Saving Face in Business: Managing

Cross-Cultural Interactions 1st Edition

Rebecca S. Merkin (Auth.)
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/saving-face-in-business-managing-cross-cultural-inter
actions-1st-edition-rebecca-s-merkin-auth/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Cross-Cultural Practices in Business and Finance:

Frameworks and Skills Binod Sundararajan

https://ebookmass.com/product/cross-cultural-practices-in-
business-and-finance-frameworks-and-skills-binod-sundararajan/

Family Firms and Business Families in Cross-Cultural

Perspective: Bringing Anthropology Back In Tobias
Koellner

https://ebookmass.com/product/family-firms-and-business-families-
in-cross-cultural-perspective-bringing-anthropology-back-in-
tobias-koellner/

Understanding Cross-Cultural Management 3rd Edition

Marie-Joelle Browaeys

https://ebookmass.com/product/understanding-cross-cultural-
management-3rd-edition-marie-joelle-browaeys/

Cross-Cultural Comparisons on Surrogacy and Egg

Donation 1st ed. Edition Sayani Mitra

https://ebookmass.com/product/cross-cultural-comparisons-on-
surrogacy-and-egg-donation-1st-ed-edition-sayani-mitra/
A Portrait of Assisted Reproduction in Mexico:
Scientific, Political, and Cultural Interactions 1st
ed. Edition Sandra P. González-Santos

https://ebookmass.com/product/a-portrait-of-assisted-
reproduction-in-mexico-scientific-political-and-cultural-
interactions-1st-ed-edition-sandra-p-gonzalez-santos/

(eTextbook PDF) for World Architecture: A Cross-

Cultural History 2nd Edition

https://ebookmass.com/product/etextbook-pdf-for-world-
architecture-a-cross-cultural-history-2nd-edition/

Developing Cross-Cultural Measurement In Social Work

Research And Evaluation 2nd Edition Edition Keith T.
Chan

https://ebookmass.com/product/developing-cross-cultural-
measurement-in-social-work-research-and-evaluation-2nd-edition-
edition-keith-t-chan/

Cross-Cultural Experiences of Chinese Immigrant Mothers

in Canada: Challenges and Opportunities for Schooling
1st ed. Edition Xiaohong Chi

https://ebookmass.com/product/cross-cultural-experiences-of-
chinese-immigrant-mothers-in-canada-challenges-and-opportunities-
for-schooling-1st-ed-edition-xiaohong-chi/

Managing Financial Resources in Late Antiquity: Greek

Fathers’ Views on Hoarding and Saving Gerasimos
Merianos

https://ebookmass.com/product/managing-financial-resources-in-
late-antiquity-greek-fathers-views-on-hoarding-and-saving-
gerasimos-merianos/
S AV I N G FA C E
IN BUSINESS
M a n a g i n g C r o s s - Cu l t u r a l I n t e r a c t i o n s

REBECCA S. MERKIN
Saving Face in Business
 Rebecca S. Merkin

Saving Face in Business

Managing Cross-Cultural Interactions
Rebecca S. Merkin
Baruch College, CUNY
New York, NY, USA

ISBN 978-1-137-59173-9 ISBN 978-1-137-59174-6 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59174-6
Library of Congress Control Number: 2017940597

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2018

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher,
whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation,
reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any
other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic
adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or
hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the
publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the
material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The
publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.

Cover credit: Cover © Rawpixel/Getty Images

Printed on acid-free paper

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Nature America Inc.
The registered company address is: 1 New York Plaza, New York, NY 10004, U.S.A.
 PREFACE

The purpose of this book is to provide an overview on the research on

culture and saving face as it relates to business. More specifically, this book
serves the purposes of (1) identifying the different ways saving face
underlies the many relationships that evolve and exist in the course of
doing business, (2) explaining the types of facework communication
strategies one would be most likely to encounter when interacting with
those from other cultures with different worldviews from one’s own, and
(3) providing models with which to strategize one’s own facework to
coordinate with the likely reactions others may have upon us. The studies
examined and reported in this book are carried out specifically on the
group-level of analysis and corresponding cross-cultural communication is
examined from a group-level perspective. Case studies were provided to
enable others to experientially examine cross-cultural face threats from
different viewpoints.
Some of the circumstances that are examined in this book that relate to
how employees could experience situations in which their face could be
threatened in the process of conducting business include leadership and its
impact on employees, managing work-life balance, managing communi-
cation that is self-promoting versus modest, managing orientations that are
task versus relationship focused, managing millenials’ perceptions which
can deviate from others in their culture, managing sexual harassment,
managing expectations for participation, consultation, and feedback,
managing superior-subordinate relationships, managing petty tyranny and
paternalism, and promoting innovation. Characteristics of business that
arise and that relate to organizational context issues are also addressed in
v
vi PREFACE

this book; particularly, the areas referred to as formalization, teamwork,

corruption, organizational rituals, coopetition, Confucian dynamism, and a
Protestant work ethic.
Overall, the breadth of the discussion on facework and its relationship to
business has been expanded, allowing for research efforts that can be
undertaken further in this context. Researchers of business, communica-
tion studies, interpersonal communication, organizational communication,
intercultural communication, management, international business, eth-
nomethodology, organizational sociology, and organizational behavior can
all extend their analytical explorations with reference to the themes pre-
sented in this book. I believe this book provides new ideas and perspectives
on how saving face and facework are an important aspect of business
interactions. Future work can now proceed to investigate the new areas of
intersection presented in this book. Additionally, those conducting busi-
ness internationally can use the information disseminated in this book to
develop strategies for relating better to business partners in other cultures,
hopefully resulting in improved chances for succeeding in professional
endeavors.
Over the years I have had the opportunity to carry out a number of
cross-cultural studies and to continually examine research related to the
topic at hand. Different pieces of the material presented in this book have
been verified by a number of my own studies which have tested many
aspects of face and facework. In fact, face and facework have always been of
prime importance in my work because without upholding the dignity of
others, relationships frequently dissolve. The opposite is true as well, when
endowing upon someone respect, relationships have a basis to thrive.
I have, therefore, spent some time emphasizing this issue.
I am very grateful to Becky Rubin who first encouraged me to explore
the study of facework when I was a student at Kent State University.
Presently, I would like to thank my colleague Elisabeth Gareis for her
mentoring and continual support and encouragement throughout the
process I have experienced in writing this book. Many thanks go out to my
colleagues at Baruch College—CUNY for awarding me a semester off
which enabled me to have the time and opportunity to finish writing this
book.
I would also like to thank Marcus Ballenger, commissioning editor for
this book, for his invaluable assistance in the preparation for this manu-
script as well as for providing me with support and material vital to the
 PREFACE vii

completion of this book. Other thanks are extended to Jazmine Robles for
taking special care in aiding and serving as my editorial assistant.
Furthermost significantly, I am deeply beholden to my husband, David,
for encouraging me and for managing to “get along” patiently throughout
this book effort.
Finally, I would like to dedicate this book to my mother. My mother
modeled how to avoid conflicts, use silence effectively, and allow others to
gain face. She also quietly managed to encourage her two daughters to
pursue academic careers despite the obstacles before them.

