The phenomenon of globalisation, and consequently migration, highlights the need to foster the development of new skills or attitudes, such as intercultural sensitivity, among the citizens of this increasingly interconnected world.
The study of intercultural sensitivity, conceived as an attitude of predisposal to positive behaviours in relation to cultural diversity (Ruiz-Bernardo, 2012), is essential to our understanding of the social reality and the promotion of intercultural coexistence. It also enables people to recognise how they perceive and relate to cultural diversity.
To this end, this study identifies population profiles and subsequently analyses the personal, contextual and process factors (CIPP Model) that act as facilitators of or obstacles to this attitude.
The study was carried out in the province of Castellón, one of the provinces with the most significant demographic growth in Spain, principally due to immigration. In 2010, the immigrant population accounted for 18.7% of the total registered population (according to data from the 2011 municipal census provided by the Spanish National Statistics Institute, INE). This situation has led to the emergence of perceptions and attitudes that challenge the day-to-day coexistence among the inhabitants of the province; studies of this type enable the policies, interventions and resources allocated to promote this coexistence to be oriented more appropriately.
1.1 Intercultural sensitivity, a question of attitude towards diversity
The intercultural sensitivity construct has its roots in studies in the field of intercultural communication (Bennett, 1986; Belay, 1993). Chen and Starosta (1996) describe it as the affective component of the competence of intercultural communication, building on initial conceptualisations by Bronfenbrenner, Harding and Wallwey (1958), as cited in Chen and Starosta (1998). This dimension focuses on personal emotions or changes in feelings caused by particular situations, people and environments that are different from their own culture. These authors define intercultural sensitivity as the ability to project and receive positive emotional responses before, during and after intercultural interactions. Hammer, Bennett, and Wiseman (2003) complement this definition, adding that it is the ability to identify and appreciate relevant cultural differences.
In the Spanish university context, research on the concept has addressed the field of pedagogical intervention at various levels of formal education (Vilà, 2003, 2005, De Santos, 2004; Aguaded, 2006, Sanhueza and Cardona, 2009). All these studies approach intercultural sensitivity as the emotional dimension of the intercultural communication competence and all have adapted and used Chen and Starosta’s (2000) instrument. The results of this research are well suited to describe and approach the reality evaluated from this perspective.
The social-community sphere has approached the construct from a different angle. Documentary study of the policies and practices of social and community intervention repeatedly refers to the goal of raising awareness among the population to promote a change of attitude towards cultural diversity and the immigrant population (Ruiz-Bernardo, 2012). Allport (1935) or Thomas and Znaniecki (1918) argued that attitudes are a reflection at the individual level of the social values of their group. This view comes closer to the situation of intercultural sensitivity, in that it is known to be unique to each individual, but its development is based on its determining context. Sales and Garcia (1997:87) define the attitude as “a learned predisposition to consistently respond favourably or unfavourably to persons or groups of persons, and social objects and situations”.
From this perspective, intercultural sensitivity could be redefined as an attitude. This approach allows social intervention actions to be better justified and guided, and does not exclude the conception of intercultural sensitivity held in the field of intercultural communication.
1.2 Factors studied as facilitators of this attitude
The main studies into the factors that promote intercultural sensitivity emphasise that the development of this attitude goes hand in hand with the personal experiences of immersion or contact with other cultures (Anderson, Lawton, Rexeisen and Hubbard, 2006; Williams, 2005; De Santos, 2004; Straffon, 2003; Olson and Kroeger, 2001). This includes people who have undergone migratory processes (Aguaded, 2006; Sanhuesa and Cardona, 2009) and who, for various reasons, have experienced immersion in another culture.
In addition, studies in Anglo-Saxon countries have found that speaking a second language also favours the development of this attitude (Olson and Kroeger, 2001), a result that is supported by Vilà (2006) in a study among secondary school students in the Baix Llobregat district of Barcelona.
The results of this latest research (Vilà, 2006) also revealed the existence of gender differences, with female students having greater intercultural sensitivity than their male counterparts.
