Introduction: See Dr

Intercultural Conflicts 1

Are you satisfied with your roommates? Communication Strategies of Korean Students in Conflict with American Roommates

Khisu Beom ([email protected])

Abstract

This study is based on an assumption that people’s ways of managing conflict in the “intercultural” communication contexts may be different from the ways they used for resolving conflict in the “intracultural” communication contexts. The central purpose of this study is to uncover the unique communication styles that are used by a cultural group in intercultural conflict situations. More specifically, this study examine what communication strategies, such as competition, accommodation, compromising, avoidance, and collaboration, Korean students prefer to use for managing the conflict with their American roommates. This study also explores the relationship between Korean students’ communication strategies and their satisfaction with the interpersonal relationship, feeling of relationship growth, and satisfaction with conflict outcome. In addition, this study explores how gender and age variable are related with the patterns of communication strategies used by Korean students in cross-cultural conflict situations will be different from male to female and from the younger to the older students. The results showed that Korea students in the U.S use culturally “mixed” communication styles; that is, Korean students employed less competition and less avoidance than collaboration, compromise, and accommodation as their communication strategies for managing conflict with their American roommate. Korean male students prefer using avoidance and compromising rather than competition and collaboration more than Korean female students do. The older the Korean students are, the less competition and the more avoidance they prefer for managing conflict with their American roommates. Competition and avoidance are negatively related with the growth of and satisfaction with relationship with American roommates or satisfaction with conflict outcome. On the other hand, collaboration, accommodation, and compromise are generally good for the growth of and satisfaction with relationship with American roommates and satisfaction with conflict outcome. Implications of these results are discussed. Intercultural Conflicts 2

Are you satisfied with your roommates? Communication Strategies of

Korean Students in Conflict with American Roommates

In the global world, more and more people are going abroad for short or long time for business, vacation, study, immigration, and so on. Every society has become culturally heterogeneous. In our daily life, we can easily encounter people from different cultures. This increasing interaction with others from different cultures may potentially involve greater levels of strangeness and lower levels of familiarity than any other situation. This situation contains new, unfamiliar, atypical, and/or conspicuously different stimuli that are likely lead to increased conflict.

Conflict is an inevitable phenomenon in human interaction, especially in intercultural situations. Conflict is “the perceived and/or actual incompatibility of values, expectations, processes, or outcomes between two or more parties over substantive and/or relational issues” (Ting-Toomey, 1994, p. 360). Conflict comes from incompatible differences among participants in interaction. In the context of cross-cultural interaction, the possibility of conflict may be increased because people bring their own cultural values, beliefs, and attitudes, which are distinctive from those of opponents from different cultures. If these conflicts cannot be managed or resolved in appropriate ways, it sometimes can be transformed into the fatal outcomes such as

Cho, Seung-Hi’s gun-shot case at Verginia Tech campus.

Conflict can be dealt with in a variety of ways. Conflict management styles have been represented by two basic elements: assertiveness and cooperativeness

(Rahim, 2001). Several scholars (e.g., Black & Mouton, 1964; Thomas & Kilmann,

1974; and Rahim, 1983) have identified numerous conflict management styles. This study focuses on Thomas’s model of the styles of handling conflicts because it is Intercultural Conflicts 3 suitable for studying conflict management behaviors across the interpersonal and intercultural communication contexts that this study aims to cover. Thomas identified five conflict management styles: competition, collaboration, avoidance, accommodation, and compromising. Competition or dominating (high in assertiveness) is a style use by people who seek to achieve their own goals at the expense of others. Accommodation or obligating (high in cooperativeness) represents trying to satisfy the wishes of others at one’s own expense. Collaboration or integrating (high in both) is the preference for problem solving and seeking mutual satisfaction with the conflict outcome. Avoidance (low in both) is the ignoring the conflict and escaping from confrontation to the conflict. Compromise (mid-point) is a preference for finding practical and expedient mutually acceptable solution in which no one total win or lose.

