This article was downloaded by: [Temple University Libraries]

On: 19 November 2014, At: 16:52

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Intercultural Communication

Research
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjic20

Bridging Cultures: Understanding the

Construction of Relational Identity in
Intercultural Friendship
Pei-Wen Lee
Published online: 17 Feb 2007.

To cite this article: Pei-Wen Lee (2006) Bridging Cultures: Understanding the Construction of
Relational Identity in Intercultural Friendship, Journal of Intercultural Communication Research,
35:1, 3-22, DOI: 10.1080/17475740600739156

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17475740600739156

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
 Journal of Intercultural Communication Research
Vol. 35, No. 1, March 2006, pp. 3–22

Bridging Cultures: Understanding the

Construction of Relational Identity in
Intercultural Friendship
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

Pei-Wen Lee

This research aims to uncover the strategies/activities that shape the construction of
relational identity through analyzing the turning points occurring during the process of
intercultural friendship. Forty-five interviews were conducted with members in 15
intercultural friendship dyads. The results reveal that seven types of activities were
identified: (1) positivities/providing assistance; (2) rituals, activities, rules, and roles; (3)
self-disclosure; (4) networking; (5) exploring cultures and languages; (6) emphasizing
similarities and exploring differences; and (7) conflict/conflict management. The
strategies of exploring cultures and languages and of conflict/conflict management were
thoroughly discussed to advance our understanding of the development and maintenance
in intercultural friendship.
Keywords: Intercultural Friendship; Relational Identity; Third-culture

I am one of the many sojourners in the US. Six years ago, I left Taiwan, for New York
City to pursue my Master’s degree. Living in one of the most diverse places in the
world, for the first time, I realized the homogeneous nature of the Taiwanese
population in comparison to that of the US. Being away from my family members,
my intercultural friends, whether they are from the US or other countries around the
world, have naturally become my primary source of emotional and professional
support. My intercultural friendships with Americans play an important role in

Pei-Wen Lee (PhD, Ohio University, 2004) is currently an Assistant Professor at LaGuardia Community
College, The City University of New York (CUNY). The author wishes to express her gratitude to Dr. Claudia
Hale at Ohio University for her precious advice and comments on the final drafts of this paper. Correspondence
to: Pei-Wen Lee, Humanities Department Room E202 LaGuardia Community College, CUNY, 31-10 Thomson
Avenue, Long Island City, NY 11101, USA. Tel: (718) 482-6025; Email: [email protected]

ISSN 1747-5759 (print)/ISSN 1747-5767 (online) ß 2006 World Communication Association

DOI: 10.1080/17475740600739156
 4 P.-W. Lee
helping me to adapt to the mainstream culture in the US. With my other
intercultural friends from countries such as Japan, Korea, France, Argentina, etc., we
share our experiences and struggles in terms of living as members of co-cultural
groups in a foreign country. Most importantly, having intercultural friendships is an
eye-opening experience for me. Interacting with people from multiple cultural
backgrounds truly widens my worldview and challenges some previously held
prejudices concerning people from other cultures. Indeed, intercultural friendships
contribute to my life in both professional and personal contexts.
As illustrated through my personal experiences, the outcome of globalization leads
us generally to believe that opportunities to meet others from a variety of national
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

cultures have increased (Leeds-Hurtwiz, 2002). The truth is that we live in a global
village where our neighbors, friends, and co-workers will not necessarily share the
same values or speak the same native language as we do. As Hall (1990) stated, ‘‘[W]e
must be willing to admit that the people of this planet don’t just live in one world
[culture] but in many worlds and some of these worlds, if not properly understood,
can and do annihilate the others’’ (p. 201). To succeed in both our personal and
professional lives, we must learn how to relate, in face-to-face contexts, with people
from other cultures. As a consequence, the topic of culture is becoming one of the
central areas receiving increased attention from communication scholars.
Surprisingly, examination of extant literature reveals that intercultural relation-
ships—intercultural marriage and intercultural friendship—have remained largely
unexplored, despite the fact that it is more prevalent and influential today in an
individual’s life (Chen, 2002; Dainton, Zelley, & Langan, 2003; Gaines & Liu, 2000;
Gareis, 1995).
Although intercultural friendships can benefit our lives in a wide variety of ways,
there are many negative stereotypes associated with this type of relationship. Gaines
and Liu (2000) have argued that the reason why an intercultural relationship is more
likely to be vulnerable is because the dyad’s relational identity is not well developed,
resulting in the relationship being influenced by self-serving biases and group-serving
biases. Relational identity (also termed ‘‘relational culture’’ or ‘‘third-culture’’) is an
abstract concept that might best be defined as a reality or culture that reflects the
values, the rules, and the processes of the friendship and helps the dyad to maintain
their relationship (Casmir, 1993; Wood, 2000). Just as the culture of a particular
country influences the definition and enactment of appropriate behavior within that
country, relational identity guides behavior within a relationship. According to
Gaines and Liu, if the dyad’s relational identity is strong, the relationship tends to last
longer. In this sense, relational identity seems to be a critical component in
determining the success of an intercultural friendship. Unfortunately, researchers
have paid scant attention to the development of relational identity by members in
intercultural friendships (Gaines & Brennan, 2001). While Cupach and Imahori’s
(1993) Identity Management Theory (IMT) and Casmir’s (1999) Third-Culture
Building Model were developed in an effort to describe the phases of relational
identity construction between members of intercultural relationships, as Gudykunst
(2002) noted, very little research has sought to further explore these two theories.
 Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 5
To fill the knowledge gap created by this situation, this study explores the
development of relational identity in intercultural friendship. Specifically, this
research investigates the activities, behaviors, or influences that shape the
construction of relational identity.

Review of Literature
While the topic of friendship has been studied since the late 1970s, the extant
research has focused primarily on intracultural relationships and adopted a
noncomparative perspective. According to Cargile (1998) and Gareis (1995), the
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

focus has mostly been on middle-class European Americans’ friendships and the
differences that occur during the development of friendships across stages or a
lifetime (e.g., Rawlins, 1992). Fehr (2000) reviewed the available friendship research,
focusing on the processes by which people develop, maintain, terminate, or restore
friendships, and concluded that typical friendship studies have usually selected one
factor (or a few factors) and examined the influence of that factor at a particular stage
of friendship development. Friendship maintenance strategies have also served as a
popular topic (Duck, 1994).
Friendship research as it intersects with other cultural contexts has been largely
neglected. Chen (2002) noted:
Research on intercultural relationship communication is still in its infancy, with
limited studies on intercultural communication in interpersonal relationships such
as intercultural marriage, dating, and friendship. Interest in intercultural marriages
arises mainly from a practical need to understand marriages between partners of
different cultural backgrounds as a social phenomenon. Research on other
intercultural relationships including friendship grows out of interests in
intercultural communication as a whole. (p. 241)

There is, then, a need to expand our understanding both of the communication
dynamics involved in intercultural friendships and of cross-cultural similarities/
differences in the expectations associated with the concept of friendship.

