International Journal of Intercultural Relations 80 (2021) 349–358

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Intercultural Relations

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijintrel

Social support and cultural distance: Sojourners’ experience

in China
Alexander Scott English a, *, Yan Bing Zhang b, Rongtian Tong a
a
Shanghai International Studies University, China
b
University of Kansas, United States

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Previous research has pinpointed that social support from host, co-national, and other interna­
Anxiety tional friends plays a pivotal role in successful adaptation to a new culture, yet research on this
Cultural distance topic pertaining to China is inadequate. As such, using a cross-sectional sample of sojourners (N =
Psychological adaptation
199) in major Chinese cities, the current study examines the relationship between sojourners’ self-
Social support
Psychological well-being
reports of social support from the three sources and two psychological adaptation variables (i.e.,
Sojourners in China anxiety and well-being) as well as the moderating effect of objective cultural distance. Regression
analysis indicates that perceptions of host and international support are significant negative
predictors of anxiety and positive predictors of psychological well-being. In addition, cultural
distance moderated these predictive associations: host support and international support had a
stronger negative association with anxiety and host support had a stronger positive association
with well-being for participants whose cultural distance to China was lower compared to those
whose cultural distance was higher. This study enhances our understanding of the dynamic
interplay between social support and cultural distance in cross-cultural adaptation research
within a Chinese cultural context.

Introduction

Social support is essential to the cross-cultural adaptation process. Sojourners who receive a higher level of support from others
tend to feel better than those who receive little to no support (Zhang & Goodson, 2011). Yet few scholars have examined the impact of
social support on psychological adaptation in China—a country with over a million internationals (English, Allison, & Ma, 2016).
Adapting to life in China may be challenging due to cultural differences such as contrasting linguistic and sociocultural backgrounds.
Furthermore, sojourners have to manage and negotiate affection, bonds, and fulfillment in conjunction with uncertainty, anxiety,
power differentials, stereotypes, and identity conflicts while living abroad (Zhang & Giles, 2018). Many of these factors are indicators
of cultural distance, an important antecedent variable that accounts for discrepancies between the social and physical aspects of home
and host cultures (Suanet & Van de Vijver, 2009). This research project focuses on social support and its association with sojourners’
psychological adaptation in China and how cultural distance moderates the relationship.

* Corresponding author at: Shanghai Intercultural Institute, Shanghai International Studies University, Building 5, 604, 550 Dalian Road, Hon­
gkou Campus, Shanghai, 210000, China.
E-mail address: AlexEnglish@shisu.edu.edu (A.S. English).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2020.10.006
Received 1 December 2019; Received in revised form 10 October 2020; Accepted 19 October 2020
Available online 2 November 2020
0147-1767/© 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
A.S. English et al. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 80 (2021) 349–358

Social support and cultural adaptation

In most cases, sojourners leave behind friends, family, and other familiar networks, while establishing new social ties and support
systems, when they relocate. Cross-cultural research has found that supportive social relationships can help sojourners manage
stressful experiences and promote adjustment (Smith & Khawaja, 2011). Furthermore, social support is one of the most robust pre­
dictors of psychological adaptation for international students and expats (Zhang & Goodson, 2011). More specifically, a recent
meta-analysis on social support and psychological adaptation (Bender, van Osch, Sleegers, & Ye, 2019) linked support with positive
sociocultural adaptation, while unspecified social support was positively related to psychological adjustment.
However, many definitions of social support, along with its sources and types, exist in existing literature. House (1981) defines
social support as the perceived and/or actual care and assistance individuals receive from other people, or the help and supportive
networks individuals have access to. In the current study, we measured sojourners’ objective social support, which “is typically
assessed via self-reports of either the actual received social support or the size of the individual’s social network” (Bender et al., 2019,
p. 7) as opposed to anecdotal instances of beneficial aid (Burleson & MacGeorge, 2002; Eckenrode & Wethngton, 1990). Prior liter­
ature indicates that people can usually recall optimal levels of received support, especially during major life transitions (Hobfoll,
2009). We also demarcate sources of social support into three groups: host (Chinese nationals), co-nationals (sojourners sharing the
same country of origin), and internationals (sojourners with a different country of origin). Therefore, we define social support as
perceptions toward the quantity and quality of instrumental and emotional connectedness from various social groups in a new cultural
environment.

