Relational Dialectics in Intercultural Couples' Relationships (PDF)

J Y V Ä S K Y L Ä S T U D I E S I N H U M A N I T I E S 171 Carine Cools Relational Dialectics in Intercultural Couples’ Relationships  JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN HUMANITIES 171 Carine Cools UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ 2011 Esitetään Jyväskylän yliopiston humanistisen tiedekunnan suostumuksella julkisesti tarkastettavaksi yliopiston vanhassa juhlasalissa S212 joulukuun 19. päivänä 2011 kello 12. Academic dissertation to be publicly discussed, by permission of the Faculty of Humanities of the University of Jyväskylä, in auditorium S212, on December 19, 2011 at 12 o'clock noon. JYVÄSKYLÄ in Intercultural Couples' Relationships Relational Dialectics  Relational Dialectics in Intercultural Couples' Relationships  JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN HUMANITIES 171 JYVÄSKYLÄ 2011 Relational Dialectics UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ Carine Cools in Intercultural Couples' Relationships  Copyright © , by University of Jyväskylä URN:ISBN:978-951-39-4573-2 ISBN 978-951-39-4573-2 (PDF) ISBN 978-951-39-4572-5 (nid.) ISSN 1459-4323 2011 Jyväskylä University Printing House, Jyväskylä 2011 Cover picture by Juha Lahti, 2008. Jyväskylä Studies in Humanities Editorial Board Petri Karonen, Department of History and Ethnology, University of Jyväskylä Editor in Chief Heikki Hanka, Department of Art and Culture Studies, University of Jyväskylä Paula Kalaja, Department of Languages, University of Jyväskylä Petri Toiviainen, Department of Music, University of Jyväskylä Tarja Nikula, Centre for Applied Language Studies, University of Jyväskylä Raimo Salokangas, Department of Communication, University of Jyväskylä Editors Maarit Valo Department of Communication, University of Jyväskylä Pekka Olsbo, Ville Korkiakangas Publishing Unit, University Library of Jyväskylä ISSN 1459-4331  ABSTRACT Cools, Carine Relational dialectics in intercultural couples’ relationships Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, 2011, 282 p. (Jyväskylä Studies in Humanities ISSN 1459-4331; 171) ISBN 978-951-39-4572-5 (nid.) ISBN 978-951-39-4573-2 (PDF) English summary Diss. The main purpose of this study is to describe and to understand intercultural couples’ relationships in Finland from the relational-dialectics perspective by Baxter & Montgomery (1996). Relational dialectics supports the idea that tensions (relational contradictions) are a fundamental feature of a relationship, and are thus distinct from conflict or problems. Following the interpretive research tradition, data in this qualitative study were collected from 18 heterosexual intercultural couples (36 persons), utilizing the multi- method approach. The multi-method approach in this study includes theme interviews (5 couples), concept map interviews (six couples) and e-mail interviews (seven couples). The data were analyzed following an inductive content analysis approach. The intercultural couples in this study experienced internal and external dialectics. Internal dialectics were specifically related to intercultural adaptation, e.g. need of support, uncertainty about the future, and identity confusion issues. Externally, the couples encountered challenges of inclusion and exclusion regarding, e.g. family support, access to a social network, which are facilitated through disclosure, which is at times problematic regarding the host community’s language. The effects of intercultural couples’ cultural background on their relationship concerned continual negotiations, that constitute their lives -internally and externally- and entail repeated decision-making and compromising about friends, religion, traditions and celebrations, and their acceptance in the larger social network, the upbringing and education of their children, values and gender issues, and adaptation. The common thread surfacing in the couples’ accounts of how their different cultural backgrounds are reflected in their relationships is unquestionably the continual re-negotiation between the two partners themselves and between the couples and their social networks. In a sense these define their intercultural relationship; all their moves are negotiated moves. Intercultural relational dialectical forces present in the intercultural couples’ relationships include continual re-negotiation, cultural identity & belonging, increased sensitivity to differences and similarities, social power, social support, and uncertainty. Keywords: external dialectics, intercultural couples, intercultural dialectics, intercultural relational forces, intercultural relationships, internal dialectics, relational dialectics  Author’s address Carine Cools Finnish Institute for Educational Research (FIER) University of Jyväskylä, Finland Supervisor Professor Maarit Valo Department of Communication University of Jyväskylä, Finland Reviewers Docent Elli Heikkilä Institute of Migration Turku, Finland Dr. Maija Gerlander School of Communication, Media and Theatre University of Tampere, Finland Opponent Docent Fred Dervin Department of French Studies University of Turku, Finland  FOREWORD Close relationships lie at the heart of our lives. Interactions with family, friends, colleagues and acquaintances form the core of our well-being and make us who we are. Building up a life with an intercultural partner demands the renegotiation of our personal, cultural, linguistic and social boundaries. And it is exactly in the processes of communicating these boundaries that intercultural couples can sustain and develop their relationships, with each other and with their social networks. This study was made possible by, and is therefore dedicated to, the intercultural couples who participated in this work. Their