Literature Review Matrix Template

Author/ Theoretical/ Research Methodology Analysis & Conclusions Implications for Implications
Date Conceptual Question(s)/ Results Future research For practice
Framework Hypotheses
Social Work Original Provide activities We are most Allowing More empirical Culture hides much
with Groups - Hypothesis: and other likely to be come students to investigation on more than it reveals .
Sociological- Group opportunities for aware of our experience some other questions . . (Hall,1959, pp.29-
Field of Group interventions previously hidden cultural sense of to guide work of 30) as cited in Nitza,
Nitza, Amy Counseling make more aspects of assumptions disequilibrium teachers and Amy (2017).
sense than students’ own when they are and then practitioners
individual culture and its violated or when facilitating mul- globally.
interventions in impact on them to we are plunged tiple reflection Which elements
Botswana. be revealed and into cultural and processing of the group are
What are the experienced. settings different opportunities for culturally
characteristics from those that them to put the bound?
of a productive we are used to” pieces back What are the
and healing Gielen, Draguns together again in stages that a
group climate a new way is group might go
within this & Fish, 2008, essential to through to
specific p.5A as cited in developing develop such a
culture? Nitza, Amy cultural healing climate
How do group (2017). understanding and how similar
interventions among people or different are
that draw and groups. those stages to
heavily from those described
the in Western
individualist Literature?
and low-
context
communication
style of the
West operate in
such groups?
Theoretical Hypothesis Methodology Analysis Conclusions Implications for Suggestions for
author Conceptual Research Ques Results future Research future practice
Framework

1
Shadiev, Computers & It is vital for Bloom and Self- One possible Not many
Rustam & Education educators to Johnston (2010) Introduction- act solution to the studies have
Huang, Department of teach learners and Yamazaki and enables learners question is been carried out
Yueh-Min Engineering to understand Kayes (2004) to become Computers. For using these two
Science and value the argue that cross- acquainted with Example, the systems CAT
Cultural culture of cultural programs one another and Speech-to-text and STR to
convergence others so that need to be with other recognition support
theory explains they can administering as cultures (Liu, (STR) system communication
cross-cultural interact united, connected 2007; Tu, 2004) synchronously of interlocutors
understanding effectively and events, and as a According to transcribes text from different
takes place comfortably in knowledge Curtis and streams from cultures.
through the a world building Lawson (2001) speech input Particularly
communication characterized continuum. 4 this activity (Shadiev, hwang, whether such a
and information by close multi- essential learning reinforces the Yeh et al., 2014). technological
exchange of two faceted behaviors: 1) comfort level in According to approach
or more learners relationships building the classroom related studies facilitates cross-
from different and permeable relationships 2) and encourages the STR system cultural
cultures when borders valuing people of more social is a potential understanding or
they reach a (Huang, Chen. different cultures interaction learning tool that not has not yet
mutual & Mo. 2015) 3) Listening and among learners. has been been tested.
understanding of Observing Self intro helps successfully Therefore, this
each other’s Spoken 4)coping and learners identify applied tin many study is an
culture and the language is not ambiguity their own cultural educational attempt to
world in which the same in values and those studies (Hwang, address the
they live. That is different of their peers Shadiev, Kuo, & existing gaps in
experiences and cultures (Chasse, Chen, 2012; Kuo, the related
insights of other (Moran et al., Macfadyen, Shadiev, hwang, research. We
cultures that 2014). Reeder, & Roche, & Chen, 2012). designed cross-
learners Therefore, how 2002). For example, this cultural learning
communicate can educators Media Sharing, system is used to activities
and share among ensure that Performance and assist learners supported by
themselves learners from Appropriate, and with cognitive or speech-to-text
enable the different Reflecting on physical recognition and
expanding of cultures with Foreign Culture. disabilities and computer-aided
heir cultural no common those who attend translation
awareness and language can speeches given in systems and

2
behavior communicate languages other tested the
(Gudykunst et and exchange than their mother feasibility of
al., 1988; culture-related tongue (Shadiev, using learning
Kincaid, 1979) information hwang, Chen, & activities
with each Huang 2014; supported by the
other? Wald & Bain, two systems and
2008) Computer then examined
aided translation their
(CAT) allows effectiveness
translating texts about cross-
into different cultural
target languages understanding.
(Godwin-Jones, Shadiev, R. et
2011). Related al. (2016).
studies suggest
that CAT systems
have a great
potential to aid
learning,
especially in
second or foreign
language
learning. Related
studies suggest
that CAT systems
have a great
potential to aid
learning
especially in
second or foreign
language
learning. For
example, CAT
has been applied
to assist learners
in writing texts in

