Luận văn thạc sĩ english vietnamese cross cultural nonverbal communication understanding proxemics in different cultures

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA NOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES HOÀNG PHƯỢNG ENGLISH-VIETNAMESE CROSS-CULTURAL NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION: UNDERSTANDING PROXEMICS IN DIFFERENT CULTURES (Giao tiếp phi ngôn từ Anh-Việt: Sự lĩnh hội khoảng cách văn hoá khác nhau) M.A MAJOR PROGRAMME THESIS Field: English Linguistics Code: 8020201.01 HANOI – 2018 z VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA NOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES HOÀNG PHƯỢNG ENGLISH-VIETNAMESE CROSS-CULTURAL NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION: UNDERSTANDING PROXEMICS IN DIFFERENT CULTURES (Giao tiếp phi ngôn từ Anh-Việt: Sự lĩnh hội khoảng cách văn hoá khác nhau) M.A MAJOR PROGRAMME THESIS Field: English Linguistics Code: 8020201.01 Supervisor: Prof NGUYỄN HÒA HANOI - 2018 z DECLARATION I hereby certify the thesis entitled “English-Vietnamese cross-cultural nonverbal communication: understanding proxemics in different cultures” as my own work in the fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts at the University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University, Hanoi Hanoi, 2018 Hoàng Phượng i z ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS To be able to complete this thesis, I have been whole-heartedly supported by many people to whom I would like to express my sincere thanks for their valuable contribution First of all, I would like to express my deep sense of gratitude to my beloved supervisor, Prof Nguyễn Hòa He was the one who advised, supported, encouraged, supervised, and inspired me throughout the realization of this thesis I highly appreciate his valuable advice, detailed comments, enthusiastic and careful guidance as well as his great patience throughout this process Second of all, I would like to take this opportunity to express my sincere thanks to my respectful lectures in Faculty of Post-Graduate Studies at University of Languages and International Studies for their devotion and their fascinating, and informative lectures which have provided me useful information to fulfill this thesis What is more, I would like to give my great thanks to my colleagues and my students for their willingness to participate in this project Without them, this study would have been impossible Last but not least, I owe particular thanks to my family and my friends who have enthusiastically assisted and encouraged me to finish this thesis ii z ABSTRACT Conversational distance has been the focus of hundreds of previous research studies However, the conclusions of previous studies on interpersonal distance preferences were limited, especially the conclusions on Vietnamese‟s preferable proxemic distance were also restricted due to some certain problems of research methodologies The objective of the present study was to find out the preferred social, personal and intimate distances of Vietnamese communicators as a case of proxemics behavior This study also indicated the factors which have influence on interpersonal distance of Vietnamese communicators, in which a number of research methods were exploited The values of preferred conversational distance, then, can be used as a reference in related future research iii z TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii ABSTRACT iii TABLE OF CONTENTS iv LIST OF TABLES vii PART A INTRODUCTION .1 Rationale for the study Aims of the study Research questions: Scope of the study Structure of the thesis PART B DEVELOPMENT .4 CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW 1.1 What is communication? 1.2 What is nonverbal communication? 1.3 Areas of Proxemics 1.4 Factors affecting conversational distances 11 1.4.1 Culture 11 1.4.2 Gender 13 1.4.3 Social Status – Power Distance 14 1.4.4 Age 14 1.4.5 Personality 15 1.4.6 Marital Status 15 1.4.7 Living Area 16 1.4.8 Relationship 16 1.4.9 Individualistic and Collectivistic Cultures: 17 iv z CHAPTER II: METHODOLOGY 21 2.1 Data-collection instruments 21 2.1.1 Survey questionnaires 21 2.1.1.1 Participants 22 2.1.1.2 Procedure 23 2.1.2 Personal observation-video recordings: 25 2.1.2.1 Participants 25 2.1.2.2 Procedure 26 2.1.3 Informal interviews: 27 2.1.3.1 Participants 27 2.1.3.2 Procedure 27 2.2 Data analysis 29 2.2.1 Quantitative analysis 29 2.2.2 Qualitative analysis 30 CHAPTER III: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 32 3.1 Research question 1: What are the factors that affect the conversational distance between Vietnamese dyads? 