Contrasts, changes, and correlates in actual and potential intercultural adjustment

ARTICLE IN PRESS

International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329 www.elsevier.com/locate/ijintrel

Contrasts, changes, and correlates in actual and potential intercultural adjustment Victor Savickia,, Rick Downing-Burnettea, Lynne Hellerb, Frauke Binderb, Walter Suntingerb a

Psychology Division, Western Oregon University, Monmouth, OR 97461, USA b AHA-International, Vienna

Abstract A comparison was made between students studying abroad (SA) in a foreign culture versus students staying in their home culture (Home) in relation to potential and actual intercultural adjustment. In addition, the SA sample was followed over four time periods from predeparture, beginning, middle, and end of the study abroad semester. The SA group was higher than the Home group in actual adjustment and most of the measures of potential intercultural adjustment both at the beginning and at the end of the semester. SA students changes in the Intercultural Adjustment Potential Scale (ICAPS) did not support a single theory of adjustment. ICAPS Total and Emotional Regulation scores for the SA group at pre-departure were significantly correlated with actual adjustment three months later at the end of the semester. Clusters of personality traits and coping strategies were significantly related to average measures ICAPS Total, Emotional Regulation, and Satisfaction with Life. Actual and potential intercultural adjustment changed in opposite directions over the course of the foreign sojourn. Discussion focuses on key features that may enhance both actual and potential intercultural adjustment. r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Cross-cultural; Intercultural; Adjustment; Sojourner; Stress; Coping; Longitudinal; Study abroad

Corresponding author. +1-503-838-8353; fax: +1-503-838-8618.

E-mail address: [email protected] (V. Savicki). 0147-1767/$ - see front matter r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2004.06.001

ARTICLE IN PRESS 312

V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

1. Introduction Recently Matsumoto and his associates have conducted a series of studies developing a measure of intercultural adjustment potential (Matsumoto et al., 2001b). Although these studies do a workmanlike job of demonstrating the psychometric properties of this measure, the Intercultural Adjustment Potential Scale (ICAPS), more needs to be done to examine and locate the place of this concept of intercultural adjustment potential in a nomological net of convergent and divergent constructs. The current study attempts to facilitate this process by addressing several relevant issues through the examination of (a) the contrasts between actual and potential intercultural adjustment in people who sojourn in another culture versus those who remain in their own culture; (b) the changes in potential and actual intercultural adjustment of sojourners over time, and (c) the correlates of personality characteristics and coping strategies to potential and actual intercultural adjustment. A brief review of important constructs in this area of study and of methodological concerns will be reviewed prior to addressing the issues raised above. 1.1. Intercultural adjustment Adjustment to a foreign culture is a complex, multi-level undertaking. It may incorporate variables such as personality (Furukawa & Shibayama, 1994), cultural distance (Furnham, 1983), and social support (Adelman, 1988) to name a few (see Ward, 2001, for a review). Ward and Kennedy (1993) generally divide intercultural adjustment into two levels: psychological adjustment and socio-cultural adjustment. ‘‘Psychological adjustment, then, is interwoven with stress and coping processes, whereas socio-cultural adaptation is predicated on culture learning’’ (Ward & Kennedy, 1993, p. 222). While the emphasis in the current study is on psychological adjustment, it is clear that this type of adjustment was influenced by socio-cultural level variables as well. Various authors have offered theories concerning intercultural adjustment. For example, Kim (2001) focuses on communication acculturation; Gudykunst (1998) focuses on anxiety and uncertainty management; McGuire and McDermott (1988) focus on assimilation, deviance, and alienation states; Tajfel (1978) focuses on social identity; and Trower, Bryant, and Argyle (1978) focus on cultural learning. Following the general suggestion of Ward and Kennedy (1993) above, the current study uses the general stress and coping model offered by Lazarus (1999) as a framework for conceptualizing the intercultural adjustment process. Ward (2001) characterizes the stress and coping theory view of intercultural adjustment as emerging from ‘‘cross-cultural transitions entailing a series of stress provoking life changes that tax adjustive resources and require coping responses’’ (p. 427). In this model cognitive appraisal is an intermediate step between the stressors presented by the foreign culture and the psychological well-being of the individual. Too high a level of environmental stressors combined with too low a level of personal and environmental resources to deal with those stressors leads to the experience of threat with its attendant negative psychological and physiological

ARTICLE IN PRESS V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

313

outcomes. On the other hand, adequate resources and coping abilities leads to the experience of challenge and positive outcomes of self-efficacy, mastery, and other indicators of well-being. Much of the adjustment literature has been focused on problematic responses to intercultural stress in which the appraisal process resulted in a perception of threat (e.g. culture shock (Pederson, 1995), emotional distress (Furukawa & Shibayama, 1994), and anxiety, depression, difficult interpersonal relations; Matsumoto et al., 2001b). On the other hand, intercultural adjustment can lead to more positive outcomes based on the appraisal of challenge: e.g. gains in selfesteem and personal awareness (Babiker, Cox, & Miller, 1980), increases in selfconfidence and positive mood (Matsumoto et al., 2001b). The measurement of intercultural adjustment potential promises to help individuals faced with immersion in a foreign culture by alerting them to the need to bolster personal resources and coping strategies, thus preventing damage to their psychological well-being. 1.2. Intercultural adjustment potential The potential to make a successful adjustment to a different culture calls upon personal resources and coping strategies (Ward, 2001) that may exist in different types and quantities in individuals prior to departure from their home culture. Clearly, one’s specific experiences in a new culture will affect one’s adjustment; but, individuals also bring with them personal characteristics and codified prior learnings that may predispose them to appraise stressors differently, and thus, respond well or poorly to the stressors inherent in adjusting to a different culture. Matsumoto and his colleagues (Matsumoto, Leroux, Bernhard, & Gray, in press) define intercultural adjustment potential as ‘‘the ability to adapt successfully to life in a cultural environment different than that which one is accustomed to’’ (p. 3). They identify four factors that contribute to potentially successful intercultural adjustment: emotional regulation, openness, flexibility, and critical thinking. A person with a high potential to adjust well to a different culture will be able (1) to temper their emotional arousal (e.g. anxiety and anger) at unexpected events in the new culture so that they do not react impulsively, (2) to welcome and even seek out new experiences and situations, (3) to generate new responses and new ways of thinking about events and people in the new culture, and (4) to reflect on experiences in the new culture in order to create new understandings about the self and both new and home cultures. This combination of factors as the basis for the potential to adjust well to a different culture has high face validity as well as strong research support (Matsumoto et al., 2001b). 1.3. Actual and potential intercultural adjustment Matsumoto and his colleagues (Matsumoto et al., 2001a,b, in press) have done substantial work in documenting the psychometric properties of the ICAPS scale as well as describing the relationship of the scale to psychological adjustment and other variables. The current study extends that work in several ways.

