Download research - DataPro

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp
When learning is not enough: A process model of expatriate adjustment as
cultural cognitive dissonance reduction
Carl P. Maertz Jr. a,*, Ahmad Hassan b,1, Peter Magnusson c,2
a
Department of Management, John Cook School of Business, 3674 Lindell Boulevard, St. Louis, MO 63108, USA
Department of Management, Marketing, and Real Estate, College of Business, 150 University Boulevard, Morehead, KY 40351-1689, USA
c
College of Business, Northern Illinois University, 128 Barsema Hall, DeKalb, IL 60185, USA
b
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 6 September 2006
Accepted 27 May 2008
Available online 16 July 2008
Accepted by Dave Harrison
Keywords:
Expatriate management
Expatriate adjustment
Expatriate withdrawal
Cognitive dissonance
Cross-cultural adjustment process
a b s t r a c t
Although considerable organizational research exists on the topic of expatriate adjustment and early
departure, little has focused on the actual psychological processes causing change in adjustment outcomes. Specifically, researchers have not focused on cognitive dissonance that arises from adopting or
condoning culturally expected behaviors that are inconsistent with the expatriate’s own values or attitudes. We propose that dissonance experiences and the methods used for dissonance reduction influence
expatriates’ adjustment outcomes and, in turn, their tendency for early departure. We further specify key
situational and individual difference constructs that regulate these causal relationships. Along with a
greater understanding of cross-cultural adjustment, the current model suggests new directions for expatriate research and management.
Ó 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
As organizations continue to increase their international activity
and presence, the cross-cultural adjustment of expatriates has become a critical issue for research (e.g., Black & Gregersen, 1999;
Black, Mendenhall, & Oddou, 1991; McEvoy and Parker, 1995; Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985; Shaffer, Harrison, & Gilley, 1999; Takeuchi,
Yun, & Tesluk, 2002; Tung, 1987). A key conclusion of this work is
that if expatriates or their spouses do not adjust well to the host culture, they may depart prematurely (Black & Gregersen, 1991a; Black
& Gregersen, 1991b; Black & Stephens, 1989; McEvoy and Parker,
1995; Tung, 1982). Even expatriates who complete their assignments may demonstrate poor job performance due to dysfunctional
adjustment (Kraimer, Wayne, & Jaworski, 2001; Selmer, 2002; Shaffer, Harrison, Gregeren, Black, & Ferzandi, 2006). Not counting the
costs of such poor performance, replacing an expatriate manager
who departs early can still approach $250,000 (Shaffer et al., 2006).
Partly because of these significant costs, researchers have focused much attention on the correlates/predictors of expatriate
adjustment and early withdrawal (Bhaskar-Shrinivas, Harrison,
Shaffer, & Luk, 2005; McEvoy & Parker, 1995; Shaffer et al.,
1999). Yet, much less work has been devoted to understanding
the actual psychological processes of adjustment that expatriates
* Corresponding author. Fax: +1 314 977 1484.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (C.P. Maertz), [email protected]
(A. Hassan), [email protected] (P. Magnusson).
1
Fax: +1 606 783 5025.
2
Fax: +1 815 753 6014.
0749-5978/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.05.003
experience during the assignment (e.g., Black et al., 1991; Sinangil
& Ones, 2001). Without a better understanding of precisely what
expatriates go through psychologically, managing adjustment
effectively remains difficult and research models are likely to be
deficient in their causal explanations.
Although few psychological process theories of expatriate
adjustment have emerged, research models strongly suggest that
expatriate adjustment processes include learning and exhibiting
new behaviors in order to ‘‘fit in” with the host culture, thereby
reducing acculturative stress (e.g., Berry, 1997; Black & Mendenhall, 1990; Black et al., 1991; Kim, 1995). However, in learning
and exhibiting culturally appropriate behaviors, internal conflicts
arise when behaviors demanded in the person’s expatriate employee role are inconsistent with his/her values, attitudes, beliefs, or
behavioral norms, hereafter, ‘‘VABNs”. Internal conflicts create
stress in the form of arousal and discomfort that must be relieved
in some way (e.g., Bazerman, Tenbrunsel, & Wade-Benzoni, 1998;
Elliot & Devine, 1994). Despite the long-acknowledged need to reduce such internal inconsistencies (Festinger, 1957), this cognitive
dissonance process has been largely neglected in expatriate adjustment theory. Further, balancing home vs. host cultural identifications, or integration, has been touted as a desirable outcome
indicative of good adjustment (e.g., Berry, 1997; Sanchez, Spector,
& Cooper, 2000), but no theory addresses precisely how this happens (or fails to happen) during the assignment period.
The purpose of this paper is to address this dearth of theory. We
propose a model wherein one or more of six (6) cognitive-behav-
C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78
ioral methods are used to maintain the self-concept against threat
from a ‘‘cultural cognitive dissonance experience”. The methods
chosen relatively more drive changes in intermediate adjustment
outcomes over time (i.e., future frequency of dissonance experiences, attitudes toward host nationals, identification with the host
culture, and interaction with nationals), and thereby, cause psychological withdrawal and intention to depart the assignment
early. We next review existing research to further highlight the
contribution of this model.
67
(UAM) theory (e.g., Gudykunst, 1995) states that anxiety and
uncertainty must be managed consciously and mindfully in order
for the expatriate to interact and communicate effectively with
host nationals. Storti (1990) theorized that an expatriate’s behavioral expectations are violated during many cultural incidents,
leading to fear and withdrawal. Observing behavior can lead to
forming realistic expectations of nationals, which prevents such
unexpected, negative stress reactions. ‘‘The process of cross-cultural adaptation, then, is essentially one of the continual resolution
of internal stress. . .,” (Kim, 1995, p. 178).
Literature review
Black (1988, 1990) and colleagues (e.g., Black & Stephens, 1989;
Gregersen & Black, 1992) have conceptualized cross-cultural
adjustment to be one’s level of comfort with general (e.g., food, climate, weather, housing, and living conditions), work aspects, and
interaction aspects of the assignment. Much of the expatriate management research has essentially defined adjustment as these
desirable states that predict ultimate expatriate outcomes like
job performance and early departure (e.g., Kraimer et al., 2001;
Shaffer et al., 2006). In this stream, researchers have supported
numerous predictors and consequences, expanding understanding
of key constructs in the nomological net surrounding adjustment
outcome constructs (Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005; Black et al.,
1991; Shaffer et al., 1999).
Although we focus on process here, we do include traditional
adjustment outcomes in our model. Comfort with host interactions, work, and general host culture (e.g., Black et al., 1991) are reflected in our model as restored comfort after dissonance stress
experiences, and as positive attitudes toward host nationals. Berry
(1980), Berry (1997) also suggests key adjustment outcomes that
go beyond comfort alone, namely, some level of identification with
host nationals and the culture along with continued interaction
with host nationals.
Adjustment as a process
Far fewer studies have specifically modeled cross-cultural
adjustment as a psychological process. We should point out that
we are using the term ‘‘adjustment process” in the broadest sense.
In the general cross-cultural literature (e.g., Tsui, Nifadkar, & Ou,
2007), researchers use the terms ‘‘acculturation” and ‘‘adaptation”
as related but distinct constructs from adjustment. We realize
these differences are meaningful (see Harrison, Shaffer, & BhaskarShrinivas, 2004). However, all of these concepts involve either
short or longer-term psychological and behavioral changes in response to host environment stimuli (Berry, 1997; Sinangil & Ones,
2001), and we mean to include all such changes in our definition of
adjustment processes. Thus, we use ‘‘adjustment” to refer to all
such processes that cause change in adjustment outcomes.
Although there is no overarching cross-cultural adjustment process theory, many models certainly inform our understanding of
the psychological processes of adjustment. Black (1988, 1990)
and colleagues (e.g., Black & Gregersen, 1999; Black & Stephens,
1989) emphasize that successful adjustment involves increasing
the expatriate’s feelings of comfort, control, and degree of familiarity within the host culture vs. acculturative stress. This prevailing
construct definition clearly implies that, functionally, the adjustment process reduces acculturative stress and restores feelings of
comfort.
Several other models from the cross-cultural psychology and
communication literatures share this viewpoint. For example, Aycan (1997) and Berry (1997) both theorized that cultural interactions can cause stress that must be reduced in order to facilitate
long-term adaptation. Also, uncertainty/anxiety management
Learning as a stress reducer
Although some other acculturative stress coping mechanisms
have been suggested (e.g., Aycan, 1997), the main process in the literature for reducing acculturative stress is learning culturally
appropriate behaviors in order to ‘‘fit in” (Berry, 1997; Black &
Mendenhall, 1990; Church, 1982; Kim, 1995). Earley and Peterson
state, ‘‘Adopting the behaviors consistent with a target culture is an
important aspect of intercultural adjustment and interaction”
(2004, p. 109). ‘‘Simply stated, cross-cultural adjustment involves
the knowledge of which behavior to execute or suppress in given
situations and the ability to effectively actualize this understanding” (Black & Mendenhall, 1990, p. 124). Clearly then, learning culturally appropriate behaviors and when to execute them plays a
key role in reducing acculturative stress. To do this successfully,
studies to date imply that expatriates learn to execute new behaviors that: (1) are similar to behaviors of models, perceived to be
typical or successful in the host culture, (2) provide positive or
analogous outcomes in the host culture as those expected in the
home culture, and/or (3) allow avoidance of social sanction in
the host culture (e.g., ridicule and isolation).
