Elsevier

Personality and Individual Differences

Volume 119, 1 December 2017, Pages 307-310
Personality and Individual Differences

Short Communication
Belief in polyculturalism and cultural intelligence: Individual- and country-level differences

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.08.006Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Belief in polyculturalism predicts cultural intelligence (CQ) in 2 country samples.

  • Country-level difference in CQ mediated by polyculturalism.

  • Polyculturalism associated with individual- and country-level differences in CQ.

  • Results contribute to emerging literature on predictors of variations in CQ.

Abstract

Cultural intelligence (CQ) is a construct associated with effective functioning in intercultural contexts. We propose that polyculturalism – the belief that cultures are connected and mutually influencing each other – is an individual-difference factor that can explain individual- and country-level differences in CQ. Regression analysis showed that polyculturalism significant predicts CQ in samples from Australia and China. Mediation analysis further showed that the average CQ difference between the two countries can be partially accounted for by polyculturalism. Implications for the development of CQ in individuals and groups are discussed.

Introduction

Cultural intelligence or CQ is defined as an individual's capability to function effectively in social environments with people from different cultures (Earley & Ang, 2003). CQ is associated with numerous outcomes such as cultural adjustment (Guðmundsdóttir, 2015), intercultural cooperation and negotiations (Imai & Gelfand, 2010), and cross-cultural communication (Presbitero, 2017). Given its importance, studies have inquired into factors that relate to individual differences in CQ. We seek to contribute to this emerging area of inquiry by looking into the role of lay theories of culture in predicting individual- and country-level differences in CQ.

The conceptualization of CQ is anchored on Sternberg's (1985) triarchic theory of intelligence that highlights the importance of motivational, mental, and behavioral capabilities for effective functioning. In particular, CQ makes reference to the contextual dimension of intelligence, which involves adapting behaviors to function more effectively in culturally diverse contexts (Earley & Ang, 2003). CQ is studied as an individual difference factor with four dimensions – motivational, cognitive, metacognitive, behavioral – that refer to interactions in intercultural social contexts (Van Dyne, Ang, & Koh, 2008).

As mentioned earlier, CQ is associated with measures of effectiveness in intercultural contexts. High CQ levels enable individuals to check the accuracy of their cultural assumptions and adjust their strategies to suit the requirements of the cultural contexts (Van Dyne et al., 2012). Intercultural negotiators with higher CQ yielded higher profit compared to those with lower CQ (Imai & Gelfand, 2010). Employees with high CQ showed better adjustment both at work and non-work environments (Lin, Chen, & Song, 2012).

In recent years, there has been growing interest in identifying factors that influence the development of CQ. Exposure to varied cultures as measured by prior international experiences (Takeuchi, Tesluk, Yun, & Lepak, 2005) and number of countries visited (Crowne, 2013) are predictors of CQ. Individual differences factors like self-efficacy (MacNab & Worthley, 2012), extraversion and openness (Presbitero, 2016) are also associated with CQ. To this emerging research corpus, we seek to contribute by studying the role of lay theories of culture in predicting individual- and country-level differences in CQ.

We propose that another individual-difference factor – lay theories of culture – could explain differences in CQ. Lay theories of culture like multiculturalism and polyculturalism, also referred to as diversity ideologies (Cho, Morris, Slepian, & Tadmor, 2017) or intergroup ideologies, pertain to core beliefs about cultures and how they relate to each other (Rosenthal & Levy, 2010). The lay theories function like informal theories; the core ideas direct people's perceptions and guide thoughts and actions (Hong, Levy, & Chiu, 2001).

Multiculturalism refers to beliefs associated with the importance of being aware of, sensitive to, and tolerant of cultural group differences (Vorauer, Gagnon, & Sasaki, 2009). Its core assumptions refer to how cultural groups have distinctive histories, traditions, and values, and how members of cultural groups should be allowed to express and uphold their cultural practices. In contrast, polyculturalism refers to beliefs on how cultural groups are connected with and are influencing each other (Rosenthal & Levy, 2010). Its core assumptions relate to how cultures have interacted with each other throughout history through various forms of cultural contact. While multiculturalism's emphasizes respect for cultural differences, polyculturalism highlights recognition of cultural connections.

Both lay theories are associated with various positive intergroup processes and outcomes such as less ethnocentrism and ingroup bias (Vorauer et al., 2009), support for prodiversity policies, interest in diversity, comfort with intergroup differences (Rosenthal & Levy, 2012), and willingness for intergroup contact (Bernardo, Rosenthal, & Levy, 2013). We propose that the common belief on the importance of culture make the two lay theories conceptually aligned with CQ. Without assuming causality between lay theories and CQ, we argue that the core beliefs of polyculturalism and multiculturalism predispose individuals to develop CQ. For example, recognition of cultural connections (polyculturalism) could underlie the motivation to acquire more knowledge about other cultures. Respect for cultural differences (multiculturalism) might also guide the dimensions of CQ related to adjusting thoughts and actions in intercultural contexts. But multiculturalism sometimes relates to stronger cultural stereotyping and bias (Chao, Kung, & Yao, 2015); and whereas polyculturalism relates to greater interest in culturally mixed experiences, multiculturalism does not (Cho et al., 2017). We, therefore, hypothesize that belief in polyculturalism is associated with individual differences in CQ; but with multiculturalism's equivocal intergroup consequences, we hypothesize no relationship between multiculturalism and CQ.

