[SOUND] [MUSIC] Our next item is cultural knowledge. By this we understand an enormous and pervasive variety of facts and information that makes what we consider to be our culture. So just everything that we know about life, which makes it individual, specific, and determined by the place where we were born, where we were socialized. This is important because this amount of knowledge, this huge amount of knowledge, information, data, facts, memories, process, and so on and so forth, they determine our communicative competence. Because the communicative competence based on the language that we speak is still very much supported by the culturally determined knowledge of facts and data. Some of them are really special, we can call them pre-packed and processed cultural knowledge. And this pre-packed and processed cultural knowledge is what we know under the term of stereotypes. Stereotypes are indeed easy to study. They're easy to see, and that's why to study. This is what we usually think of when we first think of some foreign culture or some group of people that we understand make group. We usually have certain all ready well packed and ready to use facts about this group. What do these facts reflect? They always reflect the mind of those, the mind, the mindsets of those people who are judging, who are making the stereotypes. Sometimes they are real facts and real things about those who are being judged. This is a very important thing to remember. When we have certain stereotypes, sometimes it says more about us in our culture, not necessarily negative things, but something about us, then about another group of people. For instance, when British specialists in management would write in their descriptions of Russian managerial culture that Russians are very emotional, they mean something that tells us a lot about themselves. How they proceed in various negotiations, various conversations, how they see things that, for instance, from Russian perspectives, don't look emotional, and have another explanation. For instance, being able to express attitude towards facts. So, by saying this, the people who pronounce these words actually tell us a lot about their own culture. Because, of course, we always look at some other situation, at some other cultural group and its behavior, from our ethnocentric positions, sometimes even not knowing about it. What is also important is that the valid part of the stereotype is a statistical statement about a group, it is not the prediction of the properties of particular individuals. At best, the statements with their valid parts are half truths. It doesn't mean that stereotype are negative things. There are positive and negative aspects of stereotyping. Of course, positive thing is that it's really a pre-packed and processed knowledge, so it allows us to easily enter into communication, into interaction with some already before that unknown part of unknown group. So it makes it easy for us to start this interaction. Negative aspect is, of course, that in a way predisposes us to see certain things and not see other things. Also there are positive, negative or neutral stereotypes in their own, as a description of the facts that are being included into it. Here we are entering into the field, into the area of assessing information as being positive, there's good, or negative, bad. Neutral stereotypes are neutral, that's clear. For instance, and it doesn't mean whether they're correct or not. We are not looking at the correctness of this stereotype for the moment. We're just saying whether they're so to say good or bad. Neutral stereotype, they say, okay, I don't know. For instance, these are these group of people like to drink milk. Okay, drinking milk is not bad, not good. It's just nothing. But there are positive stereotypes. These people are very friendly. Americans are very friendly, say Russians. It's a positive stereotype. Negative stereotypes. As it seen by Russians, what American think about Russian. Russians don't smile. Don't ask me now, why? Not smiling is bad and smiling is good. Probably there is something about basic, that is human nature, we believe that smiling is good and not smiling is bad. Okay, at the moment, that's enough. We don't describe whether smiling is good or not smiling is bad. It will come to us later. Also stereotypes can be divided into heterostereotypes and autostereotypes. Well this [INAUDIBLE] just say stereotypes that a group of people have about themselves, like what Russians think about Russians, what Finns think about Finns. And heterostereotypes is what one group thinks about another group and vice versa. By the way, beat heterostereotypes, or autostereotypes. Beat positive, or negative, or neutral stereotypes can be misleading. You can ask me why positive stereotypes can be dangerous and misleading. They are misleading, and that's why they are dangerous, but they can be dangerous because you make your presumptions and then you act according to these presumptions. And it may lead you to mistake, which means you will not be successful. For instance, thinking that Americans are so nice and friendly people because they smile all the time, a positive heterostereotype that Russians have about Americans, so to say, may lead you to the situation when you expect this person to be really friendly to you. When after smiling and having nice