32 3.1.1 Age 32 3.1.2 Gender: 37 3.1.3 Marital status 39 3.1.4 Social Status 41 3.1.5 Living Area 42 3.1.6 Personality 44 3.2 Research question 2: What is the proxemic distance preferred by 48 Vietnamese speakers during communication process? 48 3.3 Discussions: 57 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 60 Summary of major findings 60 Implications 62 Limitations of the study 63 Suggestions for further study 64 v z REFERENCES 65 APPENDENCES .68 APPENDIX 68 APPENDIX 72 APPENDIX 77 APPENDIX 78 APPENDIX 79 APPENDIX 82 vi z LIST OF TABLES Table ANOVA descriptions of data on conversational distance measured for three age-groups 33 Table Test of Homogeneity of Variances of Age-Factor 34 Table ANOVA results of statistical analyses of different relationships 35 Table The Post hoc tests result of the three different age groups 36 Table The Robust Tests of Equality of Means of Different Relationships 37 Table Group Statistics of data on conversational distance measured for Gender 38 Table Independent Samples Test of data on conversational distance measured by male and female communicators 38 Table Group Statistics of data on conversational distance measured for Marital Status 40 Table Independent Samples Test of data on conversational distance measured by married and single communicators 40 Table 10 Independent Samples Test of data on conversational distance measured by high and low social status communicators 42 Table 11 Independent Samples Test of data on conversational distance with living areas as an effecting factor 43 Table 12 Independent Samples Test of data on conversational distance measured by introvert and extrovert informants 45 vii z PART A INTRODUCTION Rationale for the study This study was conducted because of several reasons In the first place, proxemics can be considered as one of the most prominent aspects to investigate the manifestation of nonverbal communication and to emphasize its significance in human life However, there has not been enough studies giving rise to proxemics findings In fact, none of the previous research has been performed to find out Vietnamese common conversational distance In the second place, misbehavior in proxemics within cross-cultural communication, especially in multicultual or multinational working environment, might unexpectedly arise and entail misunderstanding then cultural shock, or even communication breakdown Thus, the reviewing of proxemics behaviors in other mutual cultures in that great success in communication can be necessary Finally, nonverbal communication with attention is given to proxemics behaviour has been one of my interest as a researcher Hence, I am intending to explore and discuss conversational distances and how it affects human communication Apparently, the ways Vietnamese informants apply conversational distances will be explored and analysed The findings and results of this study would somehow expectedly raise the awareness that how important the nonverbal communication would be Also, the findings would focus on the preferred conversational distance of Vietnamese communicators and then provide recommendations to American speakers in order avoid culture shocks and misunderstandings while interacting with Vietnamese informants Aims of the study This thesis is inspired by Hall‟s work He creates a framework which indicated a need for my study The purpose of this study is to find the factors that affect the proxemics behaviors between Vietnamese dyads, mainly: age, gender, marital status, power distance, living area, and character of the informants In z APPENDENCES APPENDIX BẢN CÂU HỎI KHẢO SÁT Bản câu hỏi khảo sát này thiết kế để làm sở liệu phục vụ cho đề tài nghiên cứu “Tìm hiểu khoảng cách tham thoại giao tiếp giao văn hoá Anh-Việt: Sự khác biệt văn hố phi ngơn từ” Chúng tơi biết ơn anh/chị dành thời gian trả lời câu hỏi này Chúng xin cam kết danh tính và thơng tin cá nhân người tham gia trả lời câu hỏi giữ kín trường hợp I Thông tin cá nhân: Xin anh/chị cho biết thơng tin thân (bằng cách đánh dấu () vào thích hợp điền vào chỗ trống): - - - Độ tuổi nay: Giới tính: Tình trạng nhân: Dưới 20  Từ 20 đến 40  Trên 40  Nam  Nữ  Đã lập gia đình  Chưa lập gia đình  - Nghề nghiệp: …………………………………………… - Chức vụ: Quản lý  Nhân viên  Thành