Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Department of Social Communication Sciences, University of Tehran

2 University of Tehran

Abstract

Intercultural schemata are abstract mental representations that people make of other people and make them understandable. This study explores intercultural schemata Russian students at Jame’atol Mustafa have of Iranians, both before and after their stay in Iran. We have employed cultural schema theory as our conceptual framework. Among Intercultural schemata, two schemata -namely, self and personal schemata- were used. This is a qualitative study, and we employed semi-structured interviews to gather our data. Overall, 12 Russian students at Jame’atol Mustafa were interviewed based on the theoretical saturation model. We used theme analysis to categorize and analyze our responses. Overall, the students have more flat and positive views towards Iranians: “religious,” “accompanying the political system of Iran,” and “ethical and moral.” But, after coming to Iran, these intercultural schemata went through some changes, and sometimes these schemata have been shattered. Russian students in Iran created positive ideas such as " powerful representation ", " beneficence" and "ritualism". Also, the behavior of the Iranian people about the education of Russian students in Iran has created a negative Self Schemas(Negative schemas of others about themselves) Such as “richly life in Russia” and “creator of poverty” in the interviewees. In other words, these students have gone through cognitive prototype and mega-prototype.

Keywords


 Ameli, S. R., Shahghasemi, E. (2017). Cross Cultural Schemata Americans have of Iranians: An Online Survey, Cross Cultural & Strategic Management (Special issue on Conflict Resolution).
 Bailey, G., & Peoples, J. (2002). Essentials of cultural anthropology. London: Wadsworth Group.
 Bolderston, A., & Palmer, C. (2006). A Brief Introduction to Qualitative Research. The Canadian journal of medical radiation technology, 16-19.
 Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 77-101.
 Imai, T. (2017). How You See Us Hurts Me! Influences of Metastereotypes That International Students Hold on Their Self-disclosure, Loneliness and Depression. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 385-399.
 Sharifian, F. (2014). Cultural schemas as ‘common ground’. In K. Burridge, & R. Benczes, Wrestling with Words and Meanings (pp. 219-235). Melbourne: Monash University.
 Stier, J. (2006). Internationalisation, intercultural communication and intercultural competence. Journal of Intercultural Communication, 1-12.
 Taylor, S. E., & Crocker, J. (1981). Schematic Bases of Social Information Processing.
 Amant, K. S. (2005). A Prototype Theory Approach to International. Transactions On Professional Communication, 219-22.
 Bennett, M. J. (1986). A developmental approach to training for intercultural sensitivity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 179-196.
 Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development. London: SAGE.
 Nishida, H. (1999). A cognitive approach to intercultural communication based on schema theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 753-777.
 Shahghasemi, E., Heisey, D. R., & Mirani, G. (October 01, 2011). How do Iranians and U.S. Citizens perceive each other: A systematic review. Journal of Intercultural Communication, 27.
 Shahghasemi, E. (2017). Iranian in the minds of Americans. NewYork: Nova Science Publishers.
 Shahghasemi, E. (2017). Cultural schema theory. In, Kim, Y. Y. The international encyclopedia of intercultural communication. New York: Wiley.
 Turner, R. (1994). Adaptive Reasoning for Real-world Problems:ASchema-Based Approach. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
 Zola, S. M., & Squire, L. R. (1990). Neurophysiological investigations of memory and amnesia: findings from humans and nonhuman primates. In A. Diamond (Ed.), The development and neural bases of higher cognitive functions (pp. 434-456). New York: Academy of Sciences.