New York, USA Rebecca S. Merkin

 CONTENTS

1 Introduction 1

2 Principles of Saving Face 21

3 Culture and Face Enactment 33

4 Individualism-Collectivism and Saving Face 81

5 Individualism-Collectivism Applied to Direct

Versus Indirect Facework 119

6 Masculinity-Femininity Applied to Cooperative

and Competitive Facework 137

7 Power Distance, Receiver Facework, Innovation,

and Superior-Subordinate Relationships 165

8 Uncertainty Avoidance, Face-Saving,

and Organizations 197

9 Long/Short-Term Orientation, Facework,

and Organizational Relationships 229

ix
x CONTENTS

10 Overview and Facework Model Application

for the Cross-Cultural Workplace 261

Index 277
 LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 3.1 Facework model 46

Fig. 6.1 Facework model: individualism/collectivism,
masculinity/femininity, and facework 154
Fig. 8.1 Facework model: receiver facework: power distance
and uncertainty avoidance 200
Fig. 9.1 Facework model: short term and long term
orientation 246
Fig. 10.1 Facework model: cultural dimensions and facework 271

xi
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1 Individualism scores by country 82

Table 6.1 Masculinity scores by country 139
Table 7.1 Power distance index scores by country 167
Table 8.1 Uncertainty avoidance scores by country 203
Table 9.1 Long-term orientation scores by country 233

xiii
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

Americans love stories about “self-made” men or women. That famous

Americans can often redeem themselves—even after horrific scandals—
suggests that the remaking of self is possible too. Consider the example of
golfer Tiger Woods. Woods enjoyed unprecedented success in his career
from 1996 to 2009, winning 104 tournaments, 78 of those on the PGA
Tour. His glory days seemed to have come to an end in late 2009. In the
wee hours of the morning, Woods crashed his car into a fire hydrant just
outside his home. A tabloid fueled interest in the incident by leaking
accusations that Woods cheated on his wife. In the ensuing media storm,
reporters and the public questioned details of the crash, including the
timing of the accident as well as whether the golfer’s wife, Elin, had actually
smashed the car window with a golf club, aiming for the golfer’s head. Soon,
Woods released a statement admitting, “This situation is my fault, and it’s
obviously embarrassing to my family and me. I’m human and I’m not
perfect.” He promised to “make sure this doesn’t happen again.” More
revelations of affairs, however, caused a number of sponsors to drop the
Woods brand and ushered in an era of poor showings for Woods on the golf
circuit. By 2012 though, Woods had completed a comeback, capturing
three tournaments in one season. The American public continued to be
captivated by the excellence he displayed in his sport. Though his perfor-
mance subsequently faltered, he managed to regain his standing to some
extent, keeping contracts and developing a celebrity relationship. This is
possible in the United States, where achievement and competence raise a
person’s status and self-esteem (Shamir, House, & Arthur, 1993).

© The Author(s) 2018 1

R.S. Merkin, Saving Face in Business,
https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59174-6_1
2 R.S. MERKIN

Americans find professional competence to be one of the requirements

for credibility in politics as well as in sports. Thus, Elliot Spitzer, who
resigned from his position as governor of New York in 2008 for patron-
izing an elite escort service, was able to run for New York City comptroller
just 5 years later. Figures such as Woods and Spitzer were able to move
relatively quickly from infamy to acceptance because Americans believe that
reputation can be restored or reconstructed. We see our “face”—the
positive social value we effectively claim for ourselves—as negotiated during
the process of communicating (Goffman, 1967).
Other cultures, however, have different assumptions about the concept
of face. For example, those from collectivistic cultures like China, believe
that face is hierarchical and embedded in the status quo (Lee & Peterson,
2001; Merkin, Taras, & Steel, 2014), thus precluding the possibility of
managing one’s face (as in the case of moving from one social class to
another). Such perceptions provide fewer opportunities to regain face after
losing it, thereby increasing the stakes of losing face. Consequently, though
“saving face” and “losing face” are familiar terms. Few Americans really
understand their full range of meaning, particularly for those in collec-
tivistic cultures. In fact, the method of approaching another’s face plays a
vital role in the success or failure of cross-cultural interactions for indi-
viduals and for organizations.
The term “losing face” is an English translation of the Chinese phrase
“tiu lien”. This phrase reflects the idea that when people feel disgraced,
they do not like to show their faces in public. In China, once face is lost, it
is irretrievable. In Eastern countries, face is considered to be the
respectability and/or deference which people claim for themselves from
others by virtue of the relative position they occupy in social networks (Ho,
1976, p. 883). As a result, in Eastern cultures, people are judged based on
their position and how appropriately they function in that position. This
view of face is not as transient as ours in the United States because it is
focused on a person’s stable hierarchical position or, in some cases, their
caste. Thus, their identity is immutable—a fact they expect to be
acknowledged and reaffirmed in any successful interaction. If we misun-
derstand this, it could spell the end of a fruitful relationship before it has a
chance to flourish.
To better understand how cultures differ, theorists describe how cultural
values vary. Geert Hofstede, a renowned Dutch researcher, studied how
basic cultural values underlie organizational behavior. Using a sample of
over 110,000 people in more than 50 countries, he developed a framework
 1 INTRODUCTION 3

composed of four dimensions of cultural values that explain how people

from different cultures communicate throughout the world. Hofstede’s
(2001) cultural values include individualism-collectivism (values on group
membership), power distance (values on how to relate to authority), mas-
culinity-femininity (values on using competitiveness versus cooperative-
ness), and uncertainty avoidance (varying needs to reduce uncertainty).
Cultures fall on points along a continuum of these values. Hofstede’s work
applies these values to the kinds of underlying thinking people have when
presenting their face to others during face-threatening situations.
Understanding both cultural values and face-saving concepts can benefit
practitioners, multinational managers, and the general public. By becoming
more culturally literate, individuals are likely to become more able to
accomplish their goals.
It is just as central for travelers to understand how the concept of face
shapes the way people communicate and receive responses in different
cultures as it is to learn something about the country’s weather or lan-
guage. This is because real cross-cultural communication transpires on a
deeper level and reflects people’s underlying values. These values are hard
to define, however, until they are trampled upon, often inadvertently. But,
the values are there and they matter because the people holding these
values believe they are right and that those violating them have done
something wrong.
For example, when handed a business card in Japan, if an American
pockets the card without exclaiming over it, he or she may be shutting the
door to future relations right there and then because this is considered to
be a sign of disrespect. In Japanese culture, people expect business cards to
be immediately inspected and admired, then placed on the table in front of
the receiver for the duration of the meeting as a show of respect for the
other person. When the meeting is over, cards should be stored respectfully
and should never be placed in a back pocket. One should also never write
on a business card. If individuals want to be taken seriously at a business
meeting, they also must have business cards which are taken out of a card
holder, not just out of a pocket. Why? In Japanese culture, the business
card is a person’s face and, in turn, your face is also reflected in your
treatment of this card when you are with others who hold this belief. In
short, to succeed at cross-cultural communication without violating others’
assumptions and rituals, we must be able to read and understand the
meanings they convey through their behavior while communicating to
preserve face for all. The business card is just one example of the myriad
4 R.S. MERKIN

ways that relationships could get off to a poor start. To assure better
cross-cultural experiences, understanding the tacit beliefs people from
other cultures hold is essential.
Generally speaking, when people meet colleagues abroad they have
goals in mind, but some persuasive tactics that are useful in the US can
backfire abroad. Before such meetings, planning communication strategies
based on cultural modes practiced by the other party often is the key to
success. Moreover, if inappropriate communication maneuvers are carried
out, it is possible that both the perpetrators and their counterparts (e.g.,
their partners in business) could end up losing face as a result of cultural
misunderstandings.
For example, on January 8, 1992, US President George Bush went to
Japan with Lee Iacocca and other American business magnates on a 12 day
mission to improve trade relations with Japan. The delegation attempted to
mandate that Japanese leaders buy more American automobiles and
communicated this directly by making demands. However, to the
Japanese, it is considered rude and a sign of ignorance or desperation to
lower oneself to make direct demands. Therefore, instead of appearing as a
statesman, President Bush seemed to have demeaned himself by appearing
desperate to sell US cars. What’s more, in Japan, trade relations are handled
exclusively by lower-level assistants.
This bad impression was worsened by a mealtime faux pas that some
consider the most embarrassing diplomatic incident in recent US history.
Losing control is looked down upon by the Japanese. When at a state
dinner for over 100 diplomats held at the home of the Japanese Prime
Minister Kiichi Miyazawa, President Bush experienced unexpected intense
gastric distress, vomited into the lap of Miyazawa, and fainted; he did not
appear to have personal control or leadership. Back home, footage of the
president vomiting was broadcast on TV and became subject matter for
late night comedians. This fiasco resulted in Mr. Bush losing face in front of
the Japanese and before the whole world. In the end, President Bush’s
failure to tailor his initial message to Japanese cultural sensitivities deprived
him of the goodwill that might have allowed people to see his misfortune at
the dinner table as merely an unavoidable accident caused by illness.
US businessman Lee Iacocca’s communication style was not much
better. During his visit with President Bush, he also made insulting direct
demands. Furthermore, when he returned from this trade mission, instead
of attempting to repair their relationship, he proceeded to deride the
Japanese government for helping its own automobile industry while
 1 INTRODUCTION 5