Intercultural Friendship or Cross-cultural Comparison Friendship Research

Research suggests that our understanding of the concept of friendship varies as a
result of age, gender, region, and cultural background (Adams, Blieszner, & de Vries,
2000; Mirny, 2001; Patterson, Bettini, & Nussbaum, 1993). Since perceptions of
friendship diverge across culture (Barnlund, 1989; Cargile, 1998; Krumrey-Fulks,
2001), it seems logical that forming intercultural relationships should be a
challenging task. As such, the factors that influence the formation and maintenance
of intercultural friendships serve as important areas for research.
Scholars have found that members involved in intercultural friendships have
to deal not only with the challenges that exist with intracultural friendships
(e.g., values, interests, personality traits, and changes), but also the problems
emerging from internal and external relational dialectics, cultural differences,
 6 P.-W. Lee
and possible language barriers between the interactants (Chen, 2002; Gareis, 1995;
Javidi & Javidi, 1991; Martin & Nakayama, 1997). Clearly, positive facilitation of
intercultural friendships requires more than simply increasing the possibilities for
contact or interaction. We, as relationship scholars, need to concentrate on how
to enhance the quality of intercultural friendships and how to make such
relationships work.
Fortunately, research has indicated that stereotypes, dissimilarities, and insufficient
cultural understandings in a relationship can be constructively addressed through
communicative activities, such as, value sharing and culture learning (Monsour,
1994). Even though intercultural friendships might seem difficult or anxiety
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

provoking in the beginning stages, little research suggests that intercultural

relationships fail more easily than intracultural relationships. In effect, if the dyad
knows how to patiently embrace differences and identify their shared similarities,
intercultural friendships can be as strong and last as long as intracultural friendships
(Gaines & Agnew, 2003).

Relational Identity and Friendship Research

Co-constructing a relational identity within an intercultural friendship is the core of
such a relationship. Wood (1982) defined the term ‘‘relational identity/culture’’ as ‘‘a
privately transacted system of understandings that coordinate attitudes, actions, and
identities of participants in a relationship’’ (p. 76). A relational identity ‘‘arises out of
communication and becomes an increasingly central influence on individual
partners’ ways of knowing, being, and acting in relation to each other and the
outside world’’ (p. 75). Relational identity is essential, particularly in an intercultural
friendship because such identity is like a ‘‘mini-culture’’ (Baxter, 1987) co-created
by the members, and based on this culture, the members know how to behave
and interact appropriately, as well as effectively within their friendship. As Wood
clearly suggested, a relational identity is not simply objects or places, such as a
birthday gift or the restaurant at which the dyad first met. Instead, a relational
identity refers to the interpretations or meanings attached to the specific objects,
places, events, or popular songs (Gaines & Brennan, 2001) that make up the
relationship.
Baxter (1987) postulated that relationships possess their own unique culture.
A dyad co-creates meaning systems in a number of ways, including shared stories,
ritual enactments, and symbols. Baxter examined the content characteristics and
functions of the symbols which relational dyads use to identify their romantic
relationships and friendships. Five classes of relational symbols were identified:
behavioral actions, prior events/times, physical objects, special places, and cultural
artifacts (e.g., a movie). In Baxter’s research, participants reported nine substantive
functions with respect to their relational symbols. The most frequently identified
functions were prompting recollection, indicating intimacy, promoting communion,
providing stimulation/fun, and affording seclusion from others. Participants in
romantic relationships tended to have physical object symbols, whereas members of
 Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 7
friendships disclosed that they tended to have behavioral action and event/time
symbols. Most importantly, Baxter’s study demonstrated that relationship closeness
has a positive association with symbol valence and functional richness. In other
words, relational symbols, a mode of relational identity, function to facilitate
relational intimacy.
Bell and Healey (1992) examined idiomatic communication in friends’ relational
identities. Personal idioms, as defined by Bell and Healey, refer to a specific type of
relationship symbol, which can be words, phrases, or gestures that represent specific
meanings within a relationship. Bell and Healey held the position that idiomatic
communication can positively contribute to individuals’ relational identities. Their
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

findings supported their argument, suggesting that idiomatic communication is

common in friendship and appears to correspond with the development of relational
intimacy.

Identity Management Theory and Third-Culture Building Model

Cupach and Imahori’s (1993) Identity Management Theory (IMT) seeks to explain
the process of developing relational identity between members in an intercultural
friendship. Cupach and Imahori argued that individuals develop their identities and
relationships through interacting with their relational partners. That is, individuals’
self-identifications are shaped throughout their relationship. A relational identity is
critical in shaping the interactions of members of the relationship and in maintaining
the relationship. Cupach and Imahori also noted that an intercultural relationship
can be ‘‘interpersonal’’ if the members can co-form a relational identity. The
participants can focus on their interpersonal interaction by sharing this relational
identity temporarily allowing their cultural differences to recede into the background.
The relational process emphasized in IMT is close to the Third-Culture Building
Model advanced by Casmir (1978, 1993, 1999). The focus of the current research,
relational identity, to some extent, can be seen as a third-culture. The central
assumption of the third-culture approach, according to Casmir (1999), is that
members in intercultural relationships have a need to engage in a process of
understanding and negotiating differences. This process involves adapting and
converging different cultural values and identities. The activity of third-culture
building allows all participants to gain an appreciation for and an understanding of
others through negotiating standards, goals, and satisfaction in a conversational
process. The third-culture represents a mutuality, which is understood and
supported by people who are involved in its development (Casmir, 1999).
Taken as a whole, IMT and the Third-Culture Building Model contribute to our
understanding of relational identity development in the context of intercultural
friendships. Nonetheless, as Belay (1993), Gudykunst (2002), and Shuter (1993) have
found, little research has applied or expanded our understanding of either IMT or the
Third-Culture Building Model in relation to intercultural friendship. Furthermore, a
significant knowledge gap exists concerning the strategies employed to develop
relational identity within an intercultural friendship. Given this knowledge-void in
 8 P.-W. Lee
the extant intercultural friendship literature, the need for research in this area comes
into focus. At this point, the following research question emerges as a guide for the
present study.
What are the communicative activities, behaviors, or influences that contribute to
(or shape) the construction of relational identity in intercultural friendship?