3
the target second
or foreign
language learning
to correct
grammatical and
lexical errors in
texts (Hermet &
Desilets, 2009). .
It is believed that
learners from
different
countries may
understand each
other’s cultures
better if they
perform the
learning
behaviors
discussed in
Yamazaki and
Kayes (2004) and
participate in the
learning act’s
proposed in
Bloom and
Johnston (2010).
Chase et al.
(2002). Curtis
and Lawson
(2001), Jenkins et
al. (2009), Liu
(2007) and Tu
(2004).
Furthermore, if
learning acts are
framed within a

4
 specific topic
such as “National
Cuisine,” it is
assumed that
learners will be
more interested
in cross-cultural
learning and the
topic will draw
their attention
and motivate
their interest
(Shadiev, Hwang,
& Huang, 2015).
Rawls, Theoretical HO: Seniors in Methodology Analysis and Conclusions Online learning Future
Janita & Conceptual both Instrument and Results: For 5-% of the tends to Research and
Hammons, Framework instructional analysis: The Data from senior items, both neutralize Practice
Stacy A. National Survey formats researchers students who delivery modes student’s One of the
(2016) of Student (accelerated examined six voluntarily have no statistical differences, thus disturbing research
Engagement and traditional) questions or items completed web- differences. Half intentional findings the NSSE
(NSSE) Items: will not from the NSSE based NSSE the items are not discussions item of “included
Global and differed survey relating to survey during the showing any around global or diverse perspectives
cultural significantly on themes of global spring semester difference in cultural themes (different races,
understanding each of the six and cultural of 2011 were engagement. The might not occur. religions, genders,
(Included cultural and understanding. used. The NSSE research political beliefs,
Diverse global These items response rate for hypotheses Also, because etc.) in class
Perspectives) understanding centered on using the accelerated remain partially students in discussions or
NSSE global ideas or degree seniors supported. online learning writing
questions. talking with others was 43$. This However, for the can be more assignments.” This
Ha: Seniors in with diverse figure compares other 50%, direct, even significant
both perspectives other well with the statistical blunt, with their difference cannot be
instructional than one’s own web-based NSSE differences were communication, ignored or treated
formats and are noted in response rate of found and for all faculty members lightly. Do the
(accelerated Table 1. The 34% (NSSE the items, greater are not online programs not
and traditional) NSSE is a national 2011). engagement with discussing these possess an outcome
will differ self-report asset. Independent cultural diversity cultural and for global and

5
significantly on Collecting info analysis of each is originating global themes to cultural
each of the six annually from NSSE item was from the on-site keep potential understanding? If so,
cultural and seniors and conducted on the programs. This problems from how is it being
global freshmen to six questions to is an interesting surfacing. taught and assessed?
understanding ascertain the level determine if there finding as it Limburg and Are faculty
NSSE of student were significant suggests that Clark (2006). members intentional
questions. engagement in differences being involved in For example, about teaching it?
behaviors that lead between the a delivery mode discuss the Because on=site
to learning (NSSE means. Because does affect the “messy and programs tend to
2011). the population emphasis on multifaceted” score higher with
variance is engagement with nature required this type of
Participants unknown, two global when educators engagement, one
Enrolled as sample understanding for engage in needs to reflect on
nontraditional independent t some students in discourse the assignments in
accelerated senior tests were used. the college surrounding the online programs.
from a large The two samples university cultural Best practices in the
private university, were independent classroom. understanding face-to-face
total of 1,210. (a Rawls Janita, et classroom personal
Each were nontraditional/ac al. (2016, p.93). portfolios, role play
enrolled in 1/9 celerated student Avoiding these and reflective
programs either is enrolled in topics may thus journal writing, and
online or on-site only one program be a way to the like. (Amoore
format. The online -either online or maintain civility and Langley et al
participants total on-site). within chats, (see p.95).
was 702 and the blogs, and
onsite was 508. discussion
Table 2 shows the boards.
demographics of Limitation1)
the participates. NSSE uses self-
report data
rather than
measurement of
actual behavior
2)possible bias
with use of t
tests and large

