An Extension of the Integrated Model of Intercultural Communication Competence (IMICC) with Religiosity: An International Students’ Perspective

Abstract

This study aims to extend and further test the integrated model of intercultural communication competence (IMICC) on a cultural context of Malaysia. Since previous researchers have pointed out the need to address religion during intercultural encounters; this study adopted IMICC, expanded it with religiosity, and tested it in Malaysian context. International students from multiple countries were considered as respondents. In this study, direct effects of empathy, sensation seeking, and ethnocentrism on intercultural communication competence (ICC) were addressed. In addition, moderating effect of religiosity and mediating effects of attitude toward other cultures (ATOC) and motivation to engage in intercultural communication (MTEIIC) on ICC were also examined. The findings show that empathy, sensation seeking, and ATOC directly influenced ICC. Findings empirically justified the moderating effect of religiosity and mediating effect of ATOC. The inclusion of religiosity into IMICC adds valuable theoretical insights. This study reconfirms the culture-general nature of variables and IMICC.

Effects of Learner Variables on Chinese Bilingual Undergraduates’ Intercultural Sensitivity and Effectiveness

“…[9] conceptualized ICC as "an individual's ability to achieve their communication goal while effectively and appropriately utilizing communication behaviors to negotiate between the different identities present within a culturally diverse environment" (p. 21). Even so, there is sufficient consensus that ICC covers three key components: intercultural awareness (cognitive aspect of ICC), intercultural sensitivity (affective aspect of ICC), and intercultural effectiveness/adroitness (behavioral aspect of ICC) [1,[10][11][12][13][14][15]. Intercultural awareness refers to the ability to know about one's own and others' cultures; intercultural sensitivity represents the ability to distinguish between different behaviors, perceptions, and feelings of culturally different counterparts, as well as the ability to appreciate and respect them; intercultural effectiveness represents the ability to attain communication goals in intercultural interactions [9,12,16].…”

“…Consequently, ICC has been widely studied both as an entity encompassing a person's cognitive, affective, and behavioral capabilities, and as a product of a context [3,14,15,[17][18][19].…”

The impact of empathy, sensation seeking, anxiety, uncertainty, and mindfulness on the intercultural communication in China during the COVID-19

“…It can thus be applied to the ability of a person to communicate effectively across different cultures ( 33 ). Previous efforts to identify and explore culture-general factors have added valuable insights to the literature of intercultural communication ( 34 , 35 ), developing important, widely tested models affecting ICE. AUM is one of the most widely adopted models, but unfortunately has been minimally investigated in China, and specifically not for IS.…”

“…The present study aims to extend AUM theory with two promising indicators (empathy and sensation seeking) incorporated into the integrated model of intercultural communication competence (IMICC), that have direct relevance to intercultural communication ( 35–37 ), and which have not yet been either duly considered as additional basic causes of ICE ( 16 , 17 , 20 , 38 ) in the AUM theoretical framework, or in the lesser researched cultural context of China. Logically, the AUM factors (anxiety, uncertainty, and mindfulness) as well as the IMICC’s addition of empathy and sensation are psychological dispositions that might help people function in extreme situations.…”

A comprehensive model of intercultural communication for international students living in culturally diverse societies: evidence from China

“…The ongoing debate on IC research was either subjected to only two cultural groups (such as the USA and Japan, or to the home and host cultures) or considered the multicultural standpoints (more than two cultures) for maximum generalizability of the research findings. These two cultural approaches are culture-specific, and more than two cultural approaches are known as culture-general approaches (Arasaratnam, 2007;Nadeem, 2022). Therefore, the culture-general approach was favored and further integrated into the current study.…”