ARTICLE IN PRESS 314

V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

First, it would be useful to note differences in actual and potential adjustment between individuals who sojourned in a foreign culture in comparison to those who chose to remain in their own culture. For example, there is some suggestion that individuals voluntarily choosing to sojourn in a foreign culture may show higher levels of adjustment prior to their sojourn than do individuals not choosing such travel (Berry, 1997). This reaction may be based on enthusiasm and excitement concerning the ‘‘adventure’’ of experiencing a new culture. At the same time, the concept of culture shock (Pederson, 1995) indicates that actual adjustment of sojourners may decrease during their stay in the foreign culture before returning to its original level. Thus, comparison of sojourners to those who stayed home suggests the following hypotheses: Hypothesis 1a. At the beginning of their foreign sojourn, study abroad students will show higher intercultural adjustment potential and higher actual adjustment than students who stay at home. Hypothesis 1b. This distinction will be maintained at the end of the study abroad semester. Second, at the heart of the concept of intercultural adjustment potential is its ability to predict actual adjustment to a new culture. Matsumoto and his colleagues use this prediction as one of the bases for the development of the ICAPS (Matsumoto et al., 2001b). Most of the studies reported by Matsumoto and his colleagues were concurrent; that is, they measured the relation of the ICAPS with other indicators of adjustment measured at the same point in time. In the few studies that related ICAPS to future adjustment, the time period between measures was either quite short, or unspecified (Matsumoto et al., 2001a). Therefore, from a longitudinal perspective the following hypothesis was tested: Hypothesis 2. For study abroad students, intercultural adjustment potential at pre-departure will predict actual adjustment at the end of the foreign culture sojourn. Third, there has been no documentation of how the potential for intercultural adjustment may change during a foreign sojourn nor how potential and actual adjustment may be related to each other during a sojourn. The culture shock paradigm (Pederson, 1995) would suggest that actual adjustment would dip and then recover during a sojourn. In contrast, it may be that potential for intercultural adjustment may increase over a sojourn, since individuals are being exposed to the broadening effects of exposure to a different culture. Matsumoto et al. (2001b) reported that training on intercultural communication and adjustment resulted in increases in ICAPS scores, thus exposure to actual intercultural events might be expected to increase such scores also. The current study captures actual adjustment and intercultural adjustment potential at several points in time beginning prior to departure and then at three points over a 3 month period from beginning to end of a sojourn in a foreign culture. Given the above findings, two hypotheses are proposed: Hypothesis 3a. For study abroad students, intercultural adjustment potential will increase over their stay in a foreign culture. Hypothesis 3b. For study abroad students, actual adjustment will decrease then return to baseline during their stay in a foreign culture. Fourth, although the ICAPS has been related to various personality variables (Matsumoto et al., in press), those aspects of personality that might be relevant to the positive psychology movement (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000) such as

ARTICLE IN PRESS V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

315

optimism and hope, have not yet been examined. Given the literature on how such variables aid in adjustment to stress (Scheier & Carver, 1985; Seligman, 1991; Snyder, 2000), it might be useful to document their effect on actual and potential intercultural adjustment. In general individuals with higher optimism, lower pessimism, higher hope that they can influence events and can find successful ways of effect change show more resilience in stressful situations (Carver, 1998). In addition, if adjusting to a foreign culture is viewed as a potentially stressful experience, it might be useful to document whether or not specific strategies of coping may be more or less useful for the adjustment process (Furukawa & Shibayama, 1994). If we adopt the cognitive mediational approach to stress and coping (Lazarus, 1999), then an individual’s repertoire of coping skills should influence whether the individual views events that represent clashes between home and foreign culture as threats or challenges. To the degree that his or her coping skills are adequately developed, this differentiation between threat and challenge would likely lead to different levels adjustment in the actual intercultural situation, and probably would lead to differing estimates of potential to adjust. Clearly, an assessment of preferred coping strategies could aid in understanding both actual and potential intercultural adjustment. Thus, the following hypothesis is offered: Hypothesis 4. Across both groups, intercultural adjustment potential and personal adjustment will be related to personality characteristics and preferred coping strategies. 1.4. Analysis of data Results of statistical analyses related to support or disconfirmation of the hypotheses previously stated are as follows. Hypotheses 1a and b: Support would be demonstrated by significant differences between groups in a repeated measures and post hoc analyses. Hypothesis 2: Support would be demonstrated by significant first order correlations between pre-departure and beginning of the sojourn ICAPS scale measures and actual adjustment at the end of the sojourn. Hypotheses 3a and b: Support would be demonstrated by significant differences in both ICAPS and actual adjustment scores at different points in time during the sojourn. Hypothesis 4: Support would be demonstrated by significant first order correlations between coping strategies and average potential and actual adjustment scores.