The acculturation process and psychological outcomes

Acculturation refers to the complex process of managing change when moving to a new cultural environment (Berry, 1997). Ac­
cording to Arends-Tóth and Van deVijver (2006), who examined multiple individual and group level factors associated with accul­
turation, there are three areas of acculturation: “conditions, orientations, and outcomes” (p. 142). The current study features two of
these areas: conditions and outcomes. Social support represents a social and contextual variable that serves as an indicator of personal
characteristics, whereas psychological acculturation represents outcomes (Arends-Tóth & Van deVijver, 2006). In Ward’s ABC’s model
of acculturation, sojourners experience an ongoing process of cultural learning and psychological adaptation when moving to a new
environment (Ward, Bochner, & Furnham, 2001). Psychological adaptation refers to the emotional well-being or “feeling” of so­
journers. We feature anxiety and psychological well-being as a negative and a positive indicator of psychological adaptation
respectively in the current study.
Anxiety, which is defined as the emotional equivalent of uncertainty, includes an array of negative feelings such as fear, discomfort,
uneasiness, and/or frustration (Ruble & Zhang, 2012; 2013). Anxiety often arises during the acculturation process as a result of un­
familiarity with new norms or language (Imamura, Ruble, & Zhang, 2016), and can consequently create additional problems by
causing “tentative,” “awkward,” or “solicitous” behavior—leading to communication ineffectiveness, avoidance of host nationals, and
maladjustment (Stephan, Stephan, & Gudykunst, 1999, p. 613). Hence, anxiety management (mediator) is critical to the acculturation
process (Gudykunst, 2005), and social support may be effective in reducing anxiety (Imamura et al., 2016; Liu, Zhang, & Wiebe, 2017;
Ristić, Zhang, & Liu, 2019). According to the buffering hypothesis, social support can act as a buffer to lessen the impact of negative or
stressful events (Cohen & McKay, 1984). Social support can also help sojourners manage anxiety about a situation or themselves (Byrd
& Zhang, 2020; Zhang et al., 2018;Goldsmith & Albrecht, 2011). However, depending on the cultural context, the source of the support
may matter, as sojourners who socialize mainly or solely with co-nationals or other internationals may take a “separation” approach to
acculturation, and therefore remain anxious due to unfamiliarity with the host culture (Berry, 2006).
In contrast to anxiety, the current study considers psychological well-being as a positive indicator of psychological adjustment.
Prior research indicates that social support greatly contributes to positive psychological adaptation, higher cultural competence, and
integration to a host society (Tan & Liu, 2014). Geeraert, Demoulin, and Demes (2014) conducted a 2-year longitudinal study with
Belgian students in 29 countries and found co-national support negatively predicted, while host support positively predicted, better
psychological outcomes. Similarly, Szabó, Papp, and Luu (2020) investigated international students’ socialization (via contact) in
Hungary and found frequent host and international contact was associated with positive acculturative outcomes, while co-national
contact reported lower levels of psychological adaptation. However, studies in other cultural contexts, like Canada and Australia,
showed no association between co-national support and psychological outcomes (Kashima & Loh, 2006; Yang, Noels, & Saumure,
2006). We specifically argue that social support from host nationals help sojourners adjust best, followed by international support
(Taušová, Bender, Dimitrova, & Vijver, 2019) as these support systems provide sojourners with tangible aid, informational help,
esteem respect, and/or emotional comfort. We also attempt to address the recent finding that ambiguous “mixed” sources of social
support can benefit adjustment (Bender et al., 2019), by teasing apart the impact which type of support: international, host and
co-national support can aid sojourners.

Cultural distance and acculturation

Recently, scholarly work has paid greater attention to the role of perceived cultural distance (a contextual variable) in acculturation
(Arends-Tóth & Van deVijver, 2006; Ward & Kennedy, 1999), though results are varied. A study conducted in Russia found no as­
sociation between perceived cultural distance and adaptation for international students (Suanet & Van de Vijver, 2009). Similarly,
Kashima and Abu-Rayya (2014) found mixed results in a longitudinal study of immigrants in Australia, where only one composite

350
A.S. English et al. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 80 (2021) 349–358

measure of perceived cultural distance predicted lower levels of wellbeing. Nevertheless, some have suggested a connection between
cultural distance and adaptation (Berry, 1997; Ward & Kennedy, 1999).
Cultural distance is the degree of difference between two cultures in terms of their communication styles, norms, values, and
ecological factors (Babiker et al., 1980). Cultural distance can be separated into national indicator of cultural distance, which refers to
national indices that cover areas such as economics and cultural values (e.g., Hofstede, 1980); and individual indicator of cultural
distance or perceived cultural distance, which refers to subjective indicators individual sojourners encounter (Galchenko & van de Vijver,
2007). For the current study, we focus on national indicator of cultural distance. We argue that cultural distance moderates the role of
social support on psychological adjustment.
While cultural distance continues to receive a lot of attention in acculturation research, Bender et al. (2019) notes its absence from
social support studies and the majority of studies (52 %) fail to include cultural distance as a variable that could impact the social
support-adaptation process. Hence, the current study answers Bender et al.’s (2019) call to investigate how cultural distance moderates
the relationship between social support and psychological adaptation in China.

Chinese cultural context: social support, cultural distance, and sojourner adjustment

Research on acculturation in China is still underdeveloped. Previous studies have explored student motivation and growth (English
et al., 2016), cultural learning and connectedness (An & Chiang, 2015; Chiang, 2015; Peng et al., 2019), and discrimination, host
orientation, and coping (English & Zhang, 2020), but social support, especially in conjunction with cultural distance, has yet to be
adequately addressed. However, some existing studies do provide us with a foundation to build on. For example, a study on expatriates
working at multinational companies in China found a positive correlation between the quantity of interactions in addition to quality of
relationships with host nationals and sociocultural adaptation (Selmer, 2006). Wen et al. (2014) examined international students’
relationships with Chinese nationals and found that culturally distant Western students actually experienced better sociocultural
adaptation than culturally similar East Asians—in contrast to previous assumptions about cultural distance and acculturation. Selmer
and Shiu (1999) also discuss how culturally dissimilar expats reported higher job satisfaction than Asian expats. Meanwhile, English,
Zeng, and Ma (2015) did not find a significant relationship between cultural distance and adaptation. Some scholars argue that
culturally similar sojourning groups like East Asians might actually experience more adjustment issues compared to culturally distant
groups from North America and Western Europe (English & Zhang, 2020). These inconclusive empirical studies demonstrate the need
to further explore the role of social support and cultural distance in acculturation within China. Based on prior research, the following
hypotheses are proposed:
Hypothesis 1. Participants’ self-reports of host support have a significant positive association with their reported psychological well-
being (1a) but a negative association with anxiety (1b).
Hypothesis 2. Participants’ self-reports of international support have a significant positive association with their reported psy­
chological well-being (2a) but a negative association with anxiety (2b).
Hypothesis 3. Participants’ self-reports of co-national support have a significant positive association with their reported psycho­
logical well-being (3a) but a negative association with anxiety (3b).
Hypothesis 4. Cultural distance will moderate these associations. Specially, the associations between social support and well-being
(4a) and anxiety (4b) are stronger for participants whose cultural distance scores are lower than those whose cultural distance scores
are higher.

