Hall (1976) argues that communication varies across cultures based on the importance placed on
context in attributing meaning. He argues that low-context communication involves messages where "the
mass of information [needed to attribute meaning] is vested in the explicit code" (p. 70). High-context
communication, in contrast, involves messages where "most of the information [needed to attribute
meaning] is either in the physical context or internalized in the person, while very little is in the coded,
explicit, transmitted part of the message (p. 79). Stated differently, low-context communication involves
using direct and explicit messages, and high-context communication involves using indirect and implicit
messages in interactions. Gudykunst and Ting-Toomey (1988) argue that low-context communication is
emphasized in individualistic cultures (e.g., cultures in which individuals take precedence over ingroups;
Triandis, 1995) and high-context communication is emphasized in collectivistic cultures (e.g., cultures in
which ingroups take precedence over individuals; Triandis, 1995). Individualism-collectivism influences
whether individuals tend to view themselves as independent and autonomous or interdependent with
others (Markus & Kitayama, 1991).
If people in a culture communicate directly and explicitly or indirectly and implicitly, there should
be differences in what they have to do to communicate effectively and what they perceive to be effective
communication. Hall (1976) argues that the United States culture emphasizes low-context
communication and the Japanese culture emphasizes high-context communication (also see Okabe,
1983). What is perceived to be effective communication in the United States and Japan should differ
because of the differences in the relative emphases on low- and high-context communication and the
different emphases on viewing individuals as independent or interdependent. These cultural differences
should influence how Japanese and U.S. Americans view competent and effective communication. To
date, however, there is no research comparing what constitutes effective communication in the United
States and Japan (or any other individualistic and collectivistic cultures). Our purpose, therefore, was to
compare perceptions of effective communication in the two cultures.
Competence and Effectiveness in the United States and Japan
Competence and effectiveness are related closely. Spitzberg and Cupach (1984), for example,
Convention