On the issue of cultural self-identification, Vilà (2006) concludes that the greater the number of self-identifications, the greater the intercultural sensitivity; in other words, that people who considered themselves monocultural are less sensitive.
Finally, an adaptation of Stufflebeam and Shinkfield’s (1987) CIPP Model was used to study the factors. The name of the model refers to the four types of variables or factors described: Context, Input, Process and Product. Previous adaptations of this model have led to investigations of excellent quality, in that they explain and justify in detail the results obtained, thereby enriching the design and evaluation of educational intervention programmes (Jornet, Suarez and Belloch, 1998; Jornet, Suarez and Perales, 2000, 2003). Likewise, it is essential to explore in depth the intervening factors that are adapted to each circumstance or type of assessment or diagnosis (González Such, Jornet, Pérez Carbonell and Ferrández, 1994) so as to take into account the real possibilities of success in the socio-cultural interventions proposed.
The design proposed for this research is a descriptive correlational study, including the study of the instrument adapted to the reference population.
A non-probabilistic sample was used, which is defined as haphazard or accidental (Kalton, 1983). The sample was representative with a margin of error of 0.01.
The instrument underwent a thorough process of validation and tests for reliability in an initial stage of this investigation (Ruiz Bernardo, 2012b), obtaining a structural identification similar to the original scale, and a reliability of 0.847 (Cronbach’s α coefficient). The survey questionnaire was divided into two parts: the first part consisted of a short form to gather information identifying the participants and data on their possible experiences of contact with other cultures; the second part of the survey consisted of an adaptation of the Intercultural Sensitivity Scale (ISS) (Chen and Starosta, 2000). This is a 5-point Likert-type attitude scale, comprising 24 items grouped into five dimensions: Interaction engagement, Respect for cultural differences, Interaction confidence, Interaction enjoyment, and Interaction attentiveness.
The SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences, version 16) was used to analyse the data. Analyses included descriptive study, k-means cluster analysis to identify profiles, and testing of hypotheses among demographic variables (t-test, ANOVA, and other non-parametric tests such as the Kruskal-Wallis or Friedman tests).
The sample was made up of 995 people, of whom 76.7% were Spanish-born and the remaining 23.3% were foreigners. This composition reflects the reality of the target population of the province of Castellón (according to the 2010 census data provided by the INE). Of the sample, 38.4% were men and 58.2%  women, which yielded an overrepresentation of women in the sample, as percentages for the target population in the province were 50.4% men and 49.6% women (INE 2010). The sample represents a wide age range, from 16 to 85 years, with the largest group, 29.3% of the sample, consisting of people between the ages of 30 and 40 years. This composition resembles or matches the true population of the province. The sample includes data from 41 municipalities in the area, the largest of which were the provincial capital Castellón de la Plana, Almazora, Benicàssim, Onda, Vila-real and Vinaròs. A total of 37 nationalities were included, the most numerous, in addition to Spanish, were Romanian (5.1%), Moroccan (3.6%), Peruvian (2.9%) and Colombian (2.8%). In terms of educational background, 43% of the sample had university level studies, 17%, secondary school up to university entrance level, and 15% compulsory secondary school education; the remaining percentage of the sample was distributed among primary school, no formal education and non-responses. Two main groups were identified in terms of their employment situation: unemployed and permanent employees, each representing 33.2% of the total, and the largest groups in the sample. Although the percentage of unemployed in the sample is high, it comes close to the real unemployment rate registered in the Valencian Community during the second quarter of 2010, which stood at 31.87% (INE 2010). Those who reported having lived abroad accounted for 18.7%, while 69.9% stated they had not (the remaining percentage were non-respondents). The number of languages spoken by participants in the sample were as follows: 17.6% were monolingual, 47.2% were bilingual, 24.7% multilingual (up to four languages), and 10% spoke more than four languages. The largest percentage was bilingual, a finding that is explained by the geographical context, where two official languages coexist and Valencian is commonly used as the language of communication: the latest figures from the Sociolinguistic Research and Studies Service of the Department of Education of Valencian Community (2010) reveal that 46.4% of the population of Castellón speak reasonably good Valencian.