Current contribution
However, these three criteria are deficient as an explanation of
how expatriates come to execute new behaviors and manage
acculturative stress. In addition to these situational cues, individuals also use their own internal standards to choose or evaluate
behaviors (e.g., Beach & Mitchell, 1996), and acculturative stress
comes not only from uncertainty of how to behave appropriately,
but also from internal conflicts (e.g., Bazerman et al., 1998; Festinger, 1957). As Project GLOBE scholars recently stated, ‘‘The dexterity to adjust one’s behavior is a critical requirement. Not everyone
can do this; to many people it may bring into question one’s own
identity” (Javidan, Dorfman, Sulley de Luque, & House, 2006, p.
85). Through interacting with host nationals, the expatriate is
likely to encounter challenges to his/her own VABN standards that
must be processed and resolved somehow (Earley, 2002; Earley &
Peterson, 2004; Molinsky, 2007; Sanchez et al., 2000; Van Vianen,
De Pater, Kristof-Brown, & Johnson, 2004). Therefore, the adjustment process of managing acculturative stress involves more than
learning culturally appropriate behaviors. It involves resolving
internal inconsistencies that arise during the assignment.
Even though researchers have long acknowledged that encountering significant inconsistencies with and challenges to VABNs is
very likely in expatriate assignments (e.g., Brislin, 1981; Earley,
2002; Roccas & Brewer, 2002; Sanchez et al., 2000; Van Vianen
et al., 2004), no existing model describes the specific psychological
processes involved. Further, no model actually explains the process
by which expatriates achieve the desirable state of ‘‘integration”
Berry (1980), Berry (1997) or ‘‘dual cultural identities” (Sanchez
et al., 2000). Cultural cognitive dissonance provides such an explanation. See Table 1 for a summary of how the current model contributes relative to key existing theoretical approaches to
expatriate adjustment.
68
C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78
Table 1
Relationship of current model to earlier theoretical approaches
Exemplary
Study(ies)
Model/theoretical
approach
Key theoretical focus in expatriate literature
Relationship to cultural cognitive dissonance reduction (CCDR)
Berry (1980, 1997)
Social identity
Cross-cultural interactions challenge one’s sociocultural identity and even one’s self-concept
CCDR explains how expatriates address these challenges and why
these attempts are successful or unsuccessful in terms of adjustment
outcomes
Nicholson (1984)
Work role
transitions
Effective work-role transitions (including expatriate
assignments) demand adjustment in the form of role
and personal development
CCDR explains how the identity change portion of personal
development actually occurs, partially as a function of personal and
situational determinants in the model
Black et al. (1991)
and Shaffer et al.
(1999)
Integrated model
of international
adjustment
Determinants of work, interaction, and general
adjustment levels
Along with learning processes, CCDR explains how adjustment
determinants come to bring about stress reduction
Bell and Harrison
(1996)
Bi-cultural life
experiences
Bi-cultural experiences can positively develop the
KSAOs for expatriate effectiveness
CCDR explains the process by which one’s personal identity can be
successfully maintained throughout bi-cultural experiences; effective
CCDR is a key KSAO for expats, related to bi-cultural self-efficacy
Kristof-Brown,
Zimmerman,
and Johnson
(2005)
Person–
environment fit
Person-group (in this case) misfit has a host of negative
consequences
CCDR illustrates that striving for behavioral fit with a different cultural
group can cause misfit within one’s self that must be resolved for an
expat to be truly adjusted
Cognitive dissonance theory
To understand and model this process of cultural cognitive dissonance reduction, we draw on a long tradition of cognitive dissonance theory. Cognitive dissonance has generally been defined as a
negative state of uncomfortable arousal resulting from an inconsistency between two cognitions, or between behavior and some cognition. Further, this arousal and psychological discomfort is
motivational in that it ‘‘impels the individuals to attempt to reduce
and eliminate it,” (Wicklund & Brehm, 1976, p. 1) Since Festinger’s
(1957) seminal work on cognitive dissonance, there have been
many perspectives on the concept (Kunda, 1990) and at least three
distinguishable theoretical approaches: self-consistency, self-affirmation, and ‘‘New Look”.
The self-consistency approach proposes that dissonance is
aroused when a discrepancy is detected between a behavior/cognition and a personal standard or self-expectancy for competence and
morality (e.g., Aronson & Carlsmith, 1962; Thibodeau & Aronson,
1992). In this approach, the aim of dissonance reduction is to maintain one’s individual self-images of competence and morality
against threats from inconsistency. This approach emphasizes rescuing the individual image in the self-concept that is threatened,
and suggests that high self-esteem makes dissonance arousal worse.
The self-affirmation approach (e.g., Steele, 1988) also proposes
that dissonance is aroused by a threat to the self-concept, but disagrees that the primary goal is to rescue each specific self-image
that is threatened. In this broader perspective, the goal is to restore
the integrity of and protect the overall self-concept. This can be
accomplished by accessing other positive cognitions about the self,
not related to the individual threat. One relieves the discomfort related to the threatened self-concept through these positive affirmations. This approach suggests that higher self-esteem can be
helpful in relieving dissonance.
Finally, the ‘‘New Look” model emphasizes that dissonance is
aroused whenever behavior is inconsistent with societal normative
standards for competent or moral behavior (Cooper & Fazio, 1984),
creating aversive consequences (Scher & Cooper, 1989). This model
assumes that these societal standards are internalized or otherwise
used as evaluative standards in judging one’s own behavior. This
model implies that self-cognitions like self-esteem have no important role in dissonance arousal.
The self-standards model
It is a weakness that these perspectives disagree markedly
with respect to the role of self-esteem, a construct particularly
relevant to dissonance. The self-standards model (SSM) of cognitive dissonance helps resolve this disagreement about the role of
self-esteem in cognitive dissonance by integrating the three earlier approaches (Stone & Cooper, 2001). In the SSM model, cognitive dissonance is defined most broadly as any threat to the selfconcept from some perceived inconsistency with either societal
normative standards or uniquely personal standards of competence and morality.
Self-esteem is defined as the level of chronic negative discrepancy between perceptions of the actual self and standards for competence and morality, and as the number and accessibility of
positive attributes in the person’s self-concept (Stone & Cooper,
2001). If the level of chronic discrepancy is low and positive attributes are many and accessible, self-esteem is higher. In this model,
high self-esteem has a role in both exacerbating dissonance arousal
because of higher self-expectancies for consistency and facilitating
dissonance reduction through having more accessible selfaffirmations.
The SSM model proposes that ‘‘dissonance begins when people
commit a behavior and then assess the behavior against some
meaningful criterion of judgment” (Stone & Cooper, 2001, p.
228). People can access either personal standards or normative
standards of society (or another collective like a profession),
against which they evaluate their behavior. The type of standard
accessed, along with self-esteem level, helps determine the type
of dissonance arousal and reduction processes experienced. Because the SSM represents the most comprehensive, integrative
view of cognitive dissonance to date, we borrow key ideas from
this model to apply in the expatriate context.
The cultural cognitive dissonance reduction model
During an assignment, expatriates regularly interface with host
nationals in the course of social activities, work, or general activities (shopping and eating out). During these interactions, the expatriate often perceives a situational/role expectation to perform
some culturally appropriate behavior not in the expatriate’s normal behavioral repertoire. It is important to note that this expectation occurs in the mind of the expatriate, not necessarily in the
minds of the host national(s). Host nationals may even have considerable knowledge of the expatriate’s home culture norms or
not expect any behavior at all from an outsider. But if the expatriate does not recognize this tolerance within the situation, he/she
may still perceive an expectation for a host culture-consistent
behavior in the moment.
69
C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78
This triggering expectation causes further cognition about the
behavior. In the course of thinking about the behavior and the
VABNs represented by it, the expatriate will sometimes perceive
a discrepancy between the behavior and their own VABNs. Cognitive dissonance research proposes that this perception of inconsistency results in arousal and psychological discomfort (HarmonJones, Brehm, Greenberg, Simon, & Nelson, 1996). Silently observing and condoning inconsistent behaviors and associated VABNs
may also be viewed as concealing parts of the true self or being
internally inconsistent, causing psychological discomfort (e.g.,
Clair, Beatty, & MacLean, 2005; Norton, Monin, Cooper, & Hogg,
2003). Because condoning an inconsistent behavior may constitute
a threat to the self-concept as well, we include such dissonance
experiences where they stem from cultural differences. Moreover,
expatriates may come to anticipate expectations in future interactions for behavior inconsistent with their VABNs, such that they
may respond to anticipated dissonance as well as current inconsistencies. Thus, we define cultural cognitive dissonance as: anticipating or currently perceiving inconsistencies between one’s behaviors,
executed or condoned in order to conform to the host culture situation,
and one’s VABNs.
Assumptions
Based on significant expatriate literature we assume that situational demands for culturally appropriate behavior are bound to
result in many perceptions of inconsistencies with these behavioral demands (Earley, 2002; Van Vianen et al., 2004). Given this
and based on the strength of an extensive stream of cognitive dissonance research, which validates this construct across cultures
(Hoshino-Browne et al., 2005), we assume that all expatriates
experience multiple cultural cognitive dissonance experiences in
the course of an assignment, each of which leads to negative arousal and discomfort (Cooper & Fazio, 1984; Elliot & Devine, 1994)
and some attempt to relieve these feelings (Wicklund & Brehm,
1976).