We extend this hypothesis to possible group-level differences in CQ. Although CQ is not intended to differentiate among social groups, it is conceivable that there might be society-level differences in the average CQ of individuals in these societies. As intercultural contact is a factor associated with CQ (Kim & Van Dyne, 2012), people in more multiethnic societies (e.g., Australia) are more likely to experience intercultural contact compared to people in more ethnically homogenous ones (e.g., China). It is possible that on the average, CQ levels would he higher in the former societal groups. We hypothesize that such society-level differences in CQ would also be associated with polyculturalism. That is, the difference in society- or country-level CQ could be explained by a corresponding difference in belief in polyculturalism. Note that in CQ research there is no value in labeling one society/country as higher or lower in CQ. However, in this study we compare two country samples to provide another type of evidence for how polyculturalism relates to CQ. Core ideas of some lay theories may be more actively engaged in social discourses in some societies, making the lay theories more chronically accessible in individuals living in such societies (Hong et al., 2001). For example, discourses on how cultures mutually influence each other may be more common in multiethnic countries; and thus, polyculturalism might be more chronically accessible for individuals living in such countries and might relate to CQ in those individuals.

We study the relationship between polyculturalism and CQ in samples from Australia and China, two countries that differ in ethnic diversity. One typical measure of ethnic diversity is the percentage of foreign-born population. Australia's and China's foreign-born population are 28% and 0.05%, respectively (International Organization for Migration, 2015). The Australian sample was recruited in Sydney were the foreign-born population is 35%; the Chinese sample was recruited in Macau, a special administrative regions, where the foreign-born population is 5.4%. We first hypothesize that in each sample, belief in polyculturalism (but not in multiculturalism) would predict CQ. Second, we hypothesize that there will be average differences in CQ between the two country samples, and that this difference could be explained by country-level differences in polyculturalism.

To test our first hypothesis, we regress CQ to polyculturalism and multiculturalism for each country sample. To test the second hypothesis we apply the analytic procedure prescribed for linkage studies in cross-cultural research (Matsumoto & Yoo, 2006). The procedure aims to empirically link country-level differences in a variable to a cultural source hypothesized to explain the country-level difference. The procedure uses mediation analysis and with a significant mediation effect, “the researcher is empirically justified in claiming that that specific aspect of culture…is linked to the differences observed” (Matsumoto & Yoo, 2006, p. 241). Linkage studies typically use hierarchical regression, path analysis, or both (see Kurman, Liem, Ivancovsky, Morio, & Lee, 2015) to test mediation; we also use both in this study.

Section snippets

Participants

For the Australia sample, 141 university students (86 male; age M = 19.61, SD = 1.44) were recruited from classes; they answered the questionnaires as part of a class activity and received no credit. For the China sample, 300 students (131 male; age M = 19.02, SD = 1.30) were recruited from a university's research participants pool and received credit. For both countries, only students who gave informed consent answered the questionnaire, consistent with procedures approved by the research ethics

Results

Table 1 summarizes the descriptive statistics for the complete sample and the two country-samples and shows that all three variables are moderately related to each other. For each country, regression analysis was used to test the hypothesis about polyculturalism, multiculturalism, and CQ. We included age and sex in the regression model as was done in previous CQ studies (e.g., Templer, Tay, & Chandrasekar, 2006). The results (see left portion of Table 2) are generally consistent with the

Discussion

This study aims to contribute to the emerging literature on factors related to the development of CQ. Previous studies identified personality and exposure to different cultures to be related to individual differences in CQ; to these our study contributes evidence suggesting that belief in the connectedness of cultures – or polyculturalism – relates to individual differences in CQ. We suggest that the core belief of polyculturalism is consistent with motivations and metacognitions that underlie

References (26)

  • P.C. Earley et al.

    Cultural intelligence: Individual interactions across cultures

    (2003)
  • Y. Hong et al.

    The contribution of the lay theories approach to the study of groups

    Personality and Social Psychology Review

    (2001)
  • International Organization for Migration

    World migration report 2015. Migrants and cities: New partnerships to manage mobility.

    (2015)
  • Cited by (0)

    This research was supported by a grant from the University of Macau Research Development and Administration Office (Project No. MYRG2014-00098-FSS). The researchers thank Man Wai Lei, Yang Fuming, and Mao Sijie for their valuable assistance in various phases of the study.

    View full text