Subtle Cues to Explicit Expressions: A Cross-Cultural Examination

International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 3, pp 6064-6074 March 2024

International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews

Journal homepage: www.ijrpr.com ISSN 2582-7421

Subtle Cues to Explicit Expressions: A Cross-Cultural Examination of

Communication in Japan and the United States

Anusha S. Nadiger

, Sonia Kumawat, Aman Jindal, Riya Mehta, Nishith Jain, C Rohan Jain

Assistant Professor, Department of Management, Jain (Deemed-to-be University) - Center for Management Studies, Bangalore.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.55248/gengpi.5.0324.0910

ABSTRACT

This paper investigates the nuances of cross-cultural communication between Japan and the United States, focusing on the contrast between implicit communication

in Japan and explicit communication in the United States. It explores how cultural values, historical backgrounds, and societal norms influence communication

styles in each country. Through an analysis of linguistic features, nonverbal cues, and communication strategies, it uncovers the role of subtle cues in facilitating

implicit understanding in Japanese communication and contrasts it with the directness of American communication. Drawing on case studies and interviews, this

research underscores the significance of cultural awareness and adaptability in bridging communication gaps. Ultimately, it contributes to a deeper appreciation of

the complexities of cross-cultural communication, emphasizing the need for mutual respect, empathy, and effective communication strategies in fostering

intercultural understanding in today's globalized world.

Keywords: High/low context culture, Communication Style, Cross-culture, Cultural Barriers

Introduction

Effective communication is not only a fundamental aspect of human interaction but also a lens through which cultural values, norms, and social dynamics

are reflected and perpetuated. Across cultures, communication styles vary significantly, influencing how individuals express themselves, interpret social

cues, and navigate interpersonal relationships. Understanding these cultural nuances is paramount for fostering effective intercultural communication,

which is essential in today's globalized world.

This research paper focuses on examining the subtle cues and explicit expressions in communication within the cultural contexts of Japan and the United

States, utilizing secondary data and existing literature to delve into the complexities of cross-cultural communication. Japan and the United States

represent two distinct cultural paradigms, each with its unique communication norms and practices.

In Japanese culture, communication often emphasizes indirectness, implicitness, and non-verbal cues, reflecting a collectivist orientation and a strong

emphasis on maintaining social harmony. Conversely, American communication tends to prioritize directness, explicitness, and individual assertiveness,

reflecting a culture that values individualism and autonomy.

By drawing upon secondary data sources such as academic articles, books, and cultural studies, this research seeks to explore the underlying cultural

factors that shape communication styles in Japan and the United States. Through an analysis of existing literature on cultural dimensions, communication

theories, and cross-cultural studies, we aim to identify patterns and trends in communication behaviors within these cultural contexts.

This study aims to uncover the implicit rules, norms, and social expectations that govern communication practices in Japan and the United States, shedding

light on how cultural values influence language use, conversational patterns, and interpretation of social cues. By synthesizing insights from diverse

scholarly sources, we aim to provide a comprehensive understanding of the intricate dynamics of cross-cultural communication.

The findings of this research have implications for enhancing cultural competence and intercultural communication proficiency among individuals,

organizations, and policymakers. By leveraging existing knowledge and secondary data, we contribute to the ongoing dialogue on cross-cultural

communication, offering valuable insights for navigating cultural differences and fostering mutual understanding.

Through this exploration, we aim to not only deepen our understanding of communication across cultures but also promote greater cultural sensitivity,

empathy, and cooperation in an increasingly interconnected global community.

Review of Literature

Susumu Ueno & Uma Sekaran (1992) suggested a study speculating on how culture affects six areas of US and Japanese budget control procedures.

Through surveys, information was gathered from 149 manufacturing companies in Japan and 70 manufacturing companies in the United States. The

International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 3, pp 6064-6074 March 2024 6065

results of data analyses suggest that the Individualism-Collectivism dimension may help to explain why American businesses, as opposed to Japanese

businesses, typically use more communication and coordination, more budget slack, and fewer long-term performance evaluations.

Charles Mitchell (1999) provides a great overview of the disparities between cultures in terms of attitudes, beliefs, customs, etiquette, communication

styles, and other traits. He notes individual and regional variances in addition to differentiating between people's fundamental cultural characteristics

across various national groups. In addition to the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Nigeria, Israel, Australia, China, Japan, Russia, Vietnam,

and India, Mitchell provides examples from a wide range of important countries and civilizations.

Kevin Y. Au (1999) explains intra-cultural variation (ICV), or the population distribution of a trait inside a culture, and its theoretical and methodological

importance. Cross-cultural test statistical power is significantly impacted by ICV, according to a Monte Carlo research. To comprehend contradictory

results and create cross-cultural studies with sufficient statistical power, it is therefore crucial to do methodological research on ICV. In order to cast ICV

in a nomological net and to highlight several directions for further research, a multidisciplinary model is put forth. Discussion is also had regarding the

practical aspects.

Ireana Vida & Janez Damjan (2001) examined how a sample of customers in Slovenia's less conventional post-socialist economy was affected by the

variables influencing their decision to purchase native versus international goods. The study's empirical findings validated the hypothesized connections

between the ethnocentric attitudes' protectionism dimension, consumers' local purchase preferences, and their familiarity with global brands.

Vijay Pothukuchi. et al.,(2002) analyze how different organizational and national cultures affect the success of international joint ventures (IJVs). The

impact of organizational and national cultural variations on the performance of international joint ventures (IJVs) is investigated in this study. The alleged

detrimental impact of cultural distance on the performance of international joint ventures (IJVs) between Indian and foreign partners was discovered to

stem more from organizational than from national cultural differences, according to data gathered from a survey of executives in these types of ventures.

