Literature Review

Culture

Gross（1995）states，“All human beings are born into a particular cultural environment，and culture may be regarded as something which makes human beings different from other species”.But what virtually is“culture”？ The term culture has been defined in various ways as descriptive，historical，normative，psychological，structural，and genetic by anthropologists，sociologists，psychologists，psychiatrists，and even natural science scientists in human history，each with its own different emphasis（Kroeber et al.，1952）.Jenks（1993）summarizes the genesis of the concept“culture”in as many as four categories：a cognitive category；a more embodied and collective category；a descriptive and concrete category；and a social category.With more than two hundred definitions in the present social science literature as Williams（1976）describes it as one of the two or three most complicated words in the English language，the meaning of the word itself has changed along with the changes in our social，economic，and political life.Williams（1961，p.285）argues that“the idea of culture describes our common inquiry，but our conclusions are diverse，as our starting points were diverse”.Therefore the word“culture”，in reality，means many different things to different people.

Some culture researchers define culture in relation to the learned behavior as Hofstede（1980，p.21）puts it：“culture is the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group from another”.Other cultural theorists give broad definitions with emphasis on enumeration of content，such as Kroeber who states：

The mass of learned and transmitted motor reactions，habits，techniques，ideas，and values—and the behavior they induce—is what constitutes culture.Culture is the special and exclusive product of men，and is their distinctive quality in the cosmos....Culture...is at one and the same time the totality of products of social men，and a tremendous force affecting all human beings，socially and individually（Kroeber，1952，p.44）.

Still some researchers hold culture as the way of thinking and interpreting the world as one Swedish researcher，Engelbrektsson，states：

Culture is the image and model of reality that a group of people，the bearers of a culture，have.Included are rules for reading and interpreting reality，and rules for accepted and non-accepted behavior within this reality（cited in Lundberg，1991：13）.

Hall（1959），discusses culture in terms of communication as has been mentioned above（Hall）.Since this study focuses on the interactive behavior between teachers and students in China and Sweden the concepts of culture relating to the learned behavior and communication are adopted.

Cultural Dimensions

There are basically two ways to approach culture：“emic”versus“etic”（Berry，1980；Brislin et al.，1973；Gross，1995；Gudykunst et al.，1996）.The emic approach，a more specific one，is often adopted by anthropological researchers to study one particular culture from inside，understanding cultures as the members of the cultures understand them，whereas the etic approach，a more general one，focuses on understanding cultures from outside by comparing cultures using predetermined characteristics.The present research is focused on the comparative study on the teacher-student relationship in China and Sweden both emic and etic approaches are applied to try to analyze two cultures from inside and，at the same time，try to compare them as well.

According to Gudykunst et al.（1996），etic aspects of culture are often examined in terms of cultural variability；that is，dimensions on which cultures differ or are similar.They can be used to explain differences or similarities in communication behavior across cultures.There are many theories concerning cultural dimensions when culture is studied.Among them Hofstede's dimension theory has been extensively employed in the domain.Hall's low-context and high-context dimension，the major ways that communication varies in individualist and collectivist cultures，has also been widely adopted.In this study both Hofstede's 4-D model and Hall's context model are focused because they have been linked most closely to communication behavior.In addition，Triandis's theory on individualism-collectivism，the major dimension of cultural variability，is also included when differences and similarities between Chinese and Swedish teachers and students’communication behavior are analyzed in the study.

Based on the data of the survey questionnaire from multinational corporate employees in over forty countries Hofstede published his Culture's Consequences—International Differences in Work-Related Values in 1980.By theoretical and statistical analysis Hofstede discovered the four main dimensions upon which national cultures differ.They were labeled Power Distance（high or large vs.low or small），Uncertainty Avoidance（strong vs.weak），Individualism（vs.Collectivism），and Masculinity（vs.Femininity）.Hofstede's fifth dimension labeled as Confucian Dynamism was launched in his book Cultures and Organizations in 1991.His new dimension consisted of two contrasting sets of Confucian values：“long-term orientation”vs.“short-term orientation”values.But this dimension has not been received very enthusiastically by scholars（Fang，1999）.

