Obstacles and facilitators

of intercultural interactions

Dr. Nabil Ghantous

 Agenda

Social categorization
Stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination
Self-reference criterion
Ethnocentrism and intergroup relations
Cosmopolitanism
Xenocentrism
The potency of social categorization: minimal groups studies

Mere social categorization, i.e. identifying as part of a group and delineating in-group vs.
out-groups, affects people’s perceptions and behaviors

Minimal group studies

• Set of experimental studies, originally conducted in the late 1960s, and replicated many
times since then
• Individuals are categorized into two groups, randomly or based on a trivial criterion
• Groups as trivial as group X vs. group Y: they have no prior history and no future; there is no
interaction, no material gain for individuals from membership, and people do not know who
is in their group or in the other group

Minimal group findings

• Even minimal categorization leads to discriminating in favor of one’s group and showing
evaluative ingroup bias
• Feeling a sense of belonging to one’s group, and similarity to and liking for one’s
anonymous fellow ingroup members
Automatic activation of social categorization

The responses observed in minimal group studies (e.g. in-group bias) are
relatively automatic and occur implicitly, outside conscious control

Categorization in itself is in general a fairly fast and automatic process (akin to

system 1)
• We use perceptual cues (e.g. skin color, accent, clothing, behavior, etc.) to
unconsciously categorize other people in groups
• This allows us to imbue those people with the attributes and characteristics that we
have ascribed to the group
• An unconscious mechanism designed for cognitive economy, on which we have little
control: this process largely occurs in the amygdala, i.e. that part of the brain where
automatic cognitive processing in general occurs
 Agenda

Social categorization
Stereotypes, prejudice, and
discrimination
Self-reference criterion
Ethnocentrism and intergroup relations
Cosmopolitanism
Xenocentrism
Which ones are they?

Rigorous, hardworking, disciplined, confident

Italians

Independent, pragmatic, phlegmatic Japanese

Sweet talkers, refined, seducers English

Frivolous, warm, hedonists Swedish

Brazilians
Hard competitors, devoted to their company
German
Ecologists, socially advanced, serious
Prototypes and stereotypes

Stereotypes are a consequence of categorization

People mentally represent human categories (e.g. cultures) using prototypes:

sets of interrelated attributes (attitudes, behaviors, customs, dress, etc.) that
represent general similarities within the groups and differences between groups
• A prototype is not identical to a category => it is an idea, an image that is associated
with a category
• A stereotype appears when many people in one group share a prototype of their own
or another group

We transpose the images associated with a category to the members of the

category, despite their individual differences
The auto-stereotype and the hetero-stereotype

Auto-stereotype: the stereotype one holds of his own culture

Hetero-stereotype: the stereotype one holds of other cultures

Auto-stereotypes are generally more favorable than hetero-stereotypes

Conflict situations make stereotypes more extreme and resistant to change

They reinforce the positive perception of auto-stereotypes and negative
perception of hetero-stereotypes

Hetero-stereotypes are often more favorable when concerning countries that are
more developed than one’s own country
Accentuation and asymmetry effects

Social categorization perceptually accentuates similarities among members of

the same category and differences between members of different categories

Accentuation is asymmetrical
• People tend generally to view out-groups as more homogenous than in-groups
• Possible explanation: people are more familiar with the in-group and therefore have
more individuating information about in-group than out-group members
• Auto-stereotypes and in-group homogeneity can be reinforced for ‘strategic reasons’
depending on the subjective belief structures
- E.g. active minorities tend to emphasize their homogeneity, consistent with their need to be
consistent and consensual in order to survive and have a realistic opportunity to create social
change
https://www.creativereview.co.uk/new-ad-campaign-tackles-everyday-gender-bias/
Stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination

Three forms of social bias toward a group and its members:

• Stereotypes: associations and attributions of specific characteristics to a group
• Prejudice: an attitude reflecting an overall evaluation of a group
• Discrimination: biased behavior toward, and treatment of, a group or its members

Prejudice is an attitude with

• A cognitive component: e.g., beliefs about a target group
• An affective component: e.g., dislike
• A conative component: e.g., a behavioral predisposition to behave negatively toward
the target group