6
 sample in
research study
Potential of type
1 statistical error
Bernard, Social Sciences Examines the Methodology Results and Conclusions Analysis begins Implications for
April and Cross-cultural use of cultural Cultural Analysis Richmond’s with a debrief future research and
Fernandez, Management - metaphor to metaphors often The risks of using Model of Cross discussion of practice:
Adonis Diaz The Purpose is enhance cross- engage the use of cultural Cultural Proverb what is cultural Use of cultural
Yoruba to help construct cultural what Carl Jung metaphors for Relationships metaphor and metaphor can be an
proverbs as a conceptual understanding refers to as understanding (1987) is based relates this effective way to add
cultural framework to and argues that archetypes or human behavior on proverbs from concept to another dimension
metaphor understand how processes to images that tap within and across the Mandinka models used to of cultural
for cultural enhance into collective specific contexts culture of build cross- awareness that
understandi metaphor can be cultural reservoir of is that they can Gambia, West cultural expands our way of
ng used in knowledge or experiences and function to Africa, where competence. thinking and how we
management management awareness ways of knowing reinforce proverbs are a The fable that see and understand
in the practice to build should include shared by human distorted significant part of originated in the our world in general
Caribbean cultural strategies that species. The stereotypes that everyday cultural Yoruba tradition (Morgan 1986 as
knowledge and build upon the mother archetype can provide the expression. of West Africa cited in Bernard and
leadership for use of proverbs is a good example basis of judging Richmond’s guides the Fernandez, p.330
doing business as metaphor. of an image that is individuals and model shows the metaphorical This exercise should
in the Caribbean shared by all lead to benefits of cross- discussion in encourage
and globally. members of the unwarranted cultural this paper.78- participants to seek a
Cultural human species that conclusions about comparisons and year-old Cuban higher level of
metaphors can evolved in an groups without interpretations of Priests understanding that
provide a quick environment in considering the proverbs as a A turtle decided merges their
and efficient which a primary possibilities for method of to swim deep in knowledge of their
means to female-caregiver exceptions. One enhancing the sea toward own culture with
construct a or female example of using cultural the center of the that of another from
general caregiver- inappropriate knowledge. Earth to find the both an insider and
framework for substitute was approach toward 1)those of similar secret to life. outsider perspective.
understanding present. achieving cultural meaning and Met by a Here they can begin
behavior and understanding expression volcano who to see and critique
interaction uses false or between the shared secret. the boundaries that
within specific limited images learner’s culture Volcano wrote it separate their
contexts. and phenomenon (Culture A) and on his back. Fish understanding of

7
to reinforce the target culture saw writing and their own cultures
superficial of interest memorized it. with that of another
stereotypes about Culture B and 2) Man caught fish, and hopefully they
cultures, such as those of no opened to eat will also begin to
using a bullfight equivalent and discovered acknowledge the
or the taco to meaning between all the secrets to area of overlap in-
understand the 2 cultures. life (Baba between. The
Spanish culture Ogunda Ariku, objective to use
(Galloway 1985; 2010). proverbs to facilitate
Omaggio Hadley, this approach to
2000). The cultural
problem with this understanding is to
approach is that erase the illusion of
all cultures are barriers that separate
diverse and one from their
multifaced and perceptions of the
this makes the other to ideally
use of superficial create a more
stereotypes authentic discourse
reductionist in between what were
nature. once thought to be
disparate and
exclusive groups as
opposed to a cultural
continuum. This
process could be
labeled cultural
empathizing which
intentionally
introduces
opportunities to
compare and
interpret meaning
from multiple
vantage [points and
contexts using