sinking the US’s. Mr. Iacocca’s public remarks disparaging the Japanese
infuriated the President of the Nissan Car Company and the Chairman of
the Japanese Automobile Manufacturers Association, Mr. Yutaka Kume
who responded, “Mr Iococca’s behavior and remarks are outrageous and
insulting to us.” Then he swore never to meet with those Americans again
(Mantle, 2011).
These two examples reflect some of the most common circumstances in
which face is threatened: cross-cultural relations, initial interactions,
requests, and conflict. Intercultural communication is potentially threat-
ening to face by definition because, in today’s world, people of all cultures
experience a heightened risk of losing face if they do not interact with those
from different cultures in a mindful way. Those from different cultures
think and communicate differently because of varying cultural dimensions
that affect human behavior (Hofstede, 2001; Young, 2013).
Meeting people for the first time is also potentially face-threatening
because initial conversations are personal investments in future social
interactions (Svennevig, 1999). Interactions carry risk because the indi-
viduals do not always know how the other person feels about them. Thus,
people often do not express verbal messages about what or whom they like
because it may be easier for them to deny their feelings as a way to save face
if the feeling is not mutual. Because cultures vary in their rules for emo-
tional disclosure, it is important to understand others’ rules well before
initial meetings.
Because requests could cause a person to lose face, they are often
expressed as a question. For example, when someone asks a question like
“Is there any coffee left?” the question is usually interpreted as a request (as
opposed to an appeal for information) (Demeure, Bonnefon, & Raufaste,
2008). This is particularly likely when the status of the listener is superior to
that of the speaker, if the listener is sensitive rather than open-minded, or if
the listener likes to be in control rather than considerate of other people’s
opinions.
Geert Hofstede defined power distance as the extent to which the less
powerful members of institutions and organizations within a country
expect and accept that power is distributed unequally. In cultures that are
high in power distance, especially indirect communication is the norm for
maintaining face. Thus, researchers found that explicit requests could
actually “disrupt social bonds” (Cocroft & Ting-Toomey, 1994; Gagne,
2010).
6 R.S. MERKIN

Conflict can also break social bonds when disrespectful communication

leads to face loss. Retzinger (1991) points out how conflict causes people
to feel shame which causes them to respond with rage, which, in turn, leads
the target of this anger to shame the initiator in return. This is referred to
by Retzinger as the shame-rage cycle in which participants take turns
shaming and feeling rage, thus, perpetuating the conflict. During conflict,
or any face-threatening situation, recipients of ambiguous communication
travel swiftly between observation and imagination, testing what has been
imagined against future observations (Scheff & Retzinger, 2001). During
interactions, we observe an utterance or facial expression, then put our-
selves in the role of the other, imagining what emotion and meaning the
expression conveys. Often, we imagine what signs would be evident if our
inference is correct. We test our inferences by looking for these signs—
going back and forth between imagination and observation (Scheff &
Retzinger, 2001). In cross-cultural conflict, we may more readily misin-
terpret the signs which could lead to repeated face loss, face-threat, and
escalating spirals of conflict or impasses in the conflict negotiation processes
(Ting-Toomey, 2007).
For instance, the incident with President Bush discussed earlier, which
encompasses all of these contexts (initial interactions, requests, conflict,
and potentially a shame-rage cycle) illustrates just how badly things can
turn out if people do not carefully consider the cultural dimensions of social
contact in advance, before communicating with others with whom they are
not familiar. Most instances of international communication, of course, are
not as consequential as this American President’s unfortunate trip to Japan,
but it is worth pausing to summarize the range and nature of the more
typical consequences of losing face.

CONSEQUENCES OF LOSING FACE

Understanding the issues surrounding loss of face is key to establishing and
maintaining relationships across cultures. To begin, if someone feels
slighted communication may become defensive (Gibb, 1961). Second,
when a person actually feels a loss of face, communication may completely
break down (Gross & Stone, 1964). Third, although individuals from the
same culture may share many connections and come to communicate again
after face loss, the same is not likely for individuals in formal intercultural
relationships (Merkin, 2004). For example, it is typical for people to
interact with local colleagues and those they see at conferences or meetings
 1 INTRODUCTION 7

where they may repair fractured or strained relationships. However, people

residing in faraway countries are unlikely to have the opportunity to
casually resume a conversation or engage in small talk. Furthermore, when
someone loses face, it is memorable, which makes such encounters hard to
smooth over. Once a person feels humiliated, it is often difficult to turn
things around. And, finally, failure to understand the nuances of culture
can rob us of the opportunity to maintain other’s attention (Fang &
Rajkumar, 2013). When we first meet someone, we pay careful attention to
them in order to get to know them. But once an initial impression is made,
it is very hard to change that impression. Thus, establishing positive con-
nections upfront requires careful effort, including understanding other
cultures’ expectations about face. Due to globalization, opportunities for
cross-cultural interaction continue to multiply rapidly.

THE SUBTLETIES OF GLOBALIZATION

On the one hand, McLuhan and Fiore’s (1968) claim that the world has
become a global village is accurate. The internet, transportation, and the
globalization of the marketplace have all made the world smaller. However,
over the past 20 years, data show that around the world, value systems are
more divided than ever (Inglehart, 2005). For example, cultural attitudes
toward women and gender relations vary greatly across cultures. What’s
more, the concept of multiculturalism—wherein several dissimilar cultures
(rather than one national culture) can coexist peaceably and evenhandedly
in a single country—is flawed (Minkov, 2011). Even in the United States,
American Republicans and the Hispanic community are acknowledged to
be deeply divided (Tackett, 2013). Therefore, multiculturalism amounts to
a wide-eyed assumption that subcultures are unified, denying the need for
people with different value systems to be able to navigate their relationships
carefully with each other.

ACCEPTANCE OF DIFFERENCE
Relationships characterized by cross-cultural clashes are frequently the
result of the failure by some or all parties involved to recognize and
acknowledge differences in culturally-based communication styles
(Beamer, 1992). They assume that all people communicate using the same
styles and rules. For example, many US professionals assume that all people
want to be spoken to informally, just as they assume that their gestures are
8 R.S. MERKIN

appropriate for use in any culture, or that an openly frank style of nego-
tiating is universally respected. It is important to note that there is no such
thing as a universal form of communication. Take the simple gesture of
expressing our real opinions about ideas. It is not unusual for Americans to
believe that we know how to do everything the best way. We discuss our
ideas with strangers and acquaintances on the street, at the airport, in
restaurants, and so on. In fact, we consider it a friendly gesture to express
ourselves. However, in other cultures, a discussion can take on a com-
pletely different meaning, particularly with regard to one’s status.
Expressing oneself frankly can be considered rude, insulting, or it can even
signal one-upmanship. A person’s interpretation of communication is
dependent on his or her culturally specific context. As a result, it becomes
necessary for people trying to connect with people from other cultures to
get to know what cultural differences may account for their different modes
of communication.