Kessapidou, S., & Varsakelis, N. C (2002) investigated the effect of national culture on foreign affiliates' performance in Greece, a nation on the European

Union's periphery economically. Greece fits into Hofstede's Mediterranean culture controlling directorial model because to its low levels of globalization

and competition. This study investigates the impact of national culture on foreign affiliate performance in Greece, utilizing a sample of 478 companies.

The results also corroborate the second hypothesis, which holds that an affiliate's performance in a collectivistic environment increases with the foreign

firm's individualism score.

Sirmon, D. G & Lane, P. J. (2004) explained the contradictory results about the impact of national cultural differences on alliance performance, through

a model of cultural differences and international alliance performance. Drawing from studies on national, corporate, and professional cultures, we contend

that cultural differences between partners in a social group will be more disruptive the closer the social group's domain is to the alliance's value-creating

activities.

Kwok Leung et al.,( 2005) offer a cutting-edge analysis of a number of novel developments in international business (IB) and culture to inspire fresh

directions for future study. It examined the problems with cultural divergence and convergence as well as the mechanisms that lead to cultural shifts. In

order to open up new study directions, the article offers a cutting-edge analysis of a number of creative developments in international business and culture.

It looks at new ways to characterize cultures and how to identify key moments when cultural impacts matter in order to improve the accuracy of cultural

models. Lastly, it looks at the value of experimental techniques, which are seldom employed by scholars of international business.

James P Johnson and Tomasz Lenartowicz (2006) give a description of CC as it relates to global business, create a model to show how CC is developed

in people and connect our definition to the idea of cultural intelligence. The model's components are discussed, and it is suggested that there is a gap

between "knowing" and "doing" because of environmental and contextual barriers that prevent the necessary skills, knowledge, and qualities from being

used effectively for CC. It ends with a discussion of the model's practical ramifications and recommendations for future research initiatives.

K Lee, G Yang (2006) clarifies the causes and effects of the tension experienced during cross-border commercial discussions. In all, 176 executives from

China and the United States took part in fictitious buyer-seller discussions for international business. The participants filled out questionnaires, and the

negotiations were recorded on camera. In addition, each participant was asked to watch the videotaped negotiation, assess the tension they felt using a

form designed to evaluate the tension they felt and provide a brief explanation of the tension's causes. After that, the data were examined initially via the

use of structural equations and subsequently through a more in-depth content analysis.

Ana Maria Soares et al.,(2007) examine several methods for conceiving and operationalizing in studies of culture marketing. The benefits of using cultural

dimensions—in particular, Hofstede's values—are covered in the article. looks at several methods used in marketing studies to conceptualize and

operationalize culture. The article suggests a three-step method for operationalizing culture, which includes measuring culture at the person level,

incorporating nationality, and applying Hofstede's cultural dimensions.

Brian J Hurn (2007) investigates the significance of culture's influence on negotiations in the context of global commerce. The language of negotiation,

the importance of researching the cultures of the parties, developing interpersonal connections and trust, and suitable training for global managers are all

covered in this paper. The article provides an overview of the cultural aspects of international negotiation, supported by examples. On the basis of these,

recommended best practices are provided. The study reveals that while cultural "gurus" like Hofstede and Trompenaars discuss cultural differences, there

isn't much literature on cross-cultural negotiation.

Yuka Fujimoto et al.,(2007) examine the four types of work outcomes: work dynamics, work behaviors, work attitudes, and emotional experiences at

work. Connect each to the cross-cultural online communication environment. Research indicates that diversity-oriented human resource management

International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 3, pp 6064-6074 March 2024 6066

(HRM) might mitigate the cultural divide between individualist and collectivist (IC) cultures. This, in turn, can positively modify the association between

cross-cultural online communication and behavioral, cognitive, and affective results.

Shenkar, O., Luo, Y., & Yeheskel, O. (2008) "From ‘Distance’ to ‘Friction’: Substituting metaphors and redirecting intercultural research." The current

paper, which was published in the Academy of Management Review, questions the conventional understanding of cultural "distance" and presents the

idea of "friction" in cross-border commercial exchanges. Although this work emphasizes metaphors' potential for both positive and negative effects, it

also confirms the crucial role they play in guiding scholarly research. Culture as a research variable has gained popularity since the cultural distance

metaphor was introduced, but it has also put the phenomenon in a theoretical and methodological straitjacket that has hindered comprehension of culture

via instant messaging.

Lorraine Brown (2009) presents the results of an ethnographic investigation on a group of international postgraduate students' experiences adjusting to a

university in the South of England. In this study, friendship emerged as a prominent issue. Students placed special emphasis on their desire and inability

to establish contact with host countries. For students who recognized the beneficial influence of host companions on language and cultural understanding,

the lack of host interaction was a major cause of disappointment.

Margaret Brunton and Gabriel Eweje (2010) revisit the subject of whether culture affects how ethically aware people perceive certain working settings.

The respondents for this study will be College of Business students at a university in New Zealand (NZ). This study showed inconsistent results with the

state of the field. All things considered, Chinese and Other respondents were more likely to view the scenarios as ethical than NZ Europeans. However,

Chinese respondents were much less likely to say that their peers would conduct in a way that raised ethical concerns.

Yaakov Weber et al., (2011) indicated that culture has a crucial impact on mergers and acquisitions (M&A) performance and the post-merger integration

process. To be exact, no one has ever concurrently studied how company culture, national culture, and synergy potential affect different integration

methodologies and how they affect M&A performance. By applying a multidisciplinary approach and drawing from the literature on international

management, ethnography, and strategic management, this study seeks to close this gap and provide a theoretical model.