Method
The research question guiding this study seeks to understand how individuals make
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

sense of their experiences in intercultural friendships and how they construct shared
meanings with their intercultural friends. As such, a qualitative research method is
appropriate because its goal is to understand how people co-create meanings and
how they live with those co-created meanings in their relationships (Bogdan &
Bilken, 1998; Denzin & Lincoln, 2000; Lindlof, 1995). Furthermore, qualitative
studies are evident in interpersonal communication research (Lindlof, 1995) because
such research examines the forms of social interaction, such as family and friendship
(e.g., Jorgenson, 1989; Rawlins, 1983, 1989).
Among the qualitative research methods, grounded theory emerged as a suitable
methodological orientation for this research. Charmaz (2000) described grounded
theory as ‘‘the study of experience from the standpoint of those who live it’’ (p. 522)
and explained that the aim of a grounded theory study is to generate substantive
theories from collected data. Strauss and Corbin (1998) argued that ‘‘the data do not
lie’’ (p. 85); the data are reconstructions of participants’ lived experiences.
The data for many grounded theory studies come from interviews (Charmaz,
2000). Interviewing is the most widely employed technique for data collection in
social inquiry (Holstein & Gubrium, 2002). Kvale (1996) defines the research
interview as ‘‘an interview whose purpose is to obtain descriptions of the life world of
the interviewee with respect to interpreting the meaning of the described
phenomenon’’ (pp. 5–6). The research interview is based on a conversation with
the interviewee about the meanings of his/her life experiences.
Qualitative interviewing assists us to explore research participants’ points of view
and to obtain descriptions of their social lives that are not available for observation,
representing the world from their own perspectives (Lindlof, 1995). As Silverman
(1997) noted, ‘‘interview subjects construct not just narratives, but social worlds’’
(p. 100). The interviewer’s job is to share the participant’s subjective view, describing
that view with depth and representing it fairly and consistently with the participant’s
meanings (Charmaz, 1995). Furthermore, research suggests that interviews can yield
benefits to the interviewees in the form of life management. As Kvale (1996)
suggested, ‘‘The sensitivity of the interview and its closeness to the subjects’
lived world can lead to knowledge that can be used to enhance the human condition’’
(p. 11).
In sum, through the conversation in an interview, researchers can
better understand their participants’ life experiences. During the interview process,
 Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 9
interviewees can review/reconsider their lived world and possibly improve their lives.
Thus, the interviewing technique is appropriate for the present study because this
study aims to capture participants’ views toward their intercultural friendships and,
at the same time, this study could help them to reflect on their relationships and
enhance their skills in maintaining intercultural friendships.

Participant Recruitment
Participants were recruited on the campus of a Midwestern university. A university
campus serves as an excellent site for research of this nature because an individual’s
first intercultural friendship is often formed in college. Participants were required to
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

meet the following criteria to be included in the study. First, each participant had to
possess at least one close friend from another culture. ‘‘Different culture’’ was
operationalized to mean having a different native language and a different nationality
from each other. Although individuals might share the same native language (e.g.,
Spanish) and yet come from different cultures (e.g., Mexico versus Spain versus
Cuba), the language criterion was invoked, in part, in order to maximize the
challenging characteristics rooted in the nature of intercultural friendships. Relatives
or romantic partners were excluded from the concept of close friend. As a second
criterion, both the primary participant and his/her intercultural friend needed to be
accessible to participate in an individual interview and a conjoint interview through
face to face meetings, telephone, or email. This criterion was established in the hope
that a more complex, multifaceted picture of the relationship might emerge through
the conjoint interview.
Third, an interviewee had to be involved in the selected friendship for at least one
year and had to regularly meet with his/her intercultural friend outside the setting
where the relationship started (for example, classmates had to meet outside the
classroom). The ‘‘one year’’ criterion was set based on the belief that it was less likely
for participants to give numerous meaningful examples to help us understand the
development of the friendship if that relationship had been in existence for less than
one year. On the other hand, if the criterion was established to be longer than one
year, some potential participants in one-year Master’s programs on the selected
campus would be automatically excluded. Participants were recruited through an
online newsletter, advertisements/fliers, and network sampling. As an inducement,
the advertisement informed individuals that participants in the research would
receive a five-dollar certificate that could be used at a local coffee shop.

Description of Participants
Overall, 17 intercultural friendship dyads agreed to participate in the research.
Unfortunately, among these 17 dyads, two were eventually not included because one
dyad did not meet the criteria just outlined, and both members of the other dyad
were not able to complete the interviews during the data collection period. Thus, 15
intercultural friendships were examined, resulting in a total of 30 participants and 45
interviews.
 10 P.-W. Lee
A majority of the participants were obtained through networking with individuals
interested in intercultural or cultural issues. Ten of the intercultural friendship dyads
involved an American (i.e., African American or European American) with an
international friend. The remaining five friendships were international and
international dyads. The mean length of the 15 friendships was 2.6 years, ranging
in years from 1 to 9 (1–3 years: n ¼ 11; 4–9 years: n ¼ 4). Among the 30 interviewees,
23 were females and 7 were males; their average age was 28.5 years, ranging in
age from 21 to 41. Twenty-four participants were graduate students; six were
undergraduate students. In addition to the United States, participants were from
Malaysia, Indonesia, Turkey, India, China, Taiwan, Japan, Trinidad and Tobago, the
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

Dominican Republic, Canada, Macedonia, Argentina, and Botswana.

Interview Procedures
The participants were asked to schedule two meetings with me so that we could
conduct one individual interview and one conjoint interview with their intercultural
friend. Prior to each interview, participants were informed of the purpose of the
study, assured of the confidential nature of their participation, and asked for
permission to audiotape the interview. On average, the individual interviews lasted
approximately one hour, whereas the conjoint interviews were shorter, lasting around
45 minutes. The interviews were in-depth, semistructured, and open-ended, and took
place in locations chosen by the participants.