The standard score of the scale has a minimum of 24 (indicating an attitude radically opposed to intercultural sensitivity), a mean score of 72 (indicating an indifferent or intermediate attitude) and a maximum score of 120 (reflecting an extremely favourable attitude). The mean score for this sample was 90.29 with a standard deviation of 13.13 points. This is interpreted as middle to high intercultural sensitivity among the population of Castellón.
3.1 Differential study on intercultural sensitivity and the input, context and process variables
Using hypothesis testing techniques we identified the variables that showed significant differences, and which are detailed below.
Origin: Spanish-born or foreign. Results of the t-test (for independent samples) revealed a significant difference (p ≤ 0.013) with a confidence level of 95%. The difference in the means shows that the foreign participants are more interculturally sensitive than Spanish-born respondents.
Gender: men and women. The contrast of means (t-test for independent samples) reveals significant differences (p ≤ 0.014). The difference reveals women as more interculturally sensitive than men.
Age: this variable was divided into five subsections. An ANOVA was performed to contrast the means of these five age groups. The Levene statistic confirmed the homogeneity of variances assumption with p ≤ 0.311. The ANOVA yielded p ≤ 0.000, recognising significant differences at a 99% confidence level between different age groups. Through post-hoc tests, we found that group 1 (16-20 years) was less sensitive than groups 2 (21-30 years) and 3 (31-40 years). Differences were also found between group 3 (31-40 years), and groups 4 (41-50 years) and 5 (51 and over); in this case group 3 also emerged as the most sensitive. We can therefore conclude that group 3 (31-40 years) shows the greatest intercultural sensitivity, followed by group 2 and then group 4. The least sensitive groups were 1 and 5, i.e., the two extremes of this age spectrum.
Educational level: this variable had six subsections ranging from no education to university studies. Because the Levene test ruled out the possibility of using a parametric test, we used the Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric test, which revealed significant differences in educational background, with p ≤ 0.000; the mean ranges assigned show that the higher the educational attainment, the higher the rate of intercultural sensitivity. People with a university background are therefore more sensitive than those with no formal education.
Experience of living in another country: the response options for this variable were yes and no. The t-test (for independent samples) showed significant differences (p ≤ 0.000). The means revealed differences showing greater intercultural sensitivity among those who had lived abroad.
Number of languages spoken: this variable was split into four subdivisions (monolingual, bilingual, multilingual – up to four languages, and more than four languages). When the hypothesis was tested (prior to the Levene test: p ≤ 0.477) significant differences were revealed (p ≤ 0.000). In post hoc tests the main difference emerged in the group that spoke more than four languages; this group was more sensitive than the monolingual, bilingual and multilingual groups.
Employment situation and family situation were also analysed in this study and were found to have no influence on the development of intercultural sensitivity.
Employment situation: this variable was grouped into six subdivisions. Because the Levene test (p ≤ 0.000) ruled out the possibility of using a parametric test, the Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric test was performed. The contrast of means revealed no significant differences between the various employment situations and the rate of intercultural sensitivity (p ≤ 0.185).
Family situation: this variable also had six subdivisions. The result of the Levene test was p ≤ 0.284, indicating that the criterion of homoscedasticity had been met, and an ANOVA was subsequently performed. This test yielded a result of p ≤ 0.577. No significant differences between the six family situations were therefore evidenced.
In summary, we identified six variables that revealed significant differences in relation to intercultural sensitivity and only two variables that provided no relevant information. The profile analysis detailed below enables us to differentiate the combinations that are more likely to encourage intercultural sensitivity from those that do not promote this attitude.
3.2 Intercultural sensitivity profiles
Using classification techniques (cluster analysis or k-means cluster) we identified four intercultural sensitivity profiles. Similar uses of the methodology for profile identification developed by González Such, Jornet, Suárez and Pérez (1999) or Ferrández, Callejo, Ibáñez and Vidal (2006) were taken as a reference.