thị  Nông thôn  Sôi nổi, hướng ngoại  Trầm tính, hướng nội  - - Nơi sinh sống chủ yếu: Tính cách bật: II Câu hỏi khảo sát: A Anh/chị tưởng tượng là A, và B tiến lại gần anh/chị để trị chuyện Hãy ước lượng vị trí mà B phải dừng lại (miễn anh chị cảm 68 z thấy thoải mái trò chuyện) cách đánh dấu vào thước đo bên hai hình minh hoạ A, B trường hợp sau: Anh/ chị A người lạ B: Anh/ chị A người quen (đồng nghiệp, cấp trên, cấp dưới) B: 69 z Anh/ chị A người thân (thành viên gia đình, bạn thân) B: B Anh/ Chị đồng ý hay không đồng ý với trường hợp đây? (Hãy khoanh tròn vào đáp án mà anh/ chị thấy phù hợp nhất): Questions Scale Giới tính định đến khoảng cách giao tiếp 5 Khoảng cách giao tiếp không phụ thuộc vào không 5 5 gian xung quanh Khi tâm trạng tích cực, đối tượng giao tiếp thường có xu hướng thu ngắn khoảng cách giao tiếp Khoảng cách giao tiếp với đối tượng có địa vị thấp thường có xu hướng ngắn khoảng cách giao tiếp với đối tượng có địa vị cao Đối tượng giao tiếp sinh và lớn lên thành thị thường có nhu cầu khơng gian giao tiếp rộng lớn đối tượng sinh và lớn lên nông thôn Những đối tượng giao tiếp với tính cách hướng ngoại thường có xu hướng đứng gần giao tiếp 70 z so với đối tượng giao tiếp có tính cách hướng nội 10 Khoảng cách giao tiếp tỉ lệ thuận với mức độ thân 5 5 5 5 5 thiết đối tượng giao tiếp 11 Những người có ưu xứng đáng có nhiều khơng gian giao tiếp người yếu 12 Những người có ưu thường phép vi phạm quy tắc thông thường khoảng cách giao tiếp 13 Mối quan hệ đối tượng giao tiếp là yếu tố định khoảng cách giao tiếp 14 Các cặp giới tính nữ-nữ tương tác khoảng cách gần so với cặp đơi giới tính khác, đặc biệt là cặp giới tính nam-nam 15 Người Việt Nam thường hạn chế khoảng cách thân mật giao tiếp với người lớn tuổi 16 Duy trì khoảng cách thân mật đối tượng giao tiếp giới cho là điều cấm kỵ văn hoá Việt Nam 17 Đối với người Việt Nam, quyền lực đóng vai trị định việc lựa chọn vùng khoảng cách giao tiếp 18 Khoảng cách xã hội dường không ảnh hưởng đến khoảng cách giao tiếp 19 Nam giới thường sử dụng khoảng cách thân mật và khoảng cách công cộng nhiều so nữ giới 20 Không gian càng đơng khoảng cách giao tiếp càng bị thu hẹp Xin chân thành cảm ơn giúp đỡ nhiệt tình anh/chị! 71 z APPENDIX QUESTIONNAIRE (English version) This survey questionnaire is designed for the study in to “EnglishVietnamese cross-cultural nonverbal communication: Understanding proxemics in different cultures” Your assistance in completing the following questionnaire is highly appreciated Your responses are invaluable and will be used for the completion of my MA thesis at University of Languages and International Studies You can be confident that you will not be identified in any case Thank you very much for your time! I Personal information (for statistical purposes): Please put a tick () where appropriate or answer the question: - - - Age: Gender: Marital Status: Below 20  Between 20 and 40  Above 40  Male  Female  Married  Single  - Occupation: …………………………………………… - Social Status: Manager  Employee  Urban  Rural  Extroverted  Introverted  - - Living Area: Typical Personality: 72 z II Survey questionnaires: A Imagine that you are person A Person B is approaching to have a conversation with you Rate how close a person B could approach, so that you would feel comfortable in a conversation with her or him You can mark the distance at which person B should stop on the scale below the figures in the following cases: You are person A and person B is a stranger: 73 z You are person A and person B is an acquaintance (colleague, superior, inferior): You are person A and person B is a close person (family member, close friend): 74 z B To what extend you agree or disagree with each of the following statements? (Please circle one answer in each line across): = strongly agree = agree = undecided = disagree = strongly disagree Questions Statements The communicators‟ gender decides the distance of 5 5 5 5 violate 13 Relationship is the most powerful determinant of 5 conversation The conversational distance does not depend on the surrounding space When people are in positive mood, they are likely to stand closer People tend to stand closer to inferiors than to superiors Those who were brought up in urban require more space than those in rural Extroverted people are likely to stand closer than introverted people 10 The more intimate, the smaller the physical distance tends to be 11 Dominant individuals command more space than submissive