Comparison of influence of Thai and Japanese cultures on reasoning in social communication using simulated crowds

Abstract

Difficulties living in unfamiliar cultures are caused by differences in patterns of thinking, points of view, and physical action styles. Learning to understand these different styles is one solution that may help people to live together with their differences. This paper presents our findings on learners' cultural understanding during interaction based on culturally influenced communication in simulated crowds. Japanese and Thai participants were asked to obtain multiple tickets available at two service counters, A and B, in a shared virtual space, where a service person provided a ticket upon request. Virtual customers moved around in the system to acquire tickets and, if a counter was occupied by a customer, other customers had to wait. Two types of waiting styles (line and group) and two service person fairness levels (fair and unfair) were configured and the reactions of participants evaluated. Furthermore, the counter selection results and selection reasoning results were analysed using the ANOVA process. The results showed that culture influences ideas of waiting differently between Japanese and Thai participants: Japanese participants focused on the benefits of waiting, such as waiting speed, whereas Thai participants focused on the reaction or response of the service person to customers.

The Effect of Group Reading Strategy on Critical Thinking Skills in Thai EFL University Learners

“…Moreover, cultural influences may also play an essential role in participants' perceptions. A previous study found that Thai people are likely to be collectivist and identify other people as in-group or out-group (Thovuttikul, Ohmoto, & Nishida, 2019). Thus, whenever they feel alone or individuated, they tend to keep quiet, leading to scepticism.…”

Japanese business communication practices in Thailand: tales from an electronic components manufacturer

“…Notwithstanding the well-documented cultural dimensions framework of Hofstede (2001) and cultural layers theory of Trompenaars and Hapden-Turner (1998) Thovuttikul et al, 2018;Nishimura et al, 2009). Hall (1976) argued long ago that national cultures can be categorized by context -the inextricable information surrounding an event and being bound up with the meaning of it -in order to perceive principal cultural differences in communication style or pattern (8 typical ways of communicating or expressing one-self).…”

“…Notwithstanding the well-documented cultural dimensions framework of Hofstede (2001) and cultural layers theory of Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (1998) which respectively compare companies based on their orientations and discerning norms and values, research explaining styles of communication have depended on national culture. Most of them differentiate communication styles by using two major cross-cultural communication theories -Hall's (1976) theory of high/low context communication cultures and Lewis' (2005) communication theory (see Thovuttikul et al, 2018;Nishimura et al, 2008). Hall (1976) argued long ago that national cultures can be categorized by contextthe inextricable information surrounding an event and being bound up with the meaning of itin order to perceive principal cultural differences in communication style or pattern (8 typical ways of communicating or expressing one-self).…”

“…Notwithstanding the well-documented cultural dimensions framework of Hofstede (2001) and cultural layers theory of Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (1998) which respectively compare companies based on their orientations and discerning norms and values, research explaining styles of communication have depended on national culture. Most of them differentiate communication styles by using two major cross-cultural communication theories – Hall's (1976) theory of high/low context communication cultures and Lewis' (2005) communication theory (see Thovuttikul et al. , 2018; Nishimura et al.…”