Each culture has developed its unique styles of managing and resolving conflicts (Cushman & King, 1985; Lee & Rogan, 1991; Nomura & Barnlund, 1984;

Ting-Toomey & Oetzel, 2001). In the cross-comparison studies, the contrast of individualism and collectivism is the major concept used to explain cultural differences in communication styles (Wolfson & Norden, 1984; Ting-Toomey, 1988;

Ting-Toomey, Gao, Trubisky, Yang, Kim, Lin, & Nishida, 1991).

In a collectivistic society, such as China, Japan, and Korea, group interests are more important than individual desires. Group harmony is a very crucial value.

Individuals involved in conflict are willing to sacrifice their needs in order to maintain group harmony. On the other hand, people from collectivistic cultures manage the conflict with indirect communication styles. Therefore, conflict management styles often rely on accommodation and avoidance in collectivistic cultures. This style is closely associated with other-oriented face concerns (Ting-Toomey, 2005). In other to Intercultural Conflicts 4 maintain harmonious relationships with others, individuals in collectivistic cultures tend to try not threating others’ face directly so that they want to save other face even in conflict situations.

In an individualistic society, such as the U.S., individual interests are of more central concern than group interests. This individualism is based on the capitalism, which emphasizes individual’s right and individual’s success through competition with others. Also communication heavily relies on verbal symbols. When people are involved in conflict situation, they express their opinions directly, assertively, and even aggressively. Therefore, it can be said that conflict styles are very competitive in the individualistic culture. This style is connected to self-oriented face concerns in individualistic cultures (Ting-Toomey, 2005), which are distinctive from other- oriented face concerns in collectivistic cultures.

Although there have been several cross-cultural comparison studies of conflict management styles (e.g., Cushman & King, 1985; Lee & Rogan, 1991; Nomura &

Barnlund, 1984; Ting-Toomey & Oetzel, 2001; Wolfson & Norden, 1984), to date, there is a dearth of literature that focuses on the conflict in the context of intercultural interaction. It is unclear how short-term sojourners staying in other cultures, such as international students and businessmen/women, choose conflict strategies in intercultural communication settings. To achieve their final goal in a new culture, sojourners somewhat adjust themselves to the system of new people, norm, rule and values (Kim, 2002). Therefore, sojourners’ ways of managing conflict in the

“intercultural” communication contexts may be different from the ways they used for resolving conflict in the “intracultural” communication contexts. Based on this idea, the first research question of this study is set up as follows: Intercultural Conflicts 5

RQ1: What communication strategies, such as competition, accommodation, compromise, avoidance, and collaboration, do Korean students prefer using to manage the conflict with their American roommates?

It is expected that the people’s preferences for particular communication strategies for managing conflict are associated with demographics factors, i.e., gender and age. Some studies (e.g., Birditt, Fingerman, & Almeida, 2002; Tucker, Susan,

McHale, & Crouter, 2003) provide evidence that old people’s conflict styles are different from young people. Generally speaking, older people are less likely to use competition strategies than younger people. Additionally, Korabik, Baril, and Watson

(1993) found that there is a gender difference in terms of communication strategies in conflict situations—female workers are more likely to choose communication strategies of cooperation, accommodation, and compromising than male workers are.

Based on this idea, this study examines how age and gender are associated with communication strategies used to deal with conflict in the context of intercultural interactions.

RQ2: How are gender and age associated with communication strategies Korean students prefer using to manage the conflict with their American roommates?

Relationship growth and satisfaction with conflict opponents are associated with communication strategies in conflict situation (Cahn, 1987). Black and Mouton

(1964), in their theory, argued a collaborative style contributes toward relationship growth and satisfaction. Lim and Bowers (1991) found that integrating (collaboration) and avoidance face-work strategies are more likely to be used in the conflict with more intimate and interactive partners. Based on this idea, this study examines, in the context of cross-cultural interaction, the following two research questions: Intercultural Conflicts 6

RQ3: How are communication strategies of Korean students associated with their satisfaction levels of interpersonal relationships with American roommate?

RQ4: How are communication strategies of Korean students associated with their feeling of relationship growth after conflict with their American roommates?

Finally, we can expect that the feeling of the satisfaction with conflict outcomes is associated with the preference of communication strategies during the conflict with an opponent from a different culture. The fifth research question is:

RQ5: How are communication strategies of Korean students associated with their satisfaction levels with conflict outcome with American roommate?