The profiles can be characterised as follows:
The Kruskal-Wallis test confirmed the existence of significant differences (p ≤ 0.000) between the profiles.
The composition of each profile was then examined according to the information from the basic descriptive demographic data. Analyses were initially performed for the entire sample, which was then split into two groups according to origin (i.e., Spanish-born or foreigner). The social characteristics were as follows:
Profile 1: Low Intercultural Sensitivity
The general profile can be defined as having the following characteristics: male between the ages of 21 and 30, with compulsory secondary school studies or vocational training, in precarious employment, unmarried, with no experience of living in another country and bilingual.
In terms of Spanish-born respondents, this profile was as follows: men between the ages of 21 to 30, with compulsory secondary school studies or vocational training, in precarious or unstable work, unmarried, with no experience of living in another country and bilingual. This profile is identical to the general profile.
The profile for foreigner status is as follows: young men between the ages of 16 and 20, with primary or compulsory secondary education (similar frequencies were revealed), who are currently unemployed, unmarried and have lived in a country other than Spain and their home country, and are bilingual. Some descriptive data specific to origin can also be added to this profile; these data are only indicative and complement our understanding of the foreign population within this profile. The largest nationality within this profile is Romanian, 29.4%, followed by Moroccan, 23.5%. Regarding their official status, 94.1% have residence and work permits; only 5.9% (one case) did not respond. The length of residence in Spain and in Castellón coincided in a period of 5-8 years.
Profile 2: High Intercultural Sensitivity
The general profile can be defined as having the following characteristics: women between the ages of 31 and 40, with a university education, a steady job, married and unmarried in equal measure, have not lived in another country and bilingual.
Regarding Spanish-born status, the profile can be defined by the following characteristics: women between the ages of 31 and 40, with a university education, a steady job, unmarried, with no experience of living in another country and bilingual. In different proportions, this profile is very similar to the general profile except with regard to marital status.
The profile for foreign status can be defined as follows: women between the ages of 31 and 40, with a university education, currently unemployed, married and who have not lived in a country other than Spain and their home country, and are also bilingual. This profile can be supplemented with the following data on country of origin: the largest nationality group is Romanian, 21%, followed by Moroccan 11.4%. Latin American nationalities such as Colombian or Peruvian accounted for 10.5% and various other nationalities totalled 9.5%. Regarding official status, 71.4% have residence and work permits and 14.3% have dual nationality (due to the particular situation of people from Latin American countries who are eligible for preferential legal agreements). The period of residence in Spain is between 5 and 8 years and in Castellón, 2 to 5 years.
Profile 3: Medium Low Intercultural Sensitivity
The general profile is characterised as follows: women over the age of 51, with a university education, unemployed, married, with no experience of living in another country and bilingual.
This profile for the Spanish-born respondents is as follows: women over the age of 51, with a university education, in stable employment, married, who have not lived in another country and who are bilingual. Except in the case of employment situation, this profile is very similar to the general profile.
The profile for foreigners is also of women between the ages of 31 to 40, with compulsory secondary school education, currently unemployed, married, who have lived in a country other than Spain and their home country, and are bilingual. This profile can be supplemented with the following data on country of origin. The main nationality of this profile is Moroccan, 23.4%, followed by Peruvian, 14.9%. Regarding their official status, 78.8% have residence and work permits (the remaining percentage did not respond). The length of residence in Spain and in Castellón falls within the period of 2 to 5 years, so that it can be assumed that they had not previously lived in other regions of Spain.
Profile 4: Medium High Intercultural Sensitivity
This general profile is composed of people with the following characteristics: women between the ages of 31 and 40 with a university education, in a steady job, married, with no experience of living in another country and bilingual. This is very similar to profile 2.
The profile of the Spanish-born respondents can be defined as follows: women between the ages of 31 and 40 with a university education, in a steady job, married, with no experience of living in another country and bilingual. This profile is similar to the general profile detailed above.