contribution during the various stages of this study was vital. Besides the long interviews, they also shared their time with me, mostly during the evening or the weekend, and this often also meant time away from their children. Although the couples had busy days behind them, they even managed, subtly, to offer some “little extra”, which did not go unnoticed. These included special napkins, freshly made buns, delightfully made Japanese tea, or an Italian risotto to strengthen me for my train trip back home, to name but a few. I want to thank them all for sharing with me their profound insights into the world of intercultural couplehood. I am grateful to those who funded my research, including the Finnish Cultural Foundation, the Paasikivi Foundation, the Nyyssönen Foundation, the Department of Communication and the Faculty of Humanities of the University of Jyväskylä. I am deeply grateful to my Professor, Maarit Valo, for her continual and unfailing encouragement and guidance throughout this research process. Every PhD student should be supervised by a person like her. I also want to express my gratitude to the two reviewers, Docent Elli Heikkilä and Dr. Maija Gerlander, for their insightful comments. I am also very much obliged to Dr. Fred Dervin, who quickly and readily agreed to take part in my dissertation defense. All the advice, comments and encouragement I received during this research process have meant a great deal to me: our PhD support group meetings were just invaluable, as was the patience of colleagues always ready to read and to comment on parts of this work. Throughout the entire process the discussions with fellow PhD students and students of ICC have been of great importance and joy. I am very grateful to Eleanor Underwood for her patient and helpful editing of this manuscript. Also, I am very much obliged to Yannick Lahti and Riitta Saastamoinen who very conscientiously translated the summary into Finnish. A special thank you is due to Professor Emerita Liisa Salo-Lee for sparking my interest in the world of interculturality. Finally, I would like to say a big thank you to my dear friends, and to all those scattered all around the world who were in my heart throughout the research and writing process. Especially the people closest to me deserve the  biggest thanks: Juha, my husband and soul mate, and our wonderful “kiddileins” Ellen and Yannick. They have been “the” principal delight and support of my life, a haven always. I can never thank them enough. Jyväskylä, November 2011 Carine Cools ”Ik hou van dit land. Als ik ooit uitwijk neem ik het mee. Ik zal zijn naam noemen en het zal me volgen.“ Herman De Coninck  FIGURES FIGURE 1 The research process................................................................................. 33 FIGURE 2 Bakhtin’s foundations of dialogism (Bakhtin, 1981) ............................. 40 FIGURE 3 The interdependency of contradictions: multivocal and knotted together ................................................................................. 59 FIGURE 4 Links between dialogism and relational dialectics ............................... 63 FIGURE 5 Multivocal, inclusive analysis ................................................................ 120 FIGURE 6 The interrelation of the Salience of couples’ various cultural backgrounds, Internal and External Dialectics and of Intercultural Dialectics (Martin & Nakayama, 1999; Martin et al.2002) resulting in Intercultural Relational Dialectical Forces ....................................... 226 FIGURE 7 Intercultural Relational Dialectical Forces in Intercultural Couples’ Communication ....................................................................... 235 TABLES TABLE 1 Diversity of definitions of culture (Bodley, 1994) ................................. 21 TABLE 2 Typology of internal and external dialectical contradictions (Baxter, 1993; 1997; Baxter & Montgomery, 1996) ................................. 42 TABLE 3 Dualistic variations of change in relationship development (Baxter & Montgomery, 1996: 53-58) ....................................................... 46 TABLE 4 Overview of the distinctions between conflicts and contradictions ............................................................................................. 65 TABLE 5 Schematic representation of the Relational Typology (Fitzpatrick, 1988) ...................................................................................... 70 TABLE 6 Overview of significant turns salient to the development of relational dialectics (Adapted from Baxter, 2004) ............................ 91 TABLE 7 The link between research questions and interview type ................. 100 TABLE 8 Participants’ background information .................................................. 102 TABLE 9 Intercultural couples, interview type & mode, and research questions ................................................................................................... 103 TABLE 10 Intercultural couples and language(s) of inquiry during the theme interviews ............................................................................... 106 TABLE 11 Intercultural couples and language(s) of inquiry during the concept map interviews ................................................................... 110 TABLE 12 Intercultural couples, language(s) and mode of inquiry during the e-mail interviews .................................................................. 113 TABLE 13 Illustration of themes and categories derived from analyzing the interviews, linked to their respective chapter sections ................ 124 TABLE 14 Example of the analysis process with the intercultural couples ....... 125 TABLE 15 Typology of internal dialectical contradictions (Baxter, 1993; 1997; Baxter & Montgomery, 1996) with respective section headings in italics ........................................... 