People hide their prejudices when it is socially undesirable or dangerous to

express them (e.g. due to legislation or fear of retaliation)
Dovidio, J. F., Hewstone, M., Glick, P., & Esses, V. M. (2010). Prejudice, Stereotyping and Discrimination: Theoretical and Empirical Overview.
The SAGE Handbook of Prejudice, Stereotyping and Discrimination, 1.
Possible bike thief caught in the act | What Would You Do? |
WWYD

F Watch
it here
F Watch
it here
Stereotypes and stigma

Some social categories (e.g. minorities) can be perceived as possessing

attributes or characteristics that are devalued in particular social contexts
• They carry a stigma that can profoundly affect their self-perception and wellbeing

Stigmatized groups experience stereotype threat based on their knowledge

of the negative stereotypes that others have of them
• They worry that, through their behavior, they might confirm those stereotypes

Stigmatized groups also suffer from attributional ambiguity

• They are very sensitive to the causes of others’ treatment of them and may over-
attribute it to prejudice

One way they cope with their stigma is by denying any personal experience
of discrimination, although they are often clearly disadvantaged
Implicit Bias, Stereotype Threat and Higher Ed | Russell
McClain | TEDxUniversityofMarylandBaltimore

F Watch
it here
 Agenda

Social categorization
Stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination
Self-reference criterion
Ethnocentrism and intergroup relations
Cosmopolitanism
Xenocentrism
Self-Reference Criterion (SRC)

SRC is an unconscious reference to one’s own cultural values, experiences, and

knowledge in intercultural situations
• Seeing the world through the lens of one’s own culture

SRC acts as a “cultural blinder”, clouding our ability to interpret situations

correctly and to behave adequately
• One of the biggest enemies of cultural intelligence

SRC acts at the cognitive, affective, and behavior level

The concept of SRC was coined by J.A. Lee in

‘‘Cultural Analysis in Overseas Operations,’’ Harvard Business Review (March–April 1966): 106–114
SRC at the cognitive level: how we interpret symbols and
behaviors

From the perspective of semiotics, a sign has two dimensions:

• The signifier, i.e. that which can be seen, touched, heard, smelled, or tasted
• The signified, i.e. the substance or the concept that is inferred from the sign

Many signs, such as colors, shapes, body language, etc. can signify different
things across cultures

Source: arabianbusiness.com Source: Where Do We Go Now?

SRC at the affective level: how we feel towards others who
behave differently or in different situations

Example: attitude towards pets and towards people based on how they treat
animals are highly affected by SRC

• Westerners treat dogs as • Middle-Easterns view • Some in the Far East

family members dogs as filthy animals bread dogs to cook
and eat them
SRC at the behavioral level: how we behave and how we
expect others to behave

Cultural scripts
• Scripts are largely unconscious mental representations that shape how we act in a given
situation
• SRC makes us take for granted the scripts that we have formed from experience with
our home culture

Handshaking to start a meeting: Gift-giving in China Business cards etiquette

the case of male-female
The impact of SRC is reinforced by many unconscious,
psychological mechanisms

The lack of self-awareness of one’s cultural lens

• “There is an anaesthetic of familiarity*, a sedative of ordinariness which dulls the senses
and hides the wonder of existence” (Richard Dawkins)
• Particularly salient for people from large countries, who have had limited contact with
other cultures, and/or who’s culture has become an international norm through media
and political influence (e.g. USA globally; Egypt regionally)

Selective perception
Familiarity bias
Confirmation bias**

* For more on the anaesthetic of familiarity and unconscious psychological mechanisms, see the brilliant
introduction lecture of Prof. Steven Pinker, here
** For an illustration of the impact of selective perception, familiarity bias, and confirmation bias, see here
SRC and system 1/system 2 thinking

Nobel Prize winner, psychologist Daniel Kahneman*, describes our

two modes of thinking as:
• System 1: “operates automatically and quickly, with little or no effort and
no sense of voluntary control”
• System 2: “allocates attention to the effortful mental activities that
demand it, including complex computations”

The quick System 1 uses our unconscious references and scripts

to interpret situations and choose a course of action, whereas
intercultural intelligence requires deliberate preparation (System 2)

* There are many great talks by Prof. Kahneman on the two systems including the one here
 Agenda