Ruixiang Wang (2012) intends to look into the connection between entrepreneurship and Chinese culture. According to this study, there are certain

Chinese sociocultural characteristics that are detrimental to entrepreneurship and some typical Chinese personality traits that are incompatible with those

of a successful entrepreneur. However, there are some benefits to Chinese culture that support entrepreneurship, which helps to explain why so many

Chinese living abroad have had extraordinary success in their business endeavors.

SJ Gray et al.,(2013) investigated if global variations in equity capital costs are associated with important facets of country culture. Based on research

conducted across 32 nations between 1992 and 2006, the results indicate that societies that are more individualistic and hence take more risks tend to

have higher equity capital costs, whereas societies that are more uncertain-averse and thus take fewer risks likely to have lower equity capital costs.

National culture is a significant institutional variable that affects enterprises' cost of equity capital globally, and this study adds to the body of knowledge

in international business and finance.

TJ. Young & Alina Schartner (2014) cite the lack of research on the effects of cross- and intercultural education on sojourners to match the current growth

in its availability. The majority of the time, evaluation has only been done in the context of foreign business and has usually been done prior to the travel.

Critically, evaluation has not addressed sojourners' performance, adaption, or adjustment in relation to their actual lived experiences of adjustment or any

significant sojourn outcomes.

CF Pinto et al.,(2014) examine the ways that IB research has been influenced by country culture. We can determine the links between IB works that

address culture and related topics by using co-citation mappings. With Hofstede's (1980) work outlining most of the conceptual and empirical approach

to culture-related studies, it breaks down research into two primary clusters, each of which has two sub-clusters. Cultural conceptualization and its aspects

are the subject of one major cluster of works, while cultural distance is the focus of the second cluster. With consideration of cultural notions and

influences, this conceptual framework encapsulates the state of IB research to date.

Joost J.L.E. Bücker (2015) examined how well business students' self-efficacy and cultural intelligence (CQ) were developing as a result of playing the

cross-cultural simulation game Ecotonos. The development of cross-cultural competence in multinational managers is thought to be aided by cross-

cultural training. The training literature distinguishes between two main categories of training: training formats that transmit knowledge more cognitively

and training formats that transfer knowledge more behaviorally, including cross-cultural role-plays or cultural simulation games.

Yipeng Li, Tamar Almor (2016) provide a conceptual model and suggestions that are supported by four case studies of local and returnee entrepreneurs

in China, in an effort to address the issue of how culture affects the uncertainty construct for entrepreneurs working with suppliers. This study adds to the

body of research on returnee entrepreneurship, which focuses primarily on defining the circumstances in which and to what extent political and

commercial ties are important to returnee entrepreneurs starting businesses in developing home markets.

Sylvia Rohlfer, Yingying Zhang (2016) examine the body of knowledge derived from culture studies to determine the value of these studies to

international business and the basis of its expertise. This work seeks to elucidate the process by which the intricacy of cultural problems fuels calls for

paradigm shifts in the field of international management culture study. The necessary paradigm change has not yet occurred in the scholarly discourse

surrounding culture.

Mohammad Ayub Khan, Ekaterina Panarina (2017) examines how national cultures influence organizational management cultures. This study

investigates national cultures in the USA, Mexico, Pakistan, and Russia, focusing on their differences and similarities. It then examines the effects of

International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 3, pp 6064-6074 March 2024 6067

these cultural variances and similarities on the management cultures of these nations' organizations. This research highlights the cross-cultural

management difficulties that these nations companies must overcome in order to establish international, long-term, strategic commercial alliances.

M. Estrada Cruz (2019) distinguishes between three different entrepreneurial social identities: missionary, communitarian, and Darwinian. This study

explains the impact of the nation's culture on the development of entrepreneurial initiatives and examines how these identities affect the application of

causal and effectual logic. The findings of a poll conducted among 5076 entrepreneurs who founded their own businesses lend credence to the idea that

cultural traits such as individualism, long-term orientation, avoiding uncertainty, and power distribution affect effectuation decisions.

Sri Handari Wahyuningsih, Achmad Sudiro (2019) examine how corporate culture is applied to improve the competitiveness of businesses. Evaluation

of organizational culture at international hotels in Yogyakarta, Indonesia, is the main goal of the study. The management of international hotels must

create a culture type as a tactic to promote economic competitiveness because these establishments deal with differing personnel and client profiles. The

study's findings highlight the significance of consistency in both internal and external dimensions for global company competitiveness.

Betina Szkudlarek et.al.,(2020) rather than using intercultural, process-oriented study methodologies that better capture the dynamic character of

communication encounters, the proposed understanding of the phenomena is mostly limited by a cross-cultural comparative perspective. Reviewing

studies that examine how culture and communication intersect with international work relationships illustrates the prevailing study themes that have

shaped IB scholarship in this field up to this point.

Julian Birkinshaw (2023) explains the solutions for MNC managers to tackle problems. A summary of the six research articles about complexity and

MNCs that are part of this Special Issue is also given. Companies expand globally due to their ability to identify foreign business prospects and formulate

effective plans to capitalize on them. As MNCs grow globally and take on more uncharted and dispersed businesses, managers are simultaneously faced

with a growing amount of complexity.

Research Gap

While considerable literature exists on the cultural differences in communication styles between Japan and the United States, there remains a notable

research gap regarding the nuanced interplay between subtle cues and explicit expressions in cross-cultural communication. Existing studies often focus

on broad comparisons of communication styles or highlight specific cultural differences without delving deeply into the underlying mechanisms driving

these disparities.