In sum, the primary purpose of this study is to uncover the unique communication styles that are used by a cultural group in intercultural conflict situations. More specifically, this study focuses on Korean students’ communication strategies in intercultural conflicts with their American roommates. In addition, this study explores the relationship between Korean students’ communication strategies and their satisfaction with the interpersonal relationship and conflict outcome. This study is started with four basic assumptions: a) Because of their cultural background, the communication strategies of Korean students in cross-cultural conflict situations will have certain unique patterns; b) The patterns of communication strategies used by

Korean students in cross-cultural conflict situations will be different from male to female and from the younger to the older students; c) Korean students’ communication strategies in conflict with their American roommate will be related to their feeling of satisfaction and growth in their interpersonal relationship with their

American roommate; and d) Korean students’ communication strategies when in Intercultural Conflicts 7 conflict with their American roommate will be related to the level of the satisfaction with conflict outcomes.

Method

Participants and Procedures

Forty-five Korean students enrolled in regular classes of a large midwestern university in the U.S. were gathered through membership lists of Korean Student

Association. All participants are living with American roommates either on-campus dormitory or off-campus apartments or houses. The 45 subjects were consisted of 21 males (46.7%) and 24 females (53.3%). The respondents ranged in age from 19 to 47

(M = 28.7, SD = 3.5). The average length of stay in the U.S. was 32.7 months. The average of length of living with current American roommates is 5.1 months.

Participation in this study was absolutely voluntary.

Each participant was given a self-administered questionnaire. All participants were briefly explained the purpose of this study and then left alone to complete the questionnaire, which was picked up 10 minutes later.

Instruments

A questionnaire was developed to measure the variables: the five communication strategies in conflict, the level of relationship growth and satisfaction, and conflict outcome satisfaction. The questionnaire also included questions of age, gender, and length of stay in the U.S., etc. All questions were made with 7-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).

Communication strategies for conflict management. To measure the communication strategies, I used a modified version of Rahim’s (1983) Organization

Conflict Inventory (ROCI-II), which measured participants’ ideas about the communicate in conflict with their American roommates (see Appendix). From 28 Intercultural Conflicts 8 items of the ROCI-II, 27 items relevant to student sojourners were used in this study.

In the questionnaire, “supervisor” was changed to “American roommate” to reflect a specific conflict. For example, “I usually avoid open discussion of my differences with my supervisor” was changed to “I usually avoid open discussion of my differences with my American roommate.” Twenty-seven items consisted of seven- item collaboration style, six-item accommodation style, four-item compromise style, six-item avoidance style, and four-item competition style.

Table 1

A Modified Version of Rahim Organizational Conflict Inventory II (ROCI-II) of

Conflict Management Style Based on Rahim (1983)

1. I try to investigate an issue with my American roommate to find a solution acceptable to us. (Collaboration) 2. I generally try to satisfy the needs of my American roommate. (Accommodation) 3. I try to not to see my American roommate and avoid the conflict situation. (Avoidance) 4. I try to integrate my ideas with those of my American roommate to make a decision jointly. (Collaboration) 5. I try to work with my American roommate to find solutions to a problem, which satisfy our expectations. (Collaboration) 6. I usually avoid open discussion of my differences with my American roommate. (Avoidance) 7. I try to find a middle course to resolve a difficult situation. (Compromise) 8. I use my influence to get my ideas accepted. (Competition) 9. I wouldn’t admit I was wrong, instead I insist I was right. (Competition) 10. I usually admit the wishes of my American roommate. (Accommodation) 11. I give in to the wishes of my American roommate. (Accommodation) 12. I exchange an open conversation with my American roommate to solve a problem together. (Collaboration) 13. I usually allow concessions to my American roommate. (Accommodation) 14. I usually propose a middle ground for breaking deadlocks. (Compromise) 15. I negotiate with my American roommate so that a compromise can be reached. (Compromise) 16. I try to stay away from disagreement with my American roommate. (Avoidance) 17. I avoid an encounter with my American roommate. (Avoidance) 18. I usually try to make a decision I my favor. (Competition) 19. I often go along with the suggestions of my American roommate. (Accommdation) 20. I use “give and take” so that a compromise can be made. (Compromise) 21. I am generally firm in pursuing my side of the issue. (Competition) 22. I try to bring all our concerns out in the open so that the issues can be resolved in the best possible way. (Collaboration) 23. I collaborate with my American roommate to come up with decisions acceptable to us. (Collaboration) 24. I try to satisfy the expectations of my American roommate. (Accommodation) 25. I try to keep my disagreement with my American roommate to myself in order to avoid hard feelings. (Avoidance) 26. I try to avoid unpleasant exchanges with my American roommate. (Avoidance) 27. I try to work with my American roommate for a proper understanding of a problem. (Collaboration) Intercultural Conflicts 9