8
 proverbs and other
cultural artifacts.
Bernard and
Fernandez (2016)
Su, Ya- Frameworks Hypothesis Methodology Analysis Results Implications for Implications for
Chen, Constructivist How cultural Participants Student cultural The results in 3 Practice Future
(2011) Approach – knowledge and 38 undergraduate portfolio parts: 1) Journal entries More than half of
Promoting present culture awareness students (28 encompassed one developing an showed that the students
intercultural as a dynamic should be female and 10 18 -week understanding students affirmed that the
understandi rather than a evaluated and male) who semester. Class and knowledge of demonstrated cultural portfolio
ng and static entity. what activities English majors at met once a week the target that through project helped them
reducing Consequently, and private Univ. in for 150 minutes. language constant recognize and re-
stereotypes: culture learning assignments the Taiwan. Students worked cultures; 2) discovery and evaluate images
incorporatin is seen not as the instructor According to in groups of two fostering inquiry, student portrayed in
g the acquisition of should provide student’s self- or three to awareness and 2 not only textbooks, movies
cultural facts but as a to encourage reports – 35 conduct a cultural critical thinking promoted TV shows especially
portfolio process of learners to began studying portfolio project. about cultural from USA.
project into discovery, social discover and English in junior Study modified misconceptions curiosity but
Taiwan’s construction, construct high school and 3 Allen’s (2004) and stereotypes developed her 94 % became
EFL college AND cultural began in steps for [pes of the target new inquiry of familiar with
classes MEANING knowledge elementary implementing language cultures and insight into resources they might
negotiation. actively. school. One cultural portfolio 3) developing the target use for future
Students, are student visited project in class. positive language cultural exploration.
encouraged to English speaking Instructor helped perceptions of culture.
construct their countries for one students learn constructing Listening to
own knowledge month. Two how to create a cultural similar topics
through social studied English cultural knowledge and from different
interaction and in intensive hypothesis and EFL Learning presentations
authentic summer resources to not only
activities. progrms.one accept or reject introduced
Within the lived in Australia assumptions. All student 2 to a
constructive for 3 years. groups were The results of new, factual
paradigm, the Educational required to record students knowledge, but
learner is an Studies what they interview and also helped her
active creative Traditional learned. classroom re-evaluate her
learner Foreign observations own initial

9
generated, Language found that studies concept.
social, and instruction shifted their
constructive methodologies cultural Quantitative and
process (Abrams tended to view generalizations re qualitative
2002) culture as a target lang. results support
relatively culture to become that
uniform and more aware of participating in
static entity and sensitive the cultural
composed of towards cultural portfolio project
accumulated, differences has positive
classifiable, and within each effects on
observable country. students’
phenomena that, Students also attitudes toward
therefore can be developed an s EFL cultural
learned as facts awareness of learning. The
(Brooks 1975); their results of
Nostrand 1974) misconceptions students self-
Hadley (1993) and stereotypes eval.,
argues that the of the target questionnaires
traditional language cultures show that 90%
language and speakers. said that project
teaching improved their
APPROACH to understanding
culture (also and respect of
called the English-
information speaking
acquisition cultures and
approach of fact- increased their
based approach) desire to learn
is merely the English. 9-0%
transmission of also remarked
facts. Students that the project
are acquainted or helped them
exposed to gain insight into
another culture aspect of
passively. They, English-

10
 therefore, speaking
“establish rather cultures and
than diminish their own,
stereotypes about recognize
the target cultures impact that their
“(Hadley 1993, own
153) perspectives
have on
understanding
other cultures,
become more
aware of their
own learning
process and
develop critical
thinking skills.
94 became
familiar with
resources they
might use for
future cultural
exploration.
Framework: Research Methodology Analysis Result Conclusions Implications Implications
Verdon, Cultural History Question/Hyp What are benefits Study focuses on Sites 1 an2 Further The study reveals
Sarah, Activity Theory Contribute to of collaboration elements of involved SLT’s Research opportunities for
Wong, (CHAT)– a tool the literature by with families and community and working alone professionals to
Sandie and to describe the investigating communities in the division of labor with children Benefits of open enhance cultural
McLoad, nature of collaboration practice of speech and using the with feedback communication competence of their
Sharynne collaboration in with families and language system based and discussion and building practice through
(2016) different cultural and therapy with approach to with parents trusting engagement with
contexts and communities in children from analysis, the occurring at the relationships families and
benefits of SLT (Speech CALD interconnected end of the when communities.
collaborating and Language backgrounds and nature of these session. collaborating
with families Therapists’ their families? two elements Levels of with families to
and practice with What tensions within the act collaboration move forward
communities children from exist between system and their with families and with therapy

11
 CLAD effective impact on it can communities goals.
backgrounds in collaboration with be understood. varied.
a range of families and
different communities?
practice How can SLT
contexts around enhance cultural
world. competence of
their practice
through
engagement with
families and
communities?
Sites were
recruited through
referral from
professional
networks and an
invitation to
nominate sites that
engaged in high
quality practice
with CALD
populations posted
on online speech
and language
therapy discussion
groups.
Dittes, Sven, Theoretical Research Methodology Analysis and Conclusion Implications Implications
and Framework Questions: Aim to answer the Results Empirical studies Cultural values Research
Smolnik, Information How is the research questions The cultural uncovering the have a potential opportunities to
Stefan systems (IS) that relationship and derive a values within a n phenomenon of to be changes study this
(2016) foster between the research agenda organization have reciprocity according to relationship in an
collaboration in use of IS that that indicates been shown to be between cultural different organizational
organizations foster future research a very complex values and the approaches to setting.
such as collaboration opportunities to concept. [10]. use of IS to foster and perspectives Concluded that
knowledge and cultural study the Leidner and collaboration is on relationship organizational