Furthermore, while primary research exploring cross-cultural communication dynamics is valuable, there is a scarcity of studies specifically addressing

this topic through secondary data analysis. Secondary data analysis offers the opportunity to synthesize and critically evaluate existing research findings,

providing a comprehensive understanding of cross-cultural communication patterns while also identifying areas where further investigation is warranted.

Thus, the research gap identified in this study lies in the need for a detailed examination of how subtle cues and explicit expressions operate within the

communication contexts of Japan and the United States, drawing on secondary data sources. By filling this gap, this research aims to contribute to a

deeper understanding of cross-cultural communication dynamics and provide insights that can inform effective communication strategies in diverse

cultural settings.

Research Methodology

This study employs a qualitative research design, utilizing secondary data analysis to explore cross-cultural communication between Japan and the United

States.The information was gathered from numerous sources, including academic articles and periodicals, case studies, and frameworks and techniques

of cross-cultural communication. In order to synthesize our understanding of the area, it entails a systematic examination and analysis of prior studies,

articles, publications, and reports. This method assisted in locating the gaps in the body of knowledge and evaluated how the field's research had

developed. It enabled the discovery of recurrent themes and patterns pertaining to communication difficulties in these cultural situations. While

acknowledging limitations, such as potential bias and lack of direct engagement with participants, this research aims to provide valuable insights into

cross-cultural communication dynamics within a concise framework.

Objectives of the study

The following are the objectives of the study:

1. To define the cultural dimensions contributing to high-context and low-context communication.

2. To analyze communication patterns in Japanese and American cultures, including verbal and nonverbal cues.

3. To investigate cross-cultural misunderstandings resulting from divergent communication styles and challenges.

4. To assess the impact of high-context communication and low-context culture on interpersonal relationships.

International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 3, pp 6064-6074 March 2024 6068

Cross-culture and cross-cultural communication

Cross-culture is a fundamental aspect of our globalized world. It refers to the interactions and encounters between individuals from different cultural

backgrounds. This transcends geographical boundaries and encompasses diverse beliefs, values, customs, and communication styles that shape human

interaction. Navigating cross-cultural encounters can be challenging as individuals confront both the richness of cultural diversity and the challenges of

bridging cultural gaps. An understanding of cross-culture is essential for fostering mutual respect, empathy, and cooperation across diverse societies,

whether in personal relationships, business dealings, or international diplomacy.

Effective cross-cultural communication is at the heart of cross-culture, involving the exchange of information and ideas between individuals from different

cultural backgrounds. Sensitivity, flexibility, and adaptability are crucial in this communication process to navigate the nuances of cultural differences.

Effective cross-cultural communication goes beyond linguistic proficiency, encompassing awareness of cultural norms, values, nonverbal cues, and

communication styles. By recognizing and respecting these cultural differences, individuals can mitigate misunderstandings, build trust, and forge

meaningful connections across cultural boundaries. Various strategies can enhance mutual understanding and collaboration, such as active listening,

asking clarifying questions, and being mindful of one's own cultural biases and assumptions. Demonstrating adaptability in communication styles, such

as tone, language, or gestures, shows respect for cultural diversity and facilitates smoother interactions in diverse settings.

Cross-culture and cross-cultural communication are indispensable in today's interconnected world, where globalization has brought people of diverse

backgrounds closer together. Embracing cultural diversity and fostering inclusive communication practices enables individuals and organizations to

harness the benefits of global collaboration, innovation, and mutual enrichment. Ultimately, the journey toward effective cross-cultural communication

is a journey toward greater empathy, understanding, and unity amidst the rich tapestry of human diversity.

Importance of cross-cultural communication in a globalized world

Effective cross-cultural communication fosters understanding, collaboration, and success across diverse cultures. It enables individuals to overcome

linguistic and cultural barriers and form meaningful connections while navigating the complexities of intercultural interactions with empathy and respect.

In the realm of global business, cross-cultural communication is indispensable. As companies expand their reach across borders, they are faced with

diverse markets, workforces, and business practices. To build trust, negotiate agreements, and resolve conflicts, adept cross-cultural communication skills

are essential. By understanding and respecting cultural differences, businesses can forge strong relationships with international partners, capitalize on

global opportunities, and drive sustainable growth in the global marketplace.

Diplomatic efforts between nations depend on effective communication to bridge cultural divides, foster mutual understanding, and address common

challenges. Cross-cultural communication plays a pivotal role in promoting peace, diplomacy, and international relations. By engaging in diplomatic

dialogue and negotiation, countries can build trust, resolve conflicts, and promote peace and stability in the international arena.

Apart from the business and diplomatic realms, cross-cultural communication enriches individuals' personal and professional lives by promoting cultural

exchange and learning. Exposure to different languages, customs, and traditions broadens horizons, fosters appreciation for global diversity, and cultivates

a deeper understanding of the interconnectedness of our world. By embracing cultural diversity and engaging in meaningful dialogue, individuals can

develop empathy, respect, and cross-cultural competence, laying the foundation for a more inclusive and harmonious society.

Misunderstandings and conflicts often arise due to cultural differences and miscommunication. Cross-cultural communication is essential for conflict

resolution and social harmony. By promoting dialogue, empathy, and conflict resolution skills, individuals and communities can address differences

peacefully and build stronger social bonds based on mutual respect and understanding.

Finally, cross-cultural communication drives innovation and creativity by bringing together diverse perspectives, experiences, and ideas. Collaboration

among individuals from different cultural backgrounds sparks creativity, fosters innovation, and fuels progress in various fields. By leveraging the richness

of cultural diversity, organizations can unlock new opportunities, drive innovation, and achieve sustainable growth in an increasingly interconnected

global economy.

