2: The Communicative Style of Americans
The author opens with a reference to Dean Barnlunds research into the "communicative style" of various cultures, specifically in terms of five characteristics:
- Preferred discussion topics
- Favorite forms of interaction
- Depth of involvement
- Communication channels (verbal/nonverbal)
- Level of meaning (factual/emotional)
The communicative style differs among cultures, and most people prefer their own style and assess the styles of others against their own preferences - by means of loose perception rather than deliberate analysis - and, moreover, expect others to use the same style when communicating with them. Much of cultural miscommunications arises from mistakes and assumptions about communicative style.
PREFERRED DISCUSSION TOPICS
When they initially encounter another person, Americans engage in "small talk" - casual conversation about topics they feel to be inoffensive: the weather, what a person does for a living, their immediate situation or surroundings. After this preliminary round, Americans share minor information and seek to explore topics of mutual interest: similar experiences or interests, which remain superficial, but the emphasis is on identifying common ground.
Beyond small talk, there is variation according to the people involved. Students will talk about classes, adults about their work, both about recreational interests and families. In general, men are likely to talk about sports or cars, women about family relationships, but this is not universal.
Americans are explicitly taught to avoid discussing religion or politics until they are well-acquainted with another person. These are thought to be controversial topics, which can lead to arguments that can be damaging to relationships. This does not mean they lack strong opinions, merely that they will avoid expressing them in casual conversation.
Other topics are avoided because they are considered "too personal" to share with a casual acquaintance. Personal financial matters is such a topic, though foreigners find this quizzical in a culture that values material wealth so highly. An American will be reluctant to discuss is salary or the amount paid for a given item - it's simply unacceptable.
Bodily issues are also a sensitive topic: bodily functions, sexual behavior, mental health, and the like. A person's physical appearance, especially their weight, is a sensitive topic. (EN: Given the fitness and diet craze, my sense is weight is not entirely taboo in current times, though any mention of a person gaining weight is generally offensive.)
Conversation about family members is inconsistent. It's generally acceptable to ask "How are your wife and children?" of a casual acquaintance, but not to be too inquisitive about family matters or discuss the topic in much depth.
Listening to American "small talk" leads people from some other societies to the erroneous conclusion that they are incapable of carrying on a discussion about anything significant. However, it's a matter of communicative style to be superficial with people they don't know very well, and should you develop a closer relationship, these topics may be broached.
FAVORED FORMS OF INTERACTION
The typical pattern of communication between two Americans is quick and brief exchanges, a form of communication described as repartee. The author relates that one British observer likened the tempo of conversation between Americans to a "table tennis game."
Precipitating from the value of time, Americans expect people to be brief and to the point, and become impatient or annoyed with people who talk too much - i.e., more than a few sentences at a time.
There are ritual interactions in American conversation ("How are you?" "Fine, and you?" "Very well, thanks.") but they are fewer and briefer than in other cultures. To go off-script or engage in a longer conversation is generally awkward and inappropriate.
A foreigner who misinterprets the ritual interactions may form a negative opinion: "They always ask me how I am, but don't listen to what I say. They don't really care."
Americans are averse to arguments, generally cautious that any argument with another person will damage the relationship. They will avoid sensitive issues, and attempt to change the conversation to an agreeable topic, or find an excuse to withdraw from the conversation. Where argument is unavoidable, Americans seek to conduct the discussion in calm and moderate tones - a raised voice or vigorous gesturing are signs of emotional reaction that are expected to lead to a physical confrontation or an unproductive "shouting match."
It's noted that this puts Americans at a distinct disadvantage in verbal disagreements - they have little practice in verbally defending their viewpoints and are a bit clumsy. This leads to the perception that they are unintelligent and physically hostile.
However, Americans seem to relish argument in public discourse - their news media are peppered with raucous debates between opposing sides of an issue. And it's worth noting that the common format is to present only two sides, the most extremely opposed, rather than fairly representing all perspectives in a given debate.
(EN: The author leaves it at this, but my sense is that two other points are worth making. First, this aversion to conflict is limited to live conversation only - Americans are more open to participating in argument via proxy, such as letters in a newspaper or messages on the Internet. In away, this seems cowardly, but it's more in the line of dropping the veneer of propriety in other media. Second, an American can be engaged in an argument if the expectation is, from the outset, to have an argument. It's much a boxing match - you don't just throw punches at someone who's not expecting it, or at a time or place where it's not appropriate or convenient, and consider it a friendly sparring match.)
A fourth element of interaction is self-disclosure. Rather than asking a question that might be deemed invasive, and American will volunteer details about himself to see if the other party will reciprocate. This is a method of deepening the conversation and, as a result, the relationship.
