Cultural Differences in “Thank You”

Abstract

This research investigated cultural differences in the use of, and responses to, gratitude statements in unsolicited email advertising messages. Study 1 found that Americans, compared with Koreans, were more positive about a message that included a gratitude statement (i.e., “Thank You”). Study 2 showed no cultural differences in responses to an email message that included a gratitude statement and one that omitted a gratitude statement. When participants in Study 3 were instructed to pay attention to the gratitude statement itself, Americans, compared with Koreans, viewed the gratitude statement more positively and considered the advertiser of the gratitude statement–included message as more credible. Americans had a greater intention to include a gratitude statement in their own advertising messages than did Koreans. In fact, Study 4 showed that when participants saw a gratitude statement–included example, a greater number of Americans, compared with Koreans included a gratitude statement in their own message.

Keywords

culture thank you cross-cultural research intercultural communication

Thank you very much for reading this article. The authors of this article appreciate that you are paying attention to this article. The reason the current article started with “thank you” is because it investigated individuals’ evaluations of, responses to, and uses of a gratitude statement such as “thank you.” In general, messages that include a “thank you” generate a more positive evaluation than those that do not. People in different cultures, however, may differ in their perceptions of “thank you”; “thank you” may be considered more positive in one culture than in another. The current research conducted four studies systematically examining Koreans’ and Americans’ attitudes and uses of “thank you” in unsolicited email advertising messages.

“Thank you,” as a gratitude statement, is offered mainly when the speaker benefits from the hearer. Although the use of a gratitude statement is universal, cultures can vary with regard to the types of behaviors and situational characteristics that elicit a gratitude statement and also the functions that the gratitude statement fulfills. For example, it has been noted that when a gratitude statement such as “thank you” is expected in one culture, apologies can be used in place of, or in addition to, the gratitude statement in another culture (Coulmas, 1981; Ide, 1998; Kumatoridani, 1999). Writing “thanks in advance” is common in letters and notes asking favors in North America, whereas writing “thanks in advance” in other cultures such as Japan can make the message sender to look demanding and impolite (Ohashi, 2003).

As a type of illocutionary act, gratitude statements reflect the speaker’s psychological state toward the action that the speaker or the hearer has taken or will take (Searle, 1969). Normally, if the speakers focus on the subsequent benefit to themselves and if indebtedness is prominent, a gratitude statement will be a possible expression (Coulmas, 1981). By offering a gratitude statement, the speakers may indicate that they consider the hearer’s action as pleasing to them and thus appreciate the action. When the expression of “thank you” accompanies a certain form of a message whose goal requires that the message recipient do something such as pay attention and read the message or accept a request included in the message, the expression of “thank you” can also imply a certain amount of pressure for the message recipient to comply with the goal of the message. In that case, a gratitude statement can imply the sender’s appreciation for the potential benefit that the message recipients may provide to the speaker.

Cultural differences may exist in people’s perception of a gratitude statement used in an advertising message. For the purpose of testing cultural differences in the use of and responses to a gratitude statement, the current study focused on the context of unsolicited email advertising (i.e., spam). Spam is a relatively new phenomenon, especially compared with other interpersonal or mass communication contexts that have been existent much longer and with which people are more familiar (e.g., face-to-face interaction, TV commercials, and print media advertising). Most people do not view unsolicited email advertising favorably. For example, the ethical problems of unsolicited email advertising have been discussed (e.g., Spinello, 1999), as examples of “deception” in advertising (McAllister & Turow, 2002), and as one type of disguised advertisements (Huang, 2001). Considering that most people may not welcome unsolicited email advertising and consider it a violation of privacy, senders may need to use strategies to reduce the message recipients’ discomfort with or negative reaction to their messages. For example, the sender may thank the recipient for receiving the message and/or for the possibility of responding to the message.

Considering that an advertising message randomly sent to an individual’s private email account can be considered a violation of privacy, an imposition, and imply pressure to comply with the request, it is possible that Americans may react more negatively to the unsolicited email advertising message than Koreans may. One of the main differences between the U.S. and Korean cultures are that Americans are more individualistic than Koreans (Oyserman, Coon, & Kemmelmeier, 2002). The cultural values of privacy, autonomy, and freedom reflect cultural assumptions of the relationship between self and others in individualistic cultures, wherein self is inherently unique and separate from others (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). There may be a stronger expectation of mutual concern for each other’s privacy, autonomy, and freedom of action among Americans than among Koreans. Such cultural differences between Americans and Koreans can be observed when examining how gratitude is expressed when one’s action has a potential to impose. For example, when asking for a favor via email, Americans are more likely to include a gratitude statement (e.g., “thank you”) than Koreans (Lee & Park, 2011). In general, Americans are more explicit about their verbal expression of gratitude than Koreans (Kwon, 2000).

