-
8/2/2019 Power relationship and streotyping
1/11
POWER RELATIONSHIP AND
STEREOTYPING
Dita Grace and Wande Fitri
-
8/2/2019 Power relationship and streotyping
2/11
POWER RELATIONS AND STEREOTYPING
Here , important intercultural communicationresearch has focused
on :
1. Power relations
2. Stereotyping and group marking
3. The characterization of national culturesdifferences
-
8/2/2019 Power relationship and streotyping
3/11
HOSTEDE AND THE DIMENSIONS OF CULTURE
Culture? Hofstede says :The collective programming of the mind
which
distinguishes the members of one group orcategory of people from
another.
the dimensions of Hofstede researches, suchas:
- Power distance
- Uncertainty avoidance- Individualism / collectivism
- Masculinity / feminity
- Long term / short term orientation
-
8/2/2019 Power relationship and streotyping
4/11
THE DIMENSIONS IN THIS BOOK , 4:
1. Power distance
= degree to which member a culture acceptinstitutions and
organizations having power
SEE PAGE 82 the characteristics !!!!
Ex:
High PDI = clases Latin, Asian and Africancount
Low PDI = Germanic
-
8/2/2019 Power relationship and streotyping
5/11
UNCERTAINTY AVOIDANCE
It is degree to which members feel ambiguityand uncertainty.
Hofstede divides 2, such as:
Weak UAI / low UAI for example: Anglo,Nordic and China
cultures.
High level UAI / Strong example : UAI inLatin countries, Japan
and German-
speaking nations
-
8/2/2019 Power relationship and streotyping
6/11
INDIVIDUALISM /COLLECTIVISM
Hostede suggests that individualist culturesplace a higher
emphasis on individual goalsin comparison to group achievements
in
collectivist cultures.
-
8/2/2019 Power relationship and streotyping
7/11
MASCULINITY / FEMINITY
Masculine cultures: the culture has preferencesfor achievement,
heroism, assertiveness andmaterial success / achievement-oriented
ex:
Japan, Germany, Austria and Germany Feminity culture: viewed as
having a
preference for relationships, modesty, caring for
week and quality for life / has greater focus onrelationships ad
maintaining a balance amongpeople, ex: Nordic countries and
Netherlands
-
8/2/2019 Power relationship and streotyping
8/11
POWER RELATIONS IN INTERACTION
Social expectation and conventions
Giddens says that participation in aninteraction can be
sufficient to enable person
to acquire same level of control over theconversation.
Ex: the prisoner can maintain social control
in solitary confinement by refusing eat foodas a protest.But
from the prisoner to prisonguard is in asymmetrical power
relationship,even though the prisoner can control within
interaction.
-
8/2/2019 Power relationship and streotyping
9/11
ACCESS TO INFORMATION AND RESOURCES
Its influence the power relationship between
participants.
Ex: participants = how access to informationdiffers as a results
of socialeconomics,educational and culture background.
The power relationship = how this in turn
impacts in given interactions and or intuition.
-
8/2/2019 Power relationship and streotyping
10/11
STEREOTYPING AND IDEOLOGY
Ideology -> stereotypingany two cultures or social groups are
polaropposites
In negative stereotyping, there are 4 majorsteps :
- Contrast 2 cultures / grop on bassi of a singledimensions.
- Focus on this artificial and ideological differenceas a
problem for communication
- Assign a positive value to one strategy/ group
and a negative value to the other strategy or
-
8/2/2019 Power relationship and streotyping
11/11
In positive stereotyping , there are 2 mainstrategies :
1. Solidarity fallacy : relates to falselycombining ones group
with some group in
order to establish common ground on onesingle dimensions.
2. Lumpin fallacy : a person makes a falsegrouping in reference
to two other groups