2. Methods 2.1. Participants A group of 19 students from US universities who studied abroad for 3 months (SA) were matched with 46 students who stayed in the US during the same semester (Home). The Home students were enrolled in a social psychology class that dealt in a didactic manner with some of the same concepts that the SA students were actually

ARTICLE IN PRESS 316

V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

experiencing by virtue of their study abroad placement; such as stereotyping, ingroup–out-group labeling, individualism–collectivism, etc. The groups were matched for age (19–25, with 83% in the 20–22 range), gender (54% women), and class standing (all juniors and seniors). 2.2. Measures Intercultural Potential Scale (ICAPS). The ICAPS consists of 55 items with responses given on a scale ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 7 (Strongly Agree). A total score (ICAPS Total) was computed by summing all items (24 reverse coded) with higher scores indicating greater adjustment potential (Matsumoto et al., 2001b). This scale has demonstrated predictive validity for adjustment to a new culture based on peer and expert interviewer ratings, as well as self and subjective ratings (Matsumoto et al., 2001b, p. 492). Four factor scores were also derived—Emotion Regulation (ER): the ability to modulate one’s emotional reactions to avoid employing psychological defenses, Openness (OP): the ability to engage in learning about the new culture, Flexibility (FL): being free of over-attachment to previous ways of thinking and willingness to tolerate ambiguity, and Critical Thinking (CT): the ability to generate creative, new hypotheses about incidents in the new culture that go beyond one’s home cultural framework. All five ICAPS scores were transformed to T-scores with a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 based on a normative sample. The authors of the scale reported alphas of .783 for the ICAPS Total, .638 for Emotional Regulation, .601 for Openness, .568 for Flexibility, .433 for Critical Thinking (Matsumoto et al., 2001b). Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS). The SWLS is a five item questionnaire using a seven point Likert scale to rate overall satisfaction with life using questions such as ‘‘In most ways my life is close to my ideal’’ (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985). The SWLS can be viewed as a measure of psychological adjustment since the scale demonstrated moderately strong criterion validity with several measures of psychological well-being (Diener et al., 1985. pp. 72–73). Alpha for the current sample was .838. Five Factor Personality Questionnaire. Personality was measured using a short version of the Big 5 personality factor approach (Fossum, Weyant, Etter, & Feldman-Barrett, 1998). For this 35 item scale, each sub-scale had 7 items. The scales and key defining traits for each include: (1) Neuroticism: anxious, hostile, selfconscious; (2) Extraversion: outgoing, sociable, upbeat, assertive; (3) Openness to experience: curiosity, flexibility, unconventional attitudes; (4) Agreeableness: sympathetic, trusting, cooperative, straightforward; (5) Conscientiousness: diligent, disciplined, well-organized, dependable. Alphas for the sub-scales in this sample are Neuroticism .746, Extraversion .716, Openness .611, Agreeableness .605, Conscientiousness .720. Optimism/pessimism. Dispositional optimism was measured using the 12 item Life Orientation Test (LOT) (Scheier & Carver, 1985). The factor analyzed LOT has 2 sub-scales Optimism factor (4 items), Pessimism factor (4 items). The Optimism scale included items such as ‘‘I always look on the bright side of the things.’’ The

ARTICLE IN PRESS V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

317

Pessimism scale included items such as ‘‘If something can go wrong for me, it will.’’ Rather than combine these scales into a longer optimism scale as suggested by Scheier and Carver, the two separate sub-scales were retained consistent with findings that these sub-scales are not necessarily opposite ends of a continuum, but rather may each account for differing results (Peterson, 2000). Alphas for the current sample was .759 for Optimism and .815 for Pessimism. Hope. Two components of hope were measured using scales developed by Snyder and his colleagues (Snyder, Cheavens, & Sympson, 1997; Lopez, Ciarlelli, Coffman, Stone, & Wyatt, 2000): Hope Agency (four items), the degree to which individuals felt that they might be able to act to achieve a positive outcome, e.g. ‘‘I energetically pursue my goals;’’ and Hope Path (four items), the degree to which an individual could see a way or path toward a positive outcome, e.g. ‘‘I can think of many ways to get out of a jam.’’ All hope items were rated using an eight point Likert scale ranging from 1=Definitely false, to 8=Definitely true. Alphas for the current sample were Hope Agency=.720, Hope Path=.762. Coping. The COPE scale by Carver, Scheier, and Weintraub (1989) is a theorybased scale with 15 sub-scales. Alphas reported are for the current sample. 1. Active Coping is the process of taking active steps to try to remove or circumvent the stressor or to ameliorate its effects. Examples include initiating direct action, increasing ones efforts, and trying to execute a coping attempt in a stepwise fashion (a ¼ :776). 2. Planning is thinking about how to cope with a stressor. Planning involves coming up with action strategies, thinking about what steps to take, and how to best handle the problem (a ¼ :851). 3. Suppression of competing activities means putting other projects aside, trying to avoid becoming too distracted by other events, even letting other things slide, if necessary, in order to deal with the stressor (a ¼ :638). 4. Positive reinterpretation and growth is construing a stressful transaction in positive terms with the result of helping the person continue or resume problem focused coping (a ¼ :802). 5. Restraint coping is waiting until an appropriate opportunity to act presents itself, holding oneself back, and not acting prematurely (a ¼ :715). 6. Instrumental social support is seeking advise, assistance, or information (a ¼ :780). 7. Emotional social support is getting moral support, sympathy, or understanding (a ¼ :903). 8. Religion is seeking comfort, consolation, and/or guidance from a higher power. This might be either within the framework of an organized religion, or more informally through attention to the spiritual side of life (a ¼ :929). 9. Humor is seeing the absurdities and potentially funny side of a stressful event. It may include jokes, sarcasm, irony, wit, and other ways of re-evaluating the event through use of humor (a ¼ :902). 10. Focus on venting emotions is the tendency to focus on whatever distress or upset one is experiencing, and to ventilate or express those feelings (a ¼ :753).