Methods

Participants and procedure

Participants (N = 199; Mage = 28.73, SD = 9.42; age range = 18–71; 118 males and 81 females) of this online survey study were
voluntary international sojourners (i.e., 89 workers and 110 students) recruited from nine major metropolitans (i.e., Hangzhou,
Beijing, Shanghai, Suzhou, Tianjin, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Harbin, and Xiamen) in the People’s Republic of China. The participants
were diverse and represented many continents and major ethnicities around the world. The average time taken to complete the English
online survey was between 10− 15 min. As the survey was voluntary, it is possible that participants who did not feel their English level
was sufficient did not participate in this study. Participants reported their Chinese spoken language ability (M = 2.64, SD = 1.14; 1 =
poor and 5 = excellent), current length of stay in China (M = 2.57 years, SD = 2.77), and the location of their ‘home’ residence (North
America, n = 69, 34.67 %; Western Europe, n = 52, 26.13 %; Eastern Europe, n = 21, 10.55 %; neighboring Asian countries, n = 16;
8.04 %; Africa, n = 8, 4.02 %; Middle East, n = 16, 8.04 %; Oceania/Australia, n = 8, 4.02 %; Latin America, n = 9, 4.52 %).

Measures

Sources of social support

The current study measured the participants’ self-reports of social support from three sources: (1) host nationals; (2) internationals;
and (3) co-nationals. We followed recommendations by Gottlieb and Bergen (2010) on social support measures in acculturation
research. Ten items were adapted from the Index of Sojourner Social Support Scale (Ong & Ward, 2005) to measure participants’

351
A.S. English et al. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 80 (2021) 349–358

self-reports of the amount of social support they received from each group in various situations (e.g., ‘How many
host/internationals/co-nationals listened and talked with you when you felt lonely or depressed,’ ‘How many
host/internationals/co-nationals helped you deal with some host institutions’ rules and regulations,’ and ‘How many
host/internationals/co-nationals comforted you when you feel homesick;’ 1 = no one would do this, 2 = someone would do this, 3 = a few
would do this, 4 = several would do this, and 5 = many would do this. Consistent with prior literature (Ong & Ward, 2005), a mean index
was created for each of these measures: host (M = 3.62, SD = 1.04, α = .88,), international (M = 3.88, SD = 1.08, α = 0.88), and
co-national (M = 3.99, SD = 1.09, α = .91) support. Higher numbers indicate more social support.

Cultural distance
Secondary data were acquired from Muthukrishna et al. (2020), which incorporates and complies objective cultural distance scores
between China and most countries. The newly designed “Sino-distance” is a cultural distance metric that uses China as a non-WEIRD1
point of reference, based on genetic differences between two countries applied to World Value Survey (WVS) to assess how populations
vary from WEIRD (e.g., United States as the baseline) and non-WEIRD (e.g., China as the baseline). In this study, a cultural distance
score was assigned using data from Muthukrishna et al. (2020) for each participant depending on their country of origin (M = .17, SD =
.04).

Psychological adaptation
Psychological well-being refers to the participants’ psychological and emotional states and was measured with the Satisfaction with
Life Scale (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985). Psychological well-being is a 5-item self-report questionnaire that uses a 4-point
scale (i.e., 1 = Never or hardly at all, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = A good part of the time, and 4 = Most times). Sample items include “The
conditions in my life are excellent,” and “So far I have got the important things in life,” and items were reliable (M = 3.02, SD = .58, α =
.80). Higher numbers indicate better psychological adjustment.
Anxiety refers to feelings of discomfort, frustration, or emotion, characterized by nervousness, worry, and other somatic symptoms.
Eight 4-point Likert items (e.g., ‘I have been feeling constantly under strain;’ 1 = Never or hardly at all, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = A good part of
the time, and 4 = Most times) adapted from the anxiety subscale in General Health Questionnaire (Goldberg & Hillier, 1979) were used
to measure participants’ level of anxiety the week they took the survey (M = 1.78, SD = 0.49, α = .79). Higher numbers indicate more
anxiety.