Relationship satisfaction. Two-item scale measured the relationship satisfaction. The items included, “I am satisfied with the personal relationship with my American roommate,” and “I am satisfied with living with my American roommate.”

Relationship growth. One-item scale was developed to measure the relationship growth after conflict. The item is, “As a result of the conflict, the relationship with my American roommate gets better.”

Conflict outcome satisfaction. One-item scale measured the conflict outcome satisfaction-“I am satisfied with the outcome of the conflict resolving.”

Results

RQ1: What communication strategies, among competition, accommodation, compromise, avoidance, and collaboration, do Korean students prefer using to manage the conflict with their American roommates?

As shown in Table 2, respondents indicated that the two most preferred communication strategies for them to manage the conflict with their American roommate were accommodation (M = 4.9) and collaboration (M = 4.9). They also rated the compromise relatively highly (M = 4.7) even though it was slightly lower than accommodation and collaboration. Avoidance strategy was rated moderately (M

= 4.3). On the other hand, the least favorable communication strategy of Korean students in conflict with their American roommates was competition strategy (M =

3.4). Intercultural Conflicts 10

Table 2

Gender difference of communication strategy in conflict

Collaboration Accommodation Competition Avoidance Compromise

Male (n = 21) 4.7 5.0 2.9 4.5 5.0

Female (n = 24) 5.1 4.9 3.7 4.1 4.4

Total (n = 45) 4.9 4.9 3.4 4.3 4.7

RQ2: How are gender and age associated with communication strategies that Korean students prefer using to manage the conflict with their American roommates?

As shown in Table 2, gender differences are found on competition and compromise styles. Women had higher competition style and lower compromising style than male did. Meanwhile, gender differences on accommodation, collaboration, and avoidance were not significantly large to consider.

Respondents’ age was positively correlated with the score of avoidance, r (43)

= .54, p = .038, and negatively correlated with competition style, r (43) = -.46, p = .

088. Older Korean students tended to use avoidance in conflict with their American students than younger Korean students. On the contrary, the older Korean students did not prefer competition strategy in conflict with their American roommates in comparison with the younger Korean students. Other three variables, collaboration, accommodation, and compromising, were not associated with subject’s age. Intercultural Conflicts 11

Table 3

Correlation between conflict management styles and relationship satisfaction/growth

and conflict-outcome satisfaction

Collaboration Accommodation Competition Avoidance Compromise

n = 45 n = 43 n = 45 n = 45 n = 45 Relationship .82** .34 -.49 .28 .31 satisfaction Relationship .42 .28 -13 -55* .62* growth Conflict-outcome .70** .41 -.08 -59* .64* satisfaction **p < .01 and *p < .05

RQ3: How are communication strategies of Korean students associated with their

satisfaction levels of interpersonal relationships with American roommate?

To examine the relation between communication strategies used in roommate

conflict situation and relationship satisfaction with the American roommate,

correlation codfficient tests were performed. As shown in Table 3, the two

communication strategies of collaboration and competition were strongly correlated

with the level of relationship satisfaction. Collaboration strategy was positively

correlated with the relationship satisfaction level. Competition strategy was negatively

associated with feeling of relationship satisfaction.

RQ4: How are communication strategies of Korean students associated with their

feeling of relationship growth after conflict with their American roommates?