A gratitude statement (e.g., “Thank you very much for paying attention to our message”) in email advertising may communicate senders’ appreciation, serving two functions. One function of a gratitude statement is hearer-supportive. When receiving an unsolicited email message, a recipient may feel their privacy has been violated and may consider the email message as pressure to comply with the request stated in the message. By offering a “thank you” statement, senders may indicate their appreciation for the recipient’s generosity and kindness for paying attention to the message and reading it. Being thanked for their actions can make the message recipients feel better about themselves. Another function of a gratitude statement is sender-supportive. When sending an email advertising message to others who have not previously agreed to receiving the message, senders may feel uncomfortable about their acts. By offering a “thank you” statement in their advertising messages, senders may feel they are being polite and indicating sufficient remedial efforts for their acts. Thanking the message recipient can make the message senders feel that they look better and more polite to the recipients.

Cultural differences in a gratitude statement such as “thank you” can be examined in various ways: individuals as receivers and senders of a message. That is, the current study focused on (a) how people in different cultures would perceive an unsolicited email advertising message that included a gratitude statement, (b) whether or not people would actually respond to an unsolicited email message that included a gratitude statement, (c) how people would evaluate a gratitude statement itself, and (d) whether or not people would include a gratitude statement when creating their own messages. Based on the cultural differences between Americans and Koreans, a general prediction examined in the current study is that as message recipients, Americans, compared with Koreans, may respond more positively to an email advertising message that contains a gratitude statement. Another prediction is that as message senders, a greater proportion of Americans, compared with Koreans, may include a gratitude statement in their own messages when asked to create an advertising message.

Overview of the Current Study

The current study aimed to test the effectiveness of a gratitude statement in an email advertising message. Study 1 examined cultural differences (Koreans vs. Americans) in responses to an email advertisement that included or did not include a gratitude statement (“Thank you very much for paying attention to our message”). Study 2 examined a behavioral measure of responses to email messages with or without a gratitude statement. In Study 3, participants responded to questionnaire items that directly asked their perceptions of the gratitude statement itself. Study 3 compared cultural differences in responses to the gratitude statement included in an email advertisement. In Study 4, participants were instructed to create their own advertisement messages. In the experimental condition, participants were shown an example message that included the gratitude statement. In the control condition, participants were shown an example message that did not include the gratitude statement. The appendix shows the basic form of the email advertising message used in Studies 1, 3, and 4. For each study, stimulus materials and measurement items were constructed in both English and Korean. The equivalency of meanings was carefully checked by several individuals fluent in both languages. Participants received questionnaire in their native language. In no case did participants from one study participate in another study. Each study offers brief rationale, method, results, and discussion sections. The current article concludes with general discussion of the findings.

Study 1

This study examined the effectiveness of a gratitude statement in an email advertising message in three aspects: attitudes about the message, sender credibility, and willingness to respond to the message. It is possible that people may perceive an advertising message with a gratitude statement more favorably than a message without it. Because a gratitude statement such as “thank you” included in an advertising message can indicate the senders’ appreciation for the message recipients’ generous act of reading the message, a gratitude statement can be supportive of the message receivers and also the message senders, improving the message receivers’ evaluation of the senders. From the message recipients’ point of view, an advertising message with a gratitude statement can appear more likable (i.e., more positive attitudes about the message) than an advertising message without it. Also, the message recipients may be more willing to respond to the message with a gratitude statement than to the message without it. The sender of an advertising message with a gratitude statement can seem more believable and more convincing (i.e., higher credibility) than the sender of an advertising message without it. Thus, a hypothesis predicting the main effect of a gratitude statement is advanced as follows:

Hypothesis 1: The presence of a gratitude statement will lead to more positive attitudes about the message (Hypothesis 1a), greater credibility ascribed to the sender (Hypothesis 1b), and greater willingness to respond to the message (Hypothesis 1c) than will the absence of a gratitude statement.

Although it is possible that a message with a gratitude statement yields more positive perceptions than a message without it, the positive effect of the gratitude statement’s presence can be qualified by culture. That is, considering the cultural differences in valuing autonomy and privacy, Americans may respond more negatively to receiving unsolicited email advertising messages than Koreans. But use of a gratitude statement is more frequent and explicit among Americans than among Koreans (Kwon, 2000; Lee & Park, 2011). Although Americans can be more positively oriented toward a gratitude statement, it is not certain whether a gratitude statement will be also positively received for an email advertising message. Thus, it is questioned whether these cultural differences can mean that the positive effect of the gratitude statement’s presence can be greater for one cultural group than the other.

Research Question 1: For an email advertising message with a gratitude statement, will Americans and Koreans differ in attitudes about the message (Research Question 1a), sender credibility (Research Question 1b), and willingness to respond to the message (Research Question 1c)?

Method

Participants

Participants were 100 undergraduates (69 men and 31 women; age M = 19.67, SD = 1.72) at a large Midwestern university in the United States and 114 undergraduates (86 men and 28 women; age M = 25.17, SD = 4.99) in Korea. American participants were 71% Caucasian, 15% African American, 3% Asian American, 2% Hispanic, 4% mixed, and 5% unidentified. Korean participants were all ethnically Korean.