12
 management values within relationship Kayworth [11] still scarce. of cultural culture encourages
systems (KMS) an organization between cultural state that every The us of such values and IS employees to use
have shown the observed in values and IS that person’s cultural technologies as that foster KMS. (p.4216)
potential to current foster identity is (ESS) Enterprise collaboration. Further research
improve empirical collaboration in an comprised of Software System Studies show opportunity could
employees’ studies? organizational different values and KMS and IS that use of IS develop a holistic
work quality and Should cultural setting. at various layers has shown the b\ that foster conceptualization of
performance. values be an Contribute to the (e.g. national, potential benefit collaboration cultural values
antecedent, an research by organizational, organizations in has the potential including different
outcome, or revealing research and sub-unit). the form of their to change and manifestations that
both or none gaps that serve an Gallivan and employees transform are important within
when inspiration. Srite theorize that improved work cultural values the realm of research
examining the some layers may performance and within an dealing with IS that
use of IS that be more better organization. foster collaboration.
foster dominant than coordination and
collaboration. others regarding collaboration Both climate and
How are explaining within the culture deal with the
cultural values cultural values’ organization ways which
conceptualized influences. Conclusion = in organization
in these placing the use of members make
studies? collaboration sense of their
Influence of systems, KMS environment.
cultural value and ESS at the However, culture
has potential to center of our operates at a greater
leverage the review level of abstraction
benefits of framework, and than climate [35]
highly suggest that Future research
dependent on cultural values investigates a
the influence of are an antecedent temporal causality in
cultural values as well as an the reciprocity
within the outcome. between cultural
organization. (p.4215) values and the use of
IS that foster
collaboration.
Mahon, Theoretical Research Methodology’s Analysis Conclusion Implications Implications
Jennifer concept Question The present study Compromising Competent Conflict In the treatment of

13
(2009). Framework Conflict Style focused on conflict style, teachers are management whites vs. Students
Underlying the and Teachers – teacher’s followed very competent and intercultural of color – these
study is the 1.The individual skills as closely by communicators sensitivity (ICS) students have
Thomas and achievement indicated by their Avoiding and who can build are constructs reported feeling
Kilmann (1974) gap between conflict styles, the Accommodating and sustain that contribute oppressed; teachers
framework of whites and “modes used by Further analysis interpersonal to intercultural rarely allowed them
conflict style, a students of either or both revealed that relationships awareness. to explain their side
multi-trait dual color persists parties to cope degree of across culture of a discipline issue,
concern model (Cochran- with a conflict” cooperativeness and across We need to and those who
(DCCM), Smith & (Hendel, Fish & predicted levels conflict. examine persisted were
utilizing the Zeichner 2005; Galon, 2005, of the dependent Few studies have intercultural viewed as
traits of NCES, 2007), p.139), A teaching variable of ICS. focused on sensitivity and insubordinate or
assertiveness thus we method such as Certain teachers. Most conflict style, defiant (Sheets,
and continue to cultural demographic teachers have a perhaps we may 1996).
cooperativeness. search for congruence, is variables shown compromising begin to shed Teachers admitted
Assertiveness answers. only as good as the to be important in style and were some light on that clashes often
represents the Developmental person prior dependent avoiders who complications resulted from the “. .
degree to which Model of administering it to variable of ICS were adverse to underlying the . lack of
one seeks to Intercultural a classroom of research were collaboration. prevailing interpersonal skills,
satisfy personal Sensitivity diverse students. found to predict disparities. In knowledge of
concerns, and (DMIS) Teachers with levels of Universities are schools, cultural diversity
cooperation intercultural cooperative and dependent influenced by the successful and competence in
refers to meeting sensitivity is assertive variables. globalization navigation of the classroom.
others ‘concerns “. . . the interpersonal One study used process and those conflict depends More research is
and maintaining meaning people styles are the DMIS to with a high int’l on school norms need for preventing
the relationship. attach to perceived as more examine teacher opening can react indicating or minimizing
The crossroads cultural competent, and ICS. by First offering commitment to confrontations with
of the continua difference and positively affect Pappamihiel a study abroad conflict ethnically and
yield five styles: to the varying student motivation (2004)., program, and resolution, clear racially different
Competing, kinds of and achievement investigated second teach resolution students (as cited in
Accommodating experience that (den Brok, education future graduates procedures, and gay, 2006, p.353).
, Avoiding, accompany Brekelmans, Levy students intended how to live and individual skills
Compromising, meaning & Wubbels, 2002). expression of work efficiently (Johnson & Prior research has
and attributions” caring behaviors in another Johnson, 2008) not examined the
Collaborating. (Bennett, 1986, for children in country. relationships
The Intercultural p.30). In the ESL Intercultural Greter between