Social categorization
Stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination
Self-reference criterion
Ethnocentrism and intergroup relations
Cosmopolitanism
Xenocentrism
Ethnocentrism

An attitude that derives from the categorization of cultural groups

Triandis (1994) identifies the following characteristic of ethnocentrism:

• What goes on in our culture is seen as “natural and correct,” and what goes on in other
cultures is perceived as “unnatural and incorrect”
• We perceive our own in-group customs as universally valid
• We unquestionably think that in-group norms, roles, and values are correct
• We believe that it is natural to help and cooperate with members of our in-group, to
favor our in-group, to feel proud of our in-group, and to be distrustful of and even
hostile toward out-group members

Triandis, H. C. (1994). Culture and social behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Ethnocentrism

Ethnocentrism is “a view of things in which one’s own group is the center of

everything, and all others are scaled and rated with reference to it … Each group
nourishes its own pride and vanity, boasts itself superior, exalts its own divinities,
and looks with contempt on outsiders. Each group thinks its own folkways the only
right one … Ethnocentrism leads a people to exaggerate and intensify everything in
their own folkways which is peculiar and which differentiates them from others”
(Sumner, 1906 , p. 13)

Sumner, W. G. (1906). Folkways . Boston: Ginn.

The consequences of ethnocentrism

Ethnocentrism manifest is various ways and in different domains of our lives

Consumer ethnocentrism represents consumer beliefs about the appropriateness

and morality of purchasing foreign-made products
• For ethnocentric consumers, purchasing imported products is wrong and unpatriotic
because they believe it hurts the domestic economy and causes loss of jobs

Ethnocentrism plays an important role in intergroup relations, and hence in

intercultural interactions
• Intergroup relations are intrinsically competitive and ethnocentric, favoring the in-group
for reasons of self-esteem/self-enhancement
• Intergroup relations can vary widely however: from harmless generalized images,
tolerance, and friendly rivalry to deep-seated hatred, intolerance, and violent conflict
In-group bias does not necessarily translate into out-group
distrust or hate (1/2)

The positive-negative asymmetry effect

• People favor the in-group rather than discriminate against the out-group, unless they
feel that the in-group is under threat

An important factor is whether the groups have interdependent goals and the
nature of the latter
• If two groups have a mutually exclusive goal (i.e. only one group can achieve at the
expense of the other), they compete, typically very fiercely. This could lead to prejudice,
discrimination, and ultimately dehumanization
• If two groups have a shared goal that can only be achieved by intergroup cooperation
(e.g. dealing with a common threat), intergroup relations are less competitive and can
even be cooperative and harmonious
In-group bias does not necessarily translate into out-group
distrust or hate (2/2)

The impact of social-structural conditions

• The existence of long-term political conflict between the in- and out-group
• The polarization of a society divided into two significant subgroups along a single
categorization factor such as ethnicity or religion (e.g. racial segregation in the USA; the
apartheid regime; religious conflicts in the Middle-East, etc.)

The impact of cultural dimensions

• In-group/out-group distinction and distrust of out-groups is sharper in collectivistic
societies as the importance of in-group interdependence and of maintaining group
boundaries is higher that in individualistic societies
• Higher uncertainty avoidance could increase the perceived threat of out-groups as well
as the need to identify more strongly with the in-group to reduce uncertainty
 Agenda

Social categorization
Stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination
Self-reference criterion
Ethnocentrism and intergroup relations
Cosmopolitanism
Xenocentrism
Cosmopolitanism

From the Greek word kosmopolitēs (‘citizen of the world’)

• Cosmos: the universe
• Politês:citizen

An enduring personal orientation to positively relate to foreign countries,

cultures, and products

Cosmopolitanism reflects the extent of a person’s

• Open-mindedness towards foreign countries and cultures
• Appreciation of the diversity brought about by the availability of products, experiences,
and people from different national and cultural origins
• Positive disposition towards consuming products and interacting with people from
foreign countries
How cosmopolitan
are you?