128  TABLE 16 Praxis patterns and their functionality in internal dialectics ............ 164 TABLE 17 Typology of external dialectical contradictions (Baxter, 1993; 1997; Baxter & Montgomery, 1996) with respective section headings in italics ........................................... 166 TABLE 18 Praxis patterns and their functionality in the external dialectics ..... 187  CONTENTS ABSTRACT FOREWORD FIGURES AND TABLES CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 13 1.1 Objectives of the study .............................................................................. 13 1.2 Definitions of key concepts ...................................................................... 15 1.3 Research on intercultural couples ........................................................... 25 1.4 Research process and structure of the study ......................................... 31 2 RELATIONAL DIALECTICS ............................................................................ 36 2.1 Bakhtin and the notion of dialogism ....................................................... 37 2.2 Central concepts of the relational dialectical perspective .................... 40 2.2.1 Contradiction as a starting point .................................................... 43 2.2.2 Change as a process ......................................................................... 45 2.2.3 Praxis as a communicative choice .................................................. 52 2.2.4 Totality as a dialectical holism ....................................................... 56 2.3 Framework of relational dialectics .......................................................... 68 2.3.1 The dialectic of integration-separation ......................................... 69 2.3.2 The dialectic of stability-change ..................................................... 78 2.3.3 The dialectic of expression-privacy ............................................... 84 2.4 Significant turns in the development of relational dialectics .............. 90 3 DESIGN OF THE STUDY .................................................................................. 93 3.1 Methodological premises of the study ................................................... 93 3.2 Purpose and research questions .............................................................. 95 3.3 Choice of methods ..................................................................................... 97 3.4 Data collection .......................................................................................... 100 3.4.1. The intercultural couples .............................................................. 101 3.4.2 Theme interviews ........................................................................... 104 3.4.3 Concept map interviews ............................................................... 107 3.4.4 E-mail interviews ............................................................................ 111 3.5 Ethical considerations ............................................................................. 113 3.6 Analyses and presentation of the data ................................................. 117 4 RELATIONAL DIALECTICS WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THE INTERCULTURAL COUPLES’ RELATIONSHIPS ..................................... 128 4.1 Connection-Autonomy: Enjoying togetherness, and needing some time apart ........................................................................................ 129 4.1.1 Excessive togetherness and the search for separateness .......... 129 4.1.2 Support - A matter of give and take ............................................ 131 4.1.3 Praxis ................................................................................................ 136  4.2 Predictability-Novelty: Feeling certain about the relationship, and needing to spice it up ...................................................................... 143 4.2.1 Relationship certainty, and adaptation related uncertainty .... 143 4.2.2 Triggers of uncertainty .................................................................. 145 4.2.3 Praxis ................................................................................................ 149 4.3 Openness-closedness: Longing to share, and keeping things to yourself ...................................................................................................... 151 4.3.1 Sharing and withholding .............................................................. 151 4.3.2 Awareness of partner’s disclosure style ..................................... 152 4.3.3 Openness generates support, and conveys the essence of an intercultural relationship .............................................................. 153 4.3.4 Praxis ................................................................................................ 155 4.4 Conclusions .............................................................................................. 160 5 RELATIONAL DIALECTICS AT THE INTERFACE OF THE INTERCULTURAL COUPLES AND THEIR SOCIAL NETWORK .......... 165 5.1 Inclusion–Seclusion: The pleasure of being hospitable, and needing to set limits ......................................................................... 166 5.1.1 Couples’ need for in-laws’, friends’ and acquaintances’ support ............................................................................................. 167 5.1.2 Integration and belonging as aspects of inclusion .................... 168 5.1.3 Excessive inclusion endangers the couple relationship ............ 169 5.1.4 Exclusion from the social network ............................................... 