead us to be more complete, with a wider array of beliefs, attitudes, and skills in our personal repertoire (Kim & Ruben, 1988). Kim proposes a model that suggests that culture adaptation is two steps forward and one step back, but that most people adjust fairly well (See Figure 10.5). Kim (1995) proposes a number of variables that should help predict how well you adjust to your new university. These would be even more important if you moved to a new country. Before you leave your hometown or nation, your preparedness, willingness to go to the new culture, and personality (e.g., how mentally strong and flexible you are) will predict how well you do in the new culture. Once there, you should rely on people and media from your own culture to ease you into the new culture, but should also be spending time with people from that culture and using local media. Of course, how well the other culture accepts people of your group and the pressure they put on you to conform might impact how well you adjust. Some recent research on adaptation challenges even Kim’s cyclical model of adaptation as being too simple. Further, while some research supports the U-curve, other research contradicts it. To make sense of these competing findings, Jeffrey Ady (1995) suggests that there are different domains, or areas of adjustment. As you move to the new college, you adjust by doing well in your classes, but also by making new friends, learning the language, learning to get around and so on. Ady’s demand differential model of adjustment states that your adjustment is the extent to which you feel you are meeting the demands of the environment and that the environment is meeting your demands. Ady believes that your adjustment will be multidimensional and that it will vary over time and across different aspects (work, relationships, etc.). Further, you will most perceive a lack of adjustment in some area when a crisis arises, and then your lack of adjustment will be felt mostly in that area. [Note: Indeed, this is the bulk of Ady’s theory, presented in only four pages of his chapter. I have included this theory because of its novelty and the way it makes sense of the culture adaptation literature. In addition, Ady’s chapter provides an excellent summary of different traditions of culture adaptation literature and research.] To return to the college example, you come to your new college; after awhile you know your way around and are used to the college demands. You are even doing well in your classes. But you get lonely and miss your own relationships. You have a romantic break-up, which creates stress, even if you are doing well in your classes. Or, in the contrast, you make friends easily, but find you have never quite adjusted to the demands of homework and classes. Thus, even in a specific area of adjustment (work), you may go through stress and then growth. References
|