ARTICLE IN PRESS 318

V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

11. Denial is refusing to believe that the stressor exists or trying to act as if the stressor is not real (a ¼ :717). 12. Mental disengagement is distracting oneself from thinking about the stressor. Tactics may include using alternative activities to take one’s mind off the problem (a ¼ :433). 13. Behavioral disengagement is reducing one’s effort to deal with the stressor, even giving up the attempt to attain the goals with which the stressor is interfering (a ¼ :729). 14. Acceptance is accepting that the stressor cannot be changed and getting on with accommodating to the situation as it is (a ¼ :708). 15. Alcohol and drugs means using chemicals to blunt the feelings associated with exposure to the stressor (a ¼ :923). 2.3. Procedures SA students’ voluntary participation was requested at four points in time: within 1 month prior to departure for their study abroad experience, during the beginning, middle, and end of the academic term of the study abroad experience. Home students’ voluntary participation was solicited as one of several extra-credit activities in two sections of a social psychology course at a university in the United States at the beginning and at the end of the same term as the SA group’s foreign stay. All responses were confidential. The ICAPS Total and factor scales were scored by the scale developer (Matsumoto et al., 2001b); all other scales were locally scored.

3. Results and discussion Results will be presented in the order of the hypotheses proposed previously. 3.1. Hypotheses 1a and 1b. Contrasts between stay at home and study abroad groups Repeated measures ANOVA’s comparing Groups (SA and Home) across two Time periods (T1=beginning of the semester, T2=end of the semester) indicated that the SA group was significantly higher on Emotional Regulation (F ð1; 61Þ ¼ 3:96; p ¼ :05, partial eta2=.06), Critical Thinking (F ð1; 61Þ ¼ 5:19; po.05, partial eta2=.08), and Satisfaction with Life (F ð1; 61Þ ¼ 11:53; po:001, partial eta2=.16). There were no significant differences across time, and no significant interactions. Table 1 shows the means and standard deviations for SA and Home groups compared at the beginning and at the end of the academic term. Examination of univariate F’s indicated that the SA group was significantly higher than the Home group on Emotional Regulation and Satisfaction with Life both at the beginning and at the end of the term. The SA group was higher on ICAPS Total at the beginning of

Variables

Emotional regulation Openness Flexibility Critical thinking Satisfaction with life



Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

po:05; po:01; po:001.

End of semester

Study abroad

Home

F (1,63)

Partial eta2

Study abroad

Home

F (1,63)

Partial eta2

65.368 14.566 54.290 9.283 49.014 11.708 48.078 8.239 54.813 9.731 28.157 3.862

58.370 11.243 49.342 8.263 44.631 8.158 47.353 7.702 50.587 9.216 23.608 8.338

4.364*

.065

.016

.066

6.050*

.090

2.980

.05

1.794

.029

.114

.001

1.336

.021

2.737

.042

5.898*

.088

5.160*

.076

60.315 9.723 47.954 7.407 44.590 8.269 46.243 6.992 50.860 9.351 25.065 4.523

.967

4.485*

63.288 12.911 53.178 7.686 48.027 10.898 48.675 8.480 56.944 7.142 29.529 4.445

12.198***

.167

ARTICLE IN PRESS

ICAPS Total

Start of semester

V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

Table 1 Comparisons of SA and home groups at the beginning and at the end of the semester on ICAPS total, factor scores, and satisfaction with life

319

ARTICLE IN PRESS 320

V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

the term, but not at the end; the SA group was higher on Critical Thinking at the end of the term, but not at the beginning. In summary, Hypothesis 1a, that the SA group would be higher on intercultural adjustment potential and personal adjustment at the beginning of the semester, was supported for ICAPS Total, Emotional Regulation, and Satisfaction with Life, but not for Openness, Flexibility, and Critical Thinking. Students higher on some of the intercultural adjustment potential, and actual adjustment scales seem to have selfselected for a foreign exchange experience, but that difference did not extend to all intercultural adjustment factors. Hypothesis 1b, that SA students would be higher than Home students on intercultural adjustment potential and personal adjustment at the end of the semester, was supported for Emotional Regulation, Critical Thinking, and Satisfaction with Life. ICAPS Total was not significantly different at the end of the semester. With the exception of ICAPS Total, the SA students either maintained or added to their levels of intercultural adjustment potential and personal adjustment over the course of their foreign sojourn. 3.2. Hypothesis 2. Predictive validity for ICAPS For the total sample, SA and Home groups combined (n ¼ 63), two indices of intercultural adjustment potential measured at the beginning of the term were predictive of higher personal adjustment or satisfaction with life at the end of the term 10 weeks later (ICAPS Total=.386, po:01, Emotional Regulation=.424, po:001), thus giving some credence to both the predictive validity of the ICAPS Total score, and to the notion that Emotional Regulation may be a ‘‘gatekeeper’’ for intercultural adjustment potential (Matsumoto et al., 2001b). In an even stronger test of the predictive validity, two indices of intercultural adjustment potential measured in the SA group alone (n ¼ 17) prior to departure for their foreign culture sojourn were predictive of higher personal adjustment approximately four months later at the end of the academic term (ICAPS Total=.734, po:001, Emotional Regulation=.619, po:01). Although not all factor scores showed significance, this result shows strong support for Hypothesis 2 and seems to support the notion of ICAPS as a measure of potential for intercultural adjustment that demonstrates relatively high level of accuracy of prediction even over a long time period. 3.3. Hypotheses 3a and 3b. Changes in the study abroad group Fig. 1 shows how the intercultural adjustment potential factor scores for the SA group, expressed as T-scores, changed over four time periods: pre-departure, beginning of the term, middle of the term, and end of the term. SA group averages for both Critical Thinking and Emotional Regulation were above the average for the ICAPS norm group (50) at pre-departure. While Emotional Regulation dipped slightly during the middle of the term before returning to about the pre-departure level, Critical Thinking increased steadily from the beginning to the end of the term. SA group averages for Flexibility and Openness started below the average for the