FACE-THREATENING SITUATIONS
There is no better condition for developing an understanding of a culture
in action than during a face-threatening situation. Cultures tend to reveal
themselves in situations where much is in jeopardy because it is here that
their defenses are crucial to support sustained productive communication.
When relationships require highly face-threatening communication such as
initial interactions, requests, and conflicts, the distinctive and fundamental
elements of a culture are revealed. Similarly, in business, where economic
survival is at risk, cultural attitudes toward work, power, trust, equality, and
communication influence how communication is carried out. Given that
both interpersonal and business relationships consist of mutual exchanges,
the ability to manage one’s comportment strategically is vital to protecting
one’s self-interest and avoiding losing face.
For example, suppose you are working with clients you do not know
well and the location of their company is in an inconvenient place for you
to meet them. You either cannot get there easily or cannot park. In this
case, you may need to make a request that you sometimes meet them
somewhere that is more convenient. Other requests for a change in plans,
or even for money, put other people in a position where they are
expected to provide us with something on our terms rather than on
theirs. This is face-threatening because it burdens other people. If they
acquiesce to our request, we feel relieved because the threat is gone, but
 1 INTRODUCTION 9

we also owe them a return favor for their service to us. How this
exchange is enacted varies by individuals’ cultural values. For example,
requests can be made directly or indirectly depending on whether explicit
requests are culturally acceptable.
For all these reasons, this book pulls together theory and research on the
verbal communication strategies individuals use to save face where com-
munication styles vary in different cultures around the world. The most
influential work on conceptions for understanding cultural differences is
Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory (Smith, Bond, & Cagitcibasi, 2006;
see Chaps. 2–6 for more details). Consequently, this framework will be
used throughout the book as a springboard in which to discuss diverse
communicative facework strategies that are most likely to be used by cit-
izens of a specific culture based on their particular combination of cultural
dimensions. Cultural dimensions represent independent preferences for
one state of affairs over another that distinguish countries (rather than
individuals) from each other (Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010) or
can represent the shared views individuals acquire by growing up in a
particular country (Hofstede, 2001). For example, one dimension of a
culture relates to how it understands the workings of power, while another
dimension relates to how it encourages members of the society to cope
with uncertainty. These and other dimensions of culture help explain the
underlying assumptions behind how negotiations proceed, agreements are
stated, and employees are trained and managed. Thus, this book provides a
model for understanding the likely patterns that people from different
cultures use and expect others to use when communicating. Based on this
model, the book aims to help readers develop a strategic facework plan for
intercultural interactions drawing on Hofstede’s theory of cultural
dimensions. The chapters that illustrate these patterns include examples
culled from the author’s original research in Korea, Hong Kong, Japan,
Chile, Sweden, the US, Israel, Syria, and Pakistan.

OVERVIEW OF CHAPTERS
This book begins with a chapter describing the parameters of saving face
and the use of facework—strategies used to maintain face—during inter-
cultural communication. Overall communication concepts and practices
are introduced in this chapter. This chapter explores the significance of
cross-cultural facework with an emphasis on the basics of how a person’s
face is validated. Just how significant face is to people varies by culture, and
10 R.S. MERKIN

this chapter discusses the cultural reasons that saving face is important and
how saving face is regarded and communicated. Accompanying terms such
as facework and impression-management will be set forth, demarcated, and
clearly discussed so that a working understanding of these terms can be
established before advancing into cultural processes.
Chapter 2 will describe the notion of cultural dimensions (aspects of a
culture’s assumptions)—what they are and how they impact individuals’
cultural values. Further, Chap. 2 will explicate how cultural dimensions
drive communication. Finally, Chap. 2 will lay out a fundamental model of
face developed by the author that systematically analyzes how people can
strategize their communication depending on the cultural makeup of the
country being visited. This model is set up to be used as a guideline for
purposefully conducting oneself with regard for the cultural values of
others. The model this book proposes is based on Hofstede’s
widely-recognized initial grand theory of cultural dimensions which is not
without detractors (e.g., McSweeney, 2013; Ralston et al., 2014; Venaik &
Brewer, 2013). However, in short, given that Hofstede’s theory is one of
the oldest, most comprehensive analyses of cultural values, this conceptu-
alization was chosen for the cultural model that follows. Further on in the
book, an explanation will be provided as to the logic behind this position
and the rationality attributable to the corresponding facework strategies
the model suggests to be used. We now turn to a discussion of the values
attached to the self and corresponding face, followed by a summary of the
structure of the chapters that makeup this book.
One of the most influential American sociologists of the twentieth
century, Erving Goffman (Fine & Manning, 2003), points out that peo-
ple’s feelings are attached to their self which is a sense of who one is
(Goffman, 1959). In turn, the self is the internal starting point for pre-
senting one’s face or the image of the self in social relationships, interac-
tions, and encounters. For example, a person may feel an insecure sense of
self, which may motivate him or her to manifest deliberate external
expressions of power, such as a high-priced bag or a sexy red sports car.
Cultural theorists point out that culture affects one’s notion of self
(Morisaki & Gudykunst, 1994). Specifically, the way people view themselves
is determined by how they see themselves in relation to their primary
group. If someone comes from a collectivistic culture, he or she might view
his or her family as an interconnected part of their self. This means that one
person’s actions can bring shame or pride to the others in the group. On the
other hand, if someone comes from an individualistic country—like the
 1 INTRODUCTION 11

United States—one could be a doctor but would not necessarily feel a

dimunition of personal status, such as extreme shame, if one’s brother is a
maintenance person.
Additionally, how people view their gender roles is part of their
self-identity. In particular, how one views what women and men do, as well
as the role of modesty and competition, are influenced by culture. As a
result, one’s subjective self-reflects cultural influences such as individual-
ism-collectivism and masculinity-femininity (Hofstede, 2001; Inkeles &
Levinson, 1997; De Mooij, 1998). Individualism-collectivism and
masculinity-femininity are both cultural dimensions (categories of values).
A number of researchers (e.g., Hofstede, 2001; Inkeles and Levinson,
1997) have pointed out that there are two cultural conceptions of self:
(a) the relationship between the individual and society or
individualism-collectivism (Hofstede, 2001) and (b) the individual’s con-
cept of masculinity-femininity or the social implications of having been
born a boy or a girl (Hofstede, 2001).
Since the self is expressed through face (Goffman, 1967), it logically follows
that the two values influencing one’s self would also affect one’s expression of
face. Hofstede (2001) found four dimensions of cultural variability that
explain the shared views individuals acquire by growing up in a particular
country: (a) power distance, (b) uncertainty avoidance, (c) individualism-
collectivism and (d) masculinity-femininity. Nevertheless, Hofstede (1991)
pointed out that only two of his four dimensions relate to the conception of
self (individualism-collectivism and masculinity-femininity), therefore, these
three dimensions would rationally be the forces that act upon one’s face
enactment. To illustrate this point, the model of facework presented shows
how these two cultural values are reflected in communication strategies.
Accordingly, the model presented in this book graphically depicts the entire
facework process, showing how the two cultural dimensions that represent
the self (i.e., individualism-collectivism and masculinity-femininity), as well as
the two dimensions reflecting influences of the environment and other parties’
reactive facework (i.e., power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and long-term
orientation) influence facework strategy choices.
Consequently, this model represents the elements of the self, face, and
facework via concentric circles and arrows that represent the various face-
work strategies acting together in the interactional process as described.
The innermost part of this model refers to the elements of self that makeup
one’s face—individualism-collectivism and masculinity-femininity. Power
distance, uncertainty avoidance, and a long or short-term orientation are
12 R.S. MERKIN

