Social Intelligence and Communication Competence: Predictors of Students’ Intercultural Sensitivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the level of intercultural sensitivity of foreign international undergraduates and its possible predictors. Sample participants included 269 foreign international undergraduates of both government and private universities in Thailand. The research instrument was the three-page survey constructed questionnaire based on the combination of three self-evaluation scales: Chen and Starosta’s (2000) Intercultural Sensitivity Scale (ISS), McCroskey and McCroskey’s (1988) Self-Perceived Communication Competence Scale (SPCC), and Silvera et al’s (2001) Tromso Social Intelligence Scale (TSIS). From the pilot test, the instrument’s internal consistency was .789. Data collected were analyzed by using Descriptive Statistics (SPSS for Windows), Pearson product-moment Correlations, Independent-sample t-test, F-test (ANOVA), and Multiple Regression Analysis. The findings showed that the average level of intercultural sensitivity of the participants was at a high level (X = 4.3) with nationality and intercultural experience as significant factors. It was also found that both self-perceived communication competence and social intelligence were statistically significant predictors of intercultural sensitivity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".