center title, click to go to home page . click for Air University home page
. research and theory

home
need
US gov
universities
courses & programs
research
language
reference
links

.

Click button for click this button to go to the Air Force Culture and Language Center




please see disclaimer about links, and privacy and security notice ... contact us
page reviewed/updated 7 Dec 2010


Social and Behavioral Research Resources ___return to top Cultural Lens Model ___return to top
  • USMC Center For Advanced Operational Culture Learning (CAOCL)

  • Cultural Barriers to Multinational C2 Decision Making (local copy), by Klein, Pongonis, and Klein - a DARPA sponsored report, 2000
    • National cultural differences present barriers to successful coalition command and control. The challenge is compounded by distributed decision making that characterizes many operations. If we are to work effectively in coalition operations, we have to understand the complexities presented by national cultural differences. This paper reviews cultural differences that can disrupt situational awareness, decision making, coordination, and communication in multinational coalitions. These differences are in power distance, dialectical reasoning, counterfactual thinking, risk assessment and uncertainty management, and activity orientation.

  • Why Culture Matters: an Empirically-Based Pre-Deployment Training Program (local copy), by Chandler, Naval Postgraduate School thesis, Sep 2005
    • Helen Klein (2004) uses eight dimensions in her “Cultural Lens Model” in efforts to help facilitate cognitive cultural awareness:
        Time Horizon,
        Achievement vs. Relationship,
        Mastery vs. Fatalism,
        Tolerance for Uncertainty,
        Power Distance,
        Hypothetical vs. Concrete Reasoning,
        Attribution, and
        Differentiation vs. Dialectical Reasoning.

Comparisons ___return to top
  • See also psychology on this page

  • See also storytelling on AWC Gateway to the Internet - storytelling puts context around the message, helping to communicate between high and low context cultures

  • See also Edward T. Hall section above, which includes discussion of his
    • Monochronic and Polychronic Time
    • High and Low-Context Cultures
    • The Hidden Dimension of Space
    • Concept of action chains

  • spiffy The Psychology of Worldviews, by Koltko-Rivera, in Review of General Psychology, 2004, Vol 8, No. 1 -- excellent summary of many theories, models, and impacts

  • USMC Center For Advanced Operational Culture Learning (CAOCL)
    • National Differences in Teamwork, by Klein and McHugh

  • Cross-Cultural Negotiations, by Horst, Air War College paper, 2007

  • Cultural, Religious, and Ideological Perspectives on the Just War Doctrine and the Customary Laws of Armed Conflict: Western (Catholic) and Islam (Shiite), by Pitts, Air War College paper, 2007

  • Decision Making

  • Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) at West Point

  • The Quranic Concept of War, by Pakistani Brig. Gen. S. K. Malik, originally published in Lahore, Pakistan in 1979

  • The New Arab Way of War, by Layton, in Proceedings, March 2003

  • spiffy Comparing American and Chinese Negotiation Styles, video of presentation by Terry Hird, UC Berkeley, hosted by Google Videos

  • spiffy Culture and point of view, by Nisbett and Masuda, in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Sep 2003

  • World Values Survey

  • Occupations, Cultures, and Leadership in the Army and Air Force, by Mastroianni, in Parameters, Winter 2005-06

  • Cultural Issues in Mediation: A Practical Guide to Individualist and Collectivist Paradigms, by Wright, posted by the CAOCL

  • spiffy Dimensions of Culture, by Geert Hofstede
    • Creating Cultural Competence, by Geert Hofstede
      - cultural ratings and etiquette for over 50 countries and cultures/regions
      - based on survey of more than 100,000 people
      • Hofstede's Dimension of Culture Scales - ratings for the individual countries/cultures/regions
        • Power Distance Index (PDI) - focuses on the degree of equality, or inequality, between people in the country's society. A High Power Distance ranking indicates that inequalities of power and wealth have been allowed to grow within the society.
        • Individualism (IDV) - focuses on the degree the society reinforces individual or collective achievement and interpersonal relationships. A High Individualism ranking indicates that individuality and individual rights are paramount within the society.
        • Masculinity (MAS) - focuses on the degree the society reinforces, or does not reinforce, the traditional masculine work role model of male achievement, control, and power. A High Masculinity ranking indicates the country experiences a high degree of gender differentiation.
        • Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI) - focuses on the level of tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity within the society - i.e. unstructured situations. A High Uncertainty Avoidance ranking indicates the country has a low tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity.
        • Long-Term Orientation (LTO) - focuses on the degree the society embraces, or does not embrace, long-term devotion to traditional, forward thinking values. High Long-Term Orientation ranking indicates the country prescribes to the values of long-term commitments and respect for tradition.
      • Each country's ratings also include explanatory paragraphs for the five dimensions and how they apply to that country.
    • Hofstede – Culturally questionable?, by Jones, Oxford Business & Economics Conference. Oxford, UK, 24-26 June, 2007.

