A sojourn is defined as a temporary stay in a new place. It occurs voluntarily for an unspecified, though relatively short, period of time. Although there are no fixed criteria for defining a sojourn in terms of its duration, 6 months to 5 years are commonly cited parameters. Consequently, student and business sojourners are usually more committed than tourists to their new location, but less involved than immigrants and resettled refugees. Like immigrants, they voluntarily relocate abroad; however, ‘returning home’ is anticipated and planned.
There are many types of sojourners: expatriate business people, diplomats, members of the armed forces, students, volunteers, aid workers, and missionaries. They do business; represent their country; protect civilians or instruct other armed forces; study; teach or advise locals; convert and proselytise, respectively. It is important that these sojourners adapt to the new culture rapidly in order that they may operate effectively in whatever they are doing. Consequently, the process and predictors of sojourner adaptation are discussed in this chapter and the following one.
Despite the fact that people have sojourned since time immemorial, it is not until the last 50 years that systematic research has been done with this group of cultural travellers. Although there have been some studies of diplomats and volunteers (particularly studies of the Peace Corps in the 1960s), most sojourn research has concentrated on two types of sojourners: international students and international business people. There are similarities and differences between these two groups. Both, for example, are likely to be relatively well educated and highly motivated. However, whereas students mostly originate from less developed countries and sojourn in the industrialised world, the opposite is usually true of business people. This, of course, is not uniformly the trend.
American students undertake exchanges with European countries, British managers may relocate to the continent, and Japanese managers sojourn to Canada. Nevertheless, the general flow of student and business sojourners is typically in opposite directions. Because of the enormous research literature on both students and expatriate business people, and because there are some salient differences between these groups of sojourners, they will be reviewed separately in Chapters 7 and 8.
Most of the research on student sojourners has considered the affective, behavioural and cognitive consequences of cross-cultural transition and has attempted to establish which individual, interpersonal, social, structural and economic factors reliably predict adjustment (Kagan and Cohen, 1990). The best research is difficult and expensive to undertake because it is done longitudinally and with a good matched control sample of host nationals (Gerdes and Mallinckrodt, 1994). Equally, it is important to take into account the countries/
cultures from which the sojourners come and to which they go, both to replicate findings supporting culture-general effects and to examine the highly specific effects that occur in unique cultural circumstances.
Hammer (1992) has noted that the literature on international students broadly appears to cover four areas: the problems of sojourners, the psychological reactions of sojourners to encountering a new cultural environment, the influence of social interaction and communication on sojourner adaptation, and the culture learning process apparent in the cross-cultural sojourn. This chapter will review some of this work, paying particular attention to the ABCs of acculturation for those who study abroad.
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES
In historical perspective, overseas students are probably the most intensely studied group in the culture contact literature. Early biblical references provide accounts of travelling scholars, and intercultural education can be traced to the 272–22 BC reign of Asoka the Great of India and the establishment of the University of Taxila in Asia Minor. Over the next thousand years international centres of scholarship arose in Egypt, Greece, Persia, China, and Japan. By the late Middle Ages universities in Western Europe, such as Seville, Paris, Rome and Bologna, flourished, and during the Reformation and the Counter- Reformation of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, there was a steady increase in international education, encouraged by the governments of England, France, Germany and Russia. During the nineteenth century, interest in international education continued to expand and included increasing participation by institutions in the United States (Brickman, 1965; Fraser and Brickman, 1968).
Underlying the development of international education were the social, economic, and political motives and objectives of the early rulers, public figures, and governments who initiated the programmes and provided financial and civic support to justify them. The first goal can be described as geo-political.
International education, from the earliest times, was regarded as a tool of foreign policy and as a means of extending the political and commercial influence of the states that established centres of intellectual excellence. The second purpose can be described as moral, or more precisely, as a missionary zeal to proselytise the values of the dominant culture. Later this shaded into more secular goals, such as the spread of democratic values, the diffusion of particular educational practices,
and the promotion of international harmony. Both of these strands are still very evident in recent and contemporary international education.