Design

The study used a 2 (national culture: Korea vs. the United States) × 2 (statement: presence of gratitude vs. absence of gratitude) between subjects design. Questionnaire started with statements, “On the next page, you will read an email message. Please assume that the message was sent to your email account without your permission and you just opened the message.” Two types of email advertisement messages were prepared both in English and Korean. The participants each received one of the messages in their native language. The basic message was an advertisement by a fictitious company, “Happystudent Corporation,” which buys and sells used textbooks with up to 50% savings. Research participants were instructed to consider Happystudent Corporation as a real company and respond to questionnaire items. The first type of email advertisement did not have any gratitude statement (control group). The second type of email advertisement had a gratitude statement (“Thank you very much for paying attention to our message”) at the beginning of the basic message (see the upper section in the appendix).

Measures

The English and Korean messages and measures were carefully checked for equivalency. The response format for the following measures was a 5-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Attitudes about the message were measured with five items (“The message is good,” “The message is favorable,” “The message is useful,” “I like the message,” “I think positively about the message”). Reliabilities (Cronbach’s α) were .89 in the United States and .95 in Korea. Sender (i.e., advertiser) credibility was measured with seven items (believable, accurate, fair, convincing, trustworthy, informative, and expert). Reliabilities were .88 in the United States and .95 in Korea. Willingness to respond to email advertising was assessed with four items (buying products from the advertiser, selling products to the advertiser, using their services, and visiting the advertiser’s website). The scale had reliabilities of .92 in the United States and .93 in Korea.

Results

Overview

Three 2 (national culture: the United States vs. Korea) × 2 (statement: presence of gratitude statement vs. absence of gratitude statement) between-subjects ANOVAs were conducted for the three dependent variables. The main effect for statement provided tests for Hypothesis 1, which predicted that the presence of a gratitude statement would generate more positive attitudes about the message (Hypothesis 1a), greater credibility ascribed to the sender (Hypothesis 1b), and greater willingness to respond to the message (Hypothesis 1c) than would the absence of a gratitude statement. The interaction effect of national culture by statement presence provided answers to Research Question 1, which addressed possible differences between Koreans and Americans in their attitudes about the message, sender credibility perception, and willingness to respond to the message when seeing a message with a gratitude statement included. The main effect of national culture would be of no interest because it does not involve the effect of statement presence.

Attitudes about the message

The analysis showed that the main effect for gratitude statement was not significant, F(1, 210) = 0.35, p = .56, η² = .00. Presence (M = 2.79, SD = 1.08) and absence (M = 2.96, SD = 0.91) of gratitude statement in the message did not affect attitudes about the message. The main effect for culture was significant, F(1, 210) = 35.08, p < .001, η² = .14. American participants (M = 3.27, SD = 0.86) perceived the message more positively than did Koreans (M = 2.54, SD = 0.98).

The interaction between culture and gratitude statement was significant, F(1, 210) = 4.99, p = .03, η² = .02. To examine the interaction effect more specifically, simple effects were analyzed. Americans did not differ in their attitudes about the message with the gratitude statement (M = 3.41, SD = 0.87) or about the message without the gratitude statement (M = 3.18, SD = 0.84), F(1, 210) = 1.25, p = .26. On the other hand, Korean participants had less positive attitudes for the message with the gratitude statement (M = 2.37, SD = 1.01) than for the message without the gratitude statement (M = 2.73, SD = 0.92), F(1, 210) = 4.33, p = .04.

Sender credibility

The main effect for the gratitude statement was not significant, F(1, 210) = 1.65, p = .20, η² = .01. Presence (M = 2.44, SD = 0.85) and absence (M = 2.64, SD = 0.81) of the gratitude statement in the message did not affect perception of sender credibility. The analysis showed a significant main effect for culture, F(1, 210) = 38.71, p < .001, η² = .16. Although Americans (M = 2.92, SD = 0.74) rated sender credibility higher than did Koreans (M = 2.24, SD = 0.79), the interaction between culture and statement presence was not significant, F(1, 210) = 0.23, p = .63, η² = .00.

Willingness to respond to email advertising

The main effect for statement presence was not significant, F(1, 210) = 0.03, p = .85, η² = .00. Presence (M = 2.85, SD = 1.20) and absence (M = 2.94, SD = 0.96) of the gratitude statement in the message did not affect willingness to respond to email advertising. The ANOVA showed a significant main effect for culture, F(1, 210) = 22.01, p < .001, η² = .10. American participants (M = 3.27, SD = 1.09) were more willing to respond to email advertising than Korean participants were (M = 2.59, SD = 1.00). On the other hand, the interaction between culture and gratitude statement presence was not significant, F(1, 210) = 0.38, p = .54, η² = .00.

Discussion

In summary, the data were not consistent with Hypothesis 1, because the presence of the gratitude statement did not necessarily generate more positive attitudes, greater sender credibility perception, or greater willingness to respond than the absence of the gratitude statement did. Regarding Research Question 1 on cross-cultural differences in the effectiveness of a gratitude statement in an email advertising message, no differences between Korean and American participants were found for sender credibility perception or willingness to respond to email advertising in the presence of the gratitude statement. For attitudes about the message, however, presence of the gratitude statement actually led Korean participants to be less positive about the message, whereas presence of the gratitude statement in an email advertising message did not affect American participants’ perceptions of the message. An implication of the finding is that at least when attempting to foster positive attitudes about the message, a gratitude statement is less effective for Koreans than for Americans, although a gratitude statement is not effective in increasing sender credibility and participants’ willingness to respond to the message.