represented as outer circles to indicate their presence as reactionary

strategies. Face refers to the presentation of self that is based on the two
cultural values that makeup the self. The argument this book presents is
that both aspects of the self are responsible for the presentation of face
while the other cultural dimensions are responsible for responsive facework
to prior messages received. This book argues that while face is not the sole
determinant of behavior carried out, it is highly influential. Additionally,
during intercultural interactions, culture drives both the presentation of
face and the reactions communicated during intercultural interactions that
help negotiate one’s impression and ultimately one’s face. The arrows
represent facework strategies likely to be related to the corresponding
cultural dimensions driving the reactive portrayal of face attempted during
the overall negotiation of a person’s impression. The different elements of
this model will be presented throughout the chapters that makeup this
book.
More specifically, the chapters of this book correspond to the arrange-
ment of the cultural dimensions in the model presented in Chap. 3. Thus,
the order of Chaps. 4 through 9 of this book present cultural dimensions
(i.e., individualism, masculinity, power distance, uncertainty avoidance,
and long-term orientation) and how they affect the strategies citizens from
cultures representing these dimensions choose to save face during
face-threatening exchanges.
Chapters 4 and 5 will discuss in detail the concept that cultural com-
munication experts call Individualism-Collectivism by exploring how those
traits manifest themselves in countries such as the US, Chile, and Syria.
Furthermore, Chap. 4 describes corresponding facework members of
particular cultures will likely prefer based on accompanying individualistic
and collectivistic cultural values along with examples and explanations. For
example, findings show that Japanese respondents tend to have more
collectivistic tendencies than US respondents who tend to be individual-
istic. Collectivists, who value the promotion of group cohesiveness, are
more likely to promote accord using more cooperative (Eby & Dobbins,
1997) and harmonious (Holmes, 2008) strategies to save face. In fact,
findings show that Japanese respondents (collective) reported using more
indirect facework strategies and more apologies and remediation than
North American (individualistic) respondents, who are more willing to use
antisocial, direct, competitive, and hostile facework to manage difficult
situations (Cocroft & Ting-Toomey, 1994; Merkin & Ramadan, 2010;
Pilavachi, 1995). To return to the episode that began this introduction,
 1 INTRODUCTION 13

President Bush’s mishap, when he demanded trade deals, reflects the

American tendency to communicate directly. This may be explained by the
American view that conflict can be used constructively to achieve goals
without the value of long-term relationships hindering such efforts
(O’Keefe, 1991). Chapter 5 will discuss the specific relationship between
individualism-collectivism and the use of direct versus indirect facework
strategies.
Chapter 6 will present the cultural concept referred to as
masculinity-femininity. The terms masculinity and femininity have partic-
ular meanings in communication theory and academic research that
sometimes overlap with what the terms mean in popular culture—but not
always or entirely. The cultural values associated with this dimension in a
nutshell are more colloquially referred to as competitive versus
status-leveling communications. More specifically, masculine competition
tends to be communicated by expressing more assertiveness and less
concern for people (Tosi & Greckhamer, 2004). On the other hand,
feminine leveling tends to be expressed through empathy and modesty and
violators of this value would tend to communicate by means of
self-promotion (which is also competitive).
Self-promotion is natural in competitive masculine societies. In contrast,
modesty is more prevalent in harmony-oriented feminine societies (Merkin,
2005). This chapter will explore how this cultural dimension plays out in
highly masculine cultures such as Japan and the United States as well as in
more feminine cultures such as Sweden and Chile. Additionally, corre-
sponding facework likely to be preferred based on accompanying masculine
versus feminine cultural values will be presented along with illustrations and
accounts. For example, findings show that individuals from masculine cul-
tures with high and medium levels of masculinity are significantly more
likely to choose antisocial compliance-gaining tactics in a work setting than
those from low masculinity or feminine cultures (Guowei, Pettey, Rudd, &
Lawson, 2007). This finding indicates that similar to individualism, the
competitiveness motive leads others to communicate in antisocial modes.
Chapter 7 will discuss the concept of the cultural dimension power
distance, which is the degree to which people acknowledge authority and is
presented in the facework model as a reactive strategy influenced by the
environment. This chapter will contrast high-power distance cultures, such
as Hong Kong, communication with low-power-distance cultures, such as
14 R.S. MERKIN

Israel. Many readers will remember the uprising in Tiananmen Square,

which shocked and surprised so many—particularly because of the ten-
dency of the Chinese to respect authority and accept injustice in keeping
with their high-power distance cultural values. This chapter will also discuss
the facework likely to be preferred based on associated levels of power
distance and cultural values along with additional examples and
elucidations.
Face management is profoundly shaped by whether cultures have a high
or low power distance (Ting-Toomey, 2005). Studies show that people
from high-power distance cultures tend to have greater communication
apprehension and tend to be less likely to speak up than people from low
power distance cultures (Savage, 2007). For example, investigations
showed that a series of Korean (high-power distance) airplane crashes were
due to subordinates being unwilling to challenge their superiors for fear
that the challenges might cause their superiors to lose face (Gladwell,
2008). In fact, the same phenomenon was considered during a later plane
crash involving Asiana Airlines (Chow, Yortsos, & Meshkati, 2014).
Further investigations and explanations will be presented from research
conducted in Japan, Hong Kong, Pakistan, Israel, Sweden, Chile, and the
US together with hostile, cooperative, and indirect facework strategies
which will be related and discussed in greater detail.
Chapter 8 will cover the concept of uncertainty avoidance or the degree
to which people feel insecure about ambiguity and to avoid these appre-
hensions, establish definite plans, rules, or rituals—a reactive communica-
tion strategy as depicted in the presented model. Facework likely to be
favored by members of particular cultures based on associated levels of
uncertainty avoidance will be presented along with instances and illumi-
nations. For example, people from high-uncertainty-avoidance cultures,
who tend to need to feel in control, can sometimes give into their anxiety
by engaging in aggressive behavior, which they consider to be acceptable to
either reduce anxiety or to save face (Hofstede, 2001; Merkin, 2006). This
can be further evinced by the finding that uncertainty avoidance is nega-
tively related to openness (De Jong, Smeets, & Smits, 2006). For example,
in US gift shops the owners tend to show special attention to their shop-
pers in order to close a sale. In contrast, in high-uncertainty-avoidant
Switzerland, shop owners tend to aggressively hover over their customers
who have children, to make sure that their merchandise is not disturbed
and aggressively tend to their wares by not allowing their patrons to touch
the products in the store. Thus, while US shopkeepers are concerned with
 1 INTRODUCTION 15

their customers’ face, retailers in Switzerland cannot attend to others’ face

until they can contain their own sense of uncertainty. Other examples of
uncertainty avoidance will be presented from Chilean, Chinese, Israeli,
Japanese, Swedish, and US cultures, specifically exploring ritualistic, har-
monious, and hostile facework strategies which are related to uncertainty
avoidance levels.
Chapter 9 will discuss Hofstede and Bond’s fifth cultural dimension. In
Hofstede’s original study he had not analyzed Asian cultures. However,
later, he joined Michael Bond, who carried out an additional study among
students with a survey instrument that was developed together with
Chinese employees and managers, in delineating a fifth dimension based on
Confucian dynamism, referred to as long-term orientation/short/term
orientation (Hofstede & Bond, 1988). Analyses will be made on how these
values are related to facework preferences. Long-term orientation refers to
the degree to which a culture conveys to its members’ acceptance and
delayed gratification of their needs (Dereskey, 2008). Long-term orien-
tation is manifested in behaviors such as cooperative long-term relation-
ships, composure, persistence, tradition, and thrift. On the other hand,
traits that are associated with short-term-oriented societies include respect
for tradition, fulfilling social obligations, and protecting one’s face
(Hofstede, 2001). Facework associated with long-term-oriented values will
be described, along with examples of how such values are communicated
when trying to save face. For example, people from long-term-oriented
cultures tend to engage in cooperative and harmonious facework (Merkin,
2004). Thus, when citizens of long-term-oriented societies negotiate, they
also engage in unpretentiousness because they value long-term alliances
and trust, which can only be developed when there is an absence of conflict
and disagreement. Thus, those from long-term-oriented cultures tend to
take a longer time when getting to know people, but are also patient and
persistent in their attempts at relationships. This chapter will include
descriptions and explanations from cultures including Hong Kong, Japan,
the US, and Sweden together with harmonious and cooperative facework
strategies, which are related to a long-term orientation.
Chapter 10 synthesizes the concepts introduced in earlier chapters and
describes how the model set forth initially can be used as a benchmark for
future reference and planning. In addition, Chap. 10 will describe how to
go about strategizing face-saving communication based on popular com-
binations of cultures. This discussion begins with a synopsis of the pro-
posed universal model, then continues to review original research and
16 R.S. MERKIN

report on significant findings. The results of the author’s past and present
studies as well as recent research are elucidated along with a final discussion
of the latest conclusions on face-saving strategies and culture. Finally,
Chap. 10 will summarize and discuss the implications of the conclusions
presented in this book.
One fundamental principle for success in saving face is communication
competence. An important element of communication competence is
openness. If people approach individuals from other cultures with adapt-
ability and openness, they are more likely to have successful encounters
because goodwill and the willingness to learn from others are important
steps in the direction of good relations with others.