Boundary conditions
Although cultural VABNs are certainly represented in many
symbols and structures within the host culture, we do not attempt
to model purely symbolic interfaces with or abstract judgments of
the host culture. Instead, we focus primarily on the situational demands for behavior generated in current or anticipated interactions with host nationals. We also do not model expatriate
cognitive dissonance unrelated to cultural differences, nor do we
attempt to model vicarious dissonance (e.g., Norton et al., 2003).
The cultural cognitive dissonance experience
The focal experience begins with a perceived demand for some
culturally appropriate behavior, either during a current or anticipated interaction with host nationals. For certain behaviors this
will cause the expatriate to perceive that the behavior, executed
or condoned, is inconsistent with a personal VABN. The resulting
stress-discomfort compels the expatriate to relieve it with one or
more of six dissonance reduction strategies. See Figs. 1 and 2 for
depictions of initiation and resolution of cultural cognitive dissonance experiences.
Methods of cultural cognitive dissonance reduction and their effects
over time
The research has suggested that individuals may engage in
many different methods of dissonance reduction: attitude change,
adding consonant cognitions from memory (or formulated from
Determinants of Frequency
of Demands for Inconsistent
Behaviors
- Cultural distance x Cultural
tightness
Current or
Anticipated
Expectation
to Execute
or Condone
CulturallyAppropriate
Behavior
Inconsistency or
Dissonance with
VABN Perceived
Negative arousal
and Discomfort
Experienced
Determinants of the Strength of the
Inconsistency Negative Arousal Relation
- Normative/personal standard x self-esteem
- Self-monitoring
- VABN centrality to the expatriate
Fig. 1. Initiation of a cultural cognitive dissonance experience.
the environment), discarding dissonant cognitions, perceptual
distortion/change of cognitions to make the discrepancy less
important, self-affirmation, justification of the behavior, seeking
group support for the behavior, attribute the behavior to external
causes, voicing support or reaffirming the challenged VABN,
refusing to do the counter-attitudinal behavior, and withdrawal
from the situation (e.g., Elliot & Devine, 1994; Festinger, 1957;
Harmon-Jones et al., 1996; Kunda, 1990; McKimmie et al.,
2003; Steele, 1988; Wicklund & Brehm, 1976). Unfortunately
though, some of these overlap conceptually. Also, most cognitive
dissonance studies greatly restrict responses to dissonance
through using induced compliance lab designs (Kunda, 1990).
Thus, we have little theoretical knowledge of the full range of dissonance reduction methods used. In addition, the expanding theoretical evolution of cognitive dissonance (e.g., Aronson &
Carlsmith, 1962; Cooper & Fazio, 1984; Norton et al., 2003; Scher
& Cooper, 1989; Steele, 1988; Stone & Cooper, 2001) has seemingly prevented an overall model of methods for dissonance
reduction from being synthesized. For example, most dissonance
research deals with dissonance responses after an inconsistency
has already occurred. However, expatriates may anticipate a high
likelihood of demands for inconsistent behavior in a given situation. We consider such anticipatory responses in synthesizing our
six methods of cognitive dissonance reduction: (1) VABN modification, (2) perceptual modification, (3) self-affirmation, (4) rationalization, (5) confession-redemption, and (6) host VABN
rejection. We expect that expatriates sometimes use multiple
methods for reducing cultural cognitive dissonance. For example,
one could rationalize his/her inconsistent behavior to fear of punishment, and at the same time, self-affirm saying to themselves,
‘‘I always do my job tasks well!”
Our key contention is that expatriates may be distinguished on
their tendencies/patterns to use some dissonance reduction methods more often than others. Further, this relative frequency of the
dissonance reduction methods used has effects on changes to one’s
level of intermediate adjustment outcomes over time: attitudes toward host nationals and/or identification with the host culture, frequency of future cultural cognitive dissonance experiences, and
frequency of interactions with host nationals.
Proposition 1: Expatriates differ in their tendency to use certain
methods of dissonance reduction over time.
Proposition 2: The relative frequency of dissonance reduction
methods used over time helps determine whether adjustment outcomes change positively or negatively.
We next give an example of how each of the six methods manifests itself in an actual cultural cognitive dissonance experience,
and how the method, when used over time, influences these inter-
70
C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78
OVER TIME &
DISSONANCE
EXPERIENCES
Negative
Arousal &
Discomfort
Experienced
Engage in Reduction
Method(s):
1. VABN Modification
Regulators of Reduction Method
Used
- VABN centrality to the expatriate
- More exemplars of host nationals
- Org. incentive x family incentive
- Org. incentive x intrinsic incentive
- Self-esteem x openness to exp.
2. Percept Modification
3. Self Affirmation
Attitudes toward
Host Nationals
and Identification
with Host Culture
Frequency
of
Dissonance
Experiences
4. Rationalization
Psychological
Withdrawal
and Early
Departure
from the
Assignment
Frequency of
Interactions
with Host
Nationals
5. ConfessionRedemption
6. Host VABN Rejection
= Positive Relationship
= Negative Relationship
= Negative or Neutral Relationship
Fig. 2. Reduction of cultural cognitive dissonance and linkages to early departure.
mediate adjustment outcomes. Ms. Y is from a culture and tradition where women shaking hands and hugging with men not in
their immediate family is prohibited, and she agrees with and fully
abides by this norm going into the assignment. Ms. Y knows that
her family and friends would be disappointed or would otherwise
sanction her for this behavior at home, but she also feels pressure
to engage in the behavior or at least accept it because she has
learned that failing to give a handshake greeting to men in business situations, or pulling away from a friendly embrace could be
ill-received by host country nationals. Out of a desire to fit in,
she reluctantly engages in handshakes with professionals and accepts hugs from a few friends. Still, some feelings of discomfort
are created from performing these inconsistent behaviors that
Ms. Y must somehow reduce.
VABN modification
Commonly referred to in cognitive dissonance literature as
‘‘attitude change”, VABN modification makes the inconsistent
behavior consonant again. Ms. Y can directly change her current
VABNs in order to make them more consistent with the expectations or normative VABNs encountered within the host culture.
Ms. Y could reason that her cultural behavioral norm to not allow
physical contact between women and male business colleagues
and others is outdated or uninformed. In fact, she may discard this
norm completely and decide to initiate hugs and handshakes
freely.
Perceptual modification
Through adding, selectively remembering, or distorting cognitions, Ms. Y can change the way she perceives the host culture’s
VABN underlying the behavior in question, such that the revised
host VABNs are more similar to her own. This often requires
searching for a deeper attributional and empathetic understanding
that can be used to change one’s own feelings and beliefs, similar
to ‘‘deep acting” (see Grandey, 2003). For example, Ms. Y could alter her belief that the informality of physical contact with women
indicates over-familiarity, sexual openness, or lack of respect for
women. After witnessing hugging behavior in context, she could
add the cognition that the underlying value conveyed by these
behaviors in most cases is warmth and friendship, rather than
licentiousness. She holds a value to be friendly and warm. Ms. Y
may also add to her cognitions that failing to shake hands communicates a lack of respect or professionalism. Showing respect and
professionalism in business are values that Ms. Y also holds. Her
revised view is that hugging and shaking hands in this context
are consistent with some of her other VABNs, reducing the perceived inconsistency and associated discomfort.
In another variation of perceptual modification, expatriates
can distort or change their perception of their own home-culture VABNs (e.g., ‘‘My home culture doesn’t really have a
strong norm against that behavior in some contexts”). Such a
perceptual modification relating to home-culture VABNs reduces the extent or importance of the inconsistency with the
behavior in question. This variation also involves seeking more
similarities between the expatriate’s VABNs and host national
or culture VABNs.
Effects of VABN modification and perceptual modification over time
VABN modification and perceptual modification both involve
making cognitive changes to match the culturally appropriate
behavior in question. With both of these methods, the expatriate
is basically increasing perceived similarity and changing to be
more compatible with the host nationals and their environment.
By repeatedly using these methods of increasing similarity, expatriates should develop more attraction (Brein & David, 1971) and
positive attitudes toward those host nationals through behavioral
consistency processes (e.g., Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978). Also, behaving consistently with host culture prototypes and recognizing similarities between cultural VABNs rather than differences can
facilitate identification with the host culture (Berry, 1997; Brislin,
1981). However, we do differentiate these two methods in one
meaningful way. Changing VABNs in the direction of host nationals
and/or host culture norms would facilitate ‘‘assimilation” to the
host culture and could even reduce home-culture identification
(Berry, 1997). Thus, VABN modification should produce bigger increases in host culture identification than perceptual modification
would, while both methods should tend to increase positive attitudes toward host national individuals with whom they interact.
C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78
Cumulative changes in VABNs or perceptions of the host (or
home) culture VABNs over time mean that the VABNs move closer
together in the expatriate’s mind. Thus, culturally appropriate
behavioral demands are less likely to be found inconsistent with
the expatriate’s VABNs in the future, thereby decreasing the probability of cultural cognitive dissonance experiences occurring in
the future.
VABN modification and perceptual modification can also increase the frequency of interactions with host nationals. Over time,
using these methods cause more perceived similarity with host
nationals with more VABNs in common provides more personal
attraction (Brein & David, 1971) and more depth of content to talk
about with host nationals during interactions. This should generally increase the expatriate’s motivation to interact with host
nationals, and thereby, interaction frequency.
Proposition 3: Over time, we propose a positive relationship between both VABN modification and perceptual modification and (a)
attitudes toward host nationals, (b) host culture identification, and
(c) frequency of host national interactions; and we propose a negative
relationship between these methods and (d) frequency of future dissonance experiences encountered.
