TheoriesofInterculturalCommunication

Theories of Intercultural Communication

Ting-Toomey, S. (2004). The matrix of face: An updated face-negotiation theory. In W. B.

Gudykunst (Ed.), Theorizing about intercultural communication (pp. 71-92).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Gudykunst, W. B. (2005). An anxiety-uncertainty management (AUM) theory of effective

communication. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Theorizing about intercultural

communication (pp. 281-332). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Face Negotiation Theory – Ting-Toomey

People from collectivistic cultures with an interdependent self-image are concerned with

giving other-face or mutual-face, so they adopt a conflict style of avoiding or integrating.

People from individualistic cultures with an independent self-image are concerned with

protecting self-face, so they adopt a conflict style of dominating. (Socio-cultural and socio-

psychological traditions)

This is a heuristic theory that helps explain the cultural research of Triandis (individualism-

collectivism) and builds on the conflict management typology of Rahim (five conflict styles)

and the concept of face developed by Goffman. FNT is closely aligned with communication

competence. The major tenets are below, and the theory is evaluated on the next page.

Tenets Clarification

Face concerns are universal and may be

threatened during interpersonal conflict.

During an interpersonal disagreement, we

use face work to maintain face when

threatened, restore face when lost, or give

face to others by making them look good

even if we must give in to them.

Culture influences conflict style.

Collectivists are more likely to communicate

in indirect ways (mutual-face or other-face

maintenance). Individualists engage in direct

confrontation if necessary to defend

themselves (self-face maintenance).

Self-construal is a better predictor of conflict

style than is culture.

Regardless of their home culture, individuals

who construe themselves as independent are

more likely to adopt direct conflict styles

than interdependent individuals.

Biconstrual gives competent intercultural

communicators an advantage in conflict.

Rather than using only one conflict style,

competent (adaptable) communicators

possess a wider repertoire of behavioral

options to use in different conflict situations.

To what extent does Face Negotiation Theory meet the criteria for a good objective theory?

1. Is it explanatory? The theory describes variations in communicating style across different

types of cultures, but identifies an individual’s free choice (self-construal) as the primary

determinant of conflict style.

2. Is it predictive? FNT makes some predictions about the communicating style of an

individual based on cultural and self-construal. However, predicting an individual’s behavior

in the midst of conflict is not totally reliable.

3. Is it simple? This theory is conceptually simple but addresses a level of detail not found in

all the theories we have studied.

4. Is it testable? Yes, FNT is testable and has been repeatedly examined over time by using

different experiments and surveys.

5. Does it contribute to communication competence? Competent communicators benefit

from knowing and using this theory. It addresses appropriateness (choosing acceptable

styles given the mix of cultures), effectiveness (successfully resolving conflict), and

adaptability (changing our preferred conflict style if necessary when crossing cultural

boundaries).

Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory – William Gudykunst

Cross-cultural encounters are characterized by high levels of uncertainty and anxiety,

especially when cultural variability is high. Effective communication is made possible by our

ability to mindfully manage our anxiety and reduce our uncertainty about ourselves and the

people with whom we are communicating. (Socio-cultural and Socio-psychological traditions)

If we want to achieve effective communication (i.e., minimize misunderstanding) in cross-

cultural encounters, we must manage the twin threats of anxiety and uncertainty. For

Gudykunst, the key is to be mindful of ourselves, the stranger, and the cultural and

communicative differences that exist between us. This in turn enables us to thoughtfully

adapt our communication behaviors to reduce tension and potential confusion. His associate

William Howell developed the following model to illustrate the effects of mindfulness:

High Mindfulness Low Mindfulness

Conscious Competent

Unconscious Competent

Conscious Incompetent

Unconscious Incompetent

The 34 axioms of AUM theory identify such correlations as these: Anxiety and uncertainty

are reduced in the presence of greater self-esteem, tolerance for ambiguity, perceived