OPENNESS
If President Bush had approached the Japanese with openness instead of
anger, as in the previously described case, his mission would not have been
so fraught with difficulty. To avert anger, attempts to be open to others and
their unique situation which is correlated with a lack of hostility
(Matsumoto, LeRoux, Bernhard, & Gray, 2004) would have been helpful.
When people try to be open to the other’s point of view, others are less
likely to be angry when interacting with them. Therefore, one essential
element in adjusting abroad and developing successful intercultural rela-
tionships is an open attitude towards others (Hotta & Ting-Toomey,
2013; Matsumoto, Yoo, & LeRoux, 2010). Looking back on the Bush
scenario, a better strategy might have been to try to find out what con-
cerned the Japanese first and then to use polite communication to address
both the concerns of the Japanese and themselves, working towards a
negotiated win-win face-saving solution.
What happened with President Bush also shows how vital a concern
saving face is during interactions between people with whom we are
unfamiliar. Establishing positive first impressions such as looking good,
smiling, and having an appropriate greeting for someone can go a long
way. In business or between strangers, this is much harder than it sounds
because looking good, smiling, and being nice must be applied specifically
to each culture. On a first encounter, eye contact, distance, introduction
styles, dress, gifts, and language are all things that should be studied before
a meeting takes place. What’s more, there are certain encounters (i.e.,
initial interactions, requests, and conflict) that require extra care because
they are inherently face-threatening. Without taking cultural variables into
 1 INTRODUCTION 17

account, it is likely individuals will accidentally commit a faux pas leading to

a loss of face somewhere along the line.
To avoid losing face, combining openness, goodwill, and a willingness
to learn together with cultural knowledge can help individuals accomplish
their goals in this global world. In order to begin increasing cultural
knowledge, cultural dimensions reflecting important values that underlie
communication geared to upholding one’s impression during communi-
cation will be examined in greater depth. Chapters 4 through 9 of this
book will explore the basic cultural dimensions (i.e. individualism-
collectivism, masculinity-femininity, power distance, uncertainty avoid-
ance, and long-term orientation) and how they shape the communication
strategies citizens from particular cultures are likely to use during
face-threatening exchanges and why.

REFERENCES
Beamer, L. (1992). Learning intercultural communication competence. Journal of
Business Communication, 29(3), 285–303.
Chow, S., Yortsos, S., & Meshkati, N. (2014). Asiana Airlines flight 214:
Investigating cockpit automation and culture issues in aviation safety. Aviation
Psychology and Applied Human Factors, 4(2), 113.
Cocroft, B. K., & Ting-Toomey, S. (1994). Facework in Japan and the US.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 18(4), 469–506. doi:10.1016/
0147-1767(94)90018-3.
De Jong, E., Smeets, R., & Smits, J. (2006). Culture and openness. Social
Indicators Research, 78, 111–136.
De Mooij, M. (1998). Masculinity/femininity and consumer behavior. In G.
Hofstede (Ed.), Masculinity and femininity (pp. 55–76). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Demeure, V., Bonnefon, J., & Raufaste, É. (2008). Utilitarian relevance and face
management in the interpretation of ambiguous question/request statements.
Memory & Cognition, 36(4), 873–881. doi:10.3758/MC.36.4.873.
Dereskey, H. (2008). International management: Managing across borders and
cultures. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Eby, L. T., & Dobbins, G. H. (1997). Collectivistic orientation in teams: An
individual and group-level analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(3),
275–295. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Fang, X., & Rajkumar, T. M. (2013). The role of national culture and multimedia
on first impression bias reduction: An experimental study in US and China.
IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 56(4), 354–371.
18 R.S. MERKIN

Fine, G. A., & Manning, P. (2003). Preserving Philip Rieff. Journal of Classical
Sociology, 3(3), 227–233.
Gagné, N. (2010). Reexamining the notion of negative face in the Japanese socio
linguistic politeness of request. Language & Communication, 30(2), 123–138.
doi:10.1016/j.langcom.2009.12.001.
Gibb, J. R. (1961). Defensive communication. Journal of Communication, 11,
141–148.
Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers. New York: Little Brown and Company.
Guowei, J., Pettey, G., Rudd, J., & Lawson, D. (2007). Masculinity/femininity
and compliance-gaining in business negotiations: A cross-cultural comparison.
Journal of the Northwest Communication Association, 3693, 93–110.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday.
Goffman, Erving (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays in face-to-face behavior. Random
House (2nd ed. with Joel Best, 2005). Aldine Transaction.
Gross, E., & Stone, G. P. (1964). Embarrassment and the analysis of role
requirements. American Journal of Sociology, 70, 1–15.
Ho, D. Y.-F. (1976). On the concept of face. American Journal of Sociology, 81(4),
867–884.
Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London:
McGraw-Hill.
Hofstede, G. (2001). (2nd ed.). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values,
behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations,
software of the mind. Intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival.
Hofstede, G., & Bond, M. (1988). The confucian connection: From cultural roots
to economic growth. Organizational Dynamics, 16, 4–21.
Holmes, P. (2008). Foregrounding harmony: Chinese international students’
voices in communication with their New Zealand peers. China Media Research,
4, 102–110.
Hotta, J., & Ting-Toomey, S. (2013). Intercultural adjustment and friendship
dialectics in international students: A qualitative study. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2013.06.007.
Inglehart, R. (2005). The worldviews of Islamic publics in global perspective.
World Values Survey. Internet publication. Retrieved July 28, 2013, from
http://www.worldvluessurvey.com.
Inkeles, A., & Levinson, D. J. (1997). National character: A psycho-social
perspective. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction.
Lee, S. M., & Peterson, S. J. (2001). Culture, entrepreneurial orientation, and
global competitiveness. Journal of World Business, 35(4), 401–416.
Mantle, J. (2011). Car wars: Fifty years of backstabbing, infighting, and industrial
espionage in the global market. New York: Arcade Publishing.
 1 INTRODUCTION 19

Matsumoto, D., LeRoux, J. A., Bernhard, R., & Gray, H. (2004). Unraveling the
psychological correlates of intercultural adjustment potential. International
Journal of Intercultural Relations, 28(3–4), 281–309. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.
2004.06.002.
Matsumoto, D., Yoo, S., & LeRoux, J. A. (2010). Emotion and intercultural
adjustment. In D. Matsumoto (Ed.), APA handbook of intercultural commu-
nication (pp. 41–57). Washington, DC Berlin US Germany: American
Psychological Association.
McLuhan, M., & Fiore, Q. (1968). War and peace in the global village. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
McSweeney, B. (2013). Fashion founded on a flaw: the ecological
mono-deterministic fallacy of Hofstede, GLOBE, and followers. International
Marketing Review, 30(5), 483–504.
Merkin, R. S. (2004). Cultural long-term orientation and facework strategies.
Atlantic Journal of Communication, 12(3), 163–176.
Merkin, R. (2005). The influence of masculinity-femininity on cross-cultural
facework. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 34, 267–289.
Merkin, R. (2006). Uncertainty avoidance and facework: A test of the Hofstede
model. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30(2), 213–228.
Merkin, R., & Ramadan, R. (2010). Facework in Syria and the US: A cross-cultural
comparison. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 34(6), 661–669.
doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2010.05.006.
Merkin, R., Taras, V., & Steel, P. (2014). State of the art themes in cross-cultural
communication research: A systematic and meta-analytic review. International
Journal of Intercultural Relations, 38, 1–23.
Minkov, M. (2011). Cultural differences in a globalizing world. United Kingdom:
Emerald.
Morisaki, S., & Gudykunst, W. B. (1994). Face in Japan and the United States.
In S. Ting-Toomey (Ed.), The challenge of facework (pp. 47–94). Albany: State
University of New York Press.
O’Keefe, B. J. (1991). Message design logic and multiple goals. In K. Tracy (Ed.),
Understanding face to face interaction: Issues linking goals and discourse
(pp. 131–150). Philadephia, PA: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Pilavachi, P. (1995). A cross-cultural perspective on face-repair strategies in
embarrassing situations: Japan vs. the US. Dissertation Abstracts International
Section A, 55.
Ralston, D. A., Egri, C. P., Furrer, O., Kuo, M. H., Li, Y., Wangenheim, F., et al.
(2014). Societal-level versus individual-level predictions of ethical behavior: A
48-society study of collectivism and individualism. Journal of Business Ethics, 122
(2), 283–306.
Retzinger, S. (1991). Violent Emotions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 5. Stamina a Pistillo diducta; anthera una lente aucta.
6. Stylus, et Stigma lente, aucta.