Study 2

As another way of examining cultural differences in the effectiveness of a gratitude statement, response rates can be used as a behavioral measure. More specifically, when email messages ask for a certain form of response, a question can be raised as to whether a greater number of people will respond to email messages containing a gratitude statement compared with email messages without any gratitude statement. Therefore, the effect of a gratitude statement and a cultural difference (i.e., Hypothesis 1c and Research Question 1c posed in Study 1) were tested again with response rates as a dependent variable in Study 2.

Method

This study was designed to send out unsolicited email messages. Following research ethics issues, the authors of this research could not use a (real or fake) product or service endorsement. Thus, email messages were prepared that solicited research participation. The email message contained an informed consent form and several short questions assessing TV viewing habits (e.g., hours of watching TV perceived benefits and need for watching TV). Those wanting to participate in the research could fill out the questionnaire in the email and return it to the researchers’ email accounts. The two versions of email messages included identical content, the only exception being the gratitude statement. The first version of the message did not have a gratitude statement at the beginning of the email message (control group). The second version of the message included a gratitude statement (“Thank you very much for paying attention to our message”). Undergraduate students’ email addresses were collected from various email directories at universities in Seoul, Korea, and at a large Midwestern university in the United States.

Results

The email message with a gratitude statement generated 2.2% response rate from Americans (11 out of 500) and 0% response rate from Koreans (0 out of 500). On the other hand, the email message without a gratitude statement generated 3% response rate from Americans (15 out of 500) and 0.2% response rate from Koreans (2 out of 500). Chi-square tests were conducted for each culture to examine the relationship between the presence of a gratitude statement and the response rate. Americans’ response rates were not significantly associated with the presence of a gratitude statement, χ²(1) = 0.63, p = .45, ϕ² = .00. The result also showed that Korean’s responses rates were not significantly associated with the presence of a gratitude statement, χ²(1) = 2.00, p = .16, ϕ² = .00.

Discussion

Concerning willingness to respond or actual responses, both Study 1 and Study 2 did not find that a gratitude statement had any effect and did not find cultural differences either. It seems that neither messages with a gratitude statement nor those without it may be effective, and the presence of a gratitude statement alone may not be powerful enough to get the message noticed by its recipients. On the other hand, it is possible that participants did not pay much attention to the gratitude statement itself. Both Study 1 and Study 2 involved participants responding to a message with a gratitude statement versus a message without it. Although it is possible that a gratitude statement may not be effective in improving participants’ perception of the message sender’s credibility and increasing response rate, cultural differences might be more clearly observed in individuals’ evaluations of the gratitude statement itself included in an unsolicited email message rather than the message that includes or does not include a gratitude statement. Study 3 examined this possibility.

Study 3

The issue explored in this study was what people would think about a gratitude statement itself when they were instructed to read and evaluate it as used in an advertising message. In contrast to Study 1 and Study 2, which examined the effect of a gratitude statement by preparing messages with or without it and measuring individuals’ evaluation of those different messages, participants in Study 3 were instructed to respond directly to the use of a gratitude statement in an advertising message. Thus, Study 3 examined differences between Koreans and Americans only in a gratitude statement–included message with the following research question:

Research Question 2: For the gratitude statement–included message, will Americans and Koreans differ in their attitudes (Research Question 2A), sender credibility perception (Research Question 2b), and willingness to respond (Research Question 2c)?

Additionally, by closely leading individuals’ attentions to a gratitude statement itself included in an email advertising, it could be asked whether individuals would think about using the gratitude statement if they were to send a similar email advertising to other people and whether individuals would consider a gratitude statement to be effective for other people. This study examined if Americans and Koreans would differ in their intention to use the gratitude statement and if Americans and Koreans would differ in their perception about the effectiveness of the gratitude statement for affecting other people’s willingness to respond.

Research Question 3: For the gratitude statement-included message, will Americans and Koreans differ in intention to use the gratitude statement (Research Question 3a) and perceived effectiveness of the gratitude statement for other people (Research Question 3b)?

Method

Participants

Participants were 132 undergraduates (63 men, 69 women, and 1 unidentified; age M = 19.72, SD = 1.68) at a large Midwestern university in the United States and 111 undergraduates (62 men, 47 women, and 2 unidentified; age M = 25.41, SD = 4.67) in Korea. The ethnicities of American participants consisted of 74.0% Caucasian, 14.5% African American, 3.8% Asian American, 0.8% Hispanic, 3.1% mixed, and 3.8% unidentified. Korean participants were all ethnically Korean.