Individual interview
In the first part of the individual interview, participants were encouraged to talk
about how close friendship is viewed within their own culture and then to share any
stories concerning their intercultural friendships. The second part of the individual
interview entailed use of the Retrospective Interview Technique (RIT), a
methodological strategy employed to acquire turning point data (Baxter & Bullis,
1986). Based on the RIT, each interviewee identified all of the turning points that had
played a significant role in his/her intercultural friendship since their first meeting.
The turning points identified by the interviewees represented specific activities that
gave meaning to the friendship, helping to construct the relational identity for the
intercultural friends. At the end of the individual interviews, participants were asked
whether there was any information they revealed that they preferred not to be
brought up in the conjoint interview. I recorded those topics and promised to respect
their desire for confidentiality.

Conjoint interview
The purpose for conducting a conjoint interview was to allow me to ask follow-up
questions with respect to the previous individual interview and to encourage
participants to reveal more details regarding the history of their friendship by having
a conversation with their intercultural friend. Conjoint interviewing permitted me to
 Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 11
witness how the relational partners talked with each other, how they influenced or
were influenced by the other party, and how they managed any disagreements that
occurred during the interview process (Sandelowski, Holditch-Davis, & Harris,
1992). Field notes were taken to reflect on my observations or feelings about the
interview process and the interactions between the intercultural friends.

Data Analysis
To identify the communicative activities and influences that helped shape the
construction of relational identity within the respondents’ intercultural friendship,
thematic analysis (Owen, 1984) was applied to the interview data. Themes are
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

defined as ‘‘a limited range of interpretations used to conceive of and constitute

relationships’’ (Owen, 1984, p. 274). The thematic analysis employed in the current
research included three steps. During the first step, broad themes were identified. The
ideas that were repeated, recurrent, and forceful in a majority of the data were
counted as a theme. In the second step, more specific subthemes were located when
more than one related insight was present. This allowed me to distinguish among
those highly related, but different, ideas and to categorize themes that were more
in-depth and complex. The final step was to choose a label for each theme to
represent meanings that attach to the activities in relation to the development of
relational identity in intercultural friendship (Krusiewicz & Wood, 2001).

Results
Unlike how previous research has suggested (Barnlund, 1989; Cargile, 1998;
Krumrey-Fulks, 2001), the ways in which the participants defined ‘‘close
friendship’’ were very similar across cultures. The most frequently mentioned
definitions of close friendship in the interviews included: a close friend is someone
who helps, who does not judge you, who does not need to be physically with you
all the time, who knows how to keep in touch, who is like your family, whom you
can share with or talk to, whom you can trust, whom you want to spend time with,
who shares your interests, who knows/understands you, who is always honest with
you or truthful to you, who shares the same sense of humor or laughs together
with you, who is always supportive, who can accept changes through life or grow
together with you, and finally, a close friend is someone who has a similar
personality to you.
In terms of defining what a close friend is, interestingly enough, most of the
interviewees shared the same view with their intercultural friends. For example,
Marian (all names used in this report are pseudonyms) revealed that a close friend
should be someone whom she can share everything with, someone whom she can talk
a lot to, and someone who can understand her. Marian’s intercultural friend, Renee,
described her view of ‘‘close friend’’ in a very similar way—that a close friend is
someone whom she can share life and problems with, someone whom she can
trust, and someone who will never betray her. Perceiving a similar sense of
 12 P.-W. Lee
‘‘close friendship’’ with their intercultural friends, to a certain extent explains why the
members in an intercultural friendship are attracted to each other and become close
intercultural friends, disregarding their different cultural backgrounds.
In addition, the research question seeks an understanding of the behaviors or
activities engaged in by intercultural friends that contribute to the building of their
relational identity. A total of seven major themes emerged throughout the interviews.
These seven themes are: (1) positivities/providing assistance; (2) rituals, activities,
rules, and roles; (3) self-disclosure; (4) networking; (5) exploring cultures and
languages; (6) emphasizing similarities and exploring differences; and (7) conflict/
conflict management.
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

Positivities/Providing Assistance
Positivity refers to constructive behaviors enacted by interviewees in their
intercultural friendships. Participants described their intercultural friends by using
the following words: helpful, trust, respectful, patient, nonjudgmental, encouraging,
positive attitude, tolerant, open-minded, and truthful. These terms represent the
positive characteristics that intercultural friends demonstrated in their friendships.
Particularly, all of the participants reported that giving help, doing favors, and
providing support and advice is a primary strategy that was positively employed to
confirm their mutual interest in the friendship. For example, in Tina’s interview, she
described her experience of picking up Elaine at the airport and how this act was, in
fact, symbolic to their friendship. As Tina stated:
I picked up [Elaine] at the airport a couple times. There was one time that her
flight was delayed so I had to stay at the airport. I thought she would get in at 9 but
she didn’t get in until almost 12. They lost her luggage so we were at the airport ’til
almost 2 and waiting and talking and waiting for them to find her luggage. So that
was another turning point. I mean I wouldn’t wait around for three hours for just
anybody, but she is a good friend.

By providing assistance, whether tangible or intangible, interviewees expressed that

they were needed by their friends and that they could be of help to them.

Rituals, Activities, Rules, and Roles

Participants indicated that, just as other modes of friends, they enjoyed joint
activities. In the American culture, this type of social behavior is generally termed
‘‘hanging-out,’’ whereas in Trinidad and Tobago, people call it ‘‘liming;’’ in
Chinese culture, it is common to hear friends invite each other to ‘‘waste time’’
together. Participants reported that hanging out with friends was not only fun but
also beneficial for the friendship in terms of having opportunities to update each
other about their lives, personally and culturally. After continually engaging in
certain activities, as the participants indicated, it was likely that those activities
(e.g., traveling) would become rituals within their friendship, representing
particular meanings for the intercultural friendship. For example, Ben, a
 Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 13
European American graduate student, described how smoking gradually became a
unique ritual between him and his Argentinean friend, Beth. As Ben stated:
We like to drink beer, but we smoke cigarettes a lot. I mean not all the time or
anything but that’s one. So we would just sit outside in the middle of the day which
is always a nice thing. It is not really the time for smoke. It is just the time to just
process the day and get a hand on it. So, instead of saying ‘‘oh I gotta go smoke a
cigarette,’’ I think more is just like to talk.