individuals 12 Dominant people are allowed to conversational distance norms conversational distance 14 Female-female dyads interact at closer distances 75 z than other sex-pairings, particularly male-male dyads 15 Vietnamese respondents refuse to choose intimate 5 5 5 zone when communicating with older people 16 Maintaining an intimate distance between partners of the same sex is claimed to be a taboo in Vietnamese community 17 Power plays a decisive role in the choice of proxemic zones in Vietnamese communication 18 Social status is not seemingly influential to conversational distance 19 Males seem to use less intimate distance and more public distance than females 20 The more crowded it is, the closer distance people are at If you are willing to participate in an interview after completing this questionnaire, please give me your name and your contact details: (Name: ……… ………… Mobile phone: ………………………………) Thank you very much for your cooperation! 76 z APPENDIX CÂU HỎI PHỎNG VẤN (Vietnamese Version) Theo anh/chị nào là khoảng cách giao tiếp (khoảng cách vật lý)? Theo anh/chị, yếu tố nào có ảnh hưởng đến khoảng cách giao tiếp (Văn hố, độ tuổi, giới tính, mối quan hệ, tình trạng nhân, địa vị xã hội, tính cách, nơi sinh sống chủ yếu và nghề nghiệp)? Và yếu tố nào, theo anh/chị, có ảnh hưởng nhiều đến khoảng cách giao tiếp? Anh/Chị chia sẻ kinh nghiệm khoảng cách giao tiếp anh chị tiếp với người đến từ văn hố khác (nếu có)? Anh/chị cho biết phản ứng giải thích nào người nước ngoài phàn nàn với anh chị việc người Việt Nam thường đứng xa/gần đối phương giao tiếp? Anh/Chị có cho giao tiếp phi ngơn từ (ví dụ khoảng cách giao tiếp) gây xung đột văn hố? Tại sao? Ở Việt Nam có quy tắc nào khoảng cách giao tiếp khơng, có, người thường áp dụng quy tắc giao tiếp nào? Bản thân anh/chị có quy tắc riêng nào muốn chia sẻ không? Anh/ Chị cảm thấy nào người lạ đứng gần (dưới 40 cm) giao tiếp với anh/chị? Anh chị phản ứng nào? Khoảng cách giao tiếp với người thân gia đình (bố, mẹ, vợ, chồng, người u) anh/chị có thay đổi khơng gian giao tiếp thay đổi khơng (ví dụ nhà và đến nơi công cộng? Anh chị học tập sinh sống nước ngoài chưa? Nếu có hội học tập và sinh sống nước ngoài thời gian đủ dài, anh chị có muốn tìm hiểu trước khoảng cách giao tiếp thông thường nguyên tắc bất thành văn khoảng cách giao tiếp đất nước không? Tại sao? 77 z APPENDIX INTERVIEW GUIDE The general aims of my study is to explore the conversational distances which can occur when individuals from high context cultures interact and how these distances differ to that of the communicators from low context cultures What, according to you, is conversational distance (physically)? What factors have the influence on conversational distance (Cultures, age, gender, relationships, marital status, social status, personality, living area and occupation)? Which factors you think have the most influence on conversational distance? Would you mind sharing you first-hand experience on your favorite conversational distance which occurs when you interact with the people coming from different countries? How will you react or explain when foreigners complain that the Vietnamese tends to stand too far or too close during the communication, which can make them upset Do you think that nonverbal communication (conversational distance – as mentioned) can be one of the causes leading to the cultural conflict? Is there any rule of conversational distance in Vietnam? If any, how can Vietnamese informants apply these rules during communication? Do you have any your own rules? How would you feel and react when being approached too closely (less than 40 cm) by a stranger? Will the conversational distance between you and your spouse (husband, wife, lover) change since the communication setting changes (home setting and public place setting)? Have you ever been abroad? If you had a chance, would you spend time exploring about conversational distance in that country? Why? 78 z APPENDIX TRANSCRIPT EXAMPLE Date of interview: 10/06/2018 Location: Online Skype Interview Interview length: 10 minutes Researcher: Hoang Phuong Participant: T (she is the researcher‟s colleague at workplace) Researcher: I would like to interview you seven questions related to conversational distance which I am doing a research on Can we start right now? T: Yes Let‟s start Researcher: Ok What, according to you, is conversational distance, physically? T: Well, it‟s quite hard to define… In my opinion, conversational