Measures

Questionnaire started with statements, “On the next page, you will read an email message that contains a gratitude statement (‘Thank you very much for paying attention to our message’). Please assume that the message was sent to your email account without your permission and you just opened the message.” Then, participants read an advertising message including a gratitude statement and were prompted to consider the gratitude statement in the message when answering questions (see the upper section in the appendix). That is, each measure started with a phrase, “by seeing the gratitude statement in the message.” The response format for these measures was a 5-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree).

Attitudes about the message were measured with five items (good, favorable, pleasant, liking, and positive). The reliabilities (Cronbach’s α) were .92 in the United States and .89 in Korea. The credibility of the company was measured with seven items (believable, accurate, fair, convincing, trustworthy, informative, and expert), which showed a reliability of .92 in the United States and .93 in Korea. Willingness to respond was measured with five items by asking participants to indicate the degree to which they would be willing to respond to the email advertising message (e.g., buying products from the advertiser). The items had a reliability of .90 in the United States and .89 in Korea. Intention to use the gratitude statement was assessed with five items (e.g., “If I were to send this advertising message to the public, I would intend to use the gratitude statement stated in the message”). The reliabilities were .94 in the United States and .96 in Korea. The effectiveness of the gratitude statement for other people was measured with five items by having research participants indicate the degree to which others would be willing to respond to the email advertising message (e.g., “By seeing the gratitude statement in the message, other people might be willing to buy books, CDs, and DVDs from Happystudent Corporation”). The reliabilities were .90 in the United States and .90 in Korea.

Results

When comparing Koreans’ and Americans’ evaluations of the message directly, the findings showed significant differences. For attitudes about the message, Americans (M = 3.15, SD = 0.89) showed more positive attitudes about the message with the gratitude statement than did Koreans (M = 2.63, SD = 0.69), t(240) = 4.95, p < .001, η² = .09. Regarding the sender credibility of the advertiser, Americans (M = 2.94, SD = 0.81) perceived the sender to be more credible than did Koreans (M = 2.47, SD = 0.58), t(238) = 5.03, p < .001, η² = .10. For their willingness to respond to the advertising message that included the gratitude statement, Americans (M = 3.11, SD = 0.97) showed more willingness to respond than did Koreans (M = 2.67, SD = 0.72), t(238) = 3.90, p < .001, η² = .06.

Americans perceived the gratitude statement (M = 3.63, SD = 0.75) to be more effective in influencing others’ willingness to respond to the message than did Koreans (M = 2.97, SD = 0.66), t(238) = 7.12, p < .001, η² = .18. Americans had stronger intentions to use the gratitude statement (M = 3.14, SD = 1.10) than did Koreans (M = 2.88, SD = 0.91), t(241) = 1.98, p < .05, η² = .02.

Additional analyses

Although the above results showed cultural differences, recall that Study 1 failed to show such cultural differences. In Study 3, attitudes, sender credibility, and willingness to respond were measured by instructing the participants to consider the gratitude statement included in the advertising message, whereas in Study 1, attitudes, sender credibility, and willingness to respond were measured by simply showing a message with a gratitude statement to the participants. Thus, Study 1 and Study 3 were compared and 2 (instruction: presence of instruction and absence of instruction) × 2 (culture: Korea and the United States) ANOVAs were conducted to see whether including an instruction to the participants (Study 3) or not including it (Study 1) produced different results.

For attitudes, instruction did not have a significant main effect, F(1, 335) = 0.01, p = .93, η² = .00, but culture had a significant main effect, F(1, 335) = 56.64, p < .001, η² = .14. Americans had more positive attitudes (M = 3.20, SD = 0.89) than did Koreans (M = 2.53, SD = 0.83). Instruction and culture had a significant interaction effect, F(1, 335) = 6.64, p = .01, η² = .02. For Americans, whether they were instructed to see the gratitude statement (M = 3.14, SD = .89) or not (M = 3.41, SD = .87), attitudes did not differ, t(169) = 1.73, p = .09. For Koreans, however, attitudes were less negative when they were instructed to see the gratitude statement (M = 2.63, SD = 0.69) than when they were not instructed to see it (M = 2.37, SD = 1.01), t(168) = 2.01, p < .05.

For credibility, instruction had a significant main effect, F(1, 335) = 4.98, p = .03, η² = .01, and culture had a significant main effect, F(1, 335) = 35.76, p < .001, η² = .09. Individuals who did not receive the instruction perceived higher credibility (M = 2.72, SD = 0.74) than those who received it (M = 2.44, SD = 0.85). Americans perceived higher credibility (M = 2.90, SD = 0.79) than did Koreans (M = 2.37, SD = 0.69). Instruction and culture did not have a significant interaction effect, F(1, 335) = 0.79, p = .38, η² = .00.

For willingness to respond, instruction did not have a significant main effect, F(1, 335) = 0.07, p = .79, η² = .00. Culture had a significant main effect, F(1, 335) = 26.73, p < .001, η² = .07. Americans were more willing to respond (M = 2.90, SD = 0.79) than Koreans (M = 2.37, SD = 0.69). Instruction and culture did not have a significant interaction effect, F(1, 335) = 2.12, p = .14, η² = .01.