Additionally, participants reported that rules were often developed implicitly

through activities they engaged in with their friends, for example, ‘‘no probing about
intimate relationships’’, ‘‘no picking on language,’’ ‘‘mutuality,’’ and ‘‘confidenti-
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

ality.’’ However, there were also explicit rules created to prevent the other party from
bad influences (e.g., a former boyfriend who is a player). Roles, similar to rules, were
mutually defined through the interactions between the members in intercultural
friendships. As interviewees described, roles could be as simple as who was the devil’s
advocate, who was the teaser, or who was the peace maker. As such, the friendship
members gradually developed tacit agreement between themselves in terms of
knowing who they are and what they should or should not enact in their friendships.

Self-disclosure
Sharing, whether regarding present or past life, work or personal relationships, was
reported as a dominant theme. Participants noted that they would constantly disclose
to each other about issues occurring in their lives for the purposes of seeking advice,
support, or sometimes as a channel to express thoughts. Because of the sharing,
interviewees reported feeling more important and more mutually included in each
other’s life. Particularly, secret sharing often brought two friends much closer because
the act demonstrated that the message receiver was trustworthy, nonjudgmental, and
capable of keeping a confidence although it needed to be cautiously employed with
appropriate timing and in the correct context.
During the participants’ sharing process, they often referred to their past personal
or cultural experiences. Through sharing past experiences, respondents were able to
identify more similarities and obtain a better sense of their friend’s background. For
instance, according to Monique, she and Vivian clicked so well because Vivian could
completely relate to Monique’s past cultural and personal experiences. As Monique
noted:
I can relate to her as well because she was an Indian descent Malaysian. And my
boyfriend I had just broken up with was Indian Malaysian. And she knew him. She
actually knew who he was. So I think that might have come into it more than I
actually realized at the time—that she can relate in that cultural way to the guy I
had been dating.

That said, disclosing past personal or cultural experiences can contribute to the
construction of relational identity in that intercultural friends learn about each other
in a more complete sense.
 14 P.-W. Lee
Networking
Meeting their intercultural friends’ family members, significant others, or good
friends was indicated by respondents as a way to show their friendship closeness and
to include their friends in their personal life. Becky described her experiences of
communicating with Joyce’s boyfriend:
Her boyfriend is in France, so I have never met him, but every time [he] calls,
[Joyce] gives me the phone. So I kind of like know him through our conversation
on the phone. And even [he] speaks to me as if he knows me. But we have never
met. And every time [Joyce] talks about him, well she tells me everything about
him and everything in her life.
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

Becky was shown the very personal side of Joyce, and this act implicitly confirmed
the intimacy of their friendship. Furthermore, respondents reported that, when
they found their intercultural friend was willing to meet their family members
and friends, this conveyed to them the message that he or she truly valued the
friendship.

Exploring Cultures and Languages

Culture was reported by the intercultural friendship dyads as a popular topic.
Participants would exchange information with respect to languages, food, cultural
values, and/or beliefs. Because the subject of culture naturally flowed in their
conversations, respondents often took the chance to educate each other by
introducing their cultures or eradicating previous stereotypes. A good example was
illuminated through Becky’s comments:
[Joyce] teaches me about her history . . . I feel like I am learning about some stuff
she teaches me. What makes it interesting is that it is not like a one way thing. She
is also learning about my culture. She lived in this country, South Africa, which is
close to my culture. Lived with my people for two years. I think that’s one of the
reasons that interests me. But with those things she teaches me I have learned so
much in terms of knowing who African Americans are. Where do they come from.
And I am also being able to understand it and appreciate it.
As reported, intercultural friends helped each other to learn their cultures through
story telling as well as comparing and contrasting how things were in each other’s
culture. Participants indicated that it was entertaining to talk about the differences or
similarities in their cultures. As Jeff stated: ‘‘so cultural differences to me kind of
brings us closer because we talk about these weird jokes about weird things about
Turkey and weird things happened in India.’’
In relation to cultural differences, respondents, during their interactions, would
more or less encounter situations where they did not know how to interpret the
other’s message or behavior. Some participants reported that, in those circumstances,
they would ask direct questions to clarify. As an African American, Bianca has a
tendency to change her hair style every once in a short while. She was asked once by
her Taiwanese friend, Ralph, about her hair style and she gladly explained to him
 Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 15
without feeling offended or uncomfortable. As Bianca described:
I don’t think [culture] is a barrier for either one of us. Because we feel comfortable
in asking questions about one another’s culture. Because we just genuinely want to
know so that we can understand. Not just asking because it sounds like a good
conversation.

Emerging from the interviews, language and food were central subjects in the
cultural talk. Learning the other’s language not only enhanced participants’ language
skills, but also, on a certain level showed respect for the culture. Discussing food or
experiencing different types of food were indicated by respondents as a fun, easy step
to approach the other’s culture. In Rick’s example, language and food were two key
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

elements that added fun to his interactions with Linda. Rick noted:
I guess one of the turning points I consider is when we got into the game and I was
trying to teach her a different colloquium or slang and she was trying to teach me
some other phrases in Chinese. That was when we started to know each other a lot
more . . . we’ve gone shopping together before and we’ve had dinner with each
other before. So I would cook something American and she would cook something
Chinese.
Later in the interview, Rick revealed that he was going to take Chinese language class
next year. Although Linda spoke very fluent English, according to Rick, she was one
of the persons who inspired and motivated him to learn Mandarin.
While participants reported that their cultural explorations focused primarily on
their national cultures, interestingly, some respondents disclosed that the discussion
about a third culture, American culture or organizational culture, would often come
into play as well. Nathan, an undergraduate from the Dominican Republic answered
my question: ‘‘what do you and Ken (Nathan’s Japanese friend) often talk about?’’
by replying:
We talk about how Japanese people are shyer or how they care more about
what other people might think about them. But [Ken] is not that way. And we
also talk about how group is more important in Japanese culture like compared
to other cultures. Like American culture. That’s one of the topics that we discuss
the most.

