This study investigated the relationship between cultural influence and people’s daily media choices. From the perspective of high-context and low-context culture, an online survey was conducted with 351 participants from China and America filling out questions about culture content, media richness, and daily media choices. Findings not only supported the general notion that China has a relatively high-context culture while the US is comparatively low on the scale, but also indicated that people in different cultures perceive the same communication medium differently. The current study also found out that the perceived media richness of a medium may have a negative impact on the likelihood that it would be chosen for communication. Possible reasons for these findings were explained from the perspective of media richness and social presence. This study suggested further research on variables of convenience, privacy and power distance regarding the utilization of various communication media in different contexts.
AlbersDN (1994) Relating Hofstede’s dimensions of culture to international variations in print advertisements: A comparison of appeals. PhD Thesis, University of Houston, USA.
2.
Biesenbach-LucasS (2007)
Students writing e-mails to faculty: An examination of e-politeness among native and non-native speakers of English. Language, Learning, and Technology11: 59–81.
3.
BouwmanHVan de WijngaertL (2002)
Content and context: An exploration of the basic characteristics of information needs. New Media & Society4: 329–353.
4.
BresnahanTFBrynjolfssonEHittLM (2002)
Information technology, workplace organization, and the demand for skilled labor: Firm-level evidence. The Quarterly Journal of Economics117: 339–376.
5.
ChuaEGGudykunstWB (1987)
Conflict resolution styles in low- and high-context cultures. Communication Research Reports4: 32–38.
6.
Choe Y (2001) Intercultural conflict patterns and intercultural training implications for Koreans. Paper presented at the 16th Biennal World Communication Association Conference, Cantabria, Spain.
7.
ClarkHH (1992) Arenas of Language Use.
Chicago:
University of Chicago Press and Center for the Study of Language and Information, pp. 419–844.
8.
ClarkHHBrennanES (1991)
Grounding in communication. Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition13: 127–149.
9.
ClarkHHWilkes-GibbsD (1986)
Referring as a collaborative process.Cognition22: 1–39.
10.
CulnanJMMarkusLM (1987) Information technologies. In: Handbook of Organizational Communication: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Newbury Park: Sage, pp. 420–443.
11.
DaftLRWigintonCJ (1979)
Language and organization. Academy of Management Review4: 179–191.
12.
DaftRLLengelRH (1984)
Information richness. A new approach to managerial behavior and organization design. Research in Organizational Behavior6: 191–233.
13.
DaftRLLengelRH (1986)
Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science32: 554–571.
14.
DaftRLLengelRHTrevinoLK (1987)
Message equivocality, media selection, and manager performance: Implications for information systems. MIS Quarterly11: 355–366.
15.
DaftRLMacintoshNB (1981)
A tentative exploration into the amount and equivocality of information processing in organizational work units. Administrative Science Quarterly26: 207–224.
16.
DennisARKinneyST (1998)
Testing media richness theory in the new media: The effects of cues, feedback, and task equivocality. Information Systems Research9: 256–274.
17.
DowneyE (2010) E-Government Website Development: Future Trends and Strategic Models.
Hershey:
IGI Global, pp. 162–163.
18.
DuncanSJr (1973)
Toward a grammar for dyadic conversation. Semiotica9: 29–46.
19.
El-ShinnawayMMarkusLM (1997)
The poverty of media richness theory: Explaining people’s choice of electronic mail vs. voice mail. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies46: 443–467.
20.
El-ShinnawayMMarkusM (1998)
Acceptance of communication media in organizations: Richness or features?IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication41: 242–253.
21.
FulkJSteinfieldCWSchmitzJ, et al. (1987)
A social information processing model of media use in organizations. Communication Research14: 529–552.
GudykunstWB (1997)
Cultural variability in communication. Communication Research24: 327–348.
24.
Gudykunst WB and Nishida T (1993) Closeness in interpersonal relationships in Japan and the United States. Japanese Journal of Social Psychology 8(2), 85–97.
25.
GudykunstWBMatsumotoY (1996)
Cross-cultural variability of communication in personal relationships.Communication in Personal Relationships Across Cultures2: 19–56.
26.
GudykunstWBMatsumotoYTing-ToomeyS, et al. (1996)
The influence of cultural individualism-collectivism, self construals, and individual values on communication styles across cultures. Human Communication Research22: 510–543.
27.
GudykunstWBNishidaT (1986)
Attributional confidence in low‐ and high‐context cultures. Human Communication Research12: 525–549.
28.
HackmanJR (1990)
Groups that work (and those that don’t).Human Resource Planning15: 87–89.
HasegawaTGudykunstWB (1998)
Silence in Japan and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology29:668–684.
31.
HofstedeG (1980) Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values.
Beverly Hill:
Sage.
32.
HuangLLuMWongBK (2003)
The impact of power distance on email acceptance: Evidence from the PRC. Journal of Computer Information Systems44: 93–101.
33.
HuangWWatsonRTWeiKK (1998)
Can a lean e-mail medium be used for rich communication? A psychological perspective. European Journal of Information Systems7: 269–274.
34.
KahaiSSCooperRB (2003)
Exploring the core concepts of media richness theory: The impact of cue multiplicity and feedback immediacy on decision quality. Journal of Management Information Systems20: 263–299.
35.
KaleSH (1991)
Culture‐specific marketing communications: An analytical approach. International Marketing Review8: 18–31.
36.
KatzEBlumlerJGGurevitchM (1973)
Uses and gratifications research. The Public Opinion Quarterly37: 509–523.
37.
KimDPanYParkHS (1998)
High-versus low-context culture: A comparison of Chinese, Korean, and American cultures. Psychology and Marketing15: 507–521.
