The effectiveness of cultural adaptation : Americans selling to Japanese and Thais
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 2 x 4 factorial design (cultural dyads x levels of cultural adaptation) is used to investigate the effect of cultural adaptation on attraction, outcomes, perceived compliment, and perceived trustworthiness when Americans sell to Japanese and Thais. This dissertation extends the research of Francis (1989, 1991) by taking into account the influence of collectivism, perceived status differential, similarity-attraction, and social identity. The curvilinear relationship found by Francis to exist between cultural adaptation and attraction when Japanese adapt to American norms and behaviors is not replicated by the experiments. Both Thai and Japanese subjects generally perceive Americans as having a higher status than themselves. They are not threatened by Americans’ adaptation to their cultural norms and practices. For Thai subjects, the relationship between cultural adaptation and attraction, outcomes, and perceived compliment appears to be monotonic positive. For Japanese subjects, the relationship reaches a plateau beyond moderate adaptation. The no adaptation condition is rated lower in perceived trustworthiness than is the substantial adaptation condition in both the Thai and the Japanese experiments, contradicting the findings of Francis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".