  • Basic Human Values: Theory, Methods, and Applications, by Shalom H. Schwartz, 2006
    • Schwartz Value Survey (SVS) ten basic values - from studies in more than 20 countries (with sampling in 67 countries) - text of article explains the difference between close terms (such as achievement and power; and conformity and tradition)
      1. Self-Direction. Independent thought and action; choosing, creating, exploring.
      2. Stimulation. Excitement, novelty, and challenge in life.
      3. Hedonism. Pleasure and sensuous gratification for oneself.
      4. Achievement. Personal success through demonstrating competence according to social standards.
      5. Power. Social status and prestige, control or dominance over people and resources.
      6. Security. Safety, harmony, and stability of society, of relationships, and of self.
      7. Conformity. Restraint of actions, inclinations, and impulses likely to upset or harm others and violate social expectations or norms.
      8. Tradition. Respect, commitment, and acceptance of the customs and ideas that traditional culture or religion provide the self.
      9. Benevolence. Preserving and enhancing the welfare of those with whom one is in frequent personal contact (the ‘in-group’).
      10. Universalism. Understanding, appreciation, tolerance, and protection for the welfare of all people and for nature.
    • more sources on the SVS and its use

  • The Seven Cultures of Capitalism, by Charles Hampden-Turner and Alfons Trompenaars, Doubleday, 1993
    • Compares cultural values of more than 40 countries (including US)
    • Six pairs of dimensions
      • Universalism vs. Particularism
      • Analyzing vs. Integrating
      • Individualism vs. Communitarianism
      • Inner-directed vs. Outer-directed Orientation
      • Achieved Status vs. Ascribed Status
      • Equality vs. Hierarchy

  • The culture-cognition connection: Recent research suggests that Westerners and East Asians see the world differently–literally, by Winerman, at APA Online, American Psychological Association, Feb 2006
    • The researchers have found increasing evidence that East Asians, whose more collectivist culture promotes group harmony and contextual understanding of situations, think in a more holistic way. They pay attention to all the elements of a scene, to context and to the relationships between items. Western culture, in contrast, emphasizes personal autonomy and formal logic, and so Westerners are more analytic and pay attention to particular objects and categories.
    • Another difference between Westerners and Asians regards the fundamental attribution error–a mainstay psychological theory for the last 30 years that, it turns out, may not be so fundamental after all. The theory posits that people generally overemphasize personality-related explanations for others' behavior, while underemphasizing or ignoring contextual factors. So, for example, a man may believe he tripped and fell because of a crack in the sidewalk, but assume that someone else fell because of clumsiness.

      But, it turns out, most East Asians do not fall prey to this error–they are much more likely to consider contextual factors when trying to explain other people's behavior. In a 1994 study, for example, psychologist Kaiping Peng, PhD, analyzed American and Chinese newspaper accounts of recent murders. He found that American reporters emphasized the personal attributes of the murderers, while Chinese reporters focused more on situational factors.

  • spiffy Why Culture Matters: an Empirically-Based Pre-Deployment Training Program (local copy), by Chandler, Naval Postgraduate School thesis, Sep 2005
    • Helen Klein (2004) uses eight dimensions in her “Cultural Lens Model” in efforts to help facilitate cognitive cultural awareness:
        Time Horizon,
        Achievement vs. Relationship,
        Mastery vs. Fatalism,
        Tolerance for Uncertainty,
        Power Distance,
        Hypothetical vs. Concrete Reasoning,
        Attribution, and
        Differentiation vs. Dialectical Reasoning.
    • Stella Ting-Toomey (1999) discusses identity and relational based themes of individual versus collective orientations using eight identity domains, a discussion of value orientations, as well as verbal and non-verbal communication styles. In addition, she provides tools for communication adaptability and awareness of basic biases and mindsets that lead to negative stereotypes and ethnocentric actions.
    • Social scientist Gary Weaver (2000) integrates many of the different categories that sociologists and anthropologists use to look at another culture by placing them into eight categories:
        characteristics of culture,
        social structure,
        philosophic outlook,
        psychological orientation,
        thought patterns,
        basic values,
        perception, and
        interaction.
      Each category contains the general “building blocks” for that category; and each building block is meant to be analyzed, and compared or contrasted, based on a continuum and not “either-or” absolutes.
    • So which of the models are appropriate for the military? Based on the different needs of the military audience and their level of interaction or impact on a local population, Klein’s (2004) model and Weaver’s (2000) model would work best. Klein’s (2004) model can be utilized at the basic level, when just general orientation and awareness is needed. Klein’s model looks at the U.S. culture and then places it in context of another culture. In addition, a discussion and military-relevant illustrations of stereotypes and ethnocentric thinking should be included.

