Communication Research

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for free access to the SAGE eReference platform!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Burleson, B. R.
Right arrow Articles by Mortenson, S. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Communication Research, Vol. 30, No. 2, 113-146 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/0093650202250873

Explaining Cultural Differences in Evaluations of Emotional Support Behaviors

Exploring the Mediating Influences of Value Systems and Interaction Goals

Brant R. Burleson

Department of Communication at Purdue University

Steven R. Mortenson

Department of Communication Arts at Georgia Southern University, Statesboro

Research suggests that affirming, emotion-focused expressions of comfort effectively provide social support. However, little research has examined whether preferred approaches to providing support differ as a function of culture and, if so, why. This study sought to document, for both the Barbee and Cunningham typology of support behaviors and the Burleson hierarchy of comforting messages, whether there are cultural differences in preferred approaches to emotional support provision and, if so, what factors might account for these differences. Participants completed assessments of (a) the appropriateness of using solace, solve, dismiss, and escape behaviors, (b) the perceived sensitivity of comforting messages varying in degree of person centeredness, (c) interaction goal orientation, (d) the value placed on skill in comforting, and (e) collectivist and individualist values. Analyses indicated there were significant cultural differences in evaluations of support behaviors and that these differences were partially mediated by interaction goals and value orientations.

Key Words: cross-cultural communication • comforting • emotional support • collectivism • individualism • interaction goals • value orientations


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Social and Personal RelationshipsHome page
T. C. Marshall
Cultural differences in intimacy: The influence of gender-role ideology and individualism--collectivism
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, February 1, 2008; 25(1): 143 - 168.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Cross-Cultural PsychologyHome page
S. Mortenson, M. Liu, B. R. Burleson, and Y. Liu
A Fluency of Feeling: Exploring Cultural and Individual Differences (and Similarities) Related to Skilled Emotional Support
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, July 1, 2006; 37(4): 366 - 385.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Communication ResearchHome page
B. R. Burleson, M. Liu, Y. Liu, and S. T. Mortenson
Chinese Evaluations of Emotional Support Skills, Goals, and Behaviors: An Assessment of Gender-related Similarities and Differences
Communication Research, February 1, 2006; 33(1): 38 - 63.
[Abstract] [PDF]