Results

PROCESS Model 1 with 5000 Bootstraps was used to test the predictive associations between various sources of social support and
the dependent variables, in addition to how cultural distance moderated the associations (Hayes, 2018). In each model, either psy­
chological well-being or anxiety was entered as the dependent variable (i.e., the Y variable), one source of social support (host, in­
ternational, or co-national support) was entered as the independent variable with the other two sources as control variables, and
cultural distance was entered as the moderator variable. Considering the possible influences of location, age, gender, visa type, length
of stay in China, and Chinese language proficiency, the effects of these factors were controlled for by entering them as covariates (Yeh
& Inose, 2003). The association between social support and the dependent variable, as well as moderation of the association through
cultural distance, was significant when the 95 % bias-corrected confidence interval for the interaction effect did not contain zero
(Hayes, 2018). The sample size was the same for all analyses (N = 199). Please refer to Table 1for zero-order correlations of the major
measures in the current study.

Psychological well-being

For the host support model, results indicated a positive relationship (b = .09, p = .049, CI = 01, .17) on psychological well-being,
thus supporting H1a. The interaction between host support and cultural distance was significant (b = -.11, p = .012, CI = -.19, -.02).
The host support model predicted 34%34 % of the variance of well-being, F(10,188) = 2.30, p = .014. In addition, international
support predicted psychological well-being significantly (b = .13, p = .006) and the interaction with cultural distance was significant (β
= -.10, p = .016, CI = -.18, -.02), thus supporting H2a. The entire model predicted 34% of the variance, F(10,188) = 2.11, p = .025.
Finally, co-national support was a nonsignificant predictor of psychological well-being (b = -.02, p =.647). The interaction between co-
national support and cultural distance was nonsignificant (b = -.07, p =.144), thus rejecting H3a (see Table 2. for statistics related to
the complete models).

Decomposition of the interactions (testing Hypothesis 4a)

For the two significant interactions, simple slope analysis was used to interpret the patterns of the interactions (Dawson, 2014;
O’Connor, 1998). Fig. 1 demonstrated how cultural distance functions as a moderator in the social support-psychological well-being
relationship. Supporting H4a, results (left panel in Fig. 1) indicated that for sojourners who originated from countries with low cultural
distance, host support was positively related to psychological well-being, t(193) = 3.81, p < .001, d = .55. When sojourners came from

1
WEIRD refers to Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic nations. Researchers often generalize findings in psychology comparing
WEIRD cultures to non-WEIRD societies like in East Asia (Muthukrishna et al., 2020).

352
A.S. English et al. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 80 (2021) 349–358

Table 1
Zero-order Correlations of the Major Variables.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Cronbach’s α Item-total Correlations

1. Host Support – .88 .43

2. International Support .27** – .88 .52
3. Co-national Support .24** .29** – .91 .55
4. Sino-distance .03 − .14* .04 – – –
5. Psychological Well-being .21** .23** .06 − .03 – .80 .40
6. Anxiety − .28** − .24** − .07 .04 − .51*** – .82 .17
7. Length of stay in China .07 .10 − .04 .02 .03 − .02 – – –
8. Age .09 − .03 − .14* − .05 .03 − .10 .45*** – –

Table 2
Regression Table of Social Support Interacting with Cultural Distance on Psychological Well-being.
Host Support Co-national Support International Support

b t p LLCI, ULCI b t p LLCI, ULCI b t p LLCI, ULCI

Constant 2.68 8.30 .00 2.04, 3.31 2.25 7.40 .00 1.65, 2.85 2.80 8.25 .00 2.13, 3.47
Sino-distance − .01 − .27 .79 − .10, .07 .01 .08 .93 − .09, .09 .01 .32 .75 − .07, .10
Host Support .09 1.98 .05 0, .17 .10 2.19 .03 .01, .19 .11 2.46 .01 .02, .20
Con. Support − .02 − .46 .65 − .11, .07 − .02 − .46 .65 − .12, .07 − .02 − .46 .65 − .11, .07
Int. Support .13 2.75 .01 .04, .23 .12 2.59 .01 .03, .21 .13 2.75 .01 .04, .23
Interaction − .11 − 2.52 .01 − .19, -.02 − .07 − 1.47 .14 − .16, .02 − .10 − 2.44 .02 − .18, -.02
Length .00 .30 .76 − .00, .00 .00 .26 .79 − .00, .00 .00 .22 .83 − .00, .00
Language − .04 − .90 .37 − .13, .05 − .03 − .72 .47 − .12, .06 − .05 − 1.08 .28 − .14, .04
Age .00 .10 .92 − .01, .01 .00 .28 .78 − .01, .02 .00 .19 .85 − .01, .01
Gender − .05 − .52 .61 − .22, .13 − .05 − .60 .55 − .23, .12 − .05 − .51 .61 − .22, .13
Race − .00 − .05 .96 − .08, .08 − .00 − .02 .99 − .08, .08 − .00 − .05 .96 − .08, .08
Model Statistics
R / R2 .34/ .12 .32/ .10 .34/ .11
F (df) 2.30** (10,188) 1.98* (10,188) 2.11* (10,188)

Fig. 1. Left: The interaction of host support and Sino-distance on psychological well-being. Right: The interaction of international support and Sino-
distance on psychological adaptation.

high cultural distance countries, the host support-psychological well-being relationship was nonsignificant t(193) = .56, p = .568
(Table 3).
Similarly, supporting H4a, results (right panel in Fig. 1) indicated that for sojourners from countries with low cultural distance,
international support was positively related to psychological adaptation, t(193) = 3.28, p = .001, d = .47. When individuals were from
high cultural distance countries, international support was not related to psychological adaptation, t(193) = .93, p = .353.
In sum, for individuals who originate from countries with low cultural distance to China, host and international support are
positively associated with psychological well-being. However, unlike what H4a predicted, co-national support did not interact with
cultural distance in predicting sojourners psychological well-being. Hence, H4a is partially supported.

