COMMUNICATION AND

CULTURE
INTRODUCTION
Culture and communication are two big concepts that cannot be talked about separately. Culture
influences communication because communication is shaped by deeply held cultural values and beliefs.
The way we communicate and the meanings we make are defined by cultural norms. Likewise,
communication influences culture because culture is enacted through communication. As Edward T. Hall,
who is credited with founding the field of intercultural communication, once said, “Culture is
communication.”
This module explores some aspects of intercultural communication, and in particular Hall’s framework of
high-context and low-context communication. Intercultural communication refers to communication
between people coming from different cultural backgrounds. It is not a new field but it is all the more
relevant in the era of globalization where cross-cultural interaction and exchange is taking place much
more extensively and rapidly in the workplace, popular media, and cyberspace.

LEARNING OUTCOMES
At the end of this module, you should be able to:
1. Differentiate the communication in high-context and low-context cultures; and
2. Analyze Filipino communicative behaviors.

1.0 CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN

COMMUNICATION
Some people speak frankly and directly while others “beat around the bush.” Communication between
these two types of people can be fraught with tension. What accounts for the difference in communication
styles? From Hall we learn that the difference is cultural and not simply a matter of personality.

ACTIVITY 01
Read pp. 3-31 of Understanding Cultural Differences by Edward T. Hall and Mildred Reed Hall.

Understanding Cultural Differences [Edward T. Hall and Mildred Reed Hall]

After reading the material, answer the following study questions:

 1. What kinds of stimuli are defined by context?
2. How are these stimuli different in high and low context cultures?
3. Think about some examples coming from your own experience.
We can say that when we communicate, we bring into it a cultural understanding of the concepts of time,
space, and context that will shape the meanings embedded in our messages even as the process of
communication (in turn) shapes our understanding of these three concepts. Notions of time, space and
relationships vary among cultures. These constitute contexts that are inextricably bound with the
meanings of messages conveyed in interactions. If we google the dictionary meaning of context (a noun),
we will find that it is “the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms
of which it can be fully understood and assessed.”
The importance of context in messaging and interaction is defined by cultural orientations. Some cultures
are characterized by high-context communication and other cultures by lowcontext communication. High-
context (HC) communication is indirect rather than explicit. It assumes that the people who are
interacting are familiar with each other and the communication situation, and can rely on implicit and
nonverbal cues to communicate with and understand each other. In contrast, low-context (LC)
communication is explicit and detailed. More of the information in a message is spelled out and defined.
Direct or explicit verbal messages are valued more than the non-verbal.
As stated earlier, context is shaped by a culture’s notions of time, space, and relationships. In high-
context cultures, families tend to close-knit and there is centralized social structure. They share communal
spaces and can tolerate narrower personal spaces. Time is understood to be fluid and not fixed, a process
that belongs to others and nature. In low-context cultures, relationships are formal and brief, there is a
stronger sense of individuality, and social structure is decentralized. Personal space and privacy are
important; hence space is compartmentalized. An individual’s time is her own; thus, events and tasks
have defined schedules.

2.0 FILIPINO COMMUNICATIVE BEHAVIOR

It is said that among all Asians, Filipinos are the most Westernized. The American influence in particular
is readily apparent in the Philippines, from the American shops and fast-food in every street corner to the
forms of entertainment, such as music, TV shows, and movies, that Filipinos enjoy. There is also the
Filipino’s use of American English. English is one of the official languages in the Philippines, and it is
spoken by millions of Filipinos. According to the Education First (EF) Ltd. report in 2016, the Philippines
is one of the top 15 countries in the world that have the best non-native English speakers. Many
expressions used in social media and in everyday conversations among Filipinos are American.