Taking foreign status into account, this profile may be defined by the following characteristics: men between the ages of 31 to 40, with compulsory secondary school studies, who are currently unemployed, unmarried and have not lived in a country other than Spain and their home country, and are bilingual. This profile can be supplemented with the following data on country of origin: the main nationality is Romanian with 28.6%, followed by Colombian, 15.9%. Regarding official status 76.2% have resident and work permits. Their length of residence in Spain and in Castellón is between 5 and 8 years.
3.3 Analysis of the factors from each profile
Regarding gender, the profiles analysed from the general data (i.e., not differentiated by origin) are mainly composed of women, with the exception of profile 1. The Spanish-born profile is the same as the general profile. With regard to foreign respondents, profiles 1 and 4 have a larger proportion of men, while in profiles 2 and 3 the numbers of are women are higher. In summary, women make up a higher percentage of the more sensitive profile, while men have a less sensitive profile.
Variations emerged in the age composition of the general profiles. In the case of profile 1 the largest group is between 21 and 30 years; in the case of profile 3 the main age group is that of 51 and older; and in the case of profiles 2 and 4 the main group is that of 31 to 40 years. All the profiles for the Spanish-born group reflect the same patterns as the general profiles. In the case of foreigners, profiles 2 and 4 reflect the same patterns as the general population, whereas in profile 1 the 16 to 20 year group is the largest, and in profile 3 people between the ages of 31 and 40 years account for the largest percentage. In summary, the most sensitive profile comprises people between the ages of 31 to 40 years.
Regarding educational background, in general, people in profile 1 have compulsory secondary school education or vocational training, whereas in profiles 2, 3 and 4 university studies account for the main educational level. In terms of origin, the Spanish-born group present the same patterns as in all the general population profiles; in the case of the foreign population, the patterns are quite different, reflected as follows: profile 1 reveals primary and secondary school education in the same proportions; profile 2 coincides with the general profile, namely, university studies; in profile 3, secondary education is predominant; and in profile 4, secondary education or vocational training are the main groups. On the question of educational background, a lower education level correlates with a lower profile of intercultural sensitivity, whereas a higher education level correlates with a higher profile of intercultural sensitivity. In summary, the most sensitive profile comprises people with a university education and the least sensitive profile includes those with secondary school studies or vocational training and lower levels of education.
In the general picture for employment situation, profiles 2 and 4 are characterised by permanent or steady employment. Precarious employment predominates in profile 1, whereas the outstanding feature of profile 3 is that its participants are unemployed.
Regarding Spanish-born status, profiles 1, 2 and 4 coincide with the general profile, while 3 is characterised by greater predominance of those in permanent or steady employment. A single feature predominates in the case of the profiles of foreigners, namely unemployment. While this variable did not present significant differences in the study differential within the profiles, it provides information that could be further explored in future studies, since it reveals that the most sensitive profiles are of people in more stable employment and the least sensitive profiles comprise those in precarious employment.
In terms of family situation, in general, profile 1 is characterised by unmarried status, in the case of profile 2 unmarried and married status are equally distributed, and profiles 3 and 4 married status predominates.
All profiles for Spanish-born respondents show the same pattern as the general profile, except in the case of profile 2, where single status predominates. In the foreign status group, profiles 1 and 3 reflect the same patterns as the general profiles, in profile 2 married status predominates, and profile 4 primarily comprises single people. As in the case of the previous variable, no significant differences were found in the differential study. However the profile analyses provide information for further research, given that the lowest profile of intercultural sensitivity coincides with unmarried status whereas in the highest sensitivity profile, family status depends on origin, i.e. the Spanish-born are single and the foreigners are married.
The majority response to the question about experience of living in another country was negative both in the general and in the Spanish-born and foreign profiles. This finding called for a detailed observation of the percentages, which revealed that in profile 1 those who reported having lived abroad accounted for only 9.1%; in the case of profile 2, this percentage was 26.4%; in the case of profile 3, 19.4%; and in profile 4, 12.3%. From this we can deduce a link between profiles 1 and 2: profile 1 has the lowest percentage of those who have lived in another country, whereas profile 2 reflects the largest percentage.