353
A.S. English et al. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 80 (2021) 349–358

Table 3
Regression Table of Social Support Interacting with Cultural Distance on Anxiety.
Host Support Co-national Support International Support

β t p LLCI, ULCI β t p LLCI, ULCI β t p LLCI, ULCI

Constant 2.09 7.90 .00 1.56, 2.61 2.54 9.34 .00 2.01, 3.08 2.11 7.73 .00 1.57, 2.65
Sino-distance .03 .84 .40 − .04, .10 .02 .63 .53 − 1.31, 2.54 .01 .34 .73 − .06, .08
Host Support − .10 − 2.77 .01 − .17, -.03 − .11 − 2.96 .001 -.18,-.03 − .12 − 3.28 .001 − .19,-.05
Con. Support .01 .34 .73 − .05, .07 .02 .44 .66 − .05, .08 .01 .45 .65 − .05,.08
Int. Support − .10 − 2.65 .00 − .17,-.03 − .09 − 2.43 .02 − .17,-.02 − .11 − 2.85 .00 − .18, -.03
Interactions .07 1.72 .09 − .01, .15 .06 1.66 .10 − .01, .13 .09 2.45 .02 .02, .13
Length .00 .60 .55 .00, .00 .00 .63 .53 .00, .00 .00 .67 .51 .00, .00
Language .04 1.13 .26 − .03, .12 .04 .96 .34 − .04, .11 .05 1.34 .18 − .02, .13
Age − .00 − .50 .62 − .01, .01 − .00 − .67 .50 − .02, .01 − .00 − .60 .55 − .01, .01
Gender − .12 − 1.45 .15 − .29, .04 − .11 − 1.35 .18 − .28, .05 − .12 − 1.47 .14 − .29, .04
Race .04 1.02 .31 − .03, .11 .04 1.02 .31 − .03, .11 .04 1.05 .30 − .03, .11
Model Statistics
R / R2 .40 / .16 .40 /.16 .42 /.18
F (df) 3.10*** (10,188) 2.73*** (10,188) 3.51*** (10,188)

Anxiety

We conducted the same series of regression analyses to test our hypotheses on anxiety. Results demonstrated a negative relationship
between host support (b = -.10, p = .006, CI = -.17, -.03) and anxiety, thus supporting H1b. Contrary to H4b, the interaction between
host support and cultural distance was nonsignificant on anxiety (b = .07, p = .086, CI = -.01, .15). The host support model predicted
40% of the variance of anxiety, F(10,188) = 3.10, p = .001. Supporting H2b, international support negatively predicted anxiety (b =
-.11, p = .005, CI = -.18, -.03). Supporting H4b, the interaction between international support and cultural distance was significant (b
= .09, p = .015, CI = .02, .17). The entire model predicted 42 % of the variance, F(10,188) = 3.51, p < .001. Lastly, co-national support
was a nonsignificant predictor of anxiety (b = -.02, p = .658) and the interaction between co-national support and cultural difference
was nonsignificant (b = .06, p =.098, CI = -.01, .13), thus rejecting H3b and H4b respectively. The model for co-national support
predicted 40 % of the variance, F(10,188) = 2.73, p = .004.

Decomposition of the interactions (testing Hypothesis 4)

Fig. 2 demonstrates how cultural distance functions as a moderator in the international support-anxiety relationship. According to
simple slope analyses, for sojourners from countries with low cultural distance, international support was negatively associated to
anxiety, t(193) = -4.25, p <.001, d = .61, whereas for individuals from countries with high cultural distance, international support was
not related to anxiety, t(193) = -1.34, p = .181.
In sum, H4b was only partially supported. For sojourners were from countries with high cultural distance to China, none of the three
sources of social support were significantly associated with anxiety. However, for sojourners from low cultural distance countries,
international support was significantly associated with lower levels of anxiety.

Fig. 2. The interaction between international support and Sino-distance on anxiety.

354
A.S. English et al. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 80 (2021) 349–358

Robustness tests and further analyses

Additional analyses were conducted to examine whether the results remained robust against a number of conditions: a) the removal
of control variables; b) further breakdown between group analyses of length of stay, purpose of stay, and language level; and c) a new
rate of co-national base exploratory analysis was also conducted. No major changes were found as a result of these robustness tests. All
additional analyses can be found in the supplemental materials.