• The C-COSMO scale

Riefler, P., Diamantopoulos, A. and
Siguaw, J.A. (2012), “Cosmopolitan
consumers as a target group for
segmentation”, Journal of
International Business Studies,
Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 285-305
 Cosmopolitans are not detached from their local roots

Study conducted in Singapore

Riefler, P., Diamantopoulos, A. and Siguaw, J.A. (2012),
27% “Cosmopolitan consumers as a target group for segmentation”,
Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 285-305
Localism*

27%

34%

Local cosmopolitans
12% Pure cosmopolitans
Moderately attached consumers
Alienated consumers

Cosmopolitanism
*Localism: a consumer's engagement and
interest in local activities, events, and products
Characteristics of cosmopolitans

Cosmopolitanism does not require expertise in other cultures

• Cosmopolitans have a stronger empathy towards and openness/desire to interact with
and learn about other cultures. They do not necessarily speak multiple languages or
master various cultures’ codes.

The relationship between cosmopolitanism and traveling is not straightforward

• One can be cosmopolitan at home and, on the opposite, visit foreign countries as a
tourist and keeping at distance from the local culture

Consuming foreign products and experiences is not simply a source of added-

value for cosmopolitans, but also a way of expressing their cosmopolitan identity
Factors enhancing cosmopolitanism and other positive
predispositions towards foreign cultures

Sociodemographic variables
• Younger consumers who have had a stronger exposure to global consumption symbols
tend to display stronger orientation towards a global world
• Higher levels of income and education foster cosmopolitanism

Past experience
• Frequent travel experience reinforces openness towards foreign cultures
• Exposition to cultural diversity (e.g. in multicultural or multiethnic societies, through
global media, availability of foreign products, etc.)

Individual characteristics
• Personality traits such as openness and extraversion
• Other predispositions such as materialism, innovativeness, etc.
 Agenda

Social categorization
Stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination
Self-reference criterion
Ethnocentrism and intergroup relations
Cosmopolitanism
Xenocentrism
Xenocentrism

From the ancient Greek “xenos” – stranger

• Xenophobia: “xenos” – stranger and “phobos” – fear
• Xenophilia: “xenos” – stranger and “philía” – friendship, love

Three bases of social identity, corresponding to

• “here”: consumer ethnocentrism
• “there”: xenocentrism
• “everywhere”: cosmopolitanism
Xenocentrism

Xenocentrism is the orientation to perceive and evaluate one or more out-

group(s) with a positive bias
• Such positive bias could go from simple affinity with to idealizing another culture

Xenocentrism was originally defined in opposition to ethnocentrism

• In this view, xenocentrism involves the orientation to view one’s home culture as inferior,
to develop a preference for the out-group over one’s culture
• In the most extreme cases, it manifests as detachment, disregard, disidentification, and
rejection on the home culture

Contemporary research shows that xenocentrism does not necessarily require

disregarding or rejecting the in-group
Xenocentrism
can arise from a
mindset of cultural
admiration of
another society

• This condition is thought to

be more prevalent among
emerging-market consumers
Other reasons behind xenocentrism

Feelings of mismatch with or marginalization within one’s own culture

• Particularly salient for descendants of immigrants
• Also important for certain age or gender segments, due to generation gap,
incompatible sex-role expectations, shifting social values, etc.
• Such marginalization could fuel a sense of exclusion from the community, frustration,
and possibly low self-esteem è affiliating with an out-group that is perceived positively
is a way of enhancing self-esteem
• Marginalization-based xenocentrism is more likely to be associated with rejection of the
in-group

Xenocentrism as overcompensation and counter-reaction to ones’ ethnocentrism

• Displayed upon exposure to sociocultural groups distinct from their own, to avoid
appearing undesirably biased toward their own group
Consumer xenocentrism

A bias in favor of foreign products over those which are domestic

This bias occurs even in cases which are impractical (e.g. the domestic product is
cheaper or more functional)

Two aspects to consumer xenocentrism

• Perceived inferiority: the idea that products from the origin country are lacking in
quality in comparison with similar imported products
• Social aggrandizement: the idea that foreign product consumption is a means of
signaling elevated status to others
Consumer xenocentrism and ethnocentrism are not
necessarily incompatible

Study conducted in the USA

and the UK

Prince, M., Davies, M. A., Cleveland,

M., & Palihawadana, D. (2016). Here,
there and everywhere: a study of
consumer centrism. International
Marketing Review, 33 (5) (2016), pp.
715-754