Discussion

In Study 3, participants were led to pay attention to a gratitude statement in an advertising message. The findings showed that in general, Americans, compared with Koreans, were more positive about the gratitude statement–included message. These findings are inconsistent with the findings from Study 1 and Study 2 concerning the lack of cultural differences in responses to a message with a gratitude statement. The findings of Study 3 may indicate that cultural differences are more pronounced in individuals’ evaluations of a gratitude statement itself rather than in their responses to a message which includes a gratitude statement.

Study 4

The findings from Study 3 indicate that Americans may be more receptive to gratitude statements than Koreans. It is possible that when individuals see a gratitude statement being used in an example message that is shown to them, Americans are more likely to use it in their own message than when they are not aware of a gratitude statement being used in email advertising messages. When facing the need for using unsolicited email advertising, individuals may experience high uncertainty about how to create an advertising message that can maximize their benefits; many receive advertising messages, but relatively few have composed them. On noticing a gratitude statement included in other people’s advertising messages and realizing socially positive views of a gratitude statement, individuals may decide to follow what others do (e.g., examples) and use the same or a similar gratitude statement. That is, the use or nonuse of a gratitude statement in email advertising example may have a greater effect on Americans than Koreans when prompting individuals to include or not include a gratitude statement in their own message. Thus, the following hypotheses and research question are advanced:

Hypothesis 2: Having seen a gratitude statement in an email advertising message example, a greater number of Americans will include a gratitude statement in their own advertising message than when they have not seen a gratitude statement in an email advertising message example.

Research Question 4: Having seen a gratitude statement in an email advertising message example, will a greater number of Koreans include a gratitude statement in their own advertising message than when they have not seen a gratitude statement in an email advertising message example?

Hypothesis 3: Having seen a gratitude statement in an email advertising message example, a greater number of Americans than Koreans will include a gratitude statement in their own advertising message example.

Method

Participants

Participants were 236 undergraduates (105 men and 131 women; age M = 20.29, SD = 3.30) at a large Midwestern university in the United States and 183 undergraduates (123 men and 60 women; age M = 24.76, SD = 5.11) in Korea. The ethnic make-up of American students was 78.8% Caucasian, 13.1% African American, 1.7% Hispanic, 1.7% Asian American, 2.1% mixed, and 2.5% unidentified. Korean students were all ethnically Korean.

Procedure and questionnaires

Questionnaires were distributed to research participants during their regularly scheduled class times in both the United States and Korea. Research participants were instructed to pretend they were working for a company selling music and movie CDs and DVDs and that they needed to advertise CDs and DVDs by sending email messages. The research participants were asked to compose an advertising message. The instruction sheet of the questionnaire included a statement, “On the next page, you will see an example of an email advertising message made by Happystudent Corporation about their book deals,” but the research participants were not specifically instructed to follow the example nor were they instructed to pay special attention to the gratitude statement. The example was simply shown in the questionnaire.

Design

Two versions of questionnaires were prepared. Participants received one of the two versions randomly. One version of the questionnaire included a gratitude statement (“Thank you very much for paying attention to our message”) at the beginning of the example message (see the appendix). The other version of the questionnaire omitted the gratitude statement in the example message, but kept everything else identical.

Results

It was expected that the presence of a gratitude statement in an email advertising message example would prompt a greater number of Americans to include a gratitude statement in their own advertising message than would the absence of a gratitude statement. Additionally, it was expected that the presence of a gratitude statement in an email advertising message example would induce a greater number of Americans than Koreans to use a gratitude statement. It was found that 32 of 130 Americans (24.61%) who received the gratitude statement–included example message wrote some form of a gratitude statement (e.g., “thank you . . .,” “I am grateful for . . .,” “I appreciate . . .”) in their own advertising messages, whereas 3 of 129 Americans (2.33%) who received the gratitude statement–omitted example message included a gratitude statement in their own advertising messages. A chi-square test showed a significant relationship between the presence of a gratitude statement in the example messages and Americans’ gratitude statement use in their own messages, χ²(1) = 27.53, p < .001, ϕ² = .11. On the other hand, of 123 Koreans who received the gratitude statement–included example message, 18 (14.63%) included some form of a gratitude statement, whereas none of the 60 Koreans who received the gratitude statement–omitted example message included a gratitude statement in their own advertising messages, χ²(1) = 9.74, p = .002, ϕ² = .05.

A chi-square testing the relationship between culture and the use of a gratitude statement by people who saw the gratitude statement–included example message was significant, χ²(1) = 3.97, p < .05, ϕ² = .02. Among those who saw the gratitude statement–included example message, the percentage of American participants (24.61%) who included a gratitude statement in their own message was larger from that of Korean participants (14.63%). Thus, the findings indicated that there was a cultural difference in modeling behaviors for gratitude statement.

Discussion

The findings showed that Korean and American participants differed in their tendency to include a gratitude statement in their own advertising message when they saw a gratitude statement in an example message. The gratitude statement was more frequently modeled by American participants than by Korean participants. This finding is in contrast to a finding reported in Park, Lee, and Song (2005), which examined cultural differences in apology use in unsolicited email advertising. With an exception of a gratitude statement, the stimulus material used in the current study was exactly same as that of Park et al. Park et al. showed that after seeing an example advertising message with an apology included, a greater number of Koreans, compared with Americans, included an apology in their own advertising messages. The current finding juxtaposed with that of Park et al. may indicate that the type of speech act that individuals model after can be culture specific. A more detailed discussion of this finding is provided below.

