THINKING DIALECTICALLY

ABOUT INTERCULTURAL
RELATIONSHIPS
Researcher Leslie A. Baxter (1993) suggests that a
dialectical model explains the dynamics of
relationships. She and her colleagues have identified
several basic dia- lectical tensions in relationships:
noveltypredictability, autonomyconnection, and
opennessclosedness (Baxter & Montgomery, 1996).
That is, we can simulta- neously feel the need to be
both connected and autonomous in relationships
with our parents, friends, and romantic partners. We
may also feel the need simultane- ously for novelty
and predictability and the need to be open and yet
private in our relationships.

PERSONAL-CONTEXTUAL
DIALECTIC

Intercultural relationships are both personal and contextual.

There are aspects of the relationship that are personal
consistent from situation to situation but context also plays a
huge role in how intercultural relationships are devel- oped
and maintained. For example, are there contexts where you
would be more or less comfortable in an intercultural
relationship? How do your family, your church, your religious
friends react to intercultural relationships? Studies have shown
that the number-one predictor of whether individuals engage
in intercultural dating is the diversity of their social networks
that is, if you are in contexts where there is diversity, it is more
likely you will meet and go out with people from other
ethnic/racial backgrounds (Clark-Ibanez & Felmlee,2004). Even
who we are attracted to is largely determined by cultural
contexts. Notions of attractiveness are defined for us and
reinforced by what we see on TV and film and in other media

DIFFERENCES-SIMILARITIES
DIALECTIC

According to the similarity principle, we tend to be attracted to

people who we perceive to be similar to ourselves, and evidence
indicates that this principle works for many cultural groups
(Osbeck & Moghaddam, 1997; Tan & Singh,1995). In fact, we
may explicitly seek partners who hold the same beliefs and
values because of deep spiritual, moral, or religious convic- tion.
In intercultural relationships, in contrast, we may be attracted
to persons who are somewhat different from ourselves. The
differences that form the basis of attraction may involve
personality traits and may contribute to complemen- tarity or
balance in the relationship. An introverted individual may seek
a more outgoing partner, or a spendthrift may be attracted to an
individual who is more careful with money. Some individuals are
attracted to people simply because they have a different
cultural background. Intercultural relationships present
intriguing opportunities to experience new ways of living in and
looking at the world.

Most of us seek a balance between novelty and

predictability in our rela- tionships. Research shows
that the most successful relationships have a balance of
differences and similarities (Luo & Klohnen, 2005). In
intercultural rela- tionships especially, it is important to
consider differences and similarities at the same time.

CULTURAL-INDIVIDUAL
DIALECTIC

Communication in intercultural relationships is

both cultural and individual, that is,
idiosyncratic. We have described various
cultural differences that exist in value
orientations, in both nonverbal and verbal
communication. Although we have provided
some generalizations about how various cultural
groups dif- fer, it is important to remember that
communication is both cultural and indi- vidual.

PRIVILEGE-DISADVANTAGE
DIALECTIC
We have stressed the importance of (and the
difficulty of understanding) power and power
differentials in intercultural relationships.
People may be simultane- ously privileged and
disadvantaged, or privileged in some contexts
and disad- vantaged in others.

Static-Dynamic Dialectic

This dialectic suggests that people and

relationships are constantly in flux, responding to
various personal and contextual dynamics.
Intercultural relation- ships are no different in
this regard.

HISTORY/PASTPRESENT/FUTURE
DIALECTIC

Rather than trying to understand relationships

by examining the relational part- ners alone, it is
helpful to consider the contexts in which
relationships occur. Often, this means the
historical context. As noted in Chapter 4, cultural
groups have different relationships with each
other; some of these relationships are more
positive and others more negative. For example,
the historical and con- tinuing hostility between
the United States and Cuba means that each
cultural group has fewer opportunities to meet
people from the other nation and thus fewer
opportunities to develop relationships.