Even in this, Americans are sensitive to environment. In most public or workplace situations, Americans will reveal very little about themselves that is personal. In a more private setting, such as a restaurant or a bar where there are few people who know them, they will discuss more personal matters. In a completely private situation, where the participants are isolated from others, a conversation can move to topics that are intensely personal.
A special note on gender: Americans tend to disclose more about themselves to individuals of the same gender. Discussing intensely personal topics with a person of the opposite gender is an overture to a more intimate relationship. Also, women tend to be more expressive about themselves than men, many of whom still cleave to the practice of being aloof and closed-off, even with people they consider to be close.
The degree to which a foreigner will be comfortable with the level of self-disclosure Americans prefer will depend on his one culture. Some will find Americans to be impersonal and aloof, others may be embarrassed by some of the things Americans will talk about freely.
DEPTH OF INVOLVEMENT
The degree to which people want to be closely connected to others outside their families is influenced by culture. Some seek close and interdependent relationships, others do not. Americans fall into the latter category, and those from other culture find them to be aloof or arrogant, and don't feel that Americans know how to "be friends" with others.
Aside of the cultural value of independence, Americans are accustomed to interacting with many people in their daily lives, and cannot sustain close relationships with such large numbers. As such, most Americans have many casual acquaintances with whom they have a shallow connection and little sense of obligation, but very few close friends compared to other cultures.
In general, Americans relate to other people as occupants of roles rather than whole people. That is, the relationship to a person who is a roommate, a classmate, a coworker, a neighbor, a fellow sports fan, or ought, is limited to the way in which people interact in those specific roles. While "true" friends generally begin in such roles and the relationship deepens, an American doesn't seek to deepen the relationship with everyone he meets: he is happy to have a cordial professional relationship with a coworker, and doesn't seek to develop it further.
In terms of professional relationships, Americans consider any aspect of a personality outside of their business interaction to be irrelevant. It doesn't matter that your accountant is a member of another race or religion, has different habits, and morals diametrically opposed to your own - so long as he is functional in his role as an accountant, the choices he makes in his personal life are not relevant.
(EN: The author doesn't go this far, but it is a derivative of egalitarianism and human rights, and allowing extraneous details to influence your professional relationships with others can have civil or criminal penalties. It is considered discrimination to allow your sentiments about a person affect your professional relationship.)
One exception is in professions where success depends on personal image or public opinion. A politician, athlete, or performer may find himself out of work if his off-the-job behavior is objectionable to those whom he needs to cast their votes or spend their dollars on their work product.
There is also the notion of "compartmentalized friendships," which denotes individuals with whom a person participates in specific activities. For example, an American may have a group of friends "at the gym" whom he does not attempt to involve outside that place. There may be people he meets with only at a church or social club, or even a commuting buddy he customarily interacts with only because they happen to ride the same train.
Most such friendships entail a specific activity that people do together. Simply "being together" and chatting is generally not enough - it seems a pointless waste of time.
The notion of "needing" other people is abhorrent to Americans - they do not wish to cling to others, and do not wish others to cling to them - and as such, they may seem aloof and impersonal. This derives from the values of independence and self-reliance: depending too much on others is contrary to the desire to be seklf-sufficient.
Especially in urban settings, Americans are cautions of others who seem too eager to get closely involved with them. This can be misinterpreted as fear of other people, but it largely stems from their concern for remaining self-reliant: How needy is this person? How much of my time will they take? Can I satisfy the demands for this level of commitment, given my other obligations?
International visitors are encouraged to observe that it's not just themselves that Americans have difficulty becoming close with - Americans have difficulty forming relationships even with one another.
PREFERRED CHANNELS
Americans depend more on spoken word than nonverbal communication to convey their messages. Individuals who hail from cultures where there is a richer nonverbal vocabulary will find Americans to seem insensitive, as they are not accustomed to paying much attention to nonverbal cues. A common criticism from individuals whose culture makes greater use of nonverbal communication is that Americans feel the need to "say everything."
Americans expect direct and frank communication, and admire individuals who express themselves clearly and concisely, in simple terms - a person who uses a large vocabulary is likely to be perceived as effete and snobbish, and a person who is overly glib is distrusted. Coupled with their informality and reluctance to engage in lengthy conversations about sensitive issues, the short and simple conversational style contributes to the impression that Americans are superficial and unintelligent.
The written word is also important to Americans - formal agreements, contracts, and decisions are normally documented and an American may be reluctant to proceed on a conversational commitment until it is put down in writing. And when it is in writing, the expectation is that the writ is definite and immutable, and not subject to further negotiation. This is not merely social convention, but a foundational principle of law.