According to Hofstede（1991，p.28），power distance is“the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organizations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally.”In high or large power distance cultures，inequalities in power are considered and accepted as the cultural norm.They are hierarchical cultures，and the authoritarian style of communication is more common.Much more oppressive behavior and more formalized rituals，such as respect，attentiveness，and agreement，are expected in these cultures.People in low or small power distance cultures，as contrast，are assumed to be equal and demand justification for power inequalities.Many of the Asian，African and Latin American countries exhibit a high power-distance index in Hofstede's survey.And the countries with the low power-distance scores are mostly European-style countries.

Hofstede（1991，p.113）defined uncertainty avoidance as“the extent to which the members of a culture feel threatened by uncertain or unknown situations.”Some cultures cannot stand the unknown or the ambiguity.People in these high uncertainty avoidance cultures view uncertainty as dangerous and try to avoid it.Other cultures，however，seem more comfortable dealing with diversity and ambiguity and view uncertainty as a necessary part of life which they must deal with.Countries with strong uncertainty avoidance cultures are the Southern European countries，Latin American countries，and most Asian countries.Northern European countries，the United States，Great Britain，India，Singapore and Hong Kong belong to the weak uncertainty avoidance cultures.

The third dimension of Hofstede's 4-D model is designated as individualism and its antipode is collectivism.The dimension has encouraged most amount of research（e.g.，The Chinese Culture Connection，1987；Triandis，1988，1995）.“The fundamental issue addressed by this dimension is the degree of interdependence a society maintains among individuals”（Hofstede，1984，p.83）.In individualistic cultures，“people are supposed to look after themselves and their immediate family only，”whereas in collectivist cultures，“people belong to in-groups or collectivities which are supposed to look after them in exchange for loyalty”（Hofstede et al.，1984，p.419）.In individualistic cultures the needs，values，and goals of the individual take precedence over the needs，values，and goals of the group.In collectivist cultures，the needs，values，and goals of the in-group take precedence over the needs，values，and goals of the individual（Triandis，1995）.In the former cultures，competition，initiative，ambition，responsibility，and success are regarded as positive ideas.The significant communication expectations that people in the cultures emphasize are truth telling and clear，direct，and straight talk.People are more independent，and use more“I”than“we”kind of self-referent messages in their linear pattern of conversation.In contrast，a salient feature in the latter cultures is keeping the harmony and balance in the group.People in these cultures concern for other's feelings and avoid hurting others.Community，kinship，solidarity，harmony，and maintaining face are emphasized and more appreciated by the people in the cultures.Moreover，people are more group concerned and interdependent and use indirect way of communication.The individualistic cultures include most of European countries and North American countries，while the collectivist cultures tend to be Asian and Latin-American countries.

The last dimension of Hofstede's is masculinity with femininity as its antipode.The dimension concludes that“modern societies can be differentiated on the basis of the way they allocate their social sex role”（Hofstede，1984，p.84）.Masculine cultures place a high value on material things，power，strength，ambition，assertiveness，competitiveness and independence.People in the cultures have stronger motivation for achievement and view work as more central to their lives.They tend to use more aggressive styles of communication.On the contrary，feminine cultures underscore the importance of fluid gender roles and embrace traits of affection，compassion，nurturing and interpersonal relationships.The highest masculinity-index scores come from Japan，Australia，Venezuela，Switzerland，Mexico，Great Britain，Germany，the United States，and Hong Kong.The North European countries with Sweden as the first one，and some Latin American countries，as well as Thailand rank among the highest in the femininity-index scores.

Comparison between China and Sweden in Hofstede's 4-D Model

One thing that should be mentioned is that as China was not part of Hofstede's original survey we have decided to refer to the ranks of Hong Kong（98% of the people living in Hong Kong are Chinese，and though they have been influenced by British rule for over a hundred years，they still maintain Confucian values），Taiwan（people in Taiwan have preserved Chinese customs and speak the standard Chinese as well）in the survey，Hofstede's own estimates on three dimensions（power distance，uncertainty avoidance and individualism）and his cited figure on masculinity through a researcher in Beijing as an indicator to show China's position in these four dimensions.