SPECIFIC CHARACTER.

Heath, with crested tips, within the blossom; the leaves grow by threes; the
branches are thread-shaped, the blossoms small and pitcher-shaped; the
leaves of the cup are longer than the flower, the foot-stalks very long.

DESCRIPTION.

Stem thread-shaped, grows half a foot high, upright, and very much
branched.
The Leaves grow by threes, are lance-shaped, concave on the upper
surface, pressed to the stem, and smooth, having very short foot-stalks.
The Flowers are numerous, and terminate the smaller branches in
bunches; the foot-stalks are very long, flesh coloured, with three coloured
floral leaves.
Empalement. Cup four-leaved, which are of a broad oval form, flesh
coloured, and longer than the blossom.
The Blossom is small, of a pitcher-shape, light flesh colour at the end,
greenish at the base; the segments of the mouth are bent back, and deep
flesh coloured.
Chives. Eight hair-like threads; the tips crested, and within the blossom.
Pointal. Seed-vessel nearly globular; the shaft thread-shaped, partly out
of the blossom. Summit four-cornered.
Native of the Cape of Good Hope.
Flowers from September, till December.

REFERENCE.

1. The Empalement, and Blossom.

2. The Blossom.
3. The Empalement magnified.
4. The Chives and Pointal.
5. The Chives detached from the Pointal; one tip magnified.
6. The Shaft and its Summit magnified.
 ERICA campanulata.

CHARACTER SPECIFICUS.

Erica, antheris muticis, inclusis; floribus solitariis, cernuis; calycibus

coloratis; corollis globoso-campanulatis, luteis; foliis quaternis, linearibus,
angustissimis.

DESCRIPTIO.

Caulis fruticosus, pedalis, erectus, filiformis; rami et ramuli filiformes,

virgati, glabri.
Folia quaterna, linearia, angusta, glabra, erecta; petiolis brevissimis,
adpressis.
Flores terminales, subsolitarii, cernui; pedunculi colorati, bracteis tribus,
coloratis, subulatis, instructi.
Calyx. Perianthium tetraphyllum, foliolis ovatis, acuminatis, concavis,
adpressis, coloratis.
Corolla globoso-campanulata, lutea; laciniis semi-ovatis, subreflexis.
Stamina. Filamenta octo, capillaria, incurvata. Antheræ muticæ, inclusæ.
Pistillum. Germen sub-globosum. Stylus columnaris. Stigma
tetragonum.
Habitat ad Caput Bonæ Spei.
Floret a mensi Junii, in Augustum.

REFERENTIA.

1. Calyx, et Corolla.
2. Corolla.
3. Calyx, lente auctus.
4. Stamina, et Pistillum.
 5. Anthera una, aucta.
6. Pistillum, lente auctum.

SPECIFIC CHARACTER.

Heath, with beardless tips, within the blossom; flowers grow singly,
hanging down; cups coloured; blossoms globularly bell-shaped, and yellow;
leaves grow by fours, are linear, and very narrow.

DESCRIPTION.

Stem shrubby, grows a foot high, upright, and thread-shaped; the greater
and smaller branches are thread-shaped, twiggy, and smooth.
Leaves grow by fours, linear, narrow, smooth, and upright; very short
foot-stalks, pressed to the branches.
Flowers grow mostly solitary, at the end of the smaller branches,
hanging down; the foot-stalks are coloured, having three awl-shaped,
coloured floral leaves on them.
Empalement. Cup four-leaved, leaflets egg-shaped, pointed, concave,
pressed to the blossom, and coloured.
Blossom, globularly bell-shaped, and yellow; the segments half egg-
shaped, and a little reflexed.
Chives. Eight hair-like threads, curved inwards. Tips beardless, and
within the blossom.
Pointal. Seed-bud nearly globe-shaped. Shaft pillar-shaped. Summit
four-cornered.
Native of the Cape of Good Hope.
Flowers from June, till August.

REFERENCE.

1. The Empalement, and Blossom.

2. The Blossom.
3. The Empalement, magnified.
4. The Chives, and Pointal.
5. A Tip, magnified.
6. The Pointal, magnified.
 ERICA capitata.

CHARACTER SPECIFICUS.

Erica, antheris muticis, sub-inclusis; corollis globosis, albidis, tomentosis,

tectis calyce magno, hispido, colorato; foliis ternis, pilosis.

DESCRIPTIO.

Caulis erectus, laxus, filiformis, fuseus; rami filiformes, villosi; ramuli

capillares, frequentes, tomentosi.
Folia terna, linearia, obtusa, dorso sulcata, pilis longis hirta; petiolis
brevissimis, adpressis.
Flores in extremis ramulis terminales bini, vel terni, cernuo-patenti;
pedunculi brevissimi, bracteis tribus, minutis, adpressis, instructi.
Calyx. Perianthium tetraphyllum, foliolis ovatis, concavis, incurvatis
maximis, totis densissime hirtis, adpressis, luteo-viridis.
Corolla sub-globosa, alba, lanata, in sinu calycis fere recondita.
Stamina. Filamenta octo capillaria, receptaculo inserta. Antheræ muticæ
sub-inclusæ.
Pistillum. Germen subrotundum, apice pilosum. Stylus filiformis,
exsertus. Stigma tetragonum.
Habitat ad Caput Bonæ Spei.
Floret a mensi Julii, in Octobrem.

REFERENTIA.

1. Calyx, et Corolla.
2. Corolla.
3. Calyx, lente auctus.
4. Stamina, et Pistillum.
 5. Stamina a Pistillo diducta, anthera una lente aucta.
6. Stylus, et Stigma, lente aucta.

SPECIFIC CHARACTER.

Heath, with beardless tips, just within the blossoms, which are globular,
white and downy, being covered with a large, hairy, coloured cup; leaves
grow by threes, and are hairy.

DESCRIPTION.

Stem upright, weak, thread-shaped, and brown; branches thread-shaped,

and hairy; small branches like hairs, numerous, and downy.
Leaves grow by threes, linear, blunt, furrowed at the back, and covered
with long, harsh hairs; foot-stalks very short, and pressed to the branches.
Flowers grow at the extremity of the smaller branches, by twos or
threes, spreading out, and nodding; foot-stalks very short, having three
small floral leaves, which are pressed to the blossom.
Empalement. Cup of four leaves, which are egg-shaped, concave, turned
inwards, very large, quite covered with strong hairs, pressed to the
blossoms, and of a yellow-green.
Blossom nearly globular, white and woolly, almost hid within the cup.
Chives. Eight hair-like threads, fixed into the receptacle. Tips beardless,
and nearly within the blossom.
Pointal. Seed-bud nearly round, and hairy at the end. Shaft thread-
shaped, and without the blossom. Summit four-cornered.
Native of the Cape of Good Hope.
Flowers from the month of July, till October.

REFERENCE.