It was also noticeable in Nathan’s response, as well as in other interviews, that his
cultural talk with Ken primarily centered on the Japanese culture or the US culture,
but rarely touched on the culture of the Dominican Republic. It, again, implied that
cultural discussion between intercultural friends can be one sided.
Whereas through information exchange, some respondents chose to adapt to or
adjust their values/beliefs closer to those of their friend, other respondents, in some
circumstances, chose to deal with cultural differences in alternative ways. To Rick and
Linda, the key to facing cultural differences was to accept them, respect them, and
value them. And that was the strategy that they both agreed upon. As Rick and Linda
noted:
Rick: I have an awareness whether it is conscious or unconscious, all the time
about there is a difference in values and opinions and desires between us,
 16 P.-W. Lee
but we have been able to overcome any difference by our mutual interests
to develop our friendship or get to know each other or value each other’s
culture and way of life.
Linda: I think the most important thing is for us to respect each other and trust
each other so that’s the base for the relationship. If you don’t respect each
other, you will just hey I don’t care about you I will just go with my way,
you know. You also gotta trust each other.

Overall, most participants expressed that cultural learning was the best part of their
intercultural friendship. As Sally enthusiastically described, ‘‘I don’t know, anytime
you learn about other cultures in a sense that you learn about yourself. So you just
kind of exploring new things. Coming to new understandings of things.’’ ‘‘Exploring
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

culture,’’ through Sally’s words, did not only imply advancing an understanding of
the other’s culture, but also one’s own culture.

Emphasizing Similarities and Exploring Differences

The participants emphasized in their interviews that they bonded with their
intercultural friends because of their shared similarities with respect to many aspects
of themselves, such as personalities, interests, religion, values, and identities. Through
identifying their similarities, participants believed that they were close to their
intercultural friends because their intercultural friends could understand them in that
particular area. To give an example, sharing work ethics and family values was
considered by Ralph, a Taiwanese, as the center connection between himself and
Bianca, an African American. Ralph commented that:
I mentioned we share a set of core values. Work and study, a sense of fun and humor,
working attitude. We work very hard and we try to do more. We try to make
progress. I like the way [Bianca] treats her students. She treats student workers like
our staff members. [We] share the same philosophy. We don’t work our students; we
work our students as colleagues. And we encourage them to take responsibilities. . . .
I think African Americans’ set of values are quite close to Taiwanese values. It was
seen that African Americans, they respect their parents a lot just like Taiwanese. They
exercise loyalty to their friends—which is the same culture.

Frankly, between intercultural friends, differences could be identified just as much

as similarities. However, according to the participants, they often chose to emphasize
their shared similarities rather than be concerned about their differences. For
example, when asked about how culture influences her friendship with Rick, Linda
responded:
I think I am unconscious about the cultural differences. . . . I would say, when you
get too close with a friend and you, probably, the daily interaction won’t make the
boundary so clear that there is a cultural difference between us. . . . I think I don’t
keep [those differences] in mind, but sometimes we will see the differences, and it is
very clear. But sometimes, you know, even though that’s a cultural difference, that
doesn’t, you know, influence our friendship or anything or stop the friendship.
In other words, encountering cultural differences was not unusual in Linda’s
intercultural friendship with Rick. However, once they were used to each other in
 Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 17
their daily interactions, she tended to overlook those differences. Similarly, other
participants emphasized that they did not view the discussion of their differences as a
negative influence in their friendship; rather, it was beneficial for them to compare
different points of view with respect to the same issue.

Conflict/Conflict Management
This theme refers to the nature of the conflicts that several participants had faced in
their friendships, and the strategies they employed to cope with those conflicts. The
types of conflict reported by the intercultural friendship dyads were: missing
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

meetings, tensions with a third party, language, roommate issues, communication

problems, romantic tensions, and adjusting to life changes. Not only did the
nature of the conflict allow respondents to understand each other’s interests and
personalities better, but also their conflict management styles often determined how
successful they were in sustaining their friendships after the conflict occurred. Some
intercultural friendships actually ‘‘backwarded’’ (cf. Knapp & Vangelisti, 2000) to
earlier stages of their relationship because the members did not manage the conflict
in an effective manner. For other friendship dyads, the conflicts finally turned into
rules of their friendships. In Cindy’s interview, she recalled a conflict experience in
her friendship with Sherry. At the end, she admitted that the conflict eventually
became one of the taboo topics that she and Sherry never touched on. As Cindy
described:
She was telling me a story and she said something wrong, incorrect English, you
know something that was bad English. I was like correcting her English and she was
like okay, fine. And she didn’t say anything. After I reacted that way, she didn’t
even tell me what she wanted to explain. She’s decided that she is not gonna say
anything or speak to me because of that. I thought that was a bit not good because
even if I have reacted in a way that she didn’t appreciate then why don’t you say
well I didn’t appreciate what you have said or how you treated me by that reaction.
But she said nothing. I realized that the way she dealt with conflict is to avoid the
conflict. So I sent her an email and I apologized for correcting her English and I
said I will never say anything about your English. And then she was like okay fine,
let’s don’t worry about it. Let’s not make it a big deal. That’s how she avoided
conflicts.

Because of this conflict, Sherry revealed that the progression of their friendship was
impeded in the sense that, even though the conflict was ‘‘solved,’’ she did not feel
close to Cindy for a long while.
On the other hand, the conflict management style can facilitate the development of
an intercultural friendship if that style is employed constructively. In Yoshiko and
Jasmine’s case, conflict helped Jasmine to see the straightforwardness and honesty in
Yoshiko’s personality. As Jasmine described:
Since we lived together, I just noticed that we have different ways of dealing with
conflicts. For example, I noticed the kitchen is very very dirty, so I was very upset.
But I clean up everything that I can. Then I kept silence. Probably it is me because
I don’t want to knock on the other roommates’ door and say ‘‘hey, clean up
 18 P.-W. Lee
your mess.’’ For me it is very difficult to say. But when [Yoshiko] saw the kitchen
was dirty and she was upset and then she went to me and said ‘‘we need to have a
meeting.’’ So, and then we had a meeting. She complained and laid out certain
rules with the roommates. . . . So I really like her directness, forwardness. I think
I learn from her.

Given this example, conflict should not always be associated with negative
connotations. Instead, as another interviewee, Becky, disclosed, she knew more
about her friend, Joyce, after each conflict. In fact, she felt even closer to Joyce
because they always managed their conflict in an effective manner (by discussing
their differences in an open and respectful manner), and Joyce was willing to reaccept
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

her (Becky), no matter what had happened between them.