Discussion

This paper addresses how social support plays a fundamental role in helping sojourners adjust in China. Supporting H1a, H1b, H2a,
and H2b, host and international support was significant in being positively associated with psychological adaptation. These results
support the traditional scope of acculturation and social support research—that host and international support are beneficial to the
acculturation process. This study also extends existing acculturation literature by using China as a unique cultural location as well as
answers Bender et al.’s (2019) call on the use of cultural distance.
As expected, cultural distance moderated the associations between host and international support and psychological well-being.
When cultural distance between home cultures and Chinese culture were lower, social support may play a stronger positive role in
enhancing psychological well-being. International support also interacted with cultural distance in reducing anxiety. Examples of
countries with low cultural distance from China include South Korea (.087), Russia (.098), Thailand (.118), and Germany (.126), while
nations with high cultural distance include the United Kingdom (.205), Pakistan (.251), and Nigeria (.248). The United States (as
shown in Table 4) has a cultural distance score ranging in the middle (.170).
These findings on cultural distance extend existing research in several ways: (a) Sino-cultural distance is an objective measure
combining novel cross-disciplinary approaches to evaluate psychological, cultural and economic factors that illuminate differences, as
suggested by past scholars (Jose et al., 2009); (b) the interactions pinpoints individual to context relationship and the varying social
support depends on where you come from and who you interact with (Geeraert et al., 2014), and (c) provides concrete ways objective
cultural distance can be utilized in acculturation research.
It is noteworthy that H3a and H3b were not supported—co-national support was neither a significant predictor of psychological
well-being or anxiety despite previous research findings on sojourners reaching out to home countrymen during times of difficulty
(Podsiadlowski, Vauclair, Spiess, & Stroppa, 2013; Selmer, 2002). A plausible reason for why H3a and H3b failed to be supported may
be the explained by the dimension of “co-national support.” To our knowledge, previous research has not considered the varying degree
of the potential number of co-national present in the receiving country. We tested the idea of a “base rate of co-nationals” by gathering
archival data to determine the possibility of sojourners having (or not having) access to fellow co-nationals. Individuals from smaller
countries like Malta or Montenegro do not have many other co-nationals in China compared to larger countries like Japan, South Korea
or the United States. Exploratory findings show people from countries with a high base rate of co-nationals were more likely to receive
support from co-nationals, and more importantly, people from countries with low base rate of co-national tended to turn to inter­
national support, which was a significant negative predictor of anxiety (as depicted in the interaction). These preliminary analyses
were included in the additional analyses and should be interpreted as exploratory and viewed with caution.
In aggregate, the results of this study suggest that as China continues to become more internationally accessible and diverse, there
are both benefits and challenges. On the one hand, more sojourners would allow for greater access amongst internationals to build
social rapport with one another, but on the other, this may cannibalize interactions, and subsequently support, with host natio­
nals—the most effective of the three types of support measured. Instead sojourners may retreat into interacting mainly with co-
nationals, due to their shared cultural understandings and the perception that it is safer and comforting, when in fact it may have
adverse effects to the overall acculturation process (Beech, 2016).

Strengths, limitations, and conclusions

This study has a couple of major strengths. First, the participants of this study were not just English teachers or international
students, but also included sojourners who have worked in China for more than two years. Second, the current study examined a new
Sino-distance measure of cultural distance (i.e., a national indicator of cultural distance) to examine how cultural distance moderated
the relationship between social support and psychological adaptation.
Despite these strengths, the present study also has some limitations. First, it remains unclear whether sojourners who received host
support already had better psychological adaptation and thus were susceptible to more host and international contact. Second, the
current study primarily addressed the quantity of social support, rather than quality. In other words, we did not content analyze
anecdotal accounts of the types of support, supportive messages, or valence of the support they received. However, it is logical to
assume that the tangible, informational, esteem, or emotional support they received was likely to be positive. Third, participants in the
current study was composed of sojourners from 38 countries with a small number of participants from each country and from each city
where they were recruited. In addition, we did not measure participants’ overall Chinese language proficiency (but speaking com­
petency), hence it is unclear what the measures employed had different psychometric properties per group (as group sizes were too
small). Finally, it should be noted that we conducted a cross-sectional correlational study that limits our ability to explain the causal
relationship between social support and psychological adaption. Future research should conduct a longitudinal study to track so­
journers over time. Future studies should also focus on exploring the factors that lead sojourners to seek support from specific groups (i.
e. are sojourners who arrive at a location with few internationals and co-nationals compelled to make contact with host nationals).

355
A.S. English et al. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 80 (2021) 349–358

Table 4
Sino-distance Scores and Sample Sizes from Each Country.
Country Sino- distance n

South Korea .087 2

Russia .098 6
Kazakhstan .107 2
Thailand .118 4
India .122 7
Germany .126 5
Iran .126 1
Ukraine .131 3
Hungary .135 1
Mexico .140 6
Australia .147 8
Romania .149 5
Singapore .149 1
Spain .150 6
Canada .153 4
Netherlands .153 4
Georgia .154 1
Poland .157 2
Argentina .158 1
Malaysia .165 1
Uzbekistan .165 1
USA .170 65
Brazil .173 1
Indonesia .178 1
Zambia .180 1
Egypt .183 1
Tunisia .185 2
Morocco .186 1
Finland .190 2
Armenia .192 1
France .198 8
Italy .199 13
Jordan .199 1
UK .205 14
Ecuador .213 1
Algeria .238 2
Nigeria .248 2
Pakistan .251 12

Also, as previously addressed, future research should explore how sojourners in China encounter acculturative stress and how social
support alongside coping strategies play a role in the cross-cultural adaptation process (English & Chi, 2020; English et al., 2015; Szabo
et al., 2017).
In conclusion, the current research report offers a novel perspective on examining cross-cultural adaptation in China by focusing on
a wide variety of participants who live in this growing nation that deserves attention (Kuo, 2014). In addition, we have addressed
Bender et al.’s (2019) call to separate types of support and investigate their impact on two types of psychological processes, anxiety and
well-being. Furthermore, findings in our study support the existing conclusions of prior studies that social support from host and
internationals are reliable ways to achieve successful acculturation, and that interacting with co-nationals may not contribute to
cross-cultural adaptation. Moving forward, future research should focus on the underlying factors that facilitate greater access to social
support and the various dimensions of support such as supportive messages that improve cross-cultural adaptation.

