Haptic Cues: Its Importance and Impact in a Cross Cultural Setting

Abstract

Humans are separated from all other animal species through our ability to build and use symbols and tools in order to communicate. Whether consciously or unconsciously, humans communicate in order to have some bearing on the beliefs, attitudes, values, and behavior of others. In doing so, we depend highly on our cultural background (Prosser 1). It is for this reason that Intercultural and Cross-cultural communication has gained much attention in the past decade. An in-depth understanding as well as an appreciation for the similarities and differences of the different cultures tends to result in more successful communication events. Humans communicate in a variety of ways. One is through the use of language, which is verbal and another without the use of words, which is non-verbal in nature. Most authors on non-verbal communication suggest that most of the meaning generated from a communication event stem from the non-verbal component. As with language, non-verbal communication is intrinsically bound to culture in general and with individual cultures specifically (Prosser 115). Most of the recent authors on non-verbal communication, however, give the impression that a person can study its art in order to manipulate others. One type of non-verbal code is touch. The study of touch is referred to as Haptics. According to Prosser, author of the book “The Cultural Dialogue”, most authors do not include touching behavior as a non-verbal dimension of human communication. However, one author claims that the touching behavior of humans is the most important non-verbal dimension that is primarily rooted in culture. Hence, this study is an attempt to provide a clearer picture of the importance of Haptic cues as a distinct non-verbal dimension of human communication. It aims to also show the impact of the interpretation of Haptic cues in a cross-cultural setting. Thus, the following problems are proposed. The main problem proposed in this study is: How important are Haptic cues in a cross-cultural organization and how does the interpretation of which impact the organization? The following sub-problems are as follows: 1) Do members from a different culture interpret Haptic cues in a similar way? 2) Do Haptic cues effectively communicate the sender’s intention?; 2a) What is the basis for the interpretation of Haptic cues? And 2b) What is the effect of the misinterpretation of Haptic cues? To support this study, the author made use of the Perceived Dissimilarity Model of Intercultural Communication and the models of communication by Lasswell and Berlo. Lasswell and Berlo’s model are important in understanding the Hybridized Theory of Communication. The study is descriptive-exploratory in nature and in answering these problems, the author used an interview schedule and focused group discussion as the tool for data gathering. Since this is a case study, the researcher analyzed the data through componential analysis and by making use of the emic and etic points of view. In view of that, the research findings reveal that members from a different culture do interpret haptic cues in a similar way though not all members may exhibit such touching behavior. In relation to the effectiveness of haptic cues in communicating the sender’s intention, it varies greatly from person to person and the situation in which the haptic cue was given. It is not at all times that it can effectively communicate the sender’s intended message. The timing and frequency of the haptic as well the personal relationship of one person to the other and the culture in which a person belongs to are the bases for the interpretation of haptic cues. The individual’s culture is given more weight rather than the culture in general of a person when interpreting his or her touching behavior. The effect of misinterpretation of haptic cues range from keeping a certain distance from the person involved to the complete breakdown of the relationship.