As shown in Table 2, correlation coefficient tests revealed that avoidance

strategy in conflict situation was strongly, negatively associated with relationship Intercultural Conflicts 12 growth after conflict. On the other hand, compromise strategy was significantly, positively correlated with relationship growth. Collaboration was positively correlated with relationship growth, even though it was not significant, statistically.

RQ5: How are communication strategies of Korean students associated with their satisfaction levels with conflict outcome with American roommate?

A correlation coefficient test showed, as shown in Table 2, that the communication strategies of collaboration, avoidance, and compromise were significantly associated with conflict-outcome satisfaction. Collaboration and compromise were positively correlated with the level of conflict-outcome satisfaction.

On the contrary, avoidance was negatively correlated with the level of conflict- outcome satisfaction.

Discussion

The first objective of this study is to explore the conflict management styles that Korean students in U.S. prefer using to handle conflicts with their American roommates. The results showed that Korean students employed less competition and less avoidance than collaboration, compromise, and accommodation as their communication strategies for managing conflict with their American roommate. The findings that Korean subjects used more non-confrontational strategies (collaboration, compromise, and accommodation) than confrontational strategies (competition) are generally consistent with previous reports (Lee & Rogan, 1991; Ting-Toomey, et al.,

1991).

In addition, it is normally expected that people from a collectivistic culture tend to employ avoidance techniques in conflict situations in order to maintain personal relationships or group harmony. However, Korean students did not prefer Intercultural Conflicts 13 avoidance style during the conflict with their American roommates. This result may imply that Korea students in the U.S use culturally “mixed” communication styles in conflict situations. This may be due to the fact that they have adjusted themselves into the host (America) cultural value--less avoidance, direct communication styles, honest, and so on, simultaneously keeping their home-cultural value--less competition, emphasis on relationship and group harmony. This is somewhat different from Ting-Toomey, et al. (1991), which suggested that Koreans who were living in

Korea reported two lowest scores of competition and obliging (accommodation). This result may indicate that the conflict management styles in intercultural conflict situations are different from those in intracultural conflict situations.

The second intent of this study is to examine how Korean students’ age and gender variables are associated with their communication styles in conflict with

American roommates. The results revealed that the age variable was related with communication strategy in the intercultural conflict situations. The older the Korean students are, the less competition and the more avoidance they prefer for managing conflict with their American roommates. This result may imply that in comparison with younger Korean student, older students are still more saturated in the Korean traditional values—“keep harmony and personal relationship” by avoiding confrontation with opponent parties in conflict situations. This result is consistent with Lee and Rogan’s (1991) findings, which suggested that Korean people were more likely use non-confrontational styles as they got older.

The results showed that there is a gender difference in terms of communication strategies to deal with intercultural conflict situations. Korean male students prefer using avoidance and compromising rather than competition and collaboration to handle conflict situation with their American roommates more than Intercultural Conflicts 14

Korean female students. This finding is inconsistent with Lee and Rogan’s (1991) finding that Korean males prefer using collaboration or competition strategies rather than avoidance to deal with a conflict situation rather than avoidance to deal with a conflict situation more than Koran females do. More future research needs to test the gender difference in terms of conflict styles.

This study explored how Korean students’ conflict management styles are related to their satisfaction level with the personal relationship, their perception of relationship growth, and their satisfaction level with the conflict outcome. The results revealed that whatever their preference for communication strategies for managing conflict is, competition and avoidance strategies are negatively connected with high feelings of personal relationship growth, the relationship satisfaction with American roommates, and the satisfaction with conflict outcome. On the other hand, collaboration, accommodation, and compromise are generally good for the growth of and satisfaction with relationship with American roommates or conflict outcome. This result is in part consistent with Black and Mouton (1964) who argued a collaboration style contributes toward relationship growth and satisfaction. Also, this finding is, in general, consistent with Augsburger’s (1992) assumption on the notions of

“constructive and destructive conflict.”