As for the number of languages spoken by participants in this sample, we find that in all profiles, both general and differentiated by the origin, the main characteristic is bilingualism. In the case of the Spanish-born group this is because they live in a region with two official languages and have grown up speaking both languages; in the case of the foreign group, because they speak their mother tongue and the most appropriate language to interact in a foreign country. Therefore this indicator is not able to discriminate on these profiles and we applied the same procedure used in the previous variable, namely, considering a secondary value as a possible indicator. This analysis found that profile 1 includes only 4% of those who can speak more than four languages, while profile 2 has 15.6% in the same category; the percentage in profile 3 is 7.1%, and in profile 4, 6.7%. Again profile 1 includes fewer people who speak four or more languages, whereas the situation is reversed in profile 2; in other words, the highest percentage of people with these characteristics is found in profile 2.
From these results and to seek out explanations, the variables can be classified according to the CIPP Model into input variables, process variables and context variables, in relation to the outcome variable, i.e., the intercultural sensitivity index (ISI).
Input Variables: Input variables must be differentiated because they are not directly linked to an intervention action, but are inherent characteristics or attributes. Hence, for example, the gender variable shows significant differences in the intercultural sensitivity manifested by men and women, the latter being more sensitive. This situation was also observed in the profiles, since in profile 2 (the most sensitive) women predominate, whereas men predominate in profile 1 (the least sensitive). This pattern has also been observed in previous studies (Vilà, 2005) conducted in the Spanish context, so the data obtained in this study lends further evidence to confirm this theoretical proposal. Therefore the gender distinction is shown to have an important influence, which opens up the gender theory debate on whether sensitivity is learned from the cultural context (Lamas, 1996) or whether it is genetically linked to gender. Many theories refer to the cultural nature of gender. This research leads us to assume that the gender variable is a facilitating factor for the development of an attitude of intercultural sensitivity, without going into the debate on the cultural nature of genre.
Another input variable is age; the most sensitive group is that of people between the ages of 31 to 40. Two very interesting conclusions can be drawn from this analysis. The first is that two groups of the five defined in the age descriptions have lower intercultural sensitivity and correspond to the two extremes of the distribution, i.e., the youngest aged from 16 to 20, and the oldest adults aged over 51 years; hence sensitivity can not be said to increase with age; indeed the reverse appears to be true, and this variable can not therefore be linked to maturity. Other factors may be assumed to affect people in these age groups. The second conclusion is that educational background is similar in these two groups, since they have the lowest levels of education (the first because they are still below university age, and the second because they either did not go to university or did not complete their university education), which suggests that a higher educational background can develop other skills that encourage intercultural sensitivity.
Process variables: process variables include those in which the subject or the environment can intervene in their development and implementation.
Regarding the level of education, this study has verified the premise that the higher the level of education, the higher the intercultural sensitivity. This situation can be generalised to both the Spanish-born and the foreigner groups. The foreigner group profiles are particularly relevant, in that each profile coincides directly, from lowest to highest, with the level of education in the same order. The contrast of means also supports this premise. This factor can also therefore be considered as a facilitator for the development of an attitude of intercultural sensitivity.
When asked about their experience of living in another country, the majority response was negative both in the general and in the Spanish-born or foreigner group profiles. However, secondary information was revealed through the percentages of affirmative responses, reflecting fewer people with this experience in the lowest profiles (9.1%), and larger numbers with this experience in the highest profiles (26.4%). This factor has also been found to produce significant differences, and it is unsurprisingly confirmed that those who have had the chance to spend more than three months in a different country are much more sensitive (5.44 points) than those who have not had that opportunity. This situation suggests that this is a key facilitator of intercultural sensitivity, and corroborates findings from other studies (Anderson, Lawton, Rexeisen and Hubbard, 2006; Williams