Introduction to the concepts of high-context and low-context communication

High-context and low-context communication are terms that define the differences in communication styles and the significance of contextual cues in

conveying meaning. These concepts were developed by renowned anthropologist Edward T. Hall and explain how people from different cultural

backgrounds communicate and interpret messages differently, depending on the level of explicitness and reliance on contextual information.

High-Context Communication:

● In high-context communication, much of the information is conveyed implicitly and relies heavily on context, nonverbal cues, and shared

understanding among communicators.

● Messages may be conveyed indirectly, and a considerable portion of the meaning is inferred from the context, including the

relationship between the communicators, cultural norms, and the situation.

International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 3, pp 6064-6074 March 2024 6069

● High-context cultures prioritize implicit understanding and value relationships, trust, and social harmony in communication.

● Examples of high-context cultures include Japan, China, Korea, and many Middle Eastern and Latin American countries, where

communication tends to be more nuanced and relies on shared cultural knowledge.

Low-Context Communication:

● In the context of low-context communication, messages are expressed explicitly and primarily rely on verbal content rather than contextual

or nonverbal cues.

● Communication in such situations tends to be direct, clear, and straightforward, with minimal reliance on shared understanding or implicit

meaning.

● Low-context cultures prioritize precise language, clarity, and explicitness in communication as the key indicators of effective

communication.

● Such cultures include the United States, Canada, Germany, and many Northern European countries, among others.

In summary, high-context communication is a communication style that places greater emphasis on implicit messaging, nonverbal cues and shared cultural

knowledge, which in turn promotes a sense of harmony and trust in interpersonal relationships. Conversely, low-context communication prioritizes

explicit verbal messaging, clarity, and individual autonomy, which promotes transparency and adaptability in interpersonal interactions. Given the cultural

differences between Japan and the United States, individuals seeking to engage in effective cross-cultural communication must understand these

communication styles. Doing so will enable them to effectively navigate cultural differences and foster positive relationships.

The cultural dimensions influencing communication styles in Japan and the United States

● Collectivism vs. Individualism:

In Japan, the culture is generally collectivistic, which means that group harmony, cooperation, and loyalty to the community or organization are

emphasized. When communicating with others, Japanese people place a high value on maintaining harmony within the group, avoiding conflicts, and

taking into account the needs of others.

In contrast, American culture is more individualistic, which means that personal autonomy, independence, and self-expression are highly valued. In

communication, Americans tend to prioritize their individual needs, opinions, and goals, often expressing themselves assertively and directly.

● Power Distance:

In Japan, the culture tends to have a higher power distance, which means that there is a strong emphasis on hierarchical relationships, respect for authority,

and deference to those in positions of power. During communication, it is common for individuals to use formal language and honorifics to address

superiors, and decisions may be influenced by hierarchical structures within organizations.

On the other hand, American culture has a lower power distance, which means that there is less emphasis on hierarchical relationships and greater equality

between individuals. During communication, Americans may address others by their first names, and decision-making processes may be more

decentralized and participatory, with less emphasis on formal rank or status.

● Uncertainty Avoidance:

Japanese culture tends to prioritize stability, predictability, and avoidance of ambiguity, which results in a high uncertainty avoidance. When

communicating, people in Japan may prefer indirect communication over direct communication in order to avoid potential conflict or uncertainty.

Established norms and rituals guide social interactions in Japan.

On the other hand, American culture has a lower uncertainty avoidance, which means that it has a greater tolerance for ambiguity, risk-taking, and

experimentation. Americans are more comfortable with ambiguity and change, and they tend to express themselves directly. They are also able to adapt

to new situations more easily in their communication.

● Long-term Orientation:

Japanese culture often values Cross-cultural misunderstandings and challenges may arise due to differences in communication styles between Japan and

the United States stemming from varying cultural norms, values, and expectations surrounding verbal and nonverbal communication. Communication

tends to be more indirect, nuanced, and context-dependent in Japan, while it is often more direct, explicit, and goal-oriented in the United States.

These differences can lead to misinterpretations and difficulties in understanding each other's intentions, causing friction and tension in cross-cultural

interactions. High-context social cues such as nonverbal gestures, tone of voice, and implicit meanings heavily influence communication in Japanese

culture. Japanese people often rely on subtle nuances and indirect language to convey messages, emphasizing harmony, politeness, and respect for social

hierarchy. However, individuals from the United States, where communication is typically more low-context and straightforward, may perceive Japanese

communication styles as vague or ambiguous, struggling to understand the underlying meanings and cultural nuances embedded in Japanese

International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 3, pp 6064-6074 March 2024 6070

communication, leading to confusion or frustration. Acknowledging and valuing cultural differences can assist people in bridging the gap and promoting

productive communication, teamwork, and shared understanding in diverse cultural environments.

Cross-cultural misunderstandings and challenges

Differences in communication styles between Japan and the United States can lead to cross-cultural misunderstandings and challenges due to varying

cultural norms, values, and expectations surrounding verbal and nonverbal communication. In Japan, communication tends to be more indirect, nuanced,

and context-dependent, whereas in the United States, it is often more direct, explicit, and goal-oriented. These differences can result in misinterpretations

and difficulties in understanding each other's intentions, leading to friction and tension in cross-cultural interactions.

In Japanese culture, communication is heavily influenced by high-context social cues, such as nonverbal gestures, tone of voice, and implicit meanings.

Japanese people often rely on subtle nuances and indirect language to convey messages, emphasizing harmony, politeness, and respect for social hierarchy.

However, individuals from the United States, where communication is typically more low-context and straightforward, may misinterpret Japanese

communication styles as vague or ambiguous. They may struggle to understand the underlying meanings and cultural nuances embedded in Japanese

communication, leading to confusion or frustration.