In terms of nonverbal communication, some cultures place great emphasis of physical settings, such as an office. The physical arrangements suggest a level of formality: whether it is appropriate to sit across the table from someone, or beside them, communicates critical information about the relationship between two people. The facial expressions, physical gestures, and tone and volume of voice are also aspects of behavior that are culturally influenced. And it's noted that much of the awkwardness and discomfort in communication between individuals of different cultures arise from nonverbal cues - people feel edgy and uncomfortable, ill at ease with one another, but aren't quite sure why.
A smattering of examples are provided, with the typical disclaimer that the material is neither comprehensive nor universal.
With respect to appearance and dress, it is not possible to draw generalizations about Americans. There are few costumes that are universally practiced, or consistently followed even when they are (a waiter's "uniform" differs greatly from one restaurant to the next). To many cultures, American dress seems very informal - it is acceptable for Americans to wear blue jeans to church, the opera, or a wedding - and the notion of appropriate clothing for a given setting vary (businesses are going casual, some schools are returning to uniforms). As such, dress, hairstyle, jewelry and other adornments are matters of personal preference and the ever-changing wiles of fashion.
In terms of posture, Americans tend to stand tall and move with purpose. Foreigners have observed the "American walk," rapid steps, chest forward, arms swinging - which strikes international visitors as bold, arrogant, and even hostile.
With respect to gestures, most Americans make moderate gestures when speaking, using hand and arm motions to add emphasis or clarity, but their hands seldom rise above shoulder level. Some subcultures, particularly Italian, Greek, and Hispanic Americans, are perceived as being overly emotional because of the frequency and degree of physical movements. On the other hand, a person who stands too rigidly and makes too few gestures are considered to be overly formal, timid, or uncertain.
There are a litany of hand-gestures common to Americans, for greeting, farewell, agreement or disagreement, etc. The author asserts that it would take more space than is available in the present book to detail them fully, but international visitors are encouraged to investigate them - and be especially attentive to those considered to be disrespectful. Meanwhile, foreigners should consider their own gestures, and recognize that they will likely be unrecognized or, in some instances, misinterpreted.
In terms of facial expressions, Americans are likewise modest, showing more expression than Asians typically do, but less than southern Europeans. Smiling is a typical American expression, used often merely to confer politeness. As with gestures, there are too wide an array of facial expressions to cover in the present reference, but readers are likewise encouraged to seek information elsewhere and be aware their native expressions may be misinterpreted in America.
In terms of eye contact, Americans use it more than other cultures p- and avoiding eye-contact is considered to be a sign of dishonesty. But constant, unwavering eye-contact is considered to be hostile or amorous, depending on the situation: eye contact is maintained, but people look away periodically. Eye contact is more common when a person is listening than speaking, and is often a cure when a person has finished speaking and expects the other to respond. Foreign visitors are encouraged to observer Americans in their conversation with one another to get a better feel for the level of eye contact that is appropriate.
Physical distance in conversation varies among cultures - Americans tend to stand closer than Asians, but further than Arabs. The author does not specify a distance (EN: I believe it's about 18 inches), but suggests that you can gauge it by their reaction: if you stand too close, they will back away, too far and they will move forward. The implication is that you can count on the other party to choose the distance, just don't move away or closer - and merely be aware of it so you avoid assumptions that Americans are either too aggressive or too impersonal.
Also in terms of personal space, it's observed that in crowded situations (an elevator or a crowded room), Americans avoid making eye contact with others, draw their arms and legs in around them, and avoid conversation. This is considered a matter of consideration for others in the same space.
Physical contact is also a matter of relativity: Americans touch others and are tolerant of being touched more than some cultures and less than others. There are variations by person as to how much touching is appropriate, but a few general principles apply: generally one avoids physical contact with members of the opposite sex, and higher-status people feel entitled to touch lower-status people than vice-versa.
The final aspect of nonverbal behavior is silence. Generally, Americans become uncomfortable with periods of silence of more than a few seconds in the context of a conversation. A silence of ten to fifteen seconds will make many Americans nervous.
LEVEL OF EMPHASIS
Americans pay more attention to the factual rather than emotional content of emotion. In their education, they are trained to recognize and dismiss "emotional appeals" as being invalid and subversive, and tend to ignore them entirely.
There is some evidence (in the work of linguist Deborah Tannen) that American women are more attentive to emotion than are American men. An emotional appeal will be taken more seriously by a woman and less seriously by a man.
CONCLUSION
The author emphasizes two points in particular: the first is that people naturally prefer the communicative style of their own culture and expect others to do the same, and the second is that differences in communicative style can cause problems in intercultural interactions that range from a mild sense of discomfort to a complete breakdown of communication.
And a third point: the communicative style of Americans is different, and international visitors are cautioned about reading too much into it, or making judgments about an individual who is merely acting in accordance with the communicative style of his culture.