  • Technologies for Augmented Collaboration: Social Domain Issues (local copy), by Pierce et al, for 2006 CCRTS
    • Teams have always been important in military operations, but the nature of military teamwork is changing to accommodate an increasing number of missions in stability, security, transition, and reconstruction (SSTR). These missions often require that diverse, distributed experts from multinational forces, non-governmental organizations, and other government agencies work together.
    • GlobeSmart® Commander is an instructional tool designed to provide military teams performing command and control functions the information and skill they need to adapt to cultural influences on teamwork at the operational level (Sutton, 2003; Sutton & Cosenzo, 2004; Sutton & Edelmann, 2005; Sutton & Pierce, 2003; Sutton, Pierce, Burke, & Salas, in press). Six cultural dimensions are assessed by GlobeSmart® Commander (Sutton & Gundling, 2005). These dimensions reflect basic culturally-based values or orientations identified in the culture literature (e.g., Hofstede, 1980; Schwartz, 1992; Triandis, 1989; Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 1998). Following is a list of the dimensions included in GlobeSmart® Commander along with a short description of each dimension.
        DimensionPractical Implications
        Independent – InterdependentShapes a preference for individual initiative and action, or for a more group-oriented approach that emphasizes the interests of the team as a whole.
        Egalitarian – StatusShapes a preference for mutual consultation in decision-making, or for greater deference to rank and hierarchy.
        Risk – RestraintShapes a preference for rapid action and risk-taking, or for more cautious and calculated actions based on ample information.
        Direct – IndirectShapes a preference for open and explicit communication, or for careful attention paid to context or to implicit meanings in a given message.
        Task – RelationshipShapes a preference for immediate attention to getting the job done, or for establishing strong and trusting personal relationships first.
        Short Term – Long TermShapes a preference for making choices based upon a narrow time horizon, or for considering the impact that choices will have over a longer span of time.
    • While each of these dimensions was considered important in multinational team operations to operational level staff members in B-H, reported critical incidents tended to focus on the dimensions of independent-interdependent, egalitarian-status, and risk-restraint. These three dimensions, slightly redefined, seemed to be especially important in team performance (for a detailed review see Sutton & Pierce, 2003; Sutton, Pierce, Burke, & Salas, 2006).

  • The Native Roots of Psychology in China: Sunzi and the School of Strategists as Pioneers of "Psychological Art" by Gawlikowski, at XVII International CongressInternational Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology, Xi’an, August 2-6, 2004

  • Understanding Different Cultural Patterns or Orientations Between East and West, by Liu Qingxue, in Investigationes Linguisticae, vol. IX, Posnan, Apr 2003

  • The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Westerners Think Differently… and Why, by Richard Nisbett, 2003
    • an example of the applicability:

    • To test the possibility that Asians and Asian Americans in fact find it relatively difficult to use language to represent thought, Kim had people speak out loud as they solved various kinds of problems. This had no effect on the performance of European Americans. But the requirement to speak out loud had very deleterious effects on the performance of Asians and Asian Americans.
      (page 210 of Free Press edition)

  • spiffy Interacting with Arabs and Muslims (local copy), by Navarro, in FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, Sep 2002

  • Strategic Implications of Culture: Historical Analysis of China’s Culture and Implications for United States Policy, by Crider, Wright Flyer Paper No.8, ACSC, 1999

  • Creativity across cultures resources online

  • Ethnocentrism resources online

Civil-Law vs Common Law ___return to top
  • A Primer on the Civil-Law System (local copy), by Apple and Deyling, for Federal Judicial Center (FJC)

      Civil law is the dominant legal tradition today in most of Europe, all of Central and South America, parts of Asia and Africa, and even some discrete areas of the common-law world (e.g., Louisiana, Quebec, and Puerto Rico). Public international law and the law of the European Community are in large part the product of persons trained in the civil-law tradition. Civil law is older, more widely distributed, and in many ways more influential than the common law.

      Despite the prominence of the civil-law tradition, judges and lawyers trained in the common-law tradition tend to know little about either the history or present-day operation of the civil law. Beyond the most basic generalities—e.g., the common law follows an "adversarial" model while civil law is more "inquisitorial," civil law is "code-based," civil-law judges do not interpret the law but instead follow predetermined legal rules—judges and lawyers from the United States seldom have any deeper sense of the civil-law tradition.

      This overview is designed for judges and lawyers who seek to expand their knowledge of the civil-law tradition and who might wish to consider the civil law system as a source of legal reforms

Body Language ___return to top Psychology ___return to top Myths, Legends, & Folktales ___return to top Other Sources and Topics ___return to top



























Accessibility/Section 508