Self-Affirmation
This method includes accessing cognitions about positive attributes of the self in order to protect the overall self-concept against
the threat posed by the inconsistency (e.g., Steele, 1988). Ms. Y
may think that, despite the inconsistency of handshakes and hugs
with home-culture norms, ‘‘I am particularly responsible in all my
job duties and I always take care of my family.” This reduces emotional discomfort of the inconsistency by neutralizing the threat to
the self-concept and bolstering it with offsetting positive
information.
Rationalization
This method involves adding cognitions/attributions about situational factors that excuse or explain the inconsistency (e.g., ‘‘I
need the expatriate bonus for my family and I must act inconsistently with my VABNs at times”). This reduces the associated discomfort, without minimizing or eliminating the consistency
itself. Ms. Y may reason that she has no real choice in doing these
behaviors. She may conclude that compromising her home-culture
VABNs in the host culture somewhat is a necessary cost required to
achieve the worthwhile benefits of succeeding in the assignment
and bringing honor to her family back home. This is very similar
to surface acting in order to follow display rules, while not changing underlying feelings (Grandey, 2003). In extreme cases, this
method may even involve complete compartmentalization of identities such that the expatriate has a home-culture identity with
VABNs, and a separate expatriate identity with its distinct set of
VABNs (Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Roccas & Brewer, 2002). Inconsistencies can be more readily accepted as a function of having two
separate selves, one ‘‘real” or ‘‘home self” and an ‘‘expatriate self”
allowed to be inconsistent with certain VABNs.
Effects of self-affirmation and rationalization over time
Compared to the first two methods, affirmation and rationalization do not involve the same level of personal cognitive-behavioral
change. The first two focus on similarities in order to reduce the
inconsistency, whereas affirmation and rationalization do not directly reduce or eliminate the inconsistency. Rather than any similarity with host nationals, the focus of affirmation and
rationalization is more on overcoming differences. In some cases
of rationalization, the expatriate could even assign blame for his/
her inconsistent behavior directly to host nationals or the host culture. Thus, these methods focusing on differences could certainly
influence attitudes toward nationals and host culture identification
71
in a negative way. However, because these methods do not directly
implicate the underlying host national or host culture VABNs as
being negative, we concede that, for some expatriates, repeated
use of these methods may have no net negative effect on attitudes
toward nationals and identification. Nevertheless, it seems clear
that these methods will not produce a positive relationship with
these adjustment outcomes over time.
Because these methods do not directly reduce the inconsistency, their positive effects over time are more limited than the
first two methods. The current discomfort is quelled, but this suggests no lasting effects for other new behavioral inconsistencies
that may arise in the future. In fact, rationalization as in surface
acting may entail emotional dissonance and labor (e.g., Grandey,
2003). Thus, we propose that these two methods will not reduce
future frequency of dissonance experiences, but there is also no
good reason to expect a positive effect on future reoccurrence of
dissonance either. Moreover, we see no reason that affirmation
and rationalization would cause any direct increases or decreases
in interaction frequency with host nationals, apart from effects
mediated through changes in attitudes toward host nationals and
host culture identification.
Proposition 4: Over time, we propose a weak negative relationship between both affirmation and rationalization and (a) attitudes toward host nationals and (b) host culture identification, and no
relationship with the other intermediate outcomes.
Confession-redemption
This method implies accepting responsibility for acting inconsistent with a VABN and relieving discomfort by confessing some
level of wrongdoing and promising (oneself and/or God) not to
do the behavior again. This recognition of a mistake and promise
to avoid such behavior in the future has the potential to provide
a feeling of redemption. Ms. Y may feel regret, shame, or remorse
for initially engaging in these hugs and handshakes that conflict
with home-culture norms. She admits the mistake and swears that
she will not do it again. Also, Ms. Y would also typically seek to
avoid situations in which handshakes and hugs may be offered.
Effects of confession-redemption over time
Over time, confessing wrongdoing to oneself for acting consistently with host culture normative expectations is bound to reduce
identification with the host culture (e.g., Berry, 1997). One may
also direct some negative judgment toward individual host nationals for behaving the same way, which may cause negative attitudes
or beliefs about them. This suggests a negative influence on attitudes toward nationals and host culture identification.
In anticipatory terms, this method of dissonance reduction
means avoiding situations in the future where demands for the
inconsistent behavior might arise. This avoidance aspect will have
two likely effects. Over time, it will probably succeed in producing
less dissonance experiences of any kind, because avoiding situations that may reproduce past inconsistencies will likely lead to
avoiding other inconsistencies that could arise in such interactions.
However, it will do so at the price of inhibiting interactions with
host nationals in general. This avoidance aspect suggests a negative
effect of this method on the frequency of future dissonance experiences and on the frequency of interactions with host nationals.
Proposition 5: Over time, we propose a negative relationship between using confession-redemption and (a) attitudes toward host
nationals, (b) host culture identification, (c) frequency of host national
interactions, and (d) frequency of dissonance experiences encountered.
Host VABN rejection
In the face of anticipated or current demands to execute or condone inconsistent behavior, the expatriate may refuse to perform
or condone the behavior in question. The second part of this meth-
72
C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78
od is often to verbally assert the VABN at stake and explain one’s
unwillingness to perform or condone the behavior, in order to fully
restore consonance. This is because it may break other VABNs to
simply ignore perceived host expectations during an interaction,
giving no response at all. Ms. Y could have refused and pulled away
from hugs or handshakes initially. She could mention politely that
it is not in her custom to hug or shake hands with men outside her
family.
Effects of host VABN rejection over time
VABN rejection amounts to a very explicit rejection of the host
culture’s VABNs, and is thus likely to strengthen identification with
the home culture, while weakening any identification with the
host culture or the host nationals who execute the behaviors and
espouse the underlying VABNs. It is difficult to like people if you
do not like their VABNs. Further, ‘‘host VABN rejection” and ‘‘confession-redemption” both may be followed and reinforced by support-seeking while socializing in expatriate enclaves. This may
well include seeking verbal support for maintaining home-culture
VABNs and/or some denigration or ‘‘making fun” of the host culture. Thus, repeatedly rejecting, along with such follow-up behaviors, would lead to more negative attitudes toward host nationals
and decreased identification with the host culture.
In our example, Ms. Y may want to continue to engage host
nationals similarly, asserting her home-culture VABNs again; this
may be even more likely given that she has crossed a ‘‘threshold
of discomfort” in doing it already. This choice made repeatedly
would tend to produce more frequent cultural dissonance experiences, as she continually resists and/or confronts host nationals
about VABN differences.
Finally, although Ms. Y may want to engage host nationals and
test or assert her personal or home-culture VABNs in this way, it
may be upsetting or off-putting to some host nationals, logically
reducing the frequency of interactions. However, it is possible that
other host nationals may seek out the expatriate who exemplifies
the foreign culture in order to learn and compare their own values.
If the expatriate is perceived as a cultural prototype and is popular
enough with at least a few host nationals who are interested in
learning from him/her, there may be no net negative effect on frequency of interactions.
Proposition 6: Over time, we propose a negative relationship between using host VABN rejection and (a) attitudes toward host nationals & (b) host culture identification; we propose a weak negative
relationship with (c) frequency of host interactions; and we propose
a positive relationship with (d) frequency of dissonance experiences
encountered.
Regulators of causal relationships within the model
We searched the cross-cultural literature for key constructs that
were most likely to influence the causal relationships in the model.
Although an exhaustive list of potential constructs is impossible
and future research may discover more such moderators, we include those we judged most important in the nomological net
and for the expatriate research area.
Determinants of average demands for inconsistent behaviors
During the assignment, the likelihood that situational demands
for a culturally appropriate behavior will result in a perception of
inconsistency with an expatriate’s VABN depends on two interactive environmental factors. First, the expatriate may be assigned
to a host culture that is relatively similar to or very different from
his/her home culture. Cultural distance has been defined as the degree to which the cultural values and norms in one country differ
from those in another country (Kogut & Singh, 1988). Research
suggests that the greater the cultural distance between home
and host cultures, the more difficult and stressful adjustment is
for the expatriate (Black et al., 1991; McEvoy and Parker, 1995;
Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985). Implicit in this research is the
assumption that expatriates will hold the normative VABNs from
their home culture to some extent. If true, as cultural distance increases, the chances increase that the expatriate will encounter
VABNs inconsistent with his/her own. However, distant from the
home culture of the expatriate though, host nationals may allow
for cultural differences and expect a wider range of behaviors from
foreigners. This could be communicated to the expatriate and reduce perceived pressure to behave in a culturally appropriate
way. Thus, we must consider another interactive factor.
Cultural tightness (and looseness) refers to the degree to which
norms are clearly defined and reliably imposed (Chan, Gelfand, Triandis, & Tzeng, 1996). In tight societies normative pressures for
homogeneous, culturally appropriate behavior is relatively greater
than in loose cultures (Triandis, 1977). Sanctions for defying norms
and behaving in unexpected ways are also greater in a tight culture
(Triandis, 1989). In a loose culture a larger array of VABNs and
behaviors is tolerated. Thus, in a tight culture, expatriates are likely
to feel more negative social pressure to behave in a culturally
appropriate manner. In sum, cultural distance provides greater
opportunities on average to behave inconsistently (while fitting
in), and cultural tightness increases the average situational pressure to do so. Together these factors produce the greatest likelihood that demands for culturally appropriate behavior will be
perceived as inconsistent with expatriate VABNs.