ACTIVITY 02
Watch Nas Daily's one-minute video about the Philippines below:
Do you agree with the video's claim that the Philippines is very American? Why or why not?
However, the Americanized Filipino culture, according to Melba Maggay (2002), is an external
appearance (panlabas na anyo) and may not accurately reflect the entirety of the Filipino culture. Filipinos
have an internal culture (panloob na kultura) which can be difficult to understand from a Western
standpoint. And the Filipino way of communicating can be confusing for many foreigners. While
Americans, for example, might prefer a more direct and straightforward manner of exchanging
information, Filipinos tend to communicate through pakiramdaman and pagpapaligoy-ligoy, which rely
on the implicit connection between two speakers. Using Hall’s terminology, Filipinos tend to engage in
high-context communication.
In the previous section, we learned that people from high-context cultures communicate through context-
dependent non-verbal codes and meanings that are implicitly shared both by the speaker and the listener,
whereas a low-context culture prefers a more literal and explicit exchange of information. Whereas the
former focuses on the communication context, the latter puts more importance on the message content.
Beating around the bush, or pagpapaligoyligoy, is an aspect of communication in high-context cultures
where there is a higher level of shared understanding between people. According to Maggay (2002), our
long history of communal relationship has resulted in a heightened sensitivity and shared understanding
in which messages need not always be expressed in words, but are conveyed through nonverbal codes that
are understood by both speaker and listener. However, in countries like the United States where societies
are more atomized than communal, it is important that messages be explicitly stated and expressed in a
straightforward manner to avoid confusion.
It should be noted, however, that there is no single homogenous Filipino culture. As an archipelago, the
Philippines consists of rich and diverse cultures, each with their own ways of living and understanding of
the world. Language, according to Everett (2013) is more than just a tool to exchange information but is a
cultural tool that shapes the way members of a community behave, think and know, and that which arises
out of a “social need for meaning and community” (p. xi). Language is produced by culture as it also
produces culture through usage and interaction. This means that a language – with all its vocabulary, form
and structure – reflects and reproduces a social reality of its own. For example, a Batangueño and a
Lagunense who both come from the same Tagalog region will have different understandings of the
Tagalog word “banas.” It means “being irked” for the former, and “feeling hot or humid” for the latter.
How much more for words that come from two entirely different languages? The Philippines has more
than 170 languages. This number is an indicator of the differences and diversity in cultures in the country.
Hence, care should be taken in characterizing Filipino communication behaviors. As a matter of fact,
intercultural communication may transpire even between Filipinos talking to one another. A Filipino
Muslim woman from Mindanao and a teenage Filipino urban dweller, although both can speak Filipino
and are both Filipinos, might have a different understanding of the world and a distinct set of
communication behaviors.
Nevertheless, the concepts presented in this section are attempts by Filipino scholars to distinguish our
unique way of communicating on the basis of our history, culture, psyche, and language as a people.
Hence the use of the term “Filipino Communicative Behaviors" rather than “Communicative Behaviors of
Filipinos” to refer to these concepts. The former refers to communication based on Filipino experiences,
culture, mentality, and orientations, while the latter classifies communicative behaviors based solely on
nationality. Jose Lacson from the UP College of Mass Communication coined the term Filipino
Communicative Behavior (FCB) in 2005 to refer to “concepts of awareness, knowledge, attitude, values,
beliefs, opinions, tendencies, predispositions, practices and perceptions relating to communication
behavior of Filipinos” (p. 2). Although he did not enumerate specific Filipino communicative behaviors,
his work provided observations that could lead to developing theories about our unique ways of
communicating.

ACTIVITY 03
Read "Mindsets of the Filipino: A Research Agenda for Filipino Communicative Behavior," Lacson's
professorial lecture, and reflect on the mindsets he enumerated.

Mindsets of the Filipino: A Research Agenda for Filipino Communicative Behavior" [Jose Lacson]
After reading the material, reflect on and answer the following questions as a group:
1. Do you agree with Lacson's observations? Which parts do you agree with and which
parts do you disagree with?
2. Can you think of specific examples in which the mindsets describe Lacson apply?
3. Do you think that these mindsets are innately Filipino? Or are they the result of socio-
historical and cultural influences? Explain.
NOTE: Be ready to share your reflections with your classmates in a small group discussion to be
done during your free time (March 29 to April 9) via Zoom. Record your discussion. You will use
this for ACTIVITY 05. (Same group as the one in Module 2).
For Lacson, mindsets are pre-determinants to communicative behavior and stem from a people’s
traditions, values and belief systems, and the shared experience of a social and natural environment. He
observed that there are mindsets that are relevant to Filipino Communicative Behavior, as follows:

1. Deprivation-Deservation Syndrome - This refers to people’s thinking that they deserve

something because they are deprived of something. A manifestation of this are the concepts of
sayang and libre; Filpinos don’t want to pass up opportunities, especially things that are
available for free.

2. The Kulang sa Pansin (deprivation of attention/understanding) Syndrome and the Quest

for Ownership and Credit Seeking —This refers to the need for recognition, attention, and
being or feeling understood. Concepts related to this include wanting to get credit, the crab
mentality (resenting the success of others because it reflects on us), and panglalamang (putting
one over the other).

3. Convenience Approach to Living on — This refers to the inclination towards the most
convenient and easiest way to get things done and achieve goals. It includes asking other
persons to do tasks on one’s behalf, which explains why fixers abound in our system.