General Discussion

The current study found cultural similarities and differences in the use of and responses to gratitude statements in unsolicited email advertising messages (i.e., spam). Although Korean and American participants did not differ substantially in their evaluation of messages that included or omitted a gratitude statement, Study 1 found some evidence that Korean participants, compared with American participants, were less positive about the message that included a gratitude statement. As shown in Study 2, Koreans and Americans also did not differ in responses to a gratitude statement–included email message and a gratitude statement–omitted email message. On the other hand, when Study 3 led participants to pay attention to the gratitude statement itself, cultural differences emerged; American participants, compared with Koreans, viewed the gratitude statement–included message more positively and considered the advertiser of the message as more credible. Additionally, Americans had a greater intention to include a gratitude statement in their own advertising messages than did Koreans. Finally, Study 4 showed that when participants saw a gratitude statement–included message example, a greater number of Americans, compared with Koreans, included a gratitude statement in their own message.

Some features of the current study may necessitate cautious interpretation of the current findings. First, the use of only one situation (i.e., unsolicited advertising email) may limit the generalizability of the current findings. Future studies will need to examine cultural differences in attitudes toward and the use of a gratitude statement in other situations such as asking a favor to others and responding to others who are offering a gift. Second, the current study focused on a situation where the message sender had not received any direct or immediate benefit from the message recipient but expected potential benefits from the message recipient in the future to a certain extent. Gratitude statements have many other functions such as declining or accepting an offer made by others, signaling the conclusion of a conversation (“that’s all, thank you”; Eisenstein & Bodman, 1986, p. 168), and performing a social task as a phatic expression without any content or formal meaning (Burnard, 2003; Katz, Lenhardt, & Mitchell, 2007). It would be interesting to examine whether cultural differences and similarities observed in the current study would extend to the other functions of a gratitude statement.

Despite some limitations of the current study, the findings of the four studies show cultural similarities and differences between Korean and American cultural characteristics as reflected in the use of a gratitude statement. A gratitude statement seems more appropriate in unsolicited email advertising for Americans than for Koreans. Gratitude expressions such as “thank you” are types of speech acts with which a speaker supports a hearer’s positive face (cf. Brown & Levinson, 1987; Goffman, 1971). Face, as a positive image one wants to claim for one’s self, has two types: positive and negative (Brown & Levinson, 1987). Positive face is associated with people’s desire to seek approval and appreciation from others. On the other hand, for negative face, people desire to be autonomous and not to be bothered. Gratitude expression used in a message may communicate the message sender’s appreciation for the message recipient’s action, for example, reading the message. Regarding the differences between one’s own self face and the other person’s face, cultures can differ in the amount of importance associated with whose face to protect and preferred strategies for protecting face (i.e., facework; Ting-Toomey, 1988; Ting-Toomey & Kurogi, 1998). Collectivists are often considered to be more concerned with hearer-oriented facework than individualists (Ting-Toomey, 1988; Ting-Toomey & Kurogi, 1998). Research has shown that Koreans exhibit higher concern for other-face maintenance and lower concern for self-face maintenance than Americans do (e.g., Ting-Toomey et al., 1991). The current findings, however, may imply that American participants were more concerned with respecting or protecting the other person’s positive face, considering that a gratitude statement can be considered as a supportive act for a hearer’s positive face.

An alternate way to interpret the current findings could be that a gratitude statement would be used as a customary speech act without any real meaning regardless of face concerns. Searle (1976) classified gratitude statements as a type of expressive illocutionary act because it expresses the speaker’s psychological state of gratitude. Generally, a gratitude statement such as “thank you” requires responses under this classification, but it is sometimes self-contained discourse units, not requiring any response from the other party (Coulmas, 1981). This kind of single-unit pattern is frequently used in routine speech acts in various daily interactions. If a gratitude statement such as “thank you” is just a habitual speech act lacking any genuine feeling of gratitude, it is a prototypic example of phatic expression, functioning only as a social task without any content or formal meaning (Burnard, 2003; Katz et al., 2007). Cultural differences may exist in usage of a gratitude statement as a phatic expression. That is, Americans might use a gratitude statement such as “thank you” as a phatic expression more often than Koreans, but Koreans might use a gratitude statement only when they would like to express their genuine feeling of gratitude.

The current findings share some similarities and differences with a previous study by Park et al. (2005) that showed the differences between Koreans and Americans in their uses of and responses to apology in unsolicited email advertising messages. Some of their findings included that an advertising message including apology was not more effective than a message with no apology for either Koreans or Americans; that when evaluating apology used in advertising messages, Koreans considered apology as more credible and normal than Americans did; and that after seeing an apology included in an example advertising message, Koreans were more likely to include an apology in their own advertising messages than Americans. The current findings and those of Park et al. illustrate Koreans’ and Americans’ differential preferences on a gratitude statement and an apology.