170 5.1.5. Seclusion from the social network ............................................... 171 5.1.6 Praxis ................................................................................................ 173 5.2 Uniqueness-Conventionality: The flair of being special, and caring what others think ................................................................. 175 5.2.1 Uniqueness as a constructive, destructive and neutral feature .............................................................................................. 175 5.2.2 Uniqueness and conventionality .................................................. 177 5.2.3 Praxis ................................................................................................ 178 5.3 Revelation-Concealment: Sharing relational issues with others, and wanting to keep quiet ...................................................................... 178 5.3.1 Motivational and beneficial functions of revealing ................... 179 5.3.2 Revelation at the cost of privacy .................................................. 180 5.3.3 Topics of revelation-concealment ................................................ 181 5.3.4 Praxis ................................................................................................ 182 5.4 Conclusions .............................................................................................. 185 6 INTERCULTURAL RELATIONAL DIALECTICS ....................................... 189 6.1 The reflection of couples’ cultural backgrounds in their relationship ............................................................................................... 189 6.1.1 Language issues .............................................................................. 190 6.1.2 Traditions and celebrations .......................................................... 197 6.1.3. Values ............................................................................................... 199 6.1.4 Adaptation ....................................................................................... 203  6.2 Relational dialectics in the context of intercultural couplehood ...... 213 6.2.1 Interdependency ............................................................................. 214 6.2.2 Fluctuation....................................................................................... 218 6.2.3 Negotiation ...................................................................................... 222 6.3 Conclusions .............................................................................................. 224 7 DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................... 228 7.1 Main findings ........................................................................................... 228 7.1.1 Relating dialectically ...................................................................... 229 7.1.2 The effect of intercultural couples’ cultural background on their relationship ....................................................................... 232 7.1.3 Relating dialectically in an intercultural context ....................... 233 7.2 Evaluation of the theory ......................................................................... 236 7.3 Evaluation of the study ........................................................................... 242 7.3.1 Trustworthiness and generalizability.......................................... 242 7.3.2 The multi-method approach ......................................................... 244 7.3.3 Interview practices and implications .......................................... 247 YHTEENVETO ............................................................................................................ 255 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 261  1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objectives of the study The understanding of a globalized world, even now, is often more or less restricted to the notions of economics, politics and power. Globalization undeniably suggests a growing intensity of universal flows such that states and societies become increasingly enmeshed in worldwide systems and networks of interactions. Globalization is, however, often held up as a convenient explanatory coverall for phenomena as diverse as the development of cheap and accessible transnational means of transport, the creation of real-time networks of electronic communication, the redefinition of individual and family identities across continents, and the income differences between developed and developing countries (IOM, 2003). But while in the field of trade enormous steps have been taken towards liberalization of the exchange of capital, goods and services, we can notice that there have not been equivalent advances in the field of migration (Hollifield, 2003). So, it does seem we may have forgotten that globalization and its effects influence to a greater extent the very network of society, which concerns actual people and the relationships they form in the course of life. Whether for personal reasons, studies or for professional assignments, more people go abroad for shorter or longer periods of time. These stays overseas often tend to fall together in a phase of life when people are looking for a partner or are forming families. Hence, it happens, more frequently than a few decades ago, that people find a partner or a spouse with whom they share a different cultural background. At the same time, however, we do not have much information, and particularly in Europe there has been little research, about the special form of relationship that intercultural couples represent. We do know, though, that communication and its strategies, which are essential in relationships in general and for couples in particular, tend to govern the well being of relational partners.