1. Empalement, and Blossom.

2. A Blossom.
3. The Empalement, magnified.
4. The Chives, and Pointal.
5. The Chives detached from the Pointal, one Tip magnified.
6. The Shaft, and its Summit, magnified.
 ERICA cerinthoides.

CHARACTER SPECIFICUS.

Erica, antheris muticis, inclusis; corollis tubulato-ventricosis, læte

sanguineis, fasciculatis, hispidis; foliis quaternis, rigidis, ciliatis.

DESCRIPTIO.

Caulis flexibilis, erectus, cinereus, sesquipedalis; rami pauci, erecti, raro

ramulosi.
Folia quaterna, ciliata, oblonga, convexa, subtus sulco exerata, petiolis
brevibus, adpressis.
Flores magni, sessiles, aggesti in capitulum, cernui, pedunculi hispidi,
bracteis tribus foliis similibus instructi.
Calyx. Perianthium tetraphyllum, foliolis lanceolatis, hispidis, foliis
similibus.
Corolla, tubulato-ventricosa, læte sanguinea, hirsuta, ore obsolete
quadrifida; pollicaria.
Stamina. Filamenta octo capillaria. Antheræ muticæ, inclusæ.
Pistillum. Germen cylindricum, hirsutum. Stylus filiformis, sub-
exsertus. Stigma tetragonum.
Habitat ad Caput Bonæ Spei.
Floret a mensi Augusti, in Aprilem.

REFERENTIA.

1. Calyx, et Corolla.
2. Calyx lente auctus.
3. Stamina, et Pistillum.
4. Stamina a Pistillo diducta; anthera una lente aucta.
 5. Stylus, et Stigma, lente aucta.

SPECIFIC CHARACTER.

Heath, with beardless tips, within the blossoms, which are of an inflated
tubular shape, of a rich blood colour, hairy, and bundled together; the leaves
grow by fours, are harsh, and lashed.

DESCRIPTION.

Stem grows upright, pliant, ash-coloured, and a foot and a half high; the
branches are few, and upright, seldom branching.
The Leaves grow by fours, are lashed, oblong, rounded on the upper
surface, and deeply furrowed on the under side, with short foot-stalks,
pressed to the stems.
The Flowers are large, growing in close bunches, fixed altogether at the
end of the branches, bending downward; the foot-stalks are hairy, having
three floral leaves, similar to the other leaves.
Empalement. Cup four-leaved, which are lance-shaped, hairy, and like
the other leaves.
Blossom, of an inflated tubular form, hairy, and of a rich red or blood
colour, the mouth slightly cut into four segments; an inch long.
Chives. Eight hair-like threads. Tips beardless, and within the blossom.
Pointal. Seed-vessel cylinder shape, and hairy. Style thread-shaped,
nearly without the blossom. Summit four-cornered.
Native of the Cape of Good Hope.
Flowers from August, till April.

REFERENCE.

1. The Empalement, and Blossom.

2. The Empalement magnified.
3. The Chives, and Pointal.
4. The Chives detached from the Pointal; one tip magnified.
5. The Shaft, and its Summit, magnified.
 ERICA cernua.

CHARACTER SPECIFICUS.

Erica, antheris cristatis, inclusis; floribus umbellatis, cernuis, secundis, sub-

ovatis, pallide-carneis; foliis quaternis.

DESCRIPTIO.

Caulis fruticosus, erectus, pedalis; rami sub-simplices, erecto-patenti.

Folia quaterna, linearia, obtusa, subtus sulcata, sub-scabrida; petiolis
brevissimis, adpressis.
Flores in apice ramorem umbellati, cernui; pedunculi longi, colorati,
bracteis tribus, linearibus, instructi.
Calyx. Perianthium tetraphyllum, foliolis minutis, subulatis, ciliatis,
coloratis.
Corolla sub-ovata, pallide-carnea; laciniis limbi acuminatis, sub-
erectis.
Stamina. Filamenta octo capillaria apice introrsum declinata. Antheræ
cristatæ, inclusæ.
Pistillum. Germen turbinatum, fulcatum. Stylus cylindricus, sub-
inclusus. Stigma obsolete tetragonum.
Habitat ad Caput Bonæ Spei.
Floret a mensi Augusti in Decembrem.

REFERENTIA.

1. Calyx, et Corolla.
2. Calyx, lente auctus.
3. Stamina a Pistillo diducta, anthera una lente aucta.
4. Germen, Stylus, et Stigma, lente aucta.
 SPECIFIC CHARACTER.

Heath, with crested tips, within the blossom; the flowers grow in bunches,
nodding, all pointing one way, nearly egg-shaped, and of a pale flesh colour;
leaves growing by fours.

DESCRIPTION.

Stem shrubby, upright, and grows a foot high; the branches are almost
simple, upright, and spreading.
Leaves grow by fours, linear, blunt, channelled beneath, and roughish;
having very short foot-stalks pressed to the branches.
Flowers grow in bunches, at the end of the branches, nodding; the foot-
stalks are long and coloured, with three linear floral-leaves on them.
Empalement. Cup of four leaves, which are small, awl-shaped, fringed,
and coloured.
Blossom, nearly egg-shaped, of a pale flesh-colour; the segments of the
border tapered, and nearly upright.
Chives. Eight hair-like threads, bent downward on the inner side. Tips
crested, and within the blossom.
Pointal. Seed-bud turban-shaped, and channelled. Shaft cylindrical just
within the blossom. Summit obscurely four-cornered.
Native of the Cape of Good Hope.
Flowers from August, till December.

REFERENCE.

1. The Empalement, and Blossom.

2. The Empalement, magnified.
3. The Chives detached from the Pointal; one tip magnified.
4. The Seed-bud, Shaft, and Summit, magnified.
 A SHORT DISSERTATION, &c.
Antecedent to the year 1772, the few species of this, now so numerous
Genus, known in our British gardens, were, the E. vulgaris, E. Tetralix, E.
cineria and E. vagans natives; the E. Dabœcii, from Ireland; the E. arborea
introduced in 1748, from Madeira; the E. herbacea or carnea in 1763, from
Switzerland; the E. mediterranea in 1765, from Minorca, and the E.
scoparia, E. viridi-purpurea, E. australis, E. ciliaris and E. umbellata, from
Portugal, between the years 1768 and 1707. The two other European species
we possess, the E. stricta and E. multiflora, natives of Spain, have been but
twelve years in cultivation with us. Of the African species, found within the
district of the Cape of Good Hope and the adjacent territory, which have
swelled the Genus to so great an extent; and which, but as an echo to the
general voice, may be said to contribute, by the extreme brilliancy of the
flowers of these species, more than any other, to the present splendor of our
green-houses, were unknown, till the above æra, to our English botanists,
but by name. In the year 1771 seeds of two species were received, at the
Hammersmith nursery, from the Cape, both of them vegetated; the first
which flowered, proving the E. tubiflora, of the Sp. Plant. of Linnæus; the
other, from the resemblance it bears to the Spruce Fir, was then named E.
abietina; but since, altered in the Kew catalogue, to E. concinna. Two years
subsequent, 1774, Mr. Francis Masson, botanical collector to His Majesty at
the Cape, laid the foundation for the celebrity of that superb collection at
Kew, which for many years, with unrivalled lustre, far outshone all others,
particularly by the number and variety of this most beautiful tribe of plants:
for which we refer to the second Vol. of the catalogue of that garden; where
the E. curviflora, E. lutea, E. cruenta, E. persoluta, E. baccans, E. marifolia,
E. abietina, E. corifolia, E. paniculata, E. empetrifolia, E. spumosa, E.
capitata, E. conspicua, E. cerinthoides, E. viscaria, E. Plukenetii, E. Petiveri,
and E. petiolata, are all stated to have been of that year’s introduction. From
this period, till within these few years, the accession was so rapid, that it
would be difficult, nay nearly impracticable, to ascertain the precise date
when most of the remaining species were introduced; as many different
collectors were about this time, or shortly after, producing in their
collections new species to which they each claimed the honour of priority of
introduction; the enumeration of these, therefore, in succession would be but