ARTICLE IN PRESS V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

321

58 56

T-scores

54 52 50 48 46 44 Pre-depart Start

Middle

End

Follow-up

Time Emotional Regulation Openness Flexibility Critical Thinking

Fig. 1. Intercultural adjustment potential factor changes for SA group across four time periods.

norm group (50) and remained below that norm throughout the following time periods. Flexibility, however, did increase at a statistically significant level between pre-departure and the end of the term (t-value=2.63, po:05). The largest increase in Flexibility occurred between pre-departure and the middle of the term. Openness stayed virtually unchanged across the time periods. The pattern of changes illustrated in Fig. 1 does not exclusively support one theory of intercultural adjustment over another. The dip in Emotional Regulation in the middle of the term might indicate a pattern of culture shock (Oberg, 1960); whereas, the increases in Critical Thinking and Flexibility might indicate a continuous pattern of learning consistent with social learning (Ward, 2001) or anxiety/uncertainty management (Gudykunst, 1995) models of intercultural adjustment. Interestingly, for the SA group, the index of the potential for intercultural adjustment (ICAPS Total) changed in almost mirror image fashion in relation to the index for actual personal psychological adjustment (SWLS) (see Fig. 2). The decrease in ICAPS Total from pre-departure to the end of the term was not statistically significant; however, the increase of Satisfaction with Life between pre-departure and the end of the term did reach statistical significance (t-value=2.21, po:05). The decrease in ICAPS Total for the SA group over their stay in a foreign culture was unexpected. Clearly, the SA group did adjust well to the foreign culture in which they stayed. Not only did the Satisfaction with Life scores increase significantly, but also self-report rating scales of adjustment and satisfaction were quite high (4.24 and 4.62, respectively, on a 5 point scale), as well as ratings of intercultural adjustment by the foreign families with whom the students lived during the semester (3.92 on a 5

ARTICLE IN PRESS 322

V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329 ICAPS Total SWLS

69 67

T-scores

65 63 61 59 57 55

Pre-depart

Start

Middle Time

End

Follow-up

Fig. 2. ICAPS total and satisfaction with life changes for SA group across four time periods.

point scale). Looked at a different way, the relationship between ICAPS Total and SWLS in the SA group across time showed changes. At pre-departure, the scales were significantly correlated (r ¼ :506; po:04). However, at the beginning of the semester, they lost their significant correlation (r ¼ :348) only to increase that relationship over the succeeding time periods (mid-semester r ¼ :589; po:02; end of the semester r ¼ :786; po:001). The contrast across time between measures of potential as opposed to actual adjustment and the variation in relationship of those measures raises questions about the relationship between these concepts as the actual intercultural adjustment process is underway. Hypotheses 3a and b garnered mixed support. Actual psychological adjustment (SWLS) and two factor scales for adjustment potential (Flexibility and Critical Thinking) increased during the SA group’s stay in a foreign culture. Although no intercultural potential score decreased to the level of statistical significance, the trend for ICAPS Total goes counter to Hypothesis 3a. In addition, actual adjustment rose steadily, not showing the dip associated with culture shock, as predicted in Hypothesis 3b Clearly, the processes involved in relationships between actual versus potential intercultural adjustment need to be examined further. 3.4. Hypothesis 4. Correlations of personality and coping strategies to actual and potential adjustment Table 2 shows the correlations of intercultural adjustment potential and actual adjustment to a variety of personality, and coping strategy variables for the combined sample. Potential and actual intercultural adjustment variables were averaged over the beginning and end of the term to give a more robust measure of these variables. Because the variables in the intercorrelation matrix displayed in Table 2 were not statistically independent of one another, the intercultural adjustment potential and actual adjustment variables will be examined in terms of clusters of correlations.

Table 2 Correlations of average intercultural adjustment potential total and factor scores with personality, coping strategies, and satisfaction with life for SA and home groups combined



po:01,



Flexibility

Critical thinking

Satisfaction with life

.394*** .394*** .335** .434*** .185 .316* .388** .319** .360**

.456*** .360** .451*** .380** .290* .318** .458*** .361** .401***

.557*** .048 .345** .217+ .140 .254* .352** .143 .165

.198 .136 .052 .319* .312* .197 .036 .006 .209+

.193 .247* .086 .229+ .080 .112 .148 .072 .023

.171 .387** .217+ .276* .349** .351** .378** .176 .414***

.455*** .399*** .178 .220+ .065 .223+ .143 .052 .019 .036 .406*** .031 .366** .124 .009

.431*** .315* .017 .380** .006 .082 .051 .105 .106 .069 .270* .080 .441*** .204 .026

.122 .030 .030 .033 .010 .033 .166 .110 .163 .427*** .001 .261* .151 .013 .005

.001 .087 .039 .182 .247* .321** .283* .156 .227+ .142 .202 .223+ .082 .383** .045

.030 .077 .025 .203 .096 .068 .138 .102 .025 .152 .053 .06 .067 .268* .252*

.274* .242+ .021 .467*** .001 .141 .129 .047 .037 .036 .159 .107 .363** .242+ .020

.105

.300*

.245* po:001.