Proposition 7: For expatriates in culturally distant and tight host
cultures, culturally appropriate behavior will be perceived as inconsistent with their VABNs more often than for expatriates in less distant or
looser cultures.
Determinants of the strength of the inconsistency—negative arousal
relationship
The self-standards model (SSM) proposes that both normative
and personal standards are used to judge consistency of behavior.
Normative standards are generally accessed in judging inconsistency of behavior (Stone & Cooper, 2001), which here would mean
expatriate home-culture VABNs, internalized through societal
socialization processes (Roccas & Brewer, 2002). The expatriate
may also internalize their professional standards as VABNs used
to evaluate behaviors. Finally, uniquely personal standards or
VABNs may also be used to evaluate behaviors (Stone & Cooper,
2001).
The type of standard being used interacts with self-esteem to
influence the level of arousal of dissonance, given an inconsistency.
Stone and Cooper (2001) also proposed that self-esteem implies
higher self-expectations with personal standards. This suggests
that those with low self-esteem may come to expect such inconsistencies with personal standards, causing less negative arousal.
Those with high self-esteem expect more of themselves when it
comes to consistency with personal VABNs, causing more arousal.
However, Stone and Cooper (2001) propose that there should be no
difference in dissonance arousal by self-esteem for those accessing
normative standards. Thus:
Proposition 8a: For those accessing personal standards (VABNs),
expatriates with higher self-esteem will experience more negative
arousal from a perceived inconsistency than those with low selfesteem.
Proposition 8b: For those accessing purely normative standards
(perceived host culture VABNs), there will be no difference in negative
arousal from a perceived inconsistency based on self-esteem.
Snyder (1987) proposed that high self-monitors (i.e., those who
pay attention to situational cues and base their behavior accordingly) are likely to value attitude–behavior consistency less intensely than low self-monitors (i.e., those who value consistency
C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78
between their attitudes and behavior regardless of the situational
cues). High self-monitors value behaving appropriate to the situation and would be less susceptible to strong feelings of negative
arousal and discomfort from behaving inconsistently with VABNs
than low self-monitors (Kahle, 1984; Snyder, 1987).
Proposition 9: Expatriates low on self-monitoring will experience
more negative arousal from a perceived inconsistency than those high
on self-monitoring.
We also expect that the nature of the VABN in question would
play an important part in determining the strength of arousal created from a perceived inconsistency (Kunda, 1990). Specifically,
challenges to more surface-level attitudes and behavioral norms,
which are more transient and which pose less of a threat to the
integrity of the self-system (Steele, 1988), should produce less intense negative arousal. If however, deeper-level values or beliefs
that are more central to the self-concept are challenged, negative
arousal and discomfort should be greater (Van Vianen et al., 2004).
Proposition 10: When cultural cognitive dissonance involves
inconsistency with a deeper VABN, central to the self-concept, negative
arousal will be greater than when the VABN is more surface-level and
less central to the self-concept.
Regulators of dissonance reduction method used
Several individual and situational factors help determine how
the expatriate comes to utilize some methods more than others
to relieve a given instance of negative arousal. First, if a culturally
appropriate behavior violates a personal value central to the expatriate’s current self-concept, this would cause particularly acute
cultural cognitive dissonance. In such cases, reducing dissonance
is less likely to result in attitude or behavior change (Zimbardo &
Leippe, 1991). This strongly suggests that expatriates will not use
VABN modification when other methods are available. Because of
the inconsistency and negative affective arousal, the expatriate
could be less motivated to look for common ground in VABNs behind the behavior, which is the mechanism of perceptual modification. Thus, the more central the expatriate VABN in conflict, the
less likely that the person will use VABN modification or perceptual modification methods.
Proposition 11: When the cultural cognitive dissonance involves a
value central to the self-concept, expatriates are more likely to use
methods other than VABN modification or perceptual modification.
Second, attitude representation theory (ART) proposes that
when evaluating an object and considering attitudes toward it,
people activate a mental representation, or exemplar, of the attitude object, which includes assumptions about the object’s identity and characteristics (Lord & Lepper, 1999). In this case, the
expatriate will consider an exemplar or prototype of a host national when evaluating host nationals in general or the host culture
itself. Empirical research in this area has supported that the presence of unstable exemplars makes attitudes more susceptible to
new information and attitude change (Lord, Paulson, Sia, Thomas,
& Lepper, 2004). This means that the more different exemplars that
have a probability of being activated (more unstable), the better
the probability that new information about the attitude object will
be incorporated. That is, knowing more varied host nationals
makes it more likely that new information about the host culture
will be accepted and incorporated. This information would be positively associated with the types of cognitive changes represented
in the first two methods.
Proposition 12: Expatriates who have more exemplars of host
nationals are more likely to use VABN modification and perceptual
modification than expatriates with fewer host national exemplars.
Third, expatriates may be motivated to adjust and complete
their assignments in order to obtain valued organizational incentives that are contingent on successful completion. What is not
apparent in traditional approaches to adjustment is that incentives
73
may have complicated, and even negative effects on adjustment,
particularly when the family situation of the expatriate is considered. Still, after the assignment has begun, incentives are the primary levers that managers possess to influence adjustment
processes and the chronic early withdrawal problem. Thus, the effects of incentives on cultural cognitive dissonance reduction are
important to understand.
Expatriate incentives may include organizational advancement,
bonuses, education allowances, salary premiums, and other benefits (Guzzo, Noonan, & Elron, 1994; Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985).
With respect to reducing cognitive dissonance, early theory suggested that large extrinsic incentives would not lead to attitude
change in the face of cognitive dissonance (Festinger & Carlsmith,
1959). If the incentives are large enough to be sufficient justification, the expatriate may fully attribute his adoption of new behaviors to getting the incentives. This directly suggests rationalizing
the inconsistency.
In contrast, reinforcement theory suggests that expatriate attitude change would be higher when an expatriate is offered large
incentives to stay. Wicklund and Brehm concluded that ‘‘attitude
change should increase with monetary, scientific, or other incentive for performance” (1976, p. 42). The motivation to get incentives through staying may reinforce/encourage adjustment. Out
of self-interest the expatriate may desire to change themselves to
make their adjustment, and achieving contingent rewards, easier.
According to this perspective, high organizational incentives
should facilitate personal change and using VABN modification or
perceptual modification. We believe that these seemingly contradictory predictions for high organizational incentives can be reconciled by considering whether other key ‘‘incentives” favor staying
or leaving the assignment early.
Family variables have been shown to be critical in explaining
expatriate adjustment and withdrawal as well (e.g., Black & Stephens, 1989; Palthe, 2004). Thus, when considering the effects of
incentives it is important to remember to consider the entire
range. For example, expatriates may perceive that their families
have a real investment in their success, and early return may
bring shame to the whole family. In contrast, where family
members also living in the host culture are unhappy in the host
culture location, they may exert normative pressure to leave
early (Maertz & Griffeth, 2004), which may be direct (e.g., saying,
‘‘let’s go back home”) or indirect (e.g., talking negatively about
the assignment or host culture). Net normative pressure from
family or friends amounts to a more intrinsic ‘‘incentive” that
must be considered.
We argue that when perceived family pressures favor staying in
the assignment, along with organizational incentives, an expatriate
is less likely to attribute their behavior to the organizational incentives alone. Expatriates can see any internal changes as supporting
the rest of their life and goals, and thus, may even be more consciously motivated to use VABN or perceptual modification. In contrast, when the net family pressure is to leave the assignment, the
tangible organizational career or monetary incentives become a
larger relative justification for staying in the assignment. Overall,
the expatriate is likely to rationalize that the organizational incentives will benefit the family in the long run even if they don’t know
it yet and attribute inconsistencies to achieving this long-term
goal. Unlike an induced compliance lab setting where, attitude
change is the norm following drops in justification. In this realworld setting, attitude change would be inhibited by family pressure for expatriates to distance themselves from the host culture.
Yet, high organizational incentives may remain sufficient justification for rationalizing behavioral inconsistencies.
Proposition 13: When family pressures favor staying in the
assignment, high organizational incentives for assignment completion
facilitate use of VABN modification or perceptual modification, but
74
C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78
when family incentives favor leaving, high organizational incentives
facilitate use of rationalization.
Similarly, to the extent there are other key intrinsic justifications for adjusting functionally and continuing the assignment,
expatriates should be less likely to attribute behavior primarily
to extrinsic incentives. They should be more motivated to embrace
internal change that fits with the rest of their lives. These other justifications include: personal enjoyment of activities in the country,
friendship/romantic attraction to host nationals, attachment to the
work being done in the particular location, or a personal career
goal of being a successfully adjusted expatriate abroad. Thus, like
family pressure:
Proposition 14: When other intrinsic incentives favor staying in
the assignment, high extrinsic incentives facilitate use of VABN modification or perceptual modification, but when other intrinsic incentives
are absent or favor leaving, high organizational incentives facilitate
use of rationalization.
If none of these ‘‘intrinsic incentives” are at work though, most
cognitive dissonance research would predict that VABN modification would be most likely in the context of small organizational
incentives,
which
provide
insufficient
justification
for
inconsistency.
Fourth, there is considerable evidence that expatriates encounter many situations where individual difference traits can be influential on their adjustment outcomes (Shaffer et al., 2006). Here, we
propose that openness to experience and self-esteem are the two
most important individual difference traits that help determine
which dissonance reduction methods are used, particularly with
all situational factors equal. One key distinction between those
low and high in self-esteem is that those with higher self-esteem
have more positive attributes accessible in their self-knowledge,
facilitating self-affirmations (Stone & Cooper, 2001). Those with
lower self-esteem have fewer such positive attributes of self in
their working self-knowledge and therefore less opportunity to
make self-affirmations.