conversation you expect that now this person is your close friend and you may ask him or her about something and expect that he or she will spend time with you. But that was the stereotype will get you into will get you problems because they didn't mean it. They are not so nice only because they smile. They can be nice or not nice, it doesn't depend on the amount of smiling in this situation. So two-step mistakes of stereotyping deal exactly with this. The first mistake we can do is relying on a stereotype and believe this is true that because Americans smile, they will be nice to us in the situations that we consider that belong to the situation when people smile to you. But they are not consider to be the situations like that by Americans, not Russians. So this is the first mistake you can do. And then the second, the second step in mistakes with stereotypes is about ascribing the specific situation that you are dealing with, the specific individual with whom you are interacting to be acting according to this stereotype. So, if you believe that all Russians don't smile and not smile at all, then you find a person and you believe that he would be not smiling to you. And when she smiles, you ascribe some other meaning to this effect, because, but these people, this person doesn't belong to the stereotypical behavior that Russians would express in this situation. So, that's how we can make two type of mistakes, one following from another, relying on stereotypes. Now let's look at the results of a research that was conducted in 93 at Finnish universities, but with Finns and Russians, with the heterostereotypes they have about each other. We're interested in Russians, so we take those stereotypes that are about Russians. How Finns perceive Russians. They see them as backward, and artistic, lazy, and hospitable, bureaucrats, emotional, cautious, suspicious, joyful, power seeking, liars, strong, ready to cooperate, closed. Very different features, don't make any actually, Connected picture, pictures in which you can see something concise, something comprehensive. Well, there are some clusters that you could probably make on these pictures, but still not much information. And of course, this type of research where you would get such information is not the absolutely measured instrumental objective research. It just gives you ideas. What is interesting is that, at the same research, in the same research, they would ask Russians about their autostereotypes. How Russians perceive themselves. And here we see very much, we see a lot of differences between the heterostereotypes that Finns would have about Russians and autostereotypes that Russians would have about themselves. And, as you may see on this slide, it does mean that Russians see themselves better than say Finns see them. Well, they say that we can survive all hardships, we are patient, loyal, wide thinking, well educated, flexible, mobile, this is pretty good. But they're also not goal-oriented. We have I don't care orientation, no discipline, politically passive, depressed. There is a lot of hierarchy and a lot of authoritarian behaviors and practices. So this is not just good versus bad. When speaking about stereotypes, we also need to mention one thing that differs stereotypes from generalizations, from general knowledge. Otherwise, it would be hard to make any abstract reasoning if we are aware of stereotypes, and at the same time we need to make certain generalizations, especially when you deal with such a heterogeneous, such a huge and amorph thing as culture. If stereotypes is a belief about a person or group considered to typify or conform to one pattern, lacking any individuality. Generalization, or general idea, general information, something is slightly different. It's an idea, having general, not specific implication. And when you apply it to an individual, then this idea serves as a hypothesis, and this hypothesis has to be tested and observed. For stereotypes, when people are working under stereotypical, in stereotypical mode, they reject any information that contradicts the stereotype. And any information that confirms the stereotype is hugely amplified. While for general knowledge all data is included and analyzed. With stereotypes, they are based on judgmental attitudes. They are selective. They're based on selective perception. And also they don't allow to learn. Stereotypes usually mean refusal to learn. With generalizations, they are based on open attitude, on curiosity, on willingness to learn and to make certain conclusions, come to inferences, and get new knowledge in this way. What is the way to come out of this problem, of this trap, that stereotypes often create for us? The answer is clear. We have to rely on general knowledge. We have to find information, and to analyze it, and to create our own conclusions based on this full scale of data. And that will lead us to cultural dialogue that will allow us to overcome the problems of cross-cultural communication. And on this picture here, you see these three stages of this cultural dialogue. It starts with analyzing the sensory information that we get, preparing for communicating with people who may act on different, on the base of different presumptions. And then implementing all of the knowledge, all the information that we acquired for communication, for dialogue. [SOUND] [MUSIC]