38.
KingRXiaW (1997)
Media appropriateness: Effects of experience on communication media choice. Decision Science28: 877–910.
39.
KraussRMBrickerPD (1967)
Effects of transmission delay and access delay on the efficiency of verbal communication. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America41: 286–292.
40.
KraussRMWeinheimerS (1966)
Concurrent feedback, confirmation, and the encoding of referents in verbal communication.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology4: 343–346.
41.
KrautRGalegherJFishR, et al. (1992)
Task requirements and media choice in collaborative writing. Human-Computer Interaction7: 375–407.
42.
LeavittHJMuellerRA (1951)
Some effects of feedback on communication. Human Relations4: 401–410.
43.
LengelRHDaftRL (1989)
The selection of communication media as an executive skill. Academy of Management Executive2: 225–232.
44.
LeonardKMVan ScotterJRPakdilF (2009)
Culture and communication cultural variations and media effectiveness. Administration & Society41: 850–877.
45.
LeungK (1997) Negotiation and reward allocations across cultures. In: EarleyPCErezM (eds) The New Lexington Press Management and Organization Sciences Series and New Lexington Press Social and Behavioral Sciences Series. New Perspectives on International Industrial/Organizational Psychology.
San Francisco:
The New Lexington Press/Jossey-Bass Publishers, pp. 640–675.
46.
MarkusML (1994)
Electronic mail as the medium of managerial choice. Organization Science5: 502–527.
47.
McGrathJE (1984) Groups: Interaction and Performance.
Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice-Hall.
48.
MillsJClarkMS (1982) Exchange and communal relationships. In WheelerL (ed) Review of Personality and Social Psychology. 3rd ed.
Beverly Hills:
Sage, pp. 121–144.
49.
OhashiR (2000) High/low-context communication: Conceptualization and scale development. PhD Thesis, Michigan State University, USA.
50.
OhbuchiKFukushimaOTedeschiJT (1999)
Cultural values in conflict management: Goal orientation, goal attainment, and tactical decision. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology30: 51–71.
51.
Okabe R (1983) Cultural assumptions of east and west: Japan and the United States. In Gudykunst (Ed.), W. B. Intercultural communication theory: Current perspectives. Thousand Oaks (pp. 21–44). CA: Sage Publications.
52.
RiceRE (1992) Contexts of research on organizational computer-mediated communication: A recursive review. In: LeaM (ed) Contexts of Computer-Mediated Communication.
Birmingham:
Harvester-Wheatsheaf, pp. 113–144.
53.
RiceREShookDE (1988)
Access to, usage of, and outcomes from an electronic messaging system. ACM Transactions on Information Systems6: 255–276.
54.
RichardsonRMSmithSW (2007)
The influence of high/low-context culture and power distance on choice of communication media: Students’ media choice to communicate with professors in Japan and America. International Journal of Intercultural Relations31: 479–501.
55.
RobertLDennisA (2005)
Paradox of richness: A cognitive model of media choice. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication48: 10–21.
56.
SchwartzSH (1994) Beyond Individualism/Collectivism: New Cultural Dimensions of Values.
Beverly Hills:
Sage.
57.
ShortJWilliamsEChristieB (1976) The Social Psychology of Telecommunications.
London:
John Wiley & Sons.
58.
ShuperPASorrentinoRM (2004)
Minority versus majority influence and uncertainty orientation: Processing persuasive messages on the basis of situational expectancies.The Journal of Social Psychology144: 127–147.
59.
SingelisTMBrownWJ (1995)
Culture, self, and collectivist communication linking culture to individual behavior.Human Communication Research21: 354–389.
60.
SorrentinoRMRoneyCJ (2000)
Uncertainty orientation, achievement-related motivation, and task diagnosticity as determinants of task performance. Social Cognition4: 420–436.
61.
SorrentinoRMSmithsonMHodsonGet al. (2003)
The theory of uncertainty orientation: A mathematical reformulation. Journal of Mathematical Psychology47: 132–149.
62.
SproullLKieslerS (1986)
Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science32: 1492–1512.
63.
SteinfieldCW (1986)
Computer-mediated communication in an organizational setting: Explaining task-related and socioemotional uses. Annals of the International Communication Association9: 777–804.
64.
StraubDKeilMBrennerW (1997)
Testing the technology acceptance model across cultures: A three country study. Information & Management1: 1–11.
65.
Te’eniD (2001)
Review: A cognitive-affective model of organizational communication for designing IT. MIS Quarterly25: 251–312.
66.
TrevinoLDaftRLLengelRH (1990) Understanding managers’ media choices: A symbolic interactionist perspective. In FulkJSteinfieldCW (eds) Organizations and Communication Technology.
Newbury Park:
Sage, pp. 71–95.
67.
TriandisHC (2001)
Individualism-collectivism and personality.Journal of Personality69: 907–924.
68.
Tsujimura A (1987) Some characteristics of the Japanese way of communication. In Communication Theory (pp. 115–126). Academic Press.
69.
UsunierJRoulinN (2010)
The influence of high- and low-context communication styles on the design, content, and language of business-to-business web sites. Journal of Business Communication47: 189–227.
70.
WestmyerSDiCioccioRRubinR (1998)
Appropriateness and effectiveness of communication channels in competent interpersonal communication. Journal of Communication48: 27–48.
71.
WurtzE (2005)
Intercultural communication on web sites: A cross-cultural analysis of web sites from high-context cultures and low-context cultures. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication11: 274–299.
72.
YngveVH (1970) On getting a word in edgewise. Paper presented at Sixth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago, IL.
