Having studied psychology for a little while, I was always quick at jumping in to argue that the ‘universal theory’ that I was being taught really was not universal  – I knew too much about cross-culture.  My exasperated teacher acknowledged the validity of my claims but explained I had to learn to walk before I could run and that we would (eventually) study the impact of culture.

However, in recent years, culturally oriented psychologists have sought to show that emotions are  “not the direct outcome of physiological or neurological mechanisms…[but] are always situated and embedded in specific cultural contexts. Accordingly, they are fully saturated with cultural meanings.”

One thing I didn’t learn back then and have been delighted to encounter is some research on the cross-cultural differences in the concept of happiness via Mind Hacks. So, are there cross-cultural differences in happiness? Apparently, yes. And the differences are all to do with cultural variations in the perception of the self.

For North Americans and Europeans, happiness tends to be defined in terms of personal achievement and happiness is best predicted by self-esteem. For East Asians, happiness tends to be defined in terms of interpersonal connectedness and happiness is best predicted by how well embedded the self is in a social network.

Again, as interculturalists, we are reminded of the Individualism-Collectivism dimension of culture. However, when talking about Collectivism and social harmony I somehow hadn’t managed to make this deep connection with happiness.

 The West has a strong belief in independence and autonomy of the self (Individualism). The self is believed to be the centre of thought, action and motivation and happiness is to be found in personal striving. “Happiness is likely to be constructed as personal achievement”.

For East Asian cultures, the self-in-relationship-with-others (Collectivism) is believed to be the locus of thought, action, and motivation. Individuals in these societies are highly motivated to adjust themselves to fit into pertinent social relations. Commitments to social roles, social obligations, and readiness to respond to social expectations are all manifestations of this socially oriented motivation for realizing an interdependent self. Happiness is to be found in  positive social realtionships and mutual sympathy. “Happiness is constructed as realisation of social harmony.”

The research concludes that emotions are  “are fully saturated with cultural meanings.”

Footnote: aim of research to re-evaluate the common understanding of emotions as biologically determined and therefore universal, regardless of where or by whom they are experienced. Particpants in the research were East Asians (represented by Filipino and Japanese participants) and European-Americans (represented by people living in the US). For more information on MindHacks the book by Tom Stafford and Matt Webb and blog

Having had a client whose blueprint for a very hush-hush new radar system was copied and manufactured by the potential customer they were in discussions with in the Far East , I’ve witnessed the problems connected with holding on to intellectual property rights. (See below two new books on the subject). That incident happened over ten years ago and still other similar battles are erupting all over the globe.

The scope of the problems surrounding intellectual property rights in our globalised world is vast – how far can copyright and patent-holders go in preventing others from taking their property? Intellectual property protection is not a field of bright lines and clear rules. And, the economic consequences of the dispute are also immense.

What is a nations culture? Many Governments and institutions around the world are engaged in a continual effort to preserve our heritage by restoring or maintaining ancient monuments and historic buildings. And, UNESCO’s programme aiming at the preservation and dissemination of valuable cultural heritages has been successful over the years in identifying and putting together some of the world’s most valuable archive holdings and library collections.

However, a nation’s cultural heritage often goes deeper than its physical ‘tangible’ manifestations. Each culture has its own ‘intangible cultural heritage’. But what is that?

According to UNESCO and the 2003 “Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage”, the intangible cultural heritage – or living heritage – is the mainspring of our cultural diversity and its maintenance a guarantee for continuing creativity.

The Convention states that the ICH is manifested, among others, in the following ways:

  • Oral traditions and expressions including language as a vehicle of the intangible cultural heritage;
  • Performing arts (such as traditional music, dance and theatre);
  • Social practices, rituals and festive events;
  • Knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe;
  • Traditional craftsmanship.

Anthropologists and interculturalists alike will express the importance of story-telling in relation to the embodiment of a culture. It’s good to know that UNESCO aims to help us be more aware of the importance of our intangible assets.

Most Westerners get confused about when a “Yes” means “Yes” when interacting with people from the East. Now, it seems there is more to get confused about, with a study revealing that even facial expressions can be a source of confusion too. This time it is the East Asians who have a tendency to misinterpret more than Westerners.

It would appear that people from different cultural groups observe different parts of the face when trying to interpret expressions and this leads to the misinterpretation. East Asians tend to focus on the eyes of the other person, while Western subjects take in the whole face, including the eyes and the mouth. Westerners tend to correctly identify the emotions in both white and Asian faces. East Asians are more likely than Westerners to read the expression for “fear” as “surprise”, and “disgust” as “anger”.

This is even reflected in the differing “emoticons” – typographical characters used to create rudimentary faces in emails or text messages – used by the two cultures. Eastern versions focus on the eyes, and western ones change the mouth to depict varying emotions.

The findings suggest that the communication of emotions is more complicated than had previously been believed. Rachael Jack, the psychologist who led the study, said: “Understanding facial expressions of emotion is an essential skill for effective human interaction and although many consider facial expressions to be the universal language of emotion, our research questions this and highlights the true complexities of cross-cultural communication.”

However, it is important to highlight here that in eastern cultures it is less socially acceptable to display negative emotions so they are not atuned to interpret negative facial expressions as they are rarely seen. Western societies are very individualistic, allowing us to express personal opinions explicitly – good or bad.  This is not acceptable in the East.

All in all, the study adds weight to what interculturalists have known for years: that what have always been considered to be “universal” expressions (by those in the West) do not take into account cultural differences.

The Study: Researchers at Glasgow University compared the way 13 Western Caucasians and 13 Korean, Japanese and Chinese participants interpreted the same set of facial expressions depicting seven main facial expressions: happy, sad, neutral, angry, disgusted, fearful and surprised. They used eye movement trackers to monitor where the participants were looking when interpreting the expressions. A computer programme given the same information from the eyes as the East Asian observers was similarly unable to distinguish between the emotions of disgust and anger, and fear and surprise.

The paper, entitled “Cultural Confusions Show that Facial Expressions are Not Universal,” is published today in the journal Current Biology. It states that the Eastern participants used a culturally specific decoding strategy that was inadequate to reliably distinguish the universal facial expressions of fear and disgust. It concluded that information from the eyes is often ambiguous and confusing in these expressions, with consequences for cross-cultural communication and globalisation.

Being an interculturalist is one of the most fascinating professions –
you learn something new everday. Interestingly, I was speaking to an anthropologist friend of mine recently and learned that in her professions anthroplogists aren’t considered true anthropologists until they spend five years in the community that they study. As an interculturalist I can quite understand why that is…

The election of Barack Obama must be a turning point in history as we can never go back to a time where being President of the USA is solely a job for white men. It is interesting to debate and reflect on what influence this will have on the intercultural field and on cultural diversity issues. Undoubtedly he seems to have a natural ability to mix and match with his fellow human beings in a way that George Bush could never dream of.  His skin colour, minority background, intelligence and genuine respect for others of difference has him being a role model for someone with Cultural Intelligence – long may he live up to this – there are so few people around who can.