Talk:High-context and low-context cultures

Anthropology Start‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

IBM Japan example

Is this really an example of Japan being high context and America being low context? To me it seems like a simple lack of specificity in the wording: "We would accept no more than 3 defects per 10,000." Also, there's no citation and it is even stated to be possibly apocryphal, so I'm removing it unless someone has the source. Heroeswithmetaphors (talk) 07:59, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Russia and Africa

Russian and Slavic Type Cultures are clearly low-context, as anybody who has spent time interacting with the people there can attest to. The interaction (both male and female) is *much* more direct, with very little ambiguity, compared to, say, Japan or Thailand, which rely more on indirect context clues.

Also missing from the list are African and Carribean cultures, which are much more direct, unambiguous and open. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.255.122.212 (talk) 00:38, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

if you're going to just cut and paste the same info into low context culture as high context culture, you might as well just merge the two! 24.59.181.41 (talk) 07:09, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I read these two articles, and I discover these concepts, I'm a total newbie on them, they seem to me two extremes of a single concept : scaling the level of context a given culture routinely uses for communication. So I think a better explanation could be given in one page, by stating how typical low- and a high-context cultures treat information and classifying some well-known cultures on a scale. Of course, such a scale may not be 100% pertinent and may not even exist, but it would explain in a much clearer way what are high- and low-context cultures and the underlying scaling concept. –MutosFr (talk) 16:54, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Separate but Compare/Contrast: Each topic (High Context, Low Context) is worthy of a detailed section though it can be helpful to reference the other (as in, for example, the differences or, even, difficulties that somebody from a low-context culture may experience in a high context culture). Using examples to compare/contrast can help to define each both relative to each other and independently.

In a sense, this discussion of whether or not to combine could be an example of high-/low-context rationalization.

(Summazooma (talk) 00:28, 11 March 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Both articles claim that there is no absolute sense of high or low culture and that there is only the relative difference and that the terms are used to compare two cultures. 109.144.25.42 (talk) 12:14, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge: The two articles are currently partly redundant and incomplete without each other. They cover the same single subject (a scale context in communication) from each end. As such I also feel they should be merged into one article. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 21:59, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

High Context Culture: wondering/question(s)

To the author(s),

I enjoyed reading this artcile very much. The topic was mentioned in a blog and a link was stated to this page. The blog is completely focused on living in the Philippines (a high context culture country). I happen to visit the Philippines twice on 2 different occassions. I like to think I know a lot of the Filipino-culture but still I dont understand everything of their culture maybe even nothing. The problem seems to be that nobody is able to explain it to me.

To understand the difference between high and low better I would like to read some real life examples if possible. I wonder how a new born baby acquires the high context culture? Is it innate, will it acquire during the bringing up or will it be "picked up" from the street (street-cred)? If it is innate then what about the Tabula Rasa http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabula_rasa? It is stated in this article that high context cultures only "change little over time". Can someone explain why? Are they afraid of progress, improvement, evolving? There is a lot of modern technology available in the Philippines, like the latest cell phones, modern cars, great malls, fashionable clothing.

Traits/behaviors I observed while being in the Philippines are/were: - delaying (no time-management) - hypocrisy (a lot of) - funeral processions disturbing all other traffic - no efficiency whatsoever - there seems to be that nothing can be planned - no one seems to have an active hobby - no time-schedules at jeepney-stops/bus-stops - no fixed jeepney-stops/bus-stops - I am very in doubt about the quality of all their education-levels (including university) - drivers do blow their car/jeepney/bus/tri-cycle horns all the time even when there is no danger ahead.

To me it seems people in the Philippines are stuck in the lowest level of the Maslow Piramyd http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs

I address/label their culture/behavior as primitive.

Haighton 16:25, 22 December 2011 (UTC)