Another implication of the findings is that it may not necessarily be the case that people from one culture are always likely to have stronger tendencies to model someone else’s behaviors (or social norms) than people from another culture. Although it has been argued that people in collectivistic cultures are under a normative influence to a greater extent than people in individualistic cultures are, treating such cultural characteristics as the main effect may be unwarranted. One needs to consider the possibility that the relationship between culture and normative influence may depend on the context or mode of communication and the type of communication behavior. That is, a cultural difference existed when the modeling tendency was compared for the gratitude statement versus the apology, using data from Park et al. (2005). The gratitude statement, compared with the apology, was more frequently modeled by American participants (24.61% for a gratitude statement and 2.33% for apology), while the apology, compared with the gratitude statement, was more frequently modeled by Korean participants (27.40% for apology and 14.63% for a gratitude statement). In sum, modeling behavior may depend on what is valued within the culture.

In conclusion, the current research findings may provide a couple of suggestions for future research in intercultural communication area. Future research can examine the use of and responses to a gratitude statement in various contexts such as face-to-face interactions or computer-mediated communication to find out whether the current findings generalize to other contexts. Furthermore, if cross-cultural differences in the use of and responses to a gratitude statement are observed across various contexts, the next step in this line of research is to investigate how Koreans respond to gratitude statements used by Americans and vice versa. For example, a future study may examine what type of attributions Koreans make about Americans when Americans ask Koreans for a favor and end their request with “thank you in advance” even before Koreans can decide on whether to do the favor. Expressing gratitude is a communication act that has a potential to improve individuals’ relationship with others. However, considering a possibility that a simple misuse of a gratitude statement (e.g., the use of a gratitude statement when it is not appropriate) can lead to misunderstanding, more information on cross-cultural differences can provide useful guides for intercultural communication training and theory development.

Footnotes

Appendix

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to Howard Giles and anonymous reviewers for their helpful feedback on an earlier version of this article and our research assistants at Michigan State University.

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

References

Burnard

(2003). Ordinary chat and therapeutic conversation: Phatic communication and mental health nursing. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 10, 678-682.

Brown

Levinson

S. C.

(1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Coulmas

(1981). Poison to your soul: Thanks and apologies contrastively viewed. In Coulmas

(Ed.), Conversational routine: Explorations in standardized communication situations and prepatterned speech (pp. 69-91). The Hague: Mouton.

Eisenstein

Bodman

J. W.

(1986). “I very appreciate”: Expressions of gratitude by native and non-native speakers of American English. Applied Linguistics, 7, 167-185.

Goffman

(1971). Relations in public. New York, NY: Harper.

Huang

J.-H.

(2001). Consumer evaluations of unethical behaviors of web sites: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 13, 51-71.

Ide

(1998). “Sorry for your kindness”: Japanese interactional ritual in public discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 29, 509-529.

Katz

A. N.

Lenhardt

Mitchell

(2007). On acknowledging thanks for performing a favor. Metaphor and Symbol, 22, 233-250.

Kumatoridani

(1999). Alternation and co-occurrence in Japanese thanks. Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 623-642.

10.

Kwon

(2000). Expressions of gratitude in Korean and English: A comparative analysis (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Seoul, Korea.

11.

Lee

H. E.

Park

H. S.

(2011). Why Koreans are more likely to favor “apology,” while Americans are more likely to favor “thank you.” Human Communication Research, 37, 125-146.

12.

Markus

H. R.

Kitayama

(1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.

13.

McAllister

M. P.

Turow

(2002). New media and the commercial sphere: Two interacting trends, five categories of concern. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46, 505-514.

14.

Ohashi

(2003). Japanese culture specific face and politeness orientation: A pragmatic investigation of yoroshiku onegaishimasu. Multilingua, 22, 257-274.

15.

Oyserman

Coon

Kemmelmeier

(2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3-72.

16.

Park

H. S.

Lee

H. E.

Song

J. A.

(2005). “I am sorry to send you SPAM”: Cross-cultural differences in use of apologies in email advertising in Korea and USA. Human Communication Research, 31, 365-398.

17.

Searle

J. R.

(1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. London, England: Cambridge University Press.

18.

Searle

J. R.

(1976). A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society, 5, 1-23.

19.

Spinello

R. A.

(1999). Ethical reflections on the problem of spam. Ethics and Information Technology, 1, 185-191.

20.

Ting-Toomey

(1988). Intercultural conflict styles: A face-negotiation theory. In Kim

Gudykunst

(Eds.), Theories in intercultural communication (pp. 213-235). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.

21.

Ting-Toomey

Gao

Trubisky

Yang

Kim

H. S.

Lin

S.-L.

Nishida

(1991). Culture, face maintenance, and styles of handling interpersonal conflict: A study in five cultures. International Journal of Conflict Management, 2, 275-296.

22.

Ting-Toomey

Kurogi

(1998). Facework competence in intercultural conflict: An updated face-negotiation theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22, 187-225.