This study focuses on the relationship between cultural intelligence and ethnocentrism. Researchers have established relationships between certain factors of the Big 5, such as Openness to Experiences, and Cultural Intelligence but have not found a directional relationship between Cultural Intelligence and Ethnocentrism. Researchers in the present experiment attempted to introduce participants to an intervention (interacting with individuals from different cultures) to see how levels of ethnocentrism and cultural intelligence would be affected.
First, read the article excerpts explaining the research design and results. Next, respond to the questions [3-4 sentences minimum for answers 2 & 3]. The peer-reviewed research article is attached but reading in its entirety is not necessary for completing this assignment.
- Ethnocentrism – People’s preference for their own cultural group over individuals of other groups.
- Cultural Intelligence – The ability to function effectively in cross-cultural interactions at home or in another culture.
Article excerpts:
Intro – Cultural intelligence (CQ) has been presented as a conceptually-differentiated construct from prior conceptualizations of cross-cultural skills. CQ is “culture-free,” meaning it is not culture-specific and represents a person’s capability to adapt effectively in new cultural contexts, no matter what they are. The capacity to adapt to any culture provides a more flexible approach to traditional cross-cultural training given that “in the current global environment it is often difficult to identify the target culture group as there are sometimes many represented.”
Those with greater CQ achieve greater performance, suffer lower burnout, experience greater adjustment and well-being, cope better with conflict, and develop greater trust and cooperation in culturally-diverse contexts (Kim, Kirkman, & Chen, 2009; Rockstuhl & Ng, 2009). While documentation of the positive benefits of CQ accumulate, researchers, however, have yet to uncover its predictors.
Interest in the relationship between CQ and ethnocentrism is relatively new and related evidence is far from clear. While Ang et al. (2007) proposed that ethnocentrism may be a predictor of CQ, the reverse has also been proposed (Triandis, 2006). Harrison (2012) researched the relationship between the two, finding a negative relationship, but did not examine whether one predicted the other. Hence, the nature of the relationship between ethnocentrism and CQ remains unresolved.
Hypothesis 1 (H1): An experiential CQ training approach of four weeks will reduce ethnocentrism in an experimental group relative to a control group.
Hypothesis 2 (H2): Ethnocentrism and CQ will be negatively related.
Hypothesis 3 (H3): CQ will predict the change in ethnocentrism during the measurement period.
Study Design – A quasi-experimental, field design was employed in this study. The treatment group was comprised of students studying business management and enrolled in a hospitality human capital course at a Mountain West university in the U.S. The training intervention consisted of participation in a four-week long formal, diversified mentoring program. Diversified mentoring relationships are those in which the mentor and protégé differ in terms of group membership – such as race, ethnicity, gender, class, disability, national origin, and sexual orientation (Ragins, 1995). Participants were assigned to mentor a refugee from Africa, the Middle East, or South Asia being resettled in the state of Colorado. The refugees participated in a training program focused on preparing them for food service industry jobs; the class, taught at the university, was administered and taught by staff from a local resettlement agency. The student mentors were nearly all White and of above average affluence; each mentored a protégé who differed on almost all major dimensions, including age, class, race/ethnicity, culture, religion, language, and citizenship. Several sections of a lodging management course (n= 96; 26 male and 70 female, ranging from 18 to 22 years old) formed the control group.
Results – Ethnocentrism rose over a nine week period in both the treatment and control groups, though significantly less in the treatment group than the control. This result is important because it points to a slowly growing body of work that indicates that ethnocentrism appears to be more dynamic and contextually influenced than previously conceived.
The results around H2 presented here provide support for an inverse relationship between the two constructs, with higher CQ associated with lower ethnocentrism. Overall CQ was significantly and negatively correlated with ethnocentrism, as were three of the four dimensions of CQ.
The results from the test of H3 indicate that overall CQ, which is more subject to change from a short-term intervention, did not significantly predict the change in ethnocentrism experienced over the 9 weeks that included the four week DMR experience.
Respond to each of the questions below pertaining to the research article above [3-4 sentences minimum for questions 2 & 3].
1. Briefly describe the experimental design.
2. How did levels of ethnocentrism change over the course of the experiment across all groups and how would you explain those findings? [3-4 sentences minimum]
3. Researchers found that there was a negative relationship between ethnocentrism and cultural intelligence. Would you have hypothesized this to be the case and why or why not? [3-4 sentences minimum]
0 comments