Appendix A. Supplementary data

Supplementary material related to this article can be found, in the online version, at doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2020.
10.006.

References

An, R., & Chiang, S. Y. (2015). International students’ culture learning and cultural adaptation in China. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 36,
661–676. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2015.1009080.
Arends-Tóth, J., & Van deVijver, F. R. (2006). Assessment of psychological acculturation. In D. L. Sam, & J. W. Berry (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of acculturation
psychology (pp. 142–160). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

356
A.S. English et al. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 80 (2021) 349–358

Beech, S. E. (2016). The multicultural experience? “Cultural cliques” and the international student community. Multi-dimensional transitions of international students to
higher education. London: Reed Business Information Ltd, England.
Bender, M., van Osch, Y., Sleegers, W., & Ye, M. (2019). Social support benefits psychological adjustment of international students: Evidence from a meta-analysis.
Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 50, 827–847. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022119861151.
Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology, 46, 5–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.1997.tb01087.x.
Berry, J. W. (2006). Stress perspective on acculturation. In D. L. Sam, & J. W. Berry (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of acculturation psychology (pp. 43–57). Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511489891.007.
Burleson, B. R., & MacGeorge, E. L. (2002). Supportive communication. In M. L. Knapp, & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (2nd ed., pp.
374–424). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Byrd, G., & Zhang, Y. B. (2020). Perceptions of interability communication in an interpersonal relationship and the reduction of intergroup prejudice. Western Journal
of Speech Communication, 84, 19–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2019.1636131.
Chiang, S. Y. (2015). Cultural adaptation as a sense-making experience: International students in China. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 16, 397–413.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-014-0346-4.
Cohen, S., & McKay, G. (1984). Social support, stress and the buffering hypothesis: A theoretical analysis. In A. Baum, S. E. Taylor, & J. E. Singer (Eds.), Handbook of
psychology and health (pp. 253–267). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dawson, J. F. (2014). Moderation in management research: What, why, when, and how. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10869-013-9308-7.
Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/
s15327752jpa4901_13.
Eckenrode, J., & Wethngton, E. (1990). The process and outcome of mobilizing social support personal relationships and social support (pp. 83–103). Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
English, A., & Chi, R. (2020). A longitudinal study on international students’ stress, problem focused coping and cross-cultural adaptation in China (来华留学生跨文化
压力应对和适应研究). Journal of International Students, 10, 73–86. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v10iS(3).1774.
English, A. S., Zeng, Z. J., & Ma, J. H. (2015). The stress of studying in China: Primary and secondary coping interaction effects. Springer Plus, 4, 755–761. https://doi.
org/10.1186/s40064-015-1540-3.
English, A. S., Allison, J., & Ma, J. H. (2016). Understanding Western students: Motivations and benefits for studying in China. Journal of Education and Training
Studies, 4(8), 44–55. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i8.1499.
English, A. S., & Zhang, R. (2020). Coping with perceived discrimination: A longitudinal study of sojourners in China. Current Psychology, 39, 854–869. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s12144-019-002536.
Galchenko, I., & van de Vijver, F. J. (2007). The role of perceived cultural distance in the acculturation of exchange students in Russia. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 31, 181–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2006.03.004.
Geeraert, N., Demoulin, S., & Demes, K. A. (2014). Choose your (international) contacts wisely: A multilevel analysis on the impact of intergroup contact while living
abroad. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 38, 86–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2013.08.001.
Goldberg, D. P., & Hillier, V. F. (1979). A scaled version of the general health questionnaire. Psychological Medicine, 9, 139–145. https://doi.org/10.1017/
S0033291700021644.
Goldsmith, D. J., & Albrecht, T. L. (2011). Social support, social networks, and health. The Routledge handbook of health communication (pp. 361–374). Routledge.
Gottlieb, B. H., & Bergen, A. E. (2010). Social support concepts and measures. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 69, 511–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpsychores.2009.10.001.
Gudykunst, W. B. (2005). An anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) theory of effective communication: Making the mesh of the net finer. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.),
Theorizing about intercultural communication (pp. 281–322). Sage Publications Ltd.
Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Publications.
Hobfoll, S. E. (2009). Social support: The movie. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 26, 93–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407509105524.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
Imamura, M., Ruble, R., & Zhang, Y. B. (2016). English proficiency, identity, anxiety, and intergroup attitudes. US Americans’ perceptions of Chinese. Journal of
Intercultural Communication Research, 45, 526–539. https://doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2016.1240704.
Kashima, E. S., & Abu-Rayya, H. M. (2014). Longitudinal associations of cultural distance with psychological well-being among Australian immigrants from 49
countries. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 45, 587–600. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022113519857.
Kashima, E. S., & Loh, E. (2006). International students’ acculturation: Effects of international, co-national, and local ties and need for closure. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 30, 471–485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2005.12.003.
Kuo, B. C. H. (2014). Coping, acculturation, and psychological adaptation among migrants: A theoretical and empirical review and synthesis of the literature. Health
Psychology and Behavioral Medicine: An Open Access Journal, 2, 16–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/21642850.2013.843459.
Liu, N., Zhang, Y. B., & Wiebe, W. (2017). Initial communication with and attitudes toward international students: Testing the mediating effects of friendship
formation variables. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 46, 330–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2017.1344999.
Muthukrishna, M., Bell, A. V., Henrich, J., Curtin, C. M., Gedranovich, A., McInerney, J., et al. (2020). Beyond western, educated, industrial, rich, and democratic
(WEIRD) psychology: Measuring and mapping scales of cultural and psychological distance. Psychological Science, 678–701. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0956797620916782.
O’Connor, B. P. (1998). SIMPLE: All-in-one programs for exploring interactions in moderated multiple regression. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58,
836–840. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164498058005009.
Ong, A. S., & Ward, C. (2005). The construction and validation of a social support measure for sojourners: The Index of Sojourner Social Support (ISSS) Scale. Journal
of Cross-cultural Psychology, 36, 637–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022105280508.
Peng, L., Zheng, Q., & Zhang, J. (2019). Multicultural and colorblind, investigating intergroup ideologies and relevant relations in mainland China. International
Journal of Intercultural Relations, 70, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2019.02.005.
Podsiadlowski, A., Vauclair, C. M., Spiess, E., & Stroppa, C. (2013). Social support on international assignments: The relevance of socioemotional support from locals.
International Journal of Psychology, 48, 563–573. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2012.669042.
Ristić, I., Zhang, Y. B., & Liu, N. (2019). International students’ acculturation and attitudes towards Americans as a function of communication and relational
solidarity with their most frequent American contact. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 49, 589–607. https://doi.org/10.1080/
17475759.2019.1695651.
Ruble, R. A., & Zhang, Y. B. (2012). The impact of stereotypes on American students’ willingness to communicate with Chinese international students. The Bulletin of
the Association of College Unions International, 80, 30–34. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342961497_The_impact_of_stereotypes_on_American_
students’_willingness_to_communicate_with_Chinese_international_students.
Ruble, R. A., & Zhang, Y. B. (2013). Stereotypes of Chinese international students held by American students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 37,
202–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2012.12.004.
Selmer, J. (2006). Language ability and adjustment: Western expatriates in China. Thunderbird International Business Review, 48, 347–368. https://doi.org/10.1002/
tie.20099.
Selmer, J., & Shiu, L. S. (1999). Coming home? Adjustment of Hong Kong Chinese expatriate business managers assigned to the People’s Republic of China.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23, 447–465. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0147-1767(99)00005-X.
Stephan, W. G., Stephan, C. W., & Gudykunst, W. B. (1999). Anxiety in intergroup relations: A comparison of anxiety/uncertainty management theory and integrated
threat theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23, 613–628. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0147-1767(99)00012-7.

