In Figuring Foreigners Out and Dimensions of Culture both attempt to explain how cultural values shape behavior, communication, and expectations. Storti emphasizes that what seems “strange” in another culture is more often than not a logical extension of its own underlying values, rather than being irrational behavior. By becoming aware of these cultural frameworks, individuals can reduce misunderstandings and interact more effectively. Hofstede’s model provides six dimensions—individualism vs. collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity vs. femininity, long-term vs. short-term orientation, and indulgence vs. restraint—that help categorize broad cultural tendencies. For example, some societies place greater emphasis on hierarchy and authority like those of Japan or Korea, while others value equality and independence like the U.S. or that of most western countries who don’t have that hierarchy and authority.
I mostly agree with these assessments because they offer practical tools for recognizing cultural differences and avoiding quick judgments. Although, I find the generalizations somewhat problematic. Cultures are not monolithic, and reducing them to fixed dimensions risks stereotyping individuals who may not or do not conform to the dominant patterns that are shown in our bubble/circle.
Relating this to my own background, American culture tends to align with Hofstede’s descriptions of individualism and lower power distance, which matches my personal experience. In contrast, Korean culture (the language I am studying) leans toward collectivism, higher power distance, and stronger respect for hierarchy rather than that of English or Spanish. Recognizing this difference helps me understand why formality in speech and deference to elders (Even those that are a year older than me) play such an important role in Korean society. These frameworks are useful starting points, but they must be balanced with sensitivity to diversify within any culture.
Replies