Augsburger (1992) argued that constructive conflict is associated with cooperative communication style, which induces “perceived similarity, trust, open communication, flexibility, concern for the other, emphasis on mutual interests, and attraction between the party” (p. 50), while destructive conflict is associated with competitive atmosphere, which induces “threat, coercion, deception, suspicion, rigidity, faulty communication, and so on” (p.50). Intercultural Conflicts 15

In cooperative communication, communicators usually take win-win, both/and, and non-zero sum strategies. Through the cooperative conflict process, people’s relationships are getting healthier and stronger. In a productive conflict, both parties are mutually satisfied with the conflict outcome. On the other hand, the competitive communication styles are characterized as win-lose, either/or, and zero- sum strategies. After a competitive (destructive) conflict, personal relationships get weaker and even destroyed. This knowledge can help intercultural communicators to modify and adjust their normative expectation, attitudes, and behavior so that productive conflict is facilitated.

In spite of several valuable findings, this study, like any other study, includes some limitations to be resolved by future research. It seems to be unreasonable that the results of this study can be generalized in all intercultural conflict situation; that is, the small sample were selected from only one ethnic group in particular area at one time. Therefore, it is recommended for future research to re-test with a bigger sample size over an extended period of time combining interview data which can further verify the findings of this study. Intercultural Conflicts 16

References Augsburger, D. W. (1992). Conflict mediation across culture: Pathways and patterns. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster/John Knox. Birditt, K., Fingerman, K., & Almeida, D. (2002). Do we get better at picking our battles? Age differences in reactions to daily interpersonal tensions. The Gerontologist, 21-31. Blake, R R., & Mouton, J. S. (1964). The managerial grid. Houston: Gulf Publishing. Cahn, D. D. (1987). Letting Go. New York: The State University of New York. Cushman, D. P., & King, S. S. (1985). National and organizational cultures in conflict resolution: Japan, the United States, and Yugoslavia. In W. B. Gudykunst, L. Stewart & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), Culture and organizational processes: Conflict, negotiation and decision-making (pp. 114-133). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Kagan, S., & Madsen, M. (1972). Rivalry in Anglo American and Mexican children of two ages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 24, 214-220. Kim, Y. Y. (2002). Adapting to an unfamiliar culture: An interdisciplinary overview. In W. B. Gudykunst & B. Mody (Eds.), Handbook of international and intercultural communication (2nd ed.) (pp. 259-273). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage. Korabik, K., Baril, G. L., & Watson, C. (1993). Managers' conflict management style and leadership effectiveness: the moderating effects of gender. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 29, 405-421. Lim, T. S., & Bowers, J. (1991). Face-work: Solidarity, approbation, and tact. Human Communication Research, 17, 415-450. Nomura, N., & Barnlund, D. (1983). Patterns of interpersonal criticism in Japan and the United States. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 7, 1-18. Thomas, K. W., & Kilmann, R. H. (1974). Thomas-Kilmann conflict MODE instrument. Tuxedo, NY: Xicom. Ting-Toomey, S. (1988). Intercultural conflict styles: A face-negotiation theory. In Y. Y. Kim & W. Gudykunst (Eds.), Theories in intercultural communication (pp. 213-235). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Ting-Toomey, S. (1994). Managing intercultural conflicts effectively. In L. Samovar & R Porter (Eds.). Intercultural communication: A reader (7th ed., pp. 360- 372). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Intercultural Conflicts 17

Ting-Toomey, S., Gao, G., Trubisky, P., Yang, Z., Kim, H. S., Lin, S.-L., & Nishida, T. (1991). Culture, face maintenance, and styles of handling interpersonal conflict: A study in five cultures. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 2, 275-296. Ting-Toomey, S., & Oetzel,J. G. (2001). Managing intercultural conflict effectively. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ting-Toomey, S., Yee Jung, K., Shapiro, R., Garcia, W., Wright, T., & Oetzel, J. G. (2000). Cultural/ethnic identity salience and conflict styles. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23, 47-81. Rahim, M. A. (1983). A measure of styles of handling interpersonal conflict. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 368-376. Rahim, M. A. (2001). Managing conflict in organizations (3rd Ed.). Westport, CT: Quorum books. Tucker, C. J., Susan M., McHale, S. M., & Crouter, A. C. (2003). Conflict resolution: links with adolescents' family relationships and individual well-being. Journal of Family Issues, 24, 715-737.