Intercultural competence as an aspect of the communicative ...

y the knowledge of values (savoirs, Byram 1997) which invariably led the interviewees
to having defensive attitude towards other cultures (Bennett 2004).
For the affective domain, the interviewees showed mild to strong interest in the
critical incidents and IC misunderstandings they presented. They showed willingness to
analyse and reflect on them but did not show the ability to ‘suspend disbelief about other
cultures’ (savoir-être, Byram 1997). Since most of the critical incidents show the
members of the Serbian culture as experiencing stress and discomfort, perhaps it was not
surprising that the participants showed empathy to them (Rubens 1976). On the other
hand, when the situation was reversed, the interviewees did not seem willing to do the
same. This again showed that the participants were not able to take a different, changed
perspective when analysing critical incidents (Glaser et al. 2007), but followed the ingroup
vs. out-group division and empathised only with the in-group members.
That there was interdependence between attitudes and other factors (Byram 1997)
can be seen in the case of I10, who showed strong stereotypes and negative attitudes, and
consequently provided scarce and oftentimes sarcastic attribution. Also, the participants
offered a rather stereotypical portrait of Serbia and its people, which is in line with
Byram’s view that if there is not a raised awareness about one’s own cultural values it is
unlikely that one’s biased interpretation will be under control.
As opposed to the results obtained through the questionnaire, the interviewees
showed attitudes that were rather ethnocentric. However, the negative and stereotypical
attitudes may be ascribed to the lack of both a prolonged contact with other cultures and
the first hand experience with other cultures. Since it has been shown that short
encounters with foreigners or second-hand experience (the media, friends, and relatives)
develop stereotypical beliefs which subsequently guide beliefs, opinions and evaluation
(Gamilton, Sherman 1994; Strangor, Lange 1994 in Spencer-Rogers, McGover 2002), the
findings might be understood as being a result of the lack of experience.
The interviewees analysed critical incidents and gave attributions from a uniquely
personal perspective, especially if they personally had contact with that cultural practice,
custom or value in their own culture (for example, nepotism that the interviewee’s father
faced in a job application, nepotism in schools). There were few interviewees who were
able to make the metaphoric ‘step back’ to keep the encounters in perspective (the A-
SMYLE alumna and the student who attended a communication course).
It is difficult to analyse the findings in terms of the behavioural component, since
the interviewees did not participate in actual IC encounters and therefore their skills could
224