Discussion
The themes emerging from this research suggest that relational identity is developed
through information exchange and interactions between members in an intercultural
friendship. A relational identity is a mixture of intercultural interactants’ current and
past, personal and cultural experiences and values. Third parties (e.g., family, friends)
and the third cultural context (e.g., the host culture) both play a crucial role in
shaping relational identity development. Furthermore, relational identity is built
upon interactants’ shared similarities, interests, and identities. Relational identity is a
very unique entity which includes a system of rules, roles, and communication styles,
coordinating the intercultural friendship dyad’s behaviors and actions.
Although these strategies were primarily employed in developing an intercultural
friendship, to a certain extent they are related to the relationship maintenance
strategies identified by previous intracultural friendship research. According to
Dainton et al.’s (2003) summary of extant friendship literature, four broad types of
maintenance strategies—time together, openness, social support, and avoidance—
have consistently emerged across relationship maintenance studies and echo several
strategies found in this research (i.e., (1) positivities/providing assistance; (2) rituals,
activities, and roles; (3) self-disclosure; (4) networking; (6) emphasizing similarities
and exploring differences).
What has not been discussed in the previous relationship research are the strategies
of (5) exploring cultures and languages, part of (6) emphasizing similarities and
exploring differences, and (7) conflict/conflict management found in this study.
Culture and language exploration is the activity that makes intercultural friendship so
unique and exciting. As the interviews revealed, members in intercultural friendships
are given chances to learn about, not only their own culture, but also that of their
friend’s through constant inquiring and comparing. This cultural exploration process
makes the members in intercultural friendships feel rewarded in such a relationship
because they are allowed to frequently exchange new sets of ideas or perspectives with
their friends, broadening their scope of views. Engaging in culture and language
exploration is also a positive way to show respect, sincerity, and interest to one’s
intercultural friend. Most importantly, learning about foreign cultures and languages
 Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 19
helps the members in intercultural friendships to eradicate stereotypes and avoid
prejudice, hopefully, in a way, minimizing the potentials of forming conflicts between
certain cultural groups.
Certainly, cultural differences would emerge when intercultural friends compare
their cultural values, beliefs, or ways of using languages. It is often argued that the
‘‘non-native’’ members in intercultural relationships are more likely to adapt their
own values to those of the host culture—engaging in a constant compromising
process in order to ‘‘fit in’’ the social life in the host cultural environment (Kim,
2002). In some cases, the ‘‘native’’ members in intercultural friendships tend to be
eager to educate their intercultural friends about the host culture in an effort to help
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

their friends to become more mainstreamed or Americanized. For example, some

participants in this study were more interested in disclosing information about their
own culture, usually the host culture (except when the members in an intercultural
friendship are both from outside of the host culture), instead of paying mutual
attention to learning each other’s culture. However, in other cases, it is evident that
some interviewees would try to accept, understand, and respect their ‘‘non-native’’
intercultural friend’s world views—that is, to respect who they are—but not
necessarily attempt to change their friend’s different sets of cultural values or beliefs.
Accordingly, to some respondents, identifying cultural difference is not the focus
during their interactions; emphasizing their shared similarities is rather one of the
main activities often done by them.
To my surprise, conflict/conflict management is a strategy that in effect, positively
contributes to the development of relational identity in an intercultural friendship.
The result implies that how a conflict was handled often determines whether a
friendship can last or not. We often presume that it is more likely for members in
intercultural friendships to encounter conflicts, given the differences between two
cultures. This might be true. Yet, as the result indicates, it is unfeasible to build a
positive link between the chances of a failing intercultural friendship with the
possibilities of encountering conflicts because it is the conflict management that
matters, rather than the frequency of encountering conflicts. In other words, if
members in intercultural friendships can manage their conflicts in a constructive
manner, the friendship tends to sustain.
On the one hand, conflicts can be seen as positive contributions to the relational
identity. Through various conflicts experienced by the members in intercultural
friendships, they are given opportunities to learn about each other’s personalities and
ways of viewing this world. Even though in a conflict, the intercultural friends often
do not agree with each other at the first place, an openly discussed conflict helps the
members to see where their friends’ points of views come from. On the other hand, a
conflict or an issue that is avoided purposely or is left unresolved would impede the
progression of the intercultural friendship; reverse the friendship to an earlier phase;
or in the worst case, result in failure of the friendship. As shown in Cindy and
Sherry’s case (bad English), because the two of them had different expectations
toward the ways of solving a conflict—that Sherry preferred the avoiding style,
whereas Cindy was more confrontational, although Cindy did apologize for her
 20 P.-W. Lee
inappropriate comment, the friendship was, for a while, not moving forward. Taken
as a whole, members in intercultural friendships should not be afraid of encountering
conflicts. Instead, the key to maintain an intercultural friendship is that the dyads
must learn to cope with conflicts in an open, inoffensive, and effective approach.
My purpose in engaging in this research was to begin the journey of filling in a
significant gap in our knowledge base concerning intercultural friendships. This
knowledge gap has been produced because intercultural friendship has not, to date,
received the same amount of attention from communication scholars as has been
true of intracultural friendship. Accordingly, this particular mode of relationship is
an inviting area worthy of being explored by researchers who are interested in
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

intercultural communication competence and intercultural relationship

maintenance.
As is the case when one is interested in studying the process of relationship
development, future research needs to adopt methods, such as ethnography or diary
recording, that permit a longitudinal examination of the issues in question. Yet,
because conducting such longitudinal research is very time consuming, it is more
challenging to recruit participants who are willing to devote their time and energy,
especially students. Thus, future studies might try better strategies to recruit
participants from different contexts other than college campuses or providing
attractive compensations to induce more volunteers to take on and complete these
challenging activities.
Finally, communication scholars should continue studying the construct of
relational identity/third-culture, especially with a critical lens, so as to widen our
knowledge of the nature of third-culture and the communication processes that
contribute to the formation of a third-culture. The objective of research in this area
would be to expand our understanding of intercultural competence and the skills
required for effective identity negotiation. In essence, the scholarship of intercultural
friendship is still an on-going journey, deserving researchers’ endeavors and
dedication.