Conversely, American culture encourages egalitarianism and individualism, where people are urged to speak out, express their views, and engage in open

dialogue regardless of hierarchical differences. This contrast in communication norms can lead to misunderstandings regarding decision-making

processes, leadership styles, and expectations for participation in group settings. In addition, cultural differences in the perception and interpretation of

silence, feedback, and conflict resolution strategies can further intensify cross-cultural misunderstandings. American silence may be interpreted as

agreement or consent by the Japanese, whereas it may indicate contemplation or discomfort in Japanese culture. Similarly, feedback and criticism given

straightforwardly by Americans may be received as harsh or insensitive by Japanese counterparts, who value indirect, diplomatic communication. These

divergent approaches to communication can obstruct effective feedback exchange and hinder constructive conflict resolution in cross-cultural contexts.

Differences in the ways people communicate in Japan and the United States can create significant difficulties in cross-cultural understanding and

collaboration. It is crucial to be aware of cultural norms, sensitive to cultural differences, and develop effective communication strategies to overcome

these challenges and foster positive relationships between people and organizations from diverse cultural backgrounds. By acknowledging and respecting

each other's communication styles and cultural perspectives, individuals can bridge the gap and build stronger connections in today's increasingly

interconnected globalized world.

Communication style in Japan

● Indirect and Implicit Communication: Japanese communication is often implicit and indirect, with the majority of the message conveyed

through nonverbal cues, context, and subtle nuances.

● High-Context Communication: Communication in Japan is considered high-context, meaning that it is deeply rooted in shared cultural

knowledge, social hierarchy, and implicit understanding. In Japanese communication, it is common for speakers to use understatement,

ambiguity, and reading between the lines to convey messages effectively. To maintain harmony and save face in interactions, Japanese

speakers prioritize politeness and adhere to social norms.

● Non-verbal Communication: Nonverbal communication, including facial expressions, tone of voice, and body language, is highly significant

in Japanese communication. Silence is often used in Japanese communication to convey meaning, and interpreting nonverbal cues accurately

is crucial.

● Hierarchy and Formality: Japanese communication is influenced by hierarchical structures and formal social etiquette, with individuals

showing deference to authority, using honorific language to address superiors, and adhering to strict social norms and etiquette in formal

settings

Communication style in the United States

● Direct and Explicit Communication: American communication is often characterized by direct and explicit language, which emphasizes

clarity, assertiveness, and openness.

● Low-Context Communication: The United States is considered a low-context culture where communication is more dependent on explicit

verbal expression and less on contextual cues or implicit understanding. Americans value precision and clarity in language and prioritize the

message over contextual cues.

● Verbal Dominance: Verbal communication is dominant in American culture, with individuals expressing their thoughts, opinions, and

emotions openly and assertively, relying less on nonverbal cues as compared to high-context cultures.

International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 3, pp 6064-6074 March 2024 6071

● Informality and Equality: Informality and egalitarianism are hallmarks of American communication, with individuals often addressing each

other on a first-name basis, regardless of status or hierarchy. Equality is highly valued in American culture, and open dialogue and

participation are expected in group settings.

Comparative Analysis of communication styles in Japan and the United States

● Directness vs Indirectness: The communication styles between Japan and the United States differ in directness and indirectness, which can

cause misunderstandings. This is because of the nuanced and indirect nature of Japanese communication, which contrasts with the more

explicit communication style of Americans.

● High-Context vs Low-Context: Japan is a high-context culture, and the United States is a low-context culture. This means that implicit cues

and shared cultural understanding are crucial for conveying meaning in Japan, while communication relies more on explicit verbal expression

in the United States. This difference in context reliance can create confusion, as Japanese speakers may assume that others understand implied

meanings, while Americans may prefer more explicit communication.

● Nonverbal Communication: Nonverbal cues play a significant role in Japanese communication, whereas Americans tend to prioritize verbal

expression. Japanese individuals may convey messages through subtle gestures or expressions that Americans may not recognize or

understand. This difference in reliance on nonverbal cues can lead to misinterpretations.

● Hierarchy and Formality: Japanese communication is known to be influenced by hierarchical structures and formal social etiquette, while

American communication tends to be more informal and egalitarian. This contrast in communication styles can lead to misunderstandings,

as Japanese individuals may expect others to adhere to hierarchical norms while Americans may prioritize equality and informality.

Challenges

1. Direct vs. Indirect Communication

Japan: With an emphasis on upholding harmony and averting conflict, Japanese communication is more likely to be implicit and indirect. This may

result in nonverbal clues, background, and underlying meaning being used to transmit messages.

United States: Americans place a strong focus on assertiveness and clarity in their communication, and they tend to be more direct and plain. Despite

the possibility of discomfort or disagreement, Americans may opt to voice their beliefs honestly.

Challenge: Americans may find Japanese communication unclear or confusing in cross-cultural exchanges, while Japanese people may view American

communication as unduly direct or confrontational.

2. High-Context vs. Low-Context Communication

Japan: A lot of Japanese communication is high-context, which means that common understanding, context, and nonverbal clues are used to express

meaning. In order to communicate meaning, Japanese speakers may rely on cultural allusions and implicit presumptions.

United States: American verbal communication relies significantly on explicit communication, with a tendency toward lower-context communication.

Americans tend to value directness and clarity in communication, providing specific details.

Challenge: In cross-cultural exchanges, Americans may view Japanese communication as unclear or hard to grasp because it relies on implicit clues,

whereas Japanese people may find American speech excessively explicit and lacking in subtlety.

3. Hierarchy and Formality

Japan: The country's culture, especially in work environments, strongly emphasizes hierarchy and formalities. Authority figures should be respected,

and following rules and regulations is highly appreciated.