.421***

.222+

ARTICLE IN PRESS

po:10,  po:05,

Openness

323

þ

Emotional regulation

V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

Personality Anxiety Extraversion Openness Agreeableness Conscientiousness Optimism Pessimism Hope path Hope agency Coping strategies Active Planning Suppress competing behavior Positive reinterpretation Restraint Instrumental social support Emotional social support Religion Humor Venting emotions Denial Mental disengagement Behavioral disengagement Acceptance Alcohol and drugs Psychological adjustment Satisfaction with Life

ICAPS total

ARTICLE IN PRESS 324

V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

A somewhat similar pattern of intercorrelations appeared for ICAPS Total, Emotional Regulation, and Satisfaction with Life. For these three variables, the following patterns of correlations with personality and coping variables emerged: positive correlations with Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Optimism, Hope Path, Hope Agency, Active Coping, Planning, and Positive Reinterpretation; inverse correlations with Neuroticism, Pessimism, Denial, Behavioral Disengagement. For both potential and actual intercultural adjustment, participants with a personality that was outgoing, open to new experiences, positive in outlook, and hopeful of one’s abilities and of potential outcomes were more likely to show positive adjustment. In addition, specific strategies of dealing with stress that focused on actively planning and carrying out actions to directly reduce stress, as well as developing a positive framework for stressful situations were related to better adjustment. People who showed high potential and actual intercultural adjustment also were less anxious, less negative in their outlook, less likely to ignore or withdraw from unpleasant events in the foreign culture. This configuration of variables seems to make good sense in terms of general abilities to adjust positively to stressors be they intercultural or not. Matsumoto and his colleagues (Matsumoto et al., 2001a) suggest that such a configuration may indicate a ‘‘universal psychological engine of adjustment,’’ although Brissette, Scheier, and Carver (2002) warn against making overly broad generalizations about coping patterns that may, in fact, be more relevant and successful in specific contexts. The addition of positive psychology concepts such as optimism and hope, and the array of coping mechanisms measured in this study show relationships with the ICAPS that are consistent with previous findings using personality variables only (Matsumoto et al., in press). To further examine the notion of Emotional Regulation as the ‘‘gatekeeper’’ of adjustment, individual multiple regressions were performed on actual adjustment (SWLS at the end of the semester) and specific significant coping strategies and personality variables with Emotional Regulation at the beginning of the semester controlled. Some coping and personality variables which were significant at the first order level, were not significant when the variance of Emotional Regulation controlled (e.g. Active coping, Extraversion, Agreeableness). However, several coping and personality variables added significantly to the variance explained by Emotional Regulation (e.g. Positive Reinterpretation, Behavioral Disengagement (reversed), Optimism, Pessimism (reversed), and Hope Agency). Thus, Emotional Regulation at the beginning of the semester was a powerful predictor of actual adjustment at the end of the semester, but other variables added to that prediction by accounting for variance over and above explained by Emotional Regulation alone. The gatekeeper role for Emotional Regulation may be more complex than first proposed. Variables that related to Openness were somewhat surprising. This variable correlated positively with personality variables of Neuroticism, Openness, Pessimism, and coping strategies of Venting Emotions. It was inversely related to Optimism. Such a configuration of variables is not exactly indicative of ‘‘openness’’ as it is understood in Western culture, but rather may be more accurately described as ‘‘Vigilance for Problems.’’ The difference in definitions between the scale

ARTICLE IN PRESS V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

325

developers (Matsumoto et al., 2001b) and the current study may be related to the differences in the sample groups studied. Asian as compared to North American participants may relate differently to the factor of ‘‘Openness.’’ There is some indication of this more complicated view of Openness in Matsumoto et al. (in press) where Openness showed some relationship to ‘‘skepticism’’ and a ‘‘willingness to tolerate uncertainty’’ (p. 24). Some care should be taken in interpretation of this factor with participants from different cultures. A similar, possible difference of interpretation may be evident with the factor of Flexibility as well. For the current sample Flexibility was inversely related to Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Restraint Coping, Instrumental Social Support, Emotional Social Support, and Acceptance. For the current sample, it may be more accurate to re-label this scale to something like ‘‘Independent Decision-making and Action.’’ Again, this more complicated view of Flexibility was given some support in Matsumoto et al. (in press) where Flexibility showed relationships to ‘‘concern for self-imposed tasks’’ and ‘‘evading social expectations’’ (p. 24). These differences in interpretation of the factors of Openness and Flexibility may be related to not only to the singular cultural origin of the current sample in comparison to the more mixed normative sample, but also to the small sample size. Beyond the definitional concerns found for the factors of Openness and Flexibility, it is interesting to note that the pattern of personality and coping variables associated with ICPAS Total, Emotional Regulation, and Satisfaction with Life showed strong similarity. Thus, the potential and the actual adjustment to new cultures may relate to similar characteristics of individuals, and their preferences for coping with stressors; thus supporting Hypothesis 4. Many of the factors identified in this general cluster of personality and coping variables may be able to be changed through specific training and support. Both intercultural adjustment potential (prior to engagement with a foreign culture) and actual intercultural adjustment (while engaged with a foreign culture) seem to show common themes which may be strengthened by information, training, and support both in the home culture of the potential sojourner, and in the new culture in which the sojourner is living. There is some evidence that both psychological and socio-cultural adjustment may contribute to both potential and actual intercultural adjustment (Searle & Ward, 1990). With the SA sample in the current study, no systematic intercultural education was undertaken prior to departure, but an ongoing class on intercultural communication (ICC) was undertaken throughout the SA student’s stay in the foreign culture. The ICC class focused on general themes concerning intercultural adjustment (e.g. communication, culture shock) as well as specifics regarding the local culture (e.g. customary greetings, navigating the local public transportation system). In addition, a weekly assignment for each student to find and analyze a stressful, cultural-clash incident which then was subjected to group problem solving probably enhanced emotional regulation, active coping, planning and positive reinterpretation as well as restricted denial, and behavioral disengagement. Even the Home group increased their ICAPS Total as a result of considering concepts related to successful intercultural adjustment (e.g. stereotypes, in-groups vs out-groups,