Proposition 15: Expatriates with high self-esteem are more likely
to use affirmation than those with low self-esteem.
We propose that another construct would moderate the likelihood of high self-esteem expatriates using affirmation vs. VABN
and perceptual modification. Individuals high on openness to experience have intellectual curiosity and a preference for variety,
while individuals low on openness tend to be conventional, conservative, and prefer the familiar to the novel (Costa & McCrae, 1992).
Curiosity and preference for variety or newness may lead to the
endorsement of a ‘‘change is good” value, which may extend to
personal VABNs during an expatriate assignment. Those high on
openness may also be more likely to consider a wide variety of cognitions and change their perceptions about the host culture’s
VABNs. Cultural intelligence (Earley, 2002; Earley & Peterson,
2004), flexibility, and ethnocentrism (reverse) (Shaffer et al.,
2006) constructs each reflect openness to experience. ‘‘Flexibility
of self-concept and ease of integrating new facets into it are associated with high CQ since understanding new cultures may require
abandoning pre-existing conceptualizations of how and why people function as they do,” (Earley, 2002, p. 275). Clearly, openness
to experience should be positively related to use VABN modification and perceptual modification over time.
Conversely, those low on openness or more ethnocentric may
be more resistant to changing their VABNs and accepting of new
views of the host or home culture (Lord et al., 2004). Because those
with high self-esteem will typically be more aroused by internal
inconsistencies, they are likely to want to completely resolve the
inconsistency more than those with low self-esteem who expect
some persistent inconsistencies. Thus, those with high self-esteem
and high openness would be most likely to use VABN or perceptual
modification methods. In contrast, those with high self-esteem and
low openness are more likely to use affirmation and host VABN
rejection more than changing VABNs or perceptions or other
methods.
Those low on self-esteem but high on openness to experience
would have these change-oriented methods available, but the relative willingness to accept and not be negatively aroused by inconsistency would remove some motivation to seek out new
information about the host nationals (i.e., perceptual modification). However, simply adopting a new attitude/belief that fits
the behavior or adding a ready situational explanation for acting
inconsistently are both possibilities for those with high openness.
These expatriates are likely to utilize VABN modification and rationalization more than other methods.
For those low on self-esteem and openness, self-affirmations
and adding new cognitions of any kind would be less likely. For
these expatriates, the most likely choices then would be confession-redemption and possibly host VABN rejection. We believe
that the former is more likely because low self-esteem may prevent them from standing against situational pressures required
to use the latter method. Thus, we propose, all situational factors
equal:
Proposition 16: (a) Expatriates high on self-esteem and openness
to experience are more likely to use VABN modification or perceptual
modification than other methods, (b) expatriates high on self-esteem
but low on openness to experience are more likely to use affirmation
or host VABN rejection than other methods, (c) expatriates low on
self-esteem and high on openness to experience are more likely to
use VABN modification or rationalization than other methods, (d)
expatriates low on self-esteem and low on openness are more likely
to use confession-redemption than other methods.
Relationships among intermediate adjustment outcomes
Less frequent recurrence of cultural cognitive dissonance experiences over time means less expected threats to the self-concept,
limiting fear of uncomfortable interactions. This should facilitate
more frequent interactions with host nationals. In addition, positive attitudes toward host nationals and identification with the
host culture lead the expatriate to perceiving more similarity with
the host nationals on VABNs. This will increase attraction to host
nationals (Brein & David, 1971) and motivation to interact with
them. Over time, positive attitudes toward host nationals and identification with the host culture should be positively related to frequency of interactions with host nationals.
Intermediate adjustment outcomes and early departure
Consistent with past research, we propose that positive attitudes toward host nationals/identification with the host culture
and more interactions with host nationals will help prevent psychological withdrawal and early departure from the assignment.
First, identification with the host culture can prevent psychological
withdrawal from the assignment through expatriates not wanting
to lose this part of their identity through unnecessary early departure (e.g., Berry, 1997). More positive attitudes toward nationals
should promote affective and other attachments to these ‘‘constituents” of the assignment, serving to reduce withdrawal tendency
(Maertz & Griffeth, 2004).
Finally, there are at least three research streams supporting that
frequent interactions with host nationals should inhibit early
departure from the assignment. First, researchers have found significant positive empirical relationships between interaction
adjustment levels and intention to stay on the assignment (Berry,
1997; Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005; Black & Stephens, 1989). Second, increased interactions with nationals indicate more ‘‘linkagesembeddedness” within the host national social network, which
C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78
75
would inhibit turnover from the assignment (Mitchell, Holtom,
Lee, Sablynski, & Erez, 2001). Third, frequent interactions within
the host country indicate/signal considerable effort toward assignment success and should create more behavioral commitment to
the assignment and fewer tendencies toward psychological withdrawal (Salancik, 1977).
test propositions. Finally, we must add that in empirical studies
generally, researchers must control for or consider learning processes when testing propositions, which were made assuming, all
else equal on learning processes or outcomes.
Discussion
In fact, learning has been suggested most often as the primary
stress-reduction process that expatriates employ (Black & Mendenhall, 1990; Church, 1982; Earley, 2002; Storti, 1990; Yamazaki &
Kayes, 2004). One main implication of our model for research
and practice is that learning culturally appropriate behaviors is
not enough to promote successful adjustment. Even an expatriate
who learns appropriate expectations and behaviors may not be
able to manage the resulting acculturative stress. In fact, learning
how to perform a culturally appropriate behavior may relieve
stress from social uncertainty, but at the same time, increase stress
from an internal inconsistency and threat to the self-concept. In
short, adjustment requires balancing the internal fit vs. environmental fit of behaviors in a cross-cultural setting.
Another key lesson is that both learning and dissonance reduction processes work together in contributing to the management of
acculturative stress. Future studies should focus on further integrating the processes of learning and dissonance reduction to comprehensively understand how stress is reduced and positive
adjustment outcomes achieved. For example, using certain dissonance reduction methods may promote easier integration of newly
learned information. Certain methods or contexts of learning may
also facilitate functional methods of dissonance reduction. Future
studies should attempt to more fully model such reciprocal/interactive effects between learning and dissonance reduction.
This model presents a new way to look at the cognitive processes of expatriate adjustment. We propose that all expatriates
experience cross-cultural cognitive dissonance; it is how they reduce this dissonance that is important for outcomes. This model
suggests several new directions for future research and practice.
Directions for empirical testing
We suggest that the current model be tested and expanded
through three different empirical phases: in-depth study of the
dissonance experience itself, quantitative measurement development, and study of patterns in multiple dissonance experiences
over time. First, narrative or grounded theory-building analyses
should be undertaken to focus on the individual dissonance experience in-depth, using daily interview data and diary data of host
national interactions. This would expand the richness of description for model constructs, micro-processes, and the context in
which the cultural cognitive dissonance experience occurs. This
increased detail and nuance should provide excellent inputs to
create more reliable and valid quantitative measures of our
constructs.
If some basic quantitative measurement challenges can be overcome, our propositions are imminently testable. Specifically, we
must be able to reliably measure the nature and frequency of perceived situational demands for culturally appropriate behavior not
in home repertoire, the nature and frequency of perceived inconsistencies arising in interactions with host nationals, the level of
negative affective arousal and psychological discomfort caused,
and the methods expatriates use for dissonance reduction (e.g.,
VABN modification, perceptual modification, affirmation, etc.).
We expect that expatriates will be able to accurately report these
constructs at some level if prompted sufficiently and some such
measures already exist in a general form (e.g., Elliot & Devine,
1994). Moreover, there must be a way to reliably and accurately
aggregate these responses over time and throughout the assignment in order to examine patterns.
These measurement challenges are considerable, but once they
are overcome, testing our model propositions should be straightforward. Expatriates could report extensive data through longitudinal event-sampling methodologies paired with administration
on PDA-type devices. Data on cultural cognitive dissonance experiences and adjustment intermediate outcomes could be collected
on scales whenever the expatriate is prompted to respond (e.g.,
right after an inconsistency in interaction, daily basis). These
could be aggregated over time to examine patterns and test
propositions.
Experimental designs could also be used as in the predominant
induced compliance design (Kunda, 1990). This could be combined
with cross-cultural scenario research, which has successfully cued
respondents to specific cultural values (e.g., Oyserman, Coon, &
Kemmelmeier, 2002). Using this type of design could create situations in which respondents are forced to adapt their behavior to
become ‘‘culturally appropriate” for the setting. This treatment
could be followed by measures of the type/level of inconsistency
perceived, the level of negative arousal and discomfort, the dissonance reduction method(s) used, and the moderators in order to
Learning is not enough to control acculturative stress
Functional methods of cultural cognitive dissonance reduction
A major prescriptive implication of this model is that using
VABN modification and perceptual modification for cultural cognitive dissonance reduction over time promotes positive adjustment outcomes and thereby less chance of early departure. This
does not mean that well-adjusted expatriates never use other
dissonance reduction methods. They just use these effective
methods repeatedly and more often than poorly adjusted expatriates. Affirmation and rationalization are largely neutral in effect on adjustment outcomes and may be used occasionally by
well-adjusted expatriates as well. With repeated use though,
confession-redemption and rejection are associated with negative adjustment outcomes.