United States: American society places more value on informality and egalitarianism and is generally less formal and hierarchical. It's possible that

Americans feel more at ease using informal communication approaches and addressing people by first names.

Challenge: Japanese people might anticipate more formality and submission to authority in cross-cultural relationships than Americans do. In contrast,

Japanese hierarchical systems and etiquette may seem strange or constrictive to Americans.

4. Nonverbal Communication

Japan: Japanese people use gestures, facial expressions, and body language to convey essential clues and meanings. Nonverbal communication is very

important in Japanese conversation. Additionally seen as significant are pauses and silences, which might convey discomfort, agreement, or disagreement.

United States: Nonverbal communication may not be as significant in American society as it is in Japanese culture, despite the fact it is nonetheless

crucial. The way Americans understand quiet may vary and they may rely more on spoken communication.

International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 3, pp 6064-6074 March 2024 6072

Challenge: Japanese people may rely on nonverbal clues in cross-cultural encounters that Americans might not completely get or value, which might

result in misunderstandings. On the other hand, misunderstandings can occur when Americans ignore or misread Japanese colleagues' subtle nonverbal

clues.

Impact on Interpersonal Relationships Japan

High-context communication plays a significant role in shaping interpersonal relationships in Japan, as most communication is done implicitly through

shared cultural knowledge, contextual awareness, and nonverbal cues. Strong interpersonal ties built on mutual respect, trust, and harmony are fostered

by this communication style.

● Establishing Mutual Understanding and Implicit Trust: Strong interpersonal connections built on mutual understanding and implicit trust

can be developed through high-context communication. When navigating social encounters, Japanese people frequently rely on shared

cultural norms and subtle indicators that can strengthen relationships and create a sense of closeness.

● Preserving Harmony and Preserving Face: In interpersonal relationships, in Japan, preserving peace and preserving face are crucial. When

people communicate in a high-contextual manner, they can address delicate topics without coming out as confrontational or embarrassing.

● Group cohesion: Collectivism and group cohesion are fostered in Japanese society through high-context communication. In order to preserve

harmony within social groups, people prioritize the demands of the group over their own interests, and communication frequently prioritizes

common objectives and consensus-building.

The United States

On the other hand, American society is low-context, emphasizing verbal information transmission above indirect and implicit communication. There are

various ways in which this communication style affects interpersonal relationships:

● Clarity and Transparency: In American interpersonal relationships, low-context communication fosters clarity and transparency. Americans

like direct communication, in which ideas are expressed clearly and concisely. This can lessen misconceptions and promote effective

communication.

● Individualism and Autonomy: In American low-context society, personal autonomy and individualism are valued in interpersonal

interactions. Americans place a high value on their own needs and preferences, and they frequently communicate by voicing their thoughts

and standing up for their rights.

● Flexibility and adaptation: In interpersonal relationships, low-context communication promotes better flexibility and adaptation. Americans

may modify their communication style according to the situation and the preferences of the people they are communicating with because

they are used to express themselves freely.

In conclusion, low-context culture in the United States encourages clarity, individuality, and adaptation in interpersonal relationships, but high-context

communication in Japan builds strong interpersonal connections based on trust, harmony, and shared cultural knowledge. In today's globalized society,

recognizing these cultural variances is crucial to fostering productive cross-cultural interactions and dialogue.

Findings and Discussion

This study explores the different communication styles that are common in Japan and the US and how they affect interpersonal relationships.

Communication in Japan tends to be high-contextual, meaning that meanings are implied through context, shared cultural knowledge, and nonverbalcues.

The significance of harmony, trust, and social cohesion in Japanese society is emphasized by this tactful approach. People put up front, stay out of trouble,

and keep the peace in the group, which fosters close-knit social networks and group decision-making. As a result, the nuances of high-context

communication contribute to the development of strong bonds that are based on implicit trust and mutual understanding in interpersonal interactions in

Japan.

In contrast, American communication emphasizes directness, clarity, and straightforward verbal communication, reflecting a low-context culture.

Americans value the direct expressing of their thoughts and preferences and place a high value on communication that is assertive and transparent. Open

communication and flexibility in the decision-making process are made possible by this communication style, which encourages personal autonomy and

adaptability in interpersonal relationships. Nonetheless, Japanese society values communal orientation and social cohesion, while American culture

emphasizes independence and autonomy.

Cross-cultural relationships are significantly impacted by the cultural differences in communication techniques between Japan and the United States.

Effective communication and connection building in multicultural environments require an understanding of and ability to navigate these variances.

People from the United States can promote respect and understanding between themselves and their Japanese counterparts by being aware of the subtleties

of high-context communication in Japan, such as shared cultural knowledge and implicit cues. In a similar vein, Japanese people can modify their

communication style to suit the assertiveness and directness common of low-context communication in the US, allowing for more seamless cross-cultural

exchanges and cooperation.

International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 3, pp 6064-6074 March 2024 6073

In conclusion, the study highlights the significant influence that cultural disparities in communication have on interpersonal interactions between the

United States and Japan. Individuals can strengthen cross-cultural interactions and close the gap by acknowledging and appreciating these differences.

This will ultimately improve communication efficacy and promote mutual understanding in a variety of contexts.

Suggestions for future research

Future research in the area of cross-cultural communication, specifically concerning communication between the US and Japan, might look at how

business communication practices differ from one another. This would explain how cultural variations affect cross-border interactions by focusing on

negotiation tactics, decision-making procedures, feedback and criticism, and dispute resolution.

The effect of technology on cross-cultural communication, particularly in particular how communication platforms influence language hurdles, nonverbal

clues, and cultural nuances, could be the subject of another line of inquiry. It's also crucial to look into cross-cultural communication in virtual teams,

pinpoint problems, and suggest solutions for productive cooperation.