14
 development DMIS an education is a cooperativeness intercultural
inventory individual’s necessary will relate to sensitivity and
Communication cognitive component of the increased ICS, conflict style. It does
Institute (ICI). relationship educational and less give some indication
Qualitative date with cultural system. assertiveness that relationships
suggested difference will relate to may be found.
teachers with changes as less intercultural Conflict
less their sensitivity assertiveness
sophisticated perceptions development. indicted concern for
understandings change, and self-more in line
of culture this amorphous with ethnocentric
avoided perceptual thinking.
intercultural relation is Cooperativeness is a
conflict crucial to concern for
situations. sensitivity relationship and
development. focus on the other or
ethnorelative
thinking.
Brancu, Frameworks Hypothesis Methodology Analysis and Conclusions Implications for Implications for
Laura, Using Earley & Understand CQ The study is on the Results Some individuals future research Practice
Munteanu, Ang’s (2003) components intercultural Metacognitive are more Rational Chose No information
Valentin, multidimensiona which higher intelligence among CQ refers to the successful than research topic exists regarding
and Golet, l concept as an education business students mental processes others in a cross- because we what leads to higher
Ionut (2016) analysis should focus in Romania. that individuals cultural business think that levels of CQ?
framework, more. Find Rationale: The use to acquire situation. The current business (Crowne, 2008,
educational business students and understand ability to interact students will p/392).
solutions of today will cultural effectively in find themselves
adapted to the become the global knowledge. It multiple cultures more a more Sahin et al. (2013)
actual needs of managers of about the is not a skill often in the face recent study reaches
business tomorrow. The individual’s level possessed by all of expatriate the conclusion that
graduates. (CQ) Cultural of cultural norms (Crowne, 2008). assignments and the CQ predictors
Which of the intelligence is a for different there are great are personality and
four multidimensional countries or The CQ chances for international
dimensions of concept, analyze groups of people. predictors on an them to become assignment.
CQ is a answers for each COGNITIVE Cq empirical and future global
capability of of four (4) – refers to the theoretical level, leaders. Per

15
development dimensions to knowledge of have a new Alon &Higgins
among identify which norms, practices construct to 2005, the future
students? capabilities are and conventions quote. Ang and managers not
Why are some developed among in different Van Dyne (2008) only master and
individuals students. cultures, acquired developed a know the global
more effective from education Nomological business
than others in a A questionnaire- and personal Network of functions such
cross-cultural based survey was experiences. Cultural as finance,
business used for data People with high Intelligence, human resource
situation? collection among cognitive CQ including management or
bachelor understand and variables related marketing, they
management know the to personality, must also be
students (2nd and economic and demographic extremely
3rd academic yr.) legal and social factors, skilled in the
gathering a no. of contexts of biological interpersonal
113 valid different cultures. information’s, as conduct of
questionnaires. MOTIVATIONA well as global business
From a L CQ – reflects ethnocentrism, as (p.502).
demographic view, capability to determining
93% of direct attention factors of CQ.
respondents are in and energy Shannon &
the 20-22 age towards learning Begley (2008)
group and 64% are about and found foreign
female. functioning in language abilities
Regarding the situations and influences
indirect cultural characterized by the CQ (the
exposure, cultural cultural exposure
27parents working differences. meaning
in MNC and 29% Essential employment and
had parents with component and education
expatriate source of abroad).
missions (18% fall interculturally Cultural exposure
in both groups, adapted sections. is a variable often
MNC with analyzed as a CQ
expatriate predictor. Study
missions) by the the impact of

16
time of the personal cultural
questionnaire exposure over the
completion. CQ.
The direct
culture exposure is
remarkably low
93% of student
never studied
abroad (including
Erasmus) and
95.6% never
participated in an
internship abroad
(including work
and travel). The
personal travel is
more promising
only 20%
declaring that they
have never
travelled abroad.
The travel time
interval with the
highest frequency
(30.7%) is the 1-3
months.

17