Progression of adjustment/stage models
Generally consistent with stage models, our model supports
that adjustment levels should increase over time and level off
when cultural cognitive dissonance experiences become very
infrequent (Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005). In particular, VABN
modification and perceptual modification will both lead to less
frequent cultural cognitive dissonance experiences in the future.
This suggests that those who use these methods relatively often
should progress quickly to levels of lowered stress. Those using
other methods regularly besides VABN or perceptual modification are likely to remain hampered by dissonance stress into later stages of the assignment. With the respect to the
honeymoon period often proposed in early stage models (e.g.,
Black & Mendenhall, 1991), this may be explained by the fact
that there has not been enough time for expatriates to feel
any pressure to act inconsistently with any of their VABNs. It
could be that when the cultural cognitive dissonance experiences begin, the honeymoon ends.
76
C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78
Dual-identification
Over time, using VABN modification increases perceived similarity with the host culture, which can certainly reduce acculturative stress, but it also implies some weakened identification with
the home culture leading to ‘‘assimilation,” which can potentially
cause some problems with adjustment back to the home culture
after repatriation (e.g., Berry, 1980). For this reason, researchers
have frequently proposed that maintaining dual host and homeculture identifications (Sanchez et al., 2000) or ‘‘integration” (Berry, 1997) is the most healthy adjustment mode across cultures. In
our model perceptual modification best promotes the state of: positive attitudes toward host nationals, limited identification with
the host culture, diminishing cultural cognitive dissonance experiences, and frequent interactions with host nationals. By changing
perceptions of the underlying host culture VABNs, the expatriate
understands more what he/she has in common with the host culture. This involves seeking and incorporating new information
regarding the host culture VABNs, allowing a broader view of similarities between cultures. In this way, his/her cultural identity ‘‘is
nudged” closer to the host culture without negating or necessarily
reducing any identification with the home culture (e.g., Earley,
2002; Sanchez et al., 2000). In any case, over time, this method
leads to greater cognitive identity complexity, where accepted
similarities with the host culture can exist comfortably beside
identification with the home culture (Roccas & Brewer, 2002).
Thus, assuming repatriation at some point, our model implies that
one best achieves dual identification or integration by regularly
using perceptual modification as the method of cognitive dissonance reduction.
(and to an extent, VABN modification) should be encouraged and
the propositions give clues as to how to do this:
Applicability to other groups
Limitations and conclusion
Besides expatriates, the current model should also be relevant to
family-member adjustment and other sojourner cross-cultural
adjustment. Because family adjustment is very important for predicting early departure and has crossover effects to the expatriate
(Black & Gregersen, 1991b; ; Shaffer & Harrison, 1998; Takeuchi
et al., 2002), researchers should study whether family-member and
expatriate methods of dissonance reduction are causally related or
interact to influence adjustment outcomes. Moreover, it seems that
this model should apply generally to interactions between constituents of any two collectives with distinctive VABNs, where one group’s
representation functionally serves as the ‘‘host culture”. Thus, our
model should inform behavioral science more broadly with respect
to processes that minority individuals experience while interacting
within the context of a perceived dominant group culture.
There are clearly some limitations to the proposed model. There
are many other determinants of early departure than this cognitive
dissonance process (Garonzik, Brockner, & Siegel, 2000; Guzzo
et al., 1994; Lee & Mitchell, 1994; Schaffer & Harrison, 1998), and
there are other causes of adjustment outcomes besides dissonance
reduction methods (e.g., Black et al., 1991; Shaffer et al., 1999).
There may be further constructs that could influence the causal
relationships we describe. We also did not include important
non-withdrawal outcomes of adjustment (e.g., Black & Mendenhall, 1990; McEvoy and Parker, 1995), which will also be related
to the intermediate adjustment outcomes in our model. Finally,
we had to limit our consideration of ultimate outcomes to withdrawal/early departure for reasons of parsimony in the model
and space limitations. We expect that there are additional effects
of using different dissonance reduction methods on expatriate
job performance and psychological health as well. However, our
purpose here was to model one cross-cultural adjustment process
in depth, showing how it influences the key outcome of early
departure.
Despite this limited focus, we take the necessary step of introducing a new perspective on the cross-cultural adjustment process
and outlining directions for future research and practice in the
area. Previously, without a model of this process, there was ‘‘a
blind spot” in our understanding that has likely caused development of underspecified and inaccurate theoretical and empirical
models. With the cultural cognitive dissonance perspective,
researchers can expand their inquiry in novel directions and practitioners may create new ways to effectively manage expatriates’
adjustment before and during assignments.
Management Implications
Götz-Marchand, Götz, and Irle (1974) found that people employed a mode of dissonance reduction only to the extent that it
was made obvious to them. This suggests that pre-departure or
post-arrival training could be effective in explicitly teaching the
more functional methods of dissonance reduction. For example,
many real examples of internal conflicts faced during adjustment
could be compiled through qualitative case studies. Then, expatriates could discuss and learn techniques for seeking similarities and
subtly changing perceptions of the host/home-culture’s VABNs, as
in perceptual modification. This could be usefully complimented
by attributional training that helps expatriates better understand
the underlying reasons for and VABNs behind host national behaviors (Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004). There may even be teachable metacognitive strategies for approaching dissonance experiences that
encourage functional methods (Earley & Peterson, 2004).
If supported empirically, the biggest practical implication of the
model is that reducing dissonance through perceptual modification
Select expatriates higher on self-monitoring to minimize
extreme dissonance arousal, especially for first-time expatriates
assigned in distant and tight host cultures.
Select expatriates higher on self-esteem and on openness to
experience.
Make more exemplars of the host culture available to the expatriate by introducing him/her to a large number and variety of
host nationals with broad VABNs.
Formally encourage ‘‘family incentives” for the expatriate to
stay, encourage intrinsic interests in local organizations/activities, and encourage social connections with host nationals to
further increase the effectiveness of organizational incentives
in facilitating assignment completion.
Although seemingly counter-intuitive, giving small but substantial incentives rather than large incentives for assignment completion may facilitate functional adjustment best, particularly
when the expatriate has no other intrinsic incentives to stay or
leave.
Place special emphasis on influencing early dissonance reduction experiences that can help produce a functional pattern with
diminishing frequency over time. This implies creating early
experiences where expatriates can be exposed to host nationals
of many different profiles and encouraged to seek similarities
with them in a ‘‘safe” location with family or other expatriates
for support.
References
Aronson, E., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1962). Performance expectancy as a determinant of
actual performance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65, 178–182.
C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78
Ashforth, B., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy
of Management Review, 14, 20–39.
Aycan, Z. (1997). Acculturation of expatriate managers, a process model of
adjustment and performance. In Z. Aycan (Ed.). New approaches to employee
management: Expatriate management, theory and research (Vol. 4, pp. 1–40).
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Bazerman, M. H., Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Wade-Benzoni, K. (1998). Negotiating with
yourself and losing: Making decisions with competing internal preferences.
Academy of Management Review, 23, 225–241.
Beach, L. R., & Mitchell, T. R. (1996). Image theory: The unifying perspective. In L. R.
Beach (Ed.), Decision-making in the workplace: A unified perspective (pp. 1–19).
Mawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bell, M. P., & Harrison, D. A. (1996). Using intra-national diversity for international
assignments: A model of bicultural competence and expatriate adjustment.
Human Resource Management Review, 6, 47–74.
Berry, J. W. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaptation. In A. M. Padilla (Ed.),
Acculturation, theory, models and some new findings (pp. 9–25). Boulder, CO:
Westview.
Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology:
An International Review, 46, 5–68.
Bhaskar-Shrinivas, P., Harrison, D. A., Shaffer, M. A., & Luk, D. M. (2005). Input-based
and time-based models of international adjustment: Meta-analytic evidence
and theoretical extensions. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 257–280.
Black, J. S. (1988). Work role transitions: A study of American expatriate managers
in Japan. Journal of International Business Studies, 19, 277–294.
Black, J. S., & Gregersen, H. B. (1991a). Antecedents to cross-cultural adjustment for
expatriates in Pacific Rim assignments. Human Relations, 44(5), 497–515.
Black, J. S., & Gregersen, H. B. (1991b). The other half of the picture: antecedents of
spouse cross-cultural adjustment. Journal of International Business Studies,
461–477.
Black, J. S., & Gregersen, H. B. (1999). The right way to manage expats. Harvard
Business Review, 52–62.
Black, J. S., & Mendenhall, M. (1990). Cross-cultural training effectiveness: A review
and theoretical framework for future research. Academy of Management Review,
15, 113–136.
Black, J. S., & Mendenhall, M. (1991). The U-curve adjustment hypothesis revisited:
A review and theoretical framework. Journal of International Business Studies, 22,
225–247.
Black, S., Mendenhall, M., & Oddou, G. (1991). Toward a comprehensive model of
international adjustment: An integration of multiple theoretical perspectives.
Academy of Management Review, 16, 291–317.
Black, S., & Stephens, G. K. (1989). The influence of the spouse on American
expatriate adjustment and intent to stay in Pacific Rim overseas assignments.
Journal of Management, 15(4), 529–544.
Brein, M., & David, K. H. (1971). Intercultural communication and adjustment of the
sojourner. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 215–230.
Brislin, R. W. (1981). Cross-cultural encounters. New York: Pergamon.
Chan, D. K. S., Gelfand, M. J., Triandis, H. C., & Tzeng, O. (1996). Tightness-looseness
revisited: Some preliminary analyses in Japan and the United States.
International Journal of Psychology, 31, 1–12.
Church, A. T. (1982). Sojourner adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 540–572.