Table 1 shows the culture dimension scores for China，Taiwan，Hong Kong，and Sweden in Hofstede's survey results in 1980，1991，1993，and his personal estimates for three of China's scores.

Table 1The Culture Dimension Scores of China，Taiwan，Hong Kong，and Sweden

The table shows that a great difference exists in Power Distance between China and Sweden.China scores fairly high and Sweden is one of the most equal countries in the survey.As an illustration，the Swedish tax legislation is probably one of the most equalizing legislations in the world（Phillips-Martinsson，1991）.The generous admission to universities and adult education is another typical example of Swedish equality.Chinese，having been influenced by Confucianism for over 2000 years，on the other hand，show a strong tendency to value seniority and hierarchy.The Confucian system centers on the five“cardinal relationships”（the relationships between ruler and subject，father and son，husband and wife，elder and younger brothers，and senior and junior friends）in which power differentials and responsibilities are prescribed（Gabrenya et al.，1996）.The juniors must be respectful，filial，and loyal to the seniors，whereas the seniors must love，protect，and be benevolent to the juniors.To illustrate，there is no one word for“brother”or“sister”in the Chinese language but only“elder brother”and“younger brother”or“elder sister”and“younger sister”.The Confucian conception of“filial piety”（juniors to seniors）overcasts other relationships in Chinese society，e.g.，the relationships between teacher and student and employer and employee.Worm（1994）even claims that almost all of human relations in China have become hierarchical.

In Hofstede's survey，Chinese countries rank at the bottom of the individualistic dimension while Sweden is one of the top-ranked individualistic countries.Swedes，in general，have a desire to be independent.For instance，some sayings and proverbs in the Swedish language exalt individual responsibility and solitary struggle，e.g.，“One is strong on one's own”；“A good man helps himself”；and“If you want something done well，do it yourself”（Herlitz，1995）.In China，in contrast，a person is not primarily considered as an individual，but rather a member of a family or a group.Even the English word“individualism”has a negative sense in the Chinese language and it means“selfishness”or“egoist”as well.Intragroup harmony and balance are of uttermost importance to Chinese people.Self-promoting is seen as a threat to this harmony（Hu et al.，1991）.“Union is strength”is a very well-known saying in China.

Sweden gains the lowest score in Hofstede's masculinity，which indicates it is the most feminine culture among the 53 countries surveyed.Therefore many foreign businessmen are surprised when Swedes expect the business negotiations to end at 5 p.m.so that they can go home to spend some quality time with their families（Phillips-Martinsson，1991）.Not many Swedes would like to work overtime for money in sacrifice for their holidays.On the other hand，China ranks at the high level in the dimension，which shows it is a rather masculine country.Worm（1994，p.7）argues that“two key expressions of masculinity in Chinese culture are an anti-social attitude（towards people outside their own in-groups）and a propensity for competition.”Competitive behavior can be observed among Chinese students as well（Hu et al.，1991）.

In regard to the dimension of uncertainty avoidance in Hofstede's survey，there is some uncertainty about China's position and a big disparity between China，Taiwan and Hong Kong.Since Hong Kong has been a colony to Britain for a hundred years without an agricultural economic basis like China and Taiwan，it has more impacts from the outside world，which makes its figure in the dimension rather westernized.There is a strong holistic tradition in Chinese philosophy and an intense xenophobic attitude toward foreigners among Chinese after the Opium War（Worm，1994），which expounds China's point in the direction of high uncertainty avoidance.However，both China and Sweden share a common sign of weak uncertainty avoidance—not to show emotions in public.Swedes avoid topics of conversation that are highly emotional and where opinions differ，thus avoiding open conflicts（Daun，1996）.They keep their feelings to themselves（Daun，1984）.They like the expression“lagom är bäst”（not too much，not too little—just right），which is similar to the Chinese expression“zhong yong zhi dao”（moderation；following the middle way），one of the fundamental and basic values for Chinese people（the Chinese Culture Connection，1987）.“Never too much”，the doctrine of the golden mean，has been the maxim of Confucianist and Taoist alike（Fung，1948）.