Despite a long history of intercultural education, systematic research into the concomitants and outcomes of overseas study, both at the personal and societal level, began to appear only after the Second World War. It coincided with a large and growing number of students going abroad to undertake higher education.
The intercultural educational programmes were driven mainly by the modern version of the two pragmatic considerations referred to above. The first was to assist in the reconstruction and economic development of countries that had been adversely affected by the war or whose educational infrastructure was at a rudimentary stage. Although the explicit aim was to train scientists, technologists, teachers and other professionals for employment in their home countries, the sub-text of these programmes was to create receptive markets for the industrialised sponsor countries and to extend their spheres of sociopolitical influence abroad. The second aim of the educational exchange programmes was to foster international good will and harmony A subset of this commendable approach was national self-interest, the assumption being that overseas students, who would rise to positions of responsibility in industry or government on returning home, would develop and retain positive attitudes towards the host country which had provided them with an education.
Early investigations, such as studies supported by UNESCO and the Social Science Research Council in the United States, reflected these twin objectives.
This was similarly the case for studies conducted in Great Britain (e.g. Carey, 1956; Singh, 1963) and Australia (Bochner and Wicks, 1972). The research, however, was largely atheoretical, its main aim being to survey the outcomes as they related to pragmatic social and political considerations. Most of the evaluation studies were not particularly rigorous in their designs or the manner in which they drew their conclusions; however, as their aims were undoubtedly worthy, there was some reluctance to probe too closely into their effectiveness.
The few studies which did sound a sour note during this period, e.g. Tajfel and Dawson’s (1965) Disappointed Guests, were largely ignored.
Despite the optimistic perspective of most intercultural investigators, demographic and social trends suggested that the economic-development aims of international educational exchanges were infrequently realised. As the programmes unfolded, it became obvious that a sizeable proportion of students either did not return home, or if they did, emigrated at the first opportunity, usually to the country where they had obtained their education. This phenomenon was given the label of ‘brain drain’ (Rao, 1979), and although it had a positive effect on the economies of the societies where the graduates settled, it failed in its aim to raise the technical expertise of developing countries.
Indeed, even in those instances where international students resettled in their homelands, it became apparent that there was frequently a problem of incorporating overseas-based technological innovations into the sociopolitical systems of under-resourced and under-developed countries (Alatas, 1972, 1975).
Often, the returning students tried to introduce changes that were not sensitive to local customs and traditions or which required a degree of infrastructure support that was not readily available (Kumar, 1979; Seidel, 1981). These problems are evident to this day although not to the same extent as during the height of the reconstruction phase.
The early literature on overseas students was comprehensively reviewed in the first edition of this book, and readers wishing to acquaint themselves with the historical context will find the relevant information in Furnham and Bochner (1986). In the intervening years, as Cold War and technical reconstruction considerations receded, social scientists began to use overseas student populations as a valuable resource for testing theoretical propositions about the nature, determinants and outcomes of culture contact. Most of these theoretical principles have already been identified and critically discussed in earlier sections of this book. They include the degree of cultural distance between the participants, leading to the conclusion that the greater the distance, the more difficult the interaction; whether culture learning (or acculturation) follows a systematic developmental sequence, the ongoing debate as to whether adjustment follows a U-curve, W-curve, a learning curve, or takes some other shape; changes in self-construal as a function of exposure to second-culture influences; the nature and determinants of stress and coping responses in persons exposed to unfamiliar cultures; the determinants of prejudice and ethnocentrism;
and possible remedial action to prevent or at least reduce intergroup friction. All of these phenomena and their associated theoretical formulations could (and have been) investigated with other contact populations (such as migrants or expatriate executives) but have featured prominently in the empirical literature on students because of their greater accessibility as potential research participants.