4. Sense of Humor — This mindset enables people to cope with hardships in life and gives
them relief from hard work. It is an indication of a pragmatic worldview where there is
hopefulness but also an awareness of limitations and some things being beyond one's control.
5. The Concept of Accountability — This has to do with the tendency to evade
accountability through palusot and by blaming others for their mistakes.

Lacson provides a “matrix of contexts and perspectives, illustrating the multiple layers of thinking which
precedes and determines communicative behavior” (p. 10).

3.0 FILIPINO COMMUNICATION HABITS

Melba Padilla Maggay studied the cross-cultural flow of communication among Filipinos in order to
understand and illustrate our unique ways of communication. She looked into native words in various
Philippine languages and studied different cultural records and practices of Filipinos. Her work was
heavily influenced by Sikolohiyang Pilipino, particularly Zeus Salazar’s concepts of “loob” and “labas”
and Dr. Virgilio Enriquez’s scholarship on “kapwa.”

ACTIVITY 04
Read the first chapter, “Mga katutubong pamamaraan ng interpersonal na komunikasyon,” of Melba
Maggay’s Pahiwatig: Kagawiang pangkomunikasyon ng Filipino published in 2002 by Ateneo de Manila
University Press.

Mga katutubong pamamaraan ng interpersonal na komunikasyon [Melba Maggay]

Answer the following study questions based on what you understood from the reading material:
1. Which of the 10 indigenous Filipino ways of interpersonal communication that Maggay
discusses do you find yourself and/or people you know engaging in a lot?
2. What are the motivations for these interpersonal communication behaviors? What are the
drawbacks or the problems that arise from this way of communicating?
3. The communication behaviors that Maggay describes can be observed in oral and face-to-
face interpersonal interactions. Are there manifestations of these in written and online
communication behaviors of Filipinos, for example on social media? Cite examples.
4. Maggay characterizes these behaviors as indigenous Filipino ways of interpersonal
communication. What do you think of this characterization? Are these communication
behaviors innate to Filipinos? What socio-historical and other factors would account for these
ways of communicating?
5. How do the concepts proposed by Maggay compare to and relate with the Filipino
communication behaviors described by Lacson?
To recap, Maggay identified the following "indigenous" Filipino ways of interpersonal communication:
1. Pagpapahiwatig — getting a message across in an indirect manner, especially when the
message is sensitive, embarrassing, or potentially offensive. Pahiwatig could be verbal
(parinig or padaplis), non-verbal (use of silence or other non-verbal codes, like squinting of
the eyes, raising of the eyebrows, etc.), or a combination of the two (as can be observed in
paglalambing and pagtatampo).
2. Mensaheng may tagapamagitan — communication through a third party who serves as a
bridge, in order to avoid conflict. Related concepts are pahatid, parating, pasabi, pabilin, and
paabot.
3. Pagbubunyag — bringing what is inside out to someone (panloob to panlabas). Related
words include ipagtapat (disclosing to a trusted person), ihinga (disclosing anxieties, secrets,
and other internal discomfort for relief), ilabas (revealing information to the public or the
authority), and ilahad (reporting an organized narrative to another who is not necessarily a
confidant).
4. Pagpapakitang-giliw — putting on a pleasant and gracious demeanor to create a good
impression (pabalat-bunga, pakitang-tao, palabas, and dating).
5. Paglalantad ng sarili — showing off or displaying haughtiness when presenting oneself
(pakitang-gilas, porma, garbo, bongga, bidahan) or relating to others (bola). Often this
behavior elicits derision from other Filipinos.
6. Tuwirang pagsasagutan — argumentation in formal and public events (balitaktakan,
pagtatalo, taltalan, talastasan). Although this communication practice is confrontational,
speakers are still careful with their word choice, the flow of conversation is laden with detours
and segues, and direct disagreements are prefaced with apologetic disclaimers.
7. Pagsisiwalat ng mga pansariling impormasyon — revelation of private information to the
public, reflecting lack of the concept of privacy and a blurring of the line that separates
information for a trusted circle (pang-atin) and for the public (pang-kanila). Related concepts
include ipangalandakan, itsismis, ibandila, ipagladlaran, and ipagbukambibig.
 8. Pakikipag-sosyalan — engaging in social interaction, group conversation, and intimate
conversations, such as kwentuhan, huntahan, daldalan, and dakdakdan.
9. Pagbibigay ng balita reported or announcing news — This includes ipahayag, ibalita,
ipaalam, ipaabot, ipatalastas, and magbigay ng babala.
10. Katutubong retorika — indigenous rhetorical forms or discourses, such as balagtasan,
balitaw, putungan, ambahan, oggayam and bugtungan.
According to Maggay, although it is true that implicit communication (mapagpahiwatig na
pagpapahayag) is prevalent in Filipino culture (high-context), there are contexts that require direct and
explicit communication (low-context), such as when there is a high degree of social distance between
speaker and listener, and when the other person is an Outsider rather than One-of-Us.
Below is a presentation of a classification of Filipino Communication Behaviors based on their directness
and indirectness. According to Maggay, the use of Direct and Indirect Communication Behaviors is
heavily influenced by the social distance between communicators. Filipinos communicate more indirectly
with Outsiders (Ibang-Tao) than with people who share the same culture with them (Di Ibang-Tao). This
behavior allows Filipinos to avoid offending and creating bad impressions among strangers. Similarly,
Filipinos communicate with someone of a higher rank more formally and directly than with someone with
a lower social position.