distance will be something like the barrier which makes the commucation become more difficult This barrier can occur during the communication when there exists the too large age-gaps between the informants or the communicators‟ viewpoints vary significantly Once, the distance might appear as interaction operates Researcher: Great! What factors have the influence on conversational distance (Cultures, age, gender, relationships, marital status, social status, personality, living area and occupation)? T: From my own experience, all the factors mentioned can have the influence on conversational distance Researcher: So which factors you think have the most influence on conversational distance? T: Well, I think it is the personality of the communication that weighed strongly with interpersonal distance Researcher: Ok Can you tell me how will the personality affect the conversational distance? T: Err… For example, there would be less space between extroverted communicators and vice versa 79 z Researcher: Oh, I see your point Would you mind sharing you first-hand experience on your favorite conversational distance which occurs when you interact with the people coming from different countries? T: Let‟s me see Yes There are two types of foreigners whom I had chance to communicate with: the people who are older than me, they can be the experts in education or some other related field The other group can be the people at the same age, they can be overseas students or tourists Well, when interacting with the the first type, I tend to talk about some… Researcher: Sorry to interrupt but what I wish to focus on is not the verbal, I am only keen on nonverbal… T: Oh, alright, I see… So, I almost hardly see any difference, just the feeling What I mean is that I would feel somehow more comfortable when interacting with foreigners, in compare to the interaction with Vietnamese Researcher: Is that the distance will be somehow closer when you have conversations with foreigners? T: Yes, that‟s what I mean At least I can feel that It seems that they are more open to talk to… Researcher: OK, how will you react or explain when foreigners complain that the Vietnamese tend to stand too far or too close during the communication, which can make them upset? T: Well, I have chance to study on cross-cultures so the distance created by the two communicators might be a matter to me I mean, I am a kind of open-minded and flexible When being complained, I will try to explain so that they can have more understanding For example, I can tell them that the way Vietnamese culture work, and the people who are not Vietnamese can not anything but adapt it and get used to it It is not something like the Vietnamese not like the foreigners…” Researcher: Ok I see Do you think this issue can be considered cultural breadown or conflict? For example, the foreigners can be shoecked when they have the first time communicate with Vietnamese, just because Vietnamese always keep a 80 z considerable distance whiling having conversations, which never happen in their culture Then, there can be misunderstanding leading to misinterpretation… T: Yes, I agree There would be, as you have mentioned Then, they, the people who not know anything about Vietnamese culture, can misinterpret negatively Researcher: Have you known that there are any unwritten rules of conversational distance when Vietnamese communicate? T: Yes, there arre For example, the distance between females can be smaller than that between males, or the distance between male teacher and female teacher to students can vary Researcher: Do you have anything more you would like to add? T: No, that‟s all experience that are relevance for you I think Researcher: Thank you very much for your time I really appreciate your help 81 z APPENDIX AN EXAMPLE OF SPSS DATA ANALYSIS 82 z ... determines nonverbal meanings within a society, or, the same nonverbal signal can mean different things to different people in different cultures In actuality, nonverbal communication has been defined... LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES HOÀNG PHƯỢNG ENGLISH- VIETNAMESE CROSS- CULTURAL NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION: UNDERSTANDING PROXEMICS IN DIFFERENT CULTURES (Giao... findings In fact, none of the previous research has been performed to find out Vietnamese common conversational distance In the second place, misbehavior in proxemics within cross- cultural communication,