Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research investigates the extent to which addressees’ cultural backgrounds affect the way Taiwanese university students organize topics while engaged in intercultural and intracultural small talk. The participants were 16 Taiwanese university students majoring in English. The participants were asked to take part in two role-plays in English: one with an exchange student from the Philippines and another with a local Taiwanese student. Each role-play lasted for five minutes and the role-plays were audio-recorded for analysis. Following the role-plays, the participants were asked to write a reflection report expressing their thoughts about interacting with the exchange student and the local student. Semi-structured interviews were also conducted to obtain further insights into the reason why the students introduced certain topics during the role-plays. The findings indicate that the participants were noticeably more curious and also sensitive regarding politeness when the addressee was the exchange student, but less so with the local Taiwanese student; these differences led the participants to organize their topics differently during the small talk role-plays. Despite the fact that English was the language used for all of the role-plays, the participants consistently introduced topics related to each other’s culture when they interacted with the exchange student, while topics concerning part-time jobs, plans for holidays and plans after graduation were most frequently introduced in the role-play with the local Taiwanese student. These findings suggest that Taiwanese university students introduce different types of topics in intercultural and intracultural small talk, and that the addressees’ cultural backgrounds play a significant role for the Taiwanese students in organizing their topics during small talk. Key words: Intercultural communication; Intracultural communication; Small talk Resume Cette etude examine la mesure dans laquelle les destinataires horizons culturelles affectent la facon dont les etudiants universitaires taiwanais organisent tout les sujets engages dans le petit entretien interculturel et intraculturel. Les participants etaient 16 etudiants universitaires taiwanais specialise en anglais. Les participants ont ete invites a prendre part a deux des jeux de role en anglais: l'une avec un echange d'etudiants en provenance des Philippines et une autre avec un etudiant local taiwanais. Chaque jeu de role a dure cinq minutes et les jeux de roles ont ete enregistrees sur bande audio pour l'analyse. Apres les jeux de roles, les participants ont ete invites a rediger un rapport de reflexion exprimer leurs pensees sur l'interaction avec l'etudiant d'echange et les etudiants locaux. Entretiens semi-structures ont egalement ete menees afin d'obtenir de nouvelles informations sur la raison pour laquelle les etudiants introduit certains sujets au cours des jeux de role-. Les resultats indiquent que les participants etaient sensiblement plus curieux et aussi sensibles concernant la politesse lorsque le destinataire a ete l'etudiant d'echange, mais moins avec les etudiants locaux taiwanais, ces differences ont amene les participants a organiser leurs sujets differemment au cours de l'entretien de petits jeux de role. Malgre le fait que l'anglais etait la langue utilisee pour tous les jeux de roles, les participants ont constamment presente des sujets lies a la culture des autres quand ils interagissaient avec l'etudiant d'echange, tandis que des sujets concernant emplois a temps partiel, des plans pour des vacances et des plans d'apres le diplome etaient le plus souvent introduit dans le jeu de role avec les etudiants locaux taiwanais. Ces resultats suggerent que les etudiants universitaires taiwanais d'introduire differents types de sujets dans le petit entretien interculturel et intraculturelle, et que les destinataires origines culturelles jouent un role important pour les etudiants taiwanais dans l'organisation de leurs sujets pendant le petit entretien. Mots-cles: La communication interculturelle; La communication intraculturelle; Petit discussion
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".