We continue this chapter with a selected review of recent studies to indicate the direction this literature is taking. As was suggested earlier, in the contemporary world overseas students are no longer participating in economic aid or technical reconstruction, nor are they the targets of political influence. Ironically, overseas students have become part of the export industry of the very countries that in earlier times footed their bills. There are now more than 1.3 million international students world-wide, and in the United States alone they contribute $7.5 billion annually to the national economy (Hayes, 1998; Koretz, 1998). It is not surprising that fierce competition exists for these fee-paying overseas students, and Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand also devote considerable resources to attracting international ‘consumers’ from key ‘markets’. Although there is some resistance by traditional academics to the notion that they are now part of a commercial industry and that functionally students have become clients, there is no turning back. Many institutions have now become utterly dependent on the income generated in this way.
Current research on academic exchanges reflects this concern with students as sources of income. Although it would be unfair to say that the research has degenerated into customer satisfaction surveys, many of the studies nevertheless
look at the adjustment of these students from the perspective of how to reduce their stress and enhance the positive aspects of their sojourn experience. The unspoken assumption is that word of mouth accounts for successful market penetration and that the students who feel that their study abroad has been worthwhile will provide favourable publicity for the country and the institution where they obtained their education.
Despite the pragmatic nature of much of the current work, many of the studies also reflect the increasing sophistication of the research strategies gradually being adopted in this field. The better studies are now explicitly driven by theory, and some of this research will be reviewed in the next section. There is also a growing literature reporting the results of longitudinal studies, a very welcome development.
EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON STUDENT SOJOURNERS
The psychological and educational literature on student sojourners is massive, and it would be impossible to present a comprehensive review of this rapidly expanding body of empirical research in a single chapter. Investigations in this area, however, are largely consistent with other studies of ‘culture shock’ and have been guided by the three theoretical frameworks that were reviewed in the first half of this book. To complement the studies previously described in Chapters 2–5, this section additionally identifies and elaborates salient themes in research specific to student sojourners. These include interpersonal and intergroup interactions; the difficulties faced by international students; academic issues in the intercultural classroom; temporal variations in psychological, sociocultural and academic adaptation; and the re-entry experience.
Each of the major theoretical perspectives on acculturation has been concerned with the development of interpersonal relationships and the associated patterns of intra- and intercultural interactions. Bochner’s functional model of the friendship networks, arising in the 1970s from culture learning theory, remains influential, and researchers have continued to examine the patterns and outcomes of monocultural, bicultural and multicultural relationships in overseas students.
Stress and coping theories have also considered sojourner interactions but have focused more specifically on the quality and quantity of interpersonal encounters rather than the cultural backgrounds of the persons involved in these interactions. These theories have additionally placed emphasis on social support and its consequences for the psychological well-being of student sojourners.
Finally, social identification theories, though relatively less developed in the international student literature, have concentrated on the intergroup perceptions of foreign students and their hosts, as well as issues relating to perceived discrimination. These topics are considered in the first section on interpersonal and intergroup relations.
A second matter that has concerned contemporary researchers is the problems typically experienced by overseas students. As these students have become a
major source of revenue for many secondary and tertiary institutions, ‘customer’
service and satisfaction have become important considerations. Feedback about student problems is useful for university administrators to ensure adequate service provision. It also can assist with the development of orientation and training programmes to facilitate students’ academic and cultural adaptation. In addition to addressing these pressing practical concerns, research on student problems has assumed a central position in the broader literature on cross-cultural transition and adaptation. Culture learning theory has concerned itself with the description, explanation, and prediction of social difficulties while the stress and coping approach has focused on the identification of factors that function as significant stressors and impair adaptation to a new cultural milieu. Student problems are discussed in the second section of this review.