In short，China and Sweden antipodally belong to the high and low power distance；strong and weak uncertainty avoidance；collectivist and individualist；and masculine and feminine cultures，respectively，in Hofstede's survey.

Another scholar，who has made further and profound research in the aspect of individualism-collectivism，is Triandis.He（1995）argues that individualistic and collectivist cultures can differ in whether relations among people in the culture are horizontal or vertical.People tend to see themselves as the same as others and are not expected to stand out from others in horizontal cultures where there is a strong emphasis on valuing equality.In contrast，people in vertical cultures tend to see themselves as different from others and are expected to stand out from others.Equality is not valued highly in these cultures.To be more concrete，in the horizontal，collectivist cultures（e.g.，China，Japan），high value is placed on equality，but little value placed on freedom.In vertical，collectivist cultures（e.g.，India），individuals are expected to fit into the group and，at the same time，they are allowed or expected to stand out in the group.In vertical，individualistic cultures（e.g.，United Stated，Britain，Germany，France），people are expected to act as individuals and try to stand out from others.People in these cultures place low value on equality and high value on freedom.In horizontal，individualistic cultures（e.g.，Sweden，Norway），people are expected to act as individuals but，at the same time，not to stand out from others.People in these cultures place high value on both equality and freedom.

Another dimension，low-context and high-context communication，was initiated by Hall.

A high-context（HC）communication or messages is one in which most of the information is either in the physical context or internalized in the person，while very little is in the coded，explicit，transmitted part of the message.A low-context（LC）communication is just the opposite；i.e.，the mass of the information is vested in the explicit code（Hall，1976，p.91）.

Members of high-context cultures tend to use more implicit，ambiguous，and indirect ways to communicate while members of low-context cultures tend to use explicit，unambiguous，and direct ways to communicate.Moreover，members of individualistic cultures predominately use low-context communication，whereas members of collectivist cultures predominately use high-context messages.To illustrate，it is impossible to look up a Chinese character in a dictionary if one doesn't know the context in which a particular character is used because the context influences what it means.People must know the 214 radicals（there are no counterparts for radicals in the Indo-European languages）before they can look characters up in a Chinese dictionary（Hall，1976）.For instance，to find the words for river or sea or lake，one must know that they appear under the“water”radical.In addition，people must know the spoken pronunciation system in Chinese language because there are four tones in the system and a change of tone means a change of meaning.In general，northern and western Europeans and North Americans tend toward the low-context condition；Asians tend toward the high-context condition；and Middle Easterners，Africans，and Latin Americans tend toward a blend of low and high context culture.China and Sweden belong to，respectively，high-context and low-context cultures.Gao et al.（1996）have proposed an emic framework to understand Chinese communication processes.The first basic characteristic of Chinese communication they identify is hanxu（implicit communication），which refers to a mode of communication in China as a contained，reserved，implicit，and indirect one.

On the basis of the previous literature，the following hypotheses are generated：

Hypothesis 1：There will be no great disparity between China and Sweden in regard to the degree of collectivist and individualistic orientations.

Hypothesis 2：The power distance of unequal relationships—teacher-student will be regarded as greater in China than in Sweden.

Hypothesis 3：Face-consciousness and sense of keeping up the harmony in teacher-student relationship will be stronger in China than in Sweden.

Hypothesis 4：More structured learning situations will be preferred by Chinese students than by Swedish students.

Hypothesis 5：More competitive atmosphere will exist in class in China than in Sweden.

Hypothesis 6：Not great communication disparity will exist between Chinese teachers and students and Swedish teachers and students.

This study reports an empirical investigation of these hypotheses in relation to one type of unequal or asymmetric role relationship—teacher and student—in China and Sweden.