TUWIRAN
Direct
 Pagbubunyag
 Paglalantad ng sarili
 Tuwirang pagsasagutan
 Pagsisiwalat ng mga pansariling impormasyon
 Pakikipag-sosyalan
 Pagbibigay ng balita
 Katutubong retorika
 DI-TUWIRAN
Indirect
 Pagpapahiwatig
 Tagapamagitan
 Pagpapakitang-tao
This is the reason why we Filipinos oftentimes display timidity and shyness during first encounters. But
as soon as we become familiar and comfortable with one another, we tend to shift from indirect to more
direct communication behaviors. However, because of various foreign influences and the pervasiveness
of both broadcast and new media, these behaviors are now being challenged. One need only log in to any
social media platform and read the comments below news posts to see how discussions between total
strangers end up with more differences than agreements.

ACTIVITY 05 & ASSIGNMENT

Go back to your recording of your group discussion in Activity 03. Review the recording and identify the
communicative behaviors exhibited by members of the group during the discussion. Use the following
guide questions as a guide in your analysis:
1. What are the most common communication habits and what are the least common?
2. How does context account for these behaviors? Characterize the group dynamics in terms
of whether it was high-context or low-context.
3. What are the consequences of the communication habits or behaviors you observed in
this particular case? For example, how did these behaviors impact on whether and to what
extent your group managed to cover a lot of ground in your discussion, or go beyond the
surface (i.e. the impact on the quality of the discussion)? What was the impact on the degree
of participation in the discussion of the different group members?
4. Were there some "behaviors" not covered by Maggay's theory? Discuss them briefly.
INDIVIDUALLY, WRITE A ONE-PAGE SYNTHESIS OF YOUR OBSERVATIONS AND
ANALYSIS. Submit your paper through our UPBVLE platform on or before 9 APRIL 2021,
11:59PM.

CONCLUSION
The lessons discussed above shed light not only on how we can better communicate with fellow Filipinos,
but also on how our culture and values are deeply entrenched in the ways we interact and communicate
with other people. By analyzing our communication behaviors, we also highlight the things that make us
Filipino, underscore the depth of our interpersonal relationships, and identify practices that must be
improved. It may be said that it was easy for our colonizers to take over and establish a new socio-
political order in our communities because of our hospitality and aversion to confrontation. During the
colonial era, protest and resistance were furtive and stealthy, and these behavior and mentality may have
transcended time and become part of our culture. Maggay concludes, “Ang pagkakasanay sa pailalim na
paghihimagsik noong panahon ng kolonisasyon ay maaring siyang pinanggalingan ng pagkasuwail natin
sa kasalukuyan. Madalas tayong magtangkang lumusot at ikutan ang batas, at nang maisahan ang mga
autoridad at maykapangyarihan.” Today, studying Filipino communication behaviors can enable us to
analyze and critique how we as a people and how our leaders articulate and negotiate our national
interests in diplomatic talks with foreign countries like China, Kuwait, and the United States.
While culture is dynamic, we should be critical of the kind of changes that are taking place and the
influences that make these changes possible. For instance, the issues of globalization have never been so
relevant as they are today. We are witness to the Filipino diaspora in different places in the world and to
the strong presence of foreign cultures in the Philippines. Media, too, play a very important role in
shaping our sense of national identity as many of us are avid fans of foreign pop culture and are
consumers of mostly foreign content and products. The advent of new media, specifically social media,
has also greatly changed the way we behave and express ourselves.
Nevertheless, the fact remains that culture and communication are interrelated. Each influences the other.
Our ways of communicating reflect our culture and values, and at the same time our interaction and
communication shape our culture. Communication, therefore, is not just an act of talking about the world,
but also a process of creating our identity and our realities.