357
A.S. English et al. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 80 (2021) 349–358

Suanet, I., & Van de Vijver, F. J. (2009). Perceived cultural distance and acculturation among exchange students in Russia. Journal of Community & Applied Social
Psychology, 19, 182–197. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.989.
Szabo, A., English, A. S., Zhijia, Z., Jose, P., Ward, C., & Jianhong, M. (2017). Is the utility of secondary coping a function of ethnicity or the context of reception? A
longitudinal study across Western and Eastern cultures. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 48, 1230–1246. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022117719158.
Szabó, Á., Papp, Z. Z., & Luu, L. A. N. (2020). Social contact configurations of international students at school and outside of school: Implications for acculturation
orientations and psychological adjustment. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 77, 69–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2020.05.001.
Tan, S. A., & Liu, S. (2014). Ethnic visibility and preferred acculturation orientations of international students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 39,
183–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2013.08.011.
Taušová, J., Bender, M., Dimitrova, R., & Vijver, F. V. (2019). The role of perceived cultural distance, personal growth initiative, language proficiencies, and
tridimensional acculturation orientations for psychological adjustment among international students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 69, 11–23.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2018.11.004.
Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1999). The measurement of sociocultural adaptation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23, 659–677. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0147-1767(99)00014-0.
Ward, C., Bochner, S., & Furnham, A. (2001). The psychology of culture shock. London, UK: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022101032005007.
Yang, R. P. J., Noels, K. A., & Saumure, K. D. (2006). Multiple routes to cross-cultural adaptation for international students: Mapping the paths between self-
construals, English language confidence, and adjustment. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30, 487–506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijintrel.2005.11.010.
Yeh, C. J., & Inose, M. (2003). International students’ reported English fluency, social support satisfaction, and social connectedness as predictors of acculturative
stress. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 16, 15–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/0951507031000114058.
Zhang, Y. B., & Giles, H. (2018). Communication accommodation theory. In Y. Y. Kim (Ed.), The International encyclopedia of intercultural communication (pp. 95–108).
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783665.ieicc0156.
Zhang, J., & Goodson, P. (2011). Predictors of international students’ psychosocial adjustment to life in the United States: A systematic review. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 35, 139–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2010.11.011.
Zhang, Y. B., Paik, S., Xing, C., & Harwood, J. (2018). Young adults’ contact experiences and attitudes toward aging: Age salience and intergroup anxiety in South
Korea. Asian Journal of Communication, 28, 468–489. https://doi.org/10.1080/01292986.2018.1453848.

358