References
Adams, R., Blieszner, R., & de Vries, B. (2000). Definition of friendship in the third age: Age,
gender, and study location effects. Journal of Aging Studies, 14, 117–134.
Barnlund, D. (1989). Communication styles of Japanese and Americans: Images and reality. Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth.
Baxter, L. A. (1987). Symbols of relationship identity in relationship cultures. Journal of Social and
Personal Relationships, 4, 261–280.
Baxter, L. A., & Bullis, C. (1986). Turning points in developing romantic relationships. Human
Communication Research, 12, 469–493.
Belay, G. (1993). Toward a paradigm shift for intercultural and international communication:
New research directions. In S. A. Deetz (Ed.), Communication yearbook 16 (pp. 437–457).
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Bell, R. A., & Healey, J. G. (1992). Idiomatic communication and interpersonal solidarity in friends’
relational cultures. Human Communication Research, 18, 307–335.
 Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 21
Bogdan, R., & Bilken, S. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and
methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Cargile, A. C. (1998). Meanings and modes of friendship: Verbal descriptions by native Japanese.
Howard Journal of Communication, 9, 347–370.
Casmir, F. L. (1978). Intercultural and international communication. Washington, DC: University
Press of America.
Casmir, F. L. (1993). Third-culture building: A paradigm shift for international and intercultural
communication. In S. A. Deetz (Ed.), Communication yearbook 16 (pp. 407–428). Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Casmir, F. L. (1999). Foundations for the study of intercultural communication based on a
third-culture building model. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23, 91–116.
Charmaz, K. (1995). Between positivism and postmodernism: Implications for methods. Studies in
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

Symbolic Interaction, 17, 43–72.

Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In N. K. Denzin &
Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 509–535). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Chen, L. (2002). Communication in intercultural relationships. In W. B. Gudykunst & B. Mody
(Eds.), Handbook of international and intercultural communication (2nd ed., pp. 241–258).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cupach, W. R., & Imahori, T. T. (1993). Identity management theory: Communication competence
in intercultural episodes and relationships. In R. L. Wiseman & J. Koester (Eds.), Intercultural
communication competence (pp. 112–131). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Dainton, M., Zelley, E., & Langan, E. (2003). Maintaining friendships throughout the life span.
In D. J. Canary & M. Dainton (Eds.), Maintaining relationships through communication:
Relational, contextual, and cultural variations (pp. 79–102). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative
research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 1–25).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Duck, S. (1994). Steady as (s)he goes: Relational maintenance as a shared meaning system.
In D. J. Canary & L. Stafford (Eds.), Communication and relational maintenance (pp. 45–60).
San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Fehr, B. (2000). The life cycle of friendship. In C. Hendrick & S. S. Hendrick (Eds.), Close
relationships (pp. 71–84). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gaines, S. O., & Agnew, C. R. (2003). Relationship maintenance in intercultural
couples: An interdependence analysis. In D. J. Canary & M. Dainton (Eds.), Maintaining
relationships through communication (pp. 231–253). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc.
Gaines, S. O., & Brennan, K. A. (2001). Establishing and maintaining satisfaction in multicultural
relationships. In J. H. Harvey & A. Wenzel (Eds.), Close romantic relationships: Maintenance
and enhancement (pp. 237–253). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Gaines, S. O., & Liu, J. H. (2000). Multicultural/multiracial relationships. In C. Hendrick &
S. S. Hendrick (Eds.), Close relationships (pp. 97–110). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gareis, E. (1995). Intercultural friendship: A qualitative study. Lanham, MD: University Press of
America.
Gudykunst, W. B. (2002). Intercultural communication theories. In W. B. Gudykunst & B. Mody
(Eds.), Handbook of international and intercultural communication (pp. 183–205). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hall, E. T. (1990). The dance of life. New York: Anchor Books.
Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. F. (2002). Active interviewing. In D. Weinberg (Ed.), Qualitative
research methods (pp. 112–126). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Javidi, A., & Javidi, M. (1991). Cross-cultural analysis of interpersonal bonding: A look at East and
West. Howard Journal of Communication, 3, 129–138.
 22 P.-W. Lee
Jorgenson, J. (1989). Where is the ‘‘family’’ in family communication? Exploring families’
self-definitions. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 17, 27–41.
Kim, Y. Y. (2002). Adapting to an unfamiliar culture: An interdisciplinary overview.
In W. B. Gudykunst & B. Mody (Eds.), Handbook of international and intercultural
communication (pp. 259–274). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Knapp, M. L., & Vangelisti, A. L. (2000). Interpersonal communication and human relationships,
(4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Krumrey-Fulks, K. S. (2001). At the margins of culture: Intercultural friendship between Americans
and Chinese in an academic setting. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kentucky,
Lexington, KY.
Krusiewicz, E. S., & Wood, J. T. (2001). ‘‘He was our child from the moment we walked in that
room’’: Entrance stories of adoptive parents. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 18,
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 16:52 19 November 2014

785–803.
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Leeds-Hurwitz, W. (2002). Wedding as text: Communicating cultural identities through rituals.
Mahwah, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Lindlof, T. R. (1995). Qualitative communication research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Martin, I. N., & Nakayama, T. K. (1997). Intercultural communication in contexts. Mountain View,
CA: Mayfield.
Mirny, A. I. (2001). Meaning of the group: Diverging perspectives of the early adolescent boys and girls
on their peer groups. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, Seattle, WA.
Monsour, M. (1994). Similarities and dissimilarities in personal relationship: Constructing meaning
and building intimacy through communication. In S. Duck (Ed.), Dynamics of relationships
(pp. 112–134). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Owen, W. F. (1984). Interpretive themes in relational communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech,
70, 274–287.
Patterson, B. R., Bettini, L., & Nussbaum, F. (1993). The meaning of friendship across the life-span:
Two studies. Communication Quarterly, 41, 145–160.
Rawlins, W. K. (1983). Openness as problematic in ongoing friendships: Two conversational
dilemmas. Communication Monographs, 50, 1–13.
Rawlins, W. K. (1989). A dialectical analysis of the tensions, functions, and strategic challenges of
communication in young adult friendships. In J. A. Anderson (Ed.), Communication yearbook
12 (pp. 157–189). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Rawlins, W. K. (1992). Friendships matters. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Sandelowski, M., Holditch-Davis, D., & Harris, B. G. (1992). Using qualitative and quantitative
methods: The transition to parenthood of infertile couples. In J. F. Gilgun, K. Daly & G. Handel
(Eds.), Qualitative methods in family research (pp. 301–322). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Shuter, R. (1993). On third-culture building. In S. A. Deetz (Ed.), Communication yearbook 16
(pp. 429–436). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Silverman, D. (1997). Qualitative research: Theory, method, and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wood, J. T. (1982). Communication and relational culture: Bases for the study of human
relationships. Communication Quarterly, 30, 75–83.
Wood, J. T. (2000). Relational communication: Continuity and change in personal relationships,
(2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.