ARTICLE IN PRESS 326

V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

prejudice). It seems that there may be systematic interventions that may enhance both potential and actual adjustment to a different culture.

4. Conclusions The unexpected, mirror-image change of actual versus potential intercultural adjustment of SA students while they were in a foreign culture could be explained using several concepts based in the cognitive psychology and coping literature. First, from metacognition theory comes the finding that people’s predictions of performance do not necessarily match their postdiction of that performance (Hacker, Bol, Horgan & Rakow, 2000). As Koriat (1997) says increasing accuracy of assessment over time may be due to ‘‘a general shift from theory-based to experience-based judgments’’ (p. 367). The planning fallacy might have been present, in which individuals anticipating a task (e.g. adjusting to a foreign culture) underestimate the resources to accomplish the task and overestimate how easily it can be done (Buehler, Griffin, & Ross, 1994). Thus, prior to exposure to a foreign culture, SA students could have had an unrealistically low estimation of the effort involved in intercultural adjustment, and an inflated sense of their abilities to cope in the foreign environment. Subsequent exposure to real life events in the foreign setting could have helped them revise their estimate of their abilities to adjust, thus reducing the intercultural adjustment potential score. This realignment of expectations would be expressed somewhat indirectly, however, since most ICAPS items do not have an immediate face validity in relation to adjustment potential (e.g. ‘‘I like haiku poems,’’ ‘‘I am afraid of deep water.’’). Using postdictive experience could, at the same time, help the students feel more satisfied with their situation because they had successfully negotiated a situation that was more difficult than they had at first imagined. Lazarus’ (1999) formulations concerning stress, appraisal, and coping also provide some understanding. Although students’ primary appraisal (i.e. their perception of the level of difficulty in the situation) may have had to be revised upward based on actual exposure to the foreign culture, the students also received support and education in boosting their secondary appraisal (i.e. their knowledge and confidence that they could develop the resources necessary to resolve stressors effectively in the foreign culture). Thus, they could feel good about dealing with a difficult situation despite having to expend substantial effort. On a more simplistic level, it may be that the SA students ‘‘used up’’ some their potential for intercultural adjustment as they were called upon to actually adjust to the foreign culture. Consistent with the conservation of resources theory (Hobfoll, 1989), individuals would expend resources under conditions of threat. Hobfoll and Shirom (2001) state that strong resource pools lead to the greater likelihood that persons will seek opportunities to risk resources for increased resource gains. Hobfoll and Shirom (2001) relate such resource acquiring action to factors such as optimism/pessimism, self-efficacy, and self-esteem. The SA group with a high level of initial intercultural adjustment potential could expend that psychological resource to

ARTICLE IN PRESS V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

327

accomplish actual adjustment under difficult conditions. Such a conception supports the notion that the ICAPS measures intercultural adjustment potential rather than the moment-to-moment capacity for such adjustment (Matsumoto et al., 2001a). The concepts of potential and realized adjustment are related, but may function differently from one another. It will be necessary to see if the divergence of development in the concepts found in the current study can be replicated. Actual and potential intercultural adjustment do seem amenable to change. Matsumoto et al. (2001a,b) found that Japanese students and working adults increased their ICAPS scores after taking a 1-day seminar on intercultural communication and adjustment upon arriving in the United States. The Home group in the current study increased their ICAPS Total score after taking a 10 week social psychology course that dealt, in part, with aspects of diversity and culture. The SA group increased actual adjustment and some aspects of intercultural adjustment potential, in part, due to a multi-faceted class on culture and intercultural communication. It seems that three different levels of information can be helpful in increasing actual and potential intercultural adjustment: (1) general information about major concepts and reactions that are a predictable part of the intercultural experience, (2) culture specific information to increase a sense of personal efficacy in dealing with unique aspects of the culture that people have to negotiate, and (3) information and ongoing coaching concerning personality characteristics and coping strategies that might be harnessed during the inevitable clashes between home and foreign culture that sojourners may face. It may be that a modest investment in education and coaching may produce substantial gains in potential and actual adjustment. Such gains may help to overcome distressing, and expensive consequences of poor intercultural adjustment (Shin & Abell, 1999; Kim & Gudykunst, 1988; Matsumoto et al., 2001b). The ICAPS scale (Matsumoto et al., 2001b) shows promise for not only explaining concurrent relationships with actual psychological adjustment, but also for predicting actual adjustment weeks and months into the future for sojourners who face the task of studying and working in a foreign culture. Prior knowledge of future sojourners’ levels of potential for intercultural adjustment might be useful in identifying their risk for failure in a foreign culture, and in designing remedial steps to boost skills and abilities that may encourage better actual adjustment. Finally, the SA group in this study was quite small; therefore, caution is necessary in generalizing the findings of this study. Replication using larger samples is called for.