It can also help to navigate communication difficulties to research cultural adaptation and adjustment for those living and working abroad. To enhance

comprehension of intercultural dynamics and promote efficient communication tactics, intercultural communication competency training programs and

longitudinal research monitoring cross-cultural communication patterns should be developed and evaluated.

References

Adler, N. J. (1983). A typology of management studies involving culture. Journal of international business studies, 14, 29-47.

Ueno, S., & Sekaran, U. (1992). The influence of culture on budget control practices in the USA and Japan: An empirical study. Journal of International

Business Studies, 23, 659-674.

Mitchell, C. (1999). A short course in international business culture. World Trade Press.

Au, K. Y. (1999). Intra-cultural variation: Evidence and implications for international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 30, 799-812.

Vida, I., & Damjan, J. (2001). The Role of Consumer Characteristics and Attitudes in Purchase Behavior of Domestic versus Foreign Made Products:

The Case of Slovenia. Journal of East-West Business, 6(3), 111-133.

Pothukuchi, Vijay & Damanpour, Fariborz & Choi, Jaepil & Chen, Chao & Park, Seung. (2002). National and Organizational Culture Differences and

International Joint Venture Performance. Journal of International Business Studies. 33. 243-265. 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8491015.

Kessapidou, S., & Varsakelis, N. C. (2002). The impact of national culture on international business performance: the case of foreign firms in Greece.

European Business Review, 14(4), 268-275.

Sirmon, D. G., & Lane, P. J. (2004). A model of cultural differences and international alliance performance. Journal of International Business Studies,

35, 306-319.

Leung, K., Bhagat, R. S., Buchan, N. R., Erez, M., & Gibson, C. B. (2005). Culture and international business: Recent advances and their implications

for future research. Journal of international business studies, 36, 357-378.

Johnson, J. P., Lenartowicz, T., & Apud, S. (2006). Cross-cultural competence in international business: Toward a definition and a model. Journal of

international business studies, 37, 525-543.

Lee, K. H., Yang, G., & Graham, J. L. (2006). Tension and trust in international business negotiations: American executives negotiating with Chinese

executives. Journal of International Business Studies, 37, 623-641.

Soares, A. M., Farhangmehr, M., & Shoham, A. (2007). Hofstede's dimensions of culture in international marketing studies. Journal of business research,

60(3), 277-284.

Hurn, B. J. (2007). The influence of culture on international business negotiations. Industrial and commercial training, 39(7), 354-360.

Fujimoto, Y., Bahfen, N., Fermelis, J., & Härtel, C. E. (2007). The global village: online cross‐cultural communication and HRM. Cross Cultural

Management: An International Journal, 14(1), 7-22.

Shenkar, O., Luo, Y., & Yeheskel, O. (2008). From “Distance” to “Friction”: Substituting Metaphors and Redirecting Intercultural Research. The

Academy of Management Review, 33(4), 905–923. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20159452

Brown, L. (2009). A failure of communication on the cross-cultural campus. Journal of studies in international education, 13(4), 439-454.

Brunton, M., & Eweje, G. (2010). The influence of culture on ethical perception held by business students in a New Zealand university. Business Ethics:

A European Review, 19(4), 349-362.

Yaakov Weber, Shlomo Y. Tarba & Arie Reichel (2011) A Model of the Influence of Culture on Integration Approaches and International Mergers and

Acquisitions Performance, International Studies of Management & Organization, 41:3, 9-24, DOI: 10.2753/IMO0020-8825410301

International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, Vol 5, no 3, pp 6064-6074 March 2024 6074

Wang, R. (2012). Chinese culture and its potential influence on entrepreneurship. International Business Research, 5(10), 76.

Gray, S. J., Kang, T., & Yoo, Y. K. (2013). National culture and international differences in the cost of equity capital. Management International Review,

53, 899-916.

Young, T. J., & Schartner, A. (2014). The effects of cross-cultural communication education on international students' adjustment and adaptation. Journal

of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 35(6), 547-562.

Pinto, C. F., Serra, F. R., & Ferreira, M. P. (2014). A bibliometric study on culture research in International Business. BAR-Brazilian Administration

Review, 11, 340-363.

Bücker, J. J., & Korzilius, H. (2015). Developing cultural intelligence: assessing the effect of the Ecotonos cultural simulation game for international

business students. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26(15), 1995-2014.

Liu, Y., & Almor, T. (2016). How culture influences the way entrepreneurs deal with uncertainty in inter-organizational relationships: The case of returnee

versus local entrepreneurs in China. International Business Review, 25(1), 4-14.

Rohlfer, S., & Zhang, Y. (2016). Culture studies in international business: paradigmatic shifts.European Business Review, 28(1), 39-62.

EstradaCruz, M., VerdúJover, A. J., & GómezGras, J. M. (2019). The influence of culture on the relationship between the entrepreneur's social identity

and decision-making: Effectual and causal logic. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 22(4), 226-244.

Wahyuningsih, S. H., Sudiro, A., Troena, E. A., & Irawanto, D. (2019). Analysis of organizational culture with Denison’s model approach for international

business competitiveness. Problems and perspectives in management, (17, Iss. 1), 142-151.

Szkudlarek, Betina & Osland, Joyce & Nardon, Luciara & Zander, Lena. (2020). Communication and culture in international business – Moving the field

forward. Journal of World Business. 55. 101126. 10.1016/j.jwb.2020.101126.

Larsen, M. M., Birkinshaw, J., Zhou, Y. M., & Benito, G. R. (2023). Complexity and multinationals. Global Strategy Journal, 13(3), 535-551.