Clair, J. A., Beatty, J. E., & MacLean, T. L. (2005). Out of sight but not out of mind:
Managing invisible social identities in the workplace. Academy of Management
Review, 30, 7896.
Cooper, J., & Fazio, R. H. (1984). A new look at dissonance theory. In L. Berkowitz
(Ed.). Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 16, pp. 229–262).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and
NEO Five-Factor (NEO-FFI) Inventory professional manual. Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Earley, P. C. (2002). Redefining interactions across cultures and organizations:
Moving forward with cultural intelligence. Research in Organizational Behavior,
24, 271–299.
Earley, P. C., & Peterson, R. S. (2004). The elusive cultural chameleon, cultural
intelligence as a new approach to intercultural training for the global manager.
Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3(1), 100–115.
Elliot, A. J., & Devine, P. G. (1994). On the motivational nature of cognitive
dissonance: Dissonance as psychological discomfort. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 67, 382–394.
Festinger, L. A. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Festinger, L. A., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced
compliance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203–210.
Garonzik, R., Brockner, J., & Siegel, P. A. (2000). Identifying international assignees at
risk for premature departure: The interactive effect of outcome favorability and
procedural fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 13–20.
Götz-Marchand, B., Götz, J., & Irle, M. (1974). Preference of dissonance reduction
modes as a function of their order, familiarity, and reversibility. European
Journal of Social Psychology, 4, 201–228.
Gregersen, H. B., & Black, J. S. (1992). Antecedents to commitment to a parent
company and a foreign operation. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 65–90.
Grandey, A. A. (2003). When ‘‘the show must go on”: Surface acting and deep acting
as determinants of emotional exhaustion and peer-rated service delivery.
Academy of Management Review, 46, 86–96.
Guzzo, R. A., Noonan, K. A., & Elron, E. (1994). Expatriate managers and the
psychological contract. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 617–626.
77
Gudykunst, W. B. (1995). Anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) theory, current
status. In R. L Wiseman (Ed.), Intercultural communication theory (Vol. 19, pp. 8–
58). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Harrison, D. A., Shaffer, M. A., & BhaskarShrinivas, P. (2004). Going places: Roads
more and less traveled in research on expatriate experiences. In J. J. Martocchio
(Ed.). Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 22).
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. pp. 203–252.
Harmon-Jones, E., Brehm, J. W., Greenberg, J., Simon, L., & Nelson, D. E. (1996).
Evidence that the production of aversive consequences is not necessary to create
cognitive dissonance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 5–16.
Hoshino-Browne, E., Zanna, A. S., Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., Kitayama, S., &
Lackenbauer, S. (2005). On the cultural guises of cognitive dissonance: The case
of easterners and westerners. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89,
294–310.
Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., Sulley de Luque, M., & House, R. J. (2006). In the eye of
the beholder: Cross-cultural lessons in leadership from project GLOBE. Academy
of Management Perspectives, 20(1), 67–90.
Kahle, L. R. (1984). Attitudes and social adaptation: A person-situation interaction
approach. Oxford: Pergamon.
Kim, Y. Y. (1995). Cross-cultural adaptation: An integrative theory. In R. L. Wiseman
(Ed.), Intercultural communication theory (Vol. 19, pp. 170–193). Thousand Oaks:
Sage.
Kogut, B., & Singh, H. (1988). The effect of national culture on the choice of entry
mode. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3), 411–433.
Kraimer, M. L., Wayne, S. J., & Jaworski, R. A. (2001). Sources of support and
expatriate performance: The mediating role of expatriate adjustment. Personnel
Psychology, 54, 71–99.
Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of
individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person–job, person–organization,
person–group, and person–supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281–342.
Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108,
480–498.
Lee, T. W., & Mitchell, T. R. (1994). An alternative approach: The unfolding model of
voluntary employee turnover. Academy of Management Review, 19, 51–89.
Lord, C. G., & Lepper, M. R. (1999). Attitude representation theory. In M. P. Zanna
(Ed.), Advances in experimental and social psychology, (Vol. 31, pp. 265–343). San
Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Lord, C. G., Paulson, R. M., Sia, T. L., Thomas, J. C., & Lepper, M. R. (2004). Houses built
on sand: Effects of exemplar stability on susceptibility to attitude change.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 733–749.
Maertz, C. P., & Griffeth, R. W. (2004). Eight motivational forces and voluntary
turnover: A theoretical synthesis with implications for research. Journal of
Management, 30, 667–683.
McKimmie, B. M., Terry, D. J., Hogg, M. A., Manstead, A., Spears, R., & Doosje, B. (2003).
I’m a hypocrite, but so is everyone else: Group support and the reduction of
cognitive dissonance. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7(3),
214–224.
Mendenhall, M., & Oddou, G. (1985). The dimensions of expatriate acculturation: A
review. Academy of Management Review, 10, 39–47.
Mitchell, T. R., Holtom, B. C., Lee, T. W., Sablynski, C. J., & Erez, M. (2001). Why
people stay: Using job embeddedness to predict voluntary turnover. Academy of
Management Journal, 44, 1102–1121.
Molinsky, A. (2007). Cross-cultural code switching: The psychological challenges of
adapting behavior in foreign cultural interactions. Academy of Management
Review, 32, 622–640.
Nicholson, N. (1984). A theory of work role transitions. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 29, 172–191.
Norton, M. I., Monin, B., Cooper, J., & Hogg, M. A. (2003). Vicarious dissonance:
Attitude change from the inconsistency of others. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 85, 47–62.
Palthe, J. (2004). The relative importance of antecedents to cross-cultural
adjustment: Implications for managing a global workforce. International
Journal of Intercultural Relations, 28, 37–59.
Parker, G., & McEvoy, B. (1995). Expatriate adjustment: Causes and consequences. In
J. Selmer (Ed.), Expatriate management (pp. 97–114). Westport, CT: Quorum
Books.
Roccas, S., & Brewer, M. B. (2002). Social identity complexity. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 6(2), 88–106.
Salancik, G. (1977). Commitment and the control of organizational behavior and
belief. In B. Staw & G. Salancik (Eds.), New directions in organizational behavior
(pp. 1–54). Chicago: St. Clair.
Salancik, G., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job
attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224–253.
Sanchez, J. I., Spector, P. E., & Cooper, C. L. (2000). Adapting to a boundaryless world: A
developmental expatriate model. Academy of Management Executive, 14, 96–106.
Scher, S. J., & Cooper, J. (1989). Motivational basis of dissonance: The singular role of
behavioral consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56,
899–906.
Selmer, J. (2002). Practice makes perfect? International experience and expatriate
adjustment. Management International Review, 42(1), 71–87.
Shaffer, M. A., & Harrison, D. A. (1998). Expatriates’ psychological withdrawal from
international assignments: Work, nonwork, and family influences. Personnel
Psychology, 51, 87–118.
Shaffer, M. A., Harrison, D. A., & Gilley, K. M. (1999). Dimensions, determinants, and
differences in the expatriate adjustment process. Journal of International
Business Studies, 30, 557–582.
78
C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78
Shaffer, M. A., Harrison, D. A., Gregeren, H., Black, J. S., & Ferzandi, L. A. (2006). You
can take it with you: Individual differences and expatriate effectiveness. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 91, 109–125.
Sinangil, H. K., & Ones, D. S. (2001). Expatriate management. In N. Anderson, D. S.
Ones, H. K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.). Handbook of industrial, work, &
organizational psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 424–443). London: Sage.
Snyder, M. (1987). Public appearances private realities: The psychology of selfmonitoring. New York: W.H. Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt & Co.
Steele, C. M. (1988). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of
the self. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental and social psychology
(Vol. 20, pp. 261–302). San Diego: Academic Press.
Stone, J., & Cooper, J. (2001). A self-standards model of cognitive dissonance. Journal
of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 228–243.
Storti, C. (1990). The art of crossing cultures. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.
Takeuchi, R., Yun, S., & Tesluk, P. E. (2002). An examination of crossover and
spillover effects of spousal and expatriate cross-cultural adjustment on
expatriate outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 655–666.
Thibodeau, R., & Aronson, E. (1992). Taking a closer look: Reasserting the role of the
self-concept in dissonance theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18,
591–602.
Triandis, H. C. (1989). The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts.
Psychological Review, 96, 506–520.
Triandis, H. C. (1977). Interpersonal behavior. Monterrey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing.
Tsui, A. S., Nifadkar, S. S., & Ou, A. Y. (2007). Cross-national, cross-cultural
organizational behavior research: Advances, gaps, and recommendations.
Journal of Management, 33, 426–478.
Tung, R. (1982). Selection and training procedures of US, European, and Japanese
multinationals. California Management Review, 25(1), 57–71.
Tung, R. (1987). Expatriate assignments, enhancing success and minimizing failure.
Academy of Management Executive, 1(2), 117–126.
Van Vianen, A. E. M., De Pater, I. E., Kristof-Brown, A. L., & Johnson, E. C. (2004).
Fitting in: Surface- and deep-level cultural differences and expatriates’
adjustment. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 697–710.
Wicklund, R. A., & Brehm, J. W. (1976). Perspectives on cognitive dissonance. Hillsdale,
NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Yamazaki, Y., & Kayes, D. C. (2004). An experiential approach to cross-cultural
learning: A review of competencies for successful expatriate adaptation.
Academy of Management Learning and Education, 3, 362–379.
Zimbardo, P. G., & Leippe, M. R. (1991). The psychology of attitude change and social
influence. New York: McGraw-Hill.