References Adelman, M. B. (1988). Cross-cultural adjustment: a theoretical perspective on social support. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 12, 183–204. Babiker, I. E., Cox, J. L., & Miller, P. McG. (1980). The measurement of cultural distance and its relationship to medical consultations, symptomatology, and examination of performance of overseas students at Edinburgh University. Social Psychiatry, 15, 109–116.

ARTICLE IN PRESS 328

V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation and adaptation. Applied Psychology: A International Review, 46, 5–34. Brissette, I., Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (2002). The role of optimism in social network development, coping, and psychological adjustment during a life of transition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 102–111. Buehler, R., Griffin, D., & Ross, M. (1994). Exploring the ‘‘planning fallacy’’: Why people underestimate their task completion times. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 366–381. Carver, C. S. (1998). Resilience and thriving: issues models and linkages. Journal of Social Issues, 54, 245–266. Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 267–283. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75. Fossum, T. A., Weyant, S. A., Etter, L., & Feldman-Barrett, L. (1998). A Short and Simple Alternative to Long Personality Questionnaires. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Society, Washington, DC, May. Furnham, A. (1983). Social difficulty in three cultures. International Journal of Psychology, 18, 215–228. Furukawa, T., & Shibayama, T. (1994). Factors influencing adjustment of high school students in an international exchange program. Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases, 182, 709–714. Gudykunst, W. B. (1995). Anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) theory. In R. L. Wiseman (Ed.). Intercultural communication theory (pp. 8–58). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gudykunst, W. B. (1998). Applying anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) theory to intercultural adjustment training. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22, 227–250. Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., Horgan, D. D., & Rakow, E. A. (2000). Test prediction and performance in a classroom context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 160–170. Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources. A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44, 513–544. Hobfoll, S. E., & Shirom, A. (2001). Conservation of resources theory: Applications to stress and management in the workplace. In R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.). Handbook of organizational behavior, (2nd Ed.). New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc. Kim, Y. Y. (2001). Becoming intercultural: an integrative theory of communication and cross-cultural adaptation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Kim, Y. Y., & Gudykunst, W. (Eds.) (1988). Cross-cultural adaptation: current approaches, Vol. 11. Sage: Thousand Oaks. Koriat, A. (1997). Monitoring one’s own knowledge during study: a cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 349–370. Lazarus, R. S. (1999). Stress and emotion: a new synthesis. NY: Springer Publishing. Lopez, S. J., Ciarlelli, R., Coffman, L., Stone, M., & Wyatt, L. (2000). Diagnosing for strengths: on measuring hope building blocks. In C. R. Snyder (Ed.). Handbook of hope: theory, measures, and applications (pp. 57–85). New York: Academic Press. Matsumoto, D., Leroux, J. A., Bernhard, R., & Gray, H. (in press). Unraveling the psychological correlates of intercultural adjustment potential. International Journal of Intercultural relation. Matsumoto, D., Leroux, J. A., Iwamato, M., Choi, J. W., Rogers, D., Tatani, H., & Uchida, H. (2001a). The robustness of the intercultural adjustment potential scale (ICAPS): the search for a universal psychological engine of adjustment. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 25, 483–510. Matsumoto, D., Leroux, J. A., Ratzlaff, C., Tatani, H., Uchida, H., Kim, C., & Araki, S. (2001b). Development and validation of a measure of intercultural adjustment potential in Japanese sojourners: The Intercultural Adjustment Potential Scale (ICAPS). International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 1–28. McGuire, M., & McDermott, S. (1988). Communication in assimilation, deviance, and alienation states. In Y. Y. Kim, & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds.). Cross-cultural adaptation (pp. 90–105). Newbury Park CA: Sage.

ARTICLE IN PRESS V. Savicki et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (2004) 311–329

329

Oberg, K. (1960). Culture shock: adjustment to new culture environments. Practical Anthropology, 7, 182–197. Pederson, P. (1995). The five stages of culture shock: critical incidents around the world. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Peterson, C. (2000). The future of optimism. American Psychologist, 55, 44–55. Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping, and health: assessment and implications of generalized outcome expectancies. Health Psychology, 4, 219–247. Searle, W., & Ward, C. (1990). The prediction of psychological and sociocultural adjustment during crosscultural transitions. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 14, 449–464. Seligman, M. E. P. (1991). Learned optimism. NY: Knopf. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 5–14. Shin, H., & Abell, N. (1999). The homesickness and contentment scale: developing a culturally sensitive measure of adjustment for Asians. Research on Social Work Practice, 9, 45–60. Snyder, C. R. (Ed.) (2000). Handbook of hope: theory, measures, and applications. New York: Academic Press. Snyder, C. R., Cheavens, J., & Sympson, S. C. (1997). Hope: An individual motive for social competence. Group Dynamics Theory, Research, and Practice, 1, 107–118. Tajfel, H. (Ed.) (1978). Differentiation between social groups: studies in the psychology of intergroup relations. London: Academic Press. Trower, P., Bryant, B., & Argyle, M. (1978). Social skills and mental health. London: Methuen. Ward, C. (2001). The A, B, Cs of acculturation. In D. Matsumoto (Ed.). Handbook of Culture and Psychology (pp. 411–446). New York: Oxford University Press. Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1993). Where’s the ‘‘culture’’ in cross-cultural transition? Comparative studies of sojourner adjustment. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 24, 221–249.