Academic objectives and goals distinguish students from other intercultural sojourners, such as business people and volunteers. Because students sojourn for the purpose of obtaining a degree, academic performance is a significant component of cross-cultural adaptation. In addition to research that has examined the antecedents and correlates of academic performance, there is a developing literature on the intercultural classroom. This literature explores factors such as the definitions and perceptions of intelligence, student and teacher expectations, and classroom communication, as well as their influences on academic performance and satisfaction. This literature will be briefly described in the third section.
The empirical research on student sojourners can be further distinguished from studies of other cross-cultural travellers by its methodological approaches.
Compared with tourists, immigrants and refugees, sojourners, particularly student sojourners, are more likely to have participated in longitudinal studies. These longitudinal investigations have concentrated on two basic themes: the prediction of successful adaptation by pre-departure variables and the changing patterns of adaptation over time. These will be reviewed in the fourth section. Finally, sojourner research, particularly studies of international students, has included investigations of the re-entry process. This will be reviewed in the last section.
Interpersonal and intergroup relations
Bochner's functional model of friendship networks
Studies of the friendship patterns of foreign students show that they tend to belong to three distinct social networks, each serving a particular psychological function (Bochner, McLeod and Lin, 1977). The primary network consists of bonds with fellow compatriots, its function being to rehearse, express, and affirm culture-of-origin values. Another network consists of links with host nationals, its function being largely instrumental, to facilitate the academic and professional aims of the students. Typically, the persons in this network will be
other students, teachers, counsellors, university bureaucrats, and government officials, and the relationships will tend to be formal rather than personal in nature. The third network consists of friendships with other non-compatriot foreign students. The function of this network is largely recreational, as well as providing mutual social support based on a shared foreignness.
Consistently, studies conducted in the United States, Britain, Australia, Israel, and Europe have found that despite the benefits of host national contact, this is the least salient of the three networks (Bochner, Buker and McLeod, 1976;
Bochner, Hutnik and Furnham, 1985; Bochner, McLeod and Lin, 1977; Bochner and Orr, 1979; Furnham and Bochner, 1982; Klineberg, 1982; Klineberg and Hull, 1979; Nowack and Weiland, 1998; Wiseman, 1997). In general, overseas students are most likely to report that their best friend is from the same culture (Bochner et al., 1976). In Bochner, McLeod and Lin’s (1977) study, for example, 44 per cent of overseas students indicated that their best friends were co-nationals compared with 29 per cent of those with host national friends.
Furnham and Bochner (1982) found that close links with British people accounted for only 18 per cent of the friendships of foreign students in the United Kingdom compared with 39 per cent co-nationals and 38 per cent other overseas students. In Bochner, Hutnik and Furnham’s (1985) later study only 17 per cent of the international students in their Oxford sample had host national friends, and 70 per cent had no close foreign friends after one year in the United Kingdom. International students, on the whole, have significantly more difficulties establishing friendships than do locals (Barker et al., 1991; Zheng and Berry, 1991); they also tend to find their relationships less satisfying (Furnham and Tresize, 1981).
Although overseas students generally want and need intercultural contact, the ability and willingness to interact meaningfully with host culture peers are largely dependent upon cultural distance (e.g. Bochner et al., 1977; Furnham and Alibhai, 1985). This was apparent in Redmond and Bunyi’s (1993) research which examined social integration in 644 international students in a mid-Western American university. Assessing social integration in terms of the ability to initiate interactions and maintain interpersonal relations with host nationals, they found that British, European, and South American students were best integrated while Korean, Taiwanese, and Southeast Asian students were least integrated.
There are, however, ways to increase sojourner-host interactions. Peer-pairing programmes are particularly effective, and international students who participate in these schemes are more likely to prefer local companions than those who do not (Westwood and Barker, 1990). Pre-departure contact with the target culture also increases the likelihood of sojourner-host friendships and spending leisure time with host nationals (Pruitt, 1978).
Bochner’s functional model specifies that international students use networks in different ways. Local students are preferred for informational support, such as providing help with language and academic difficulties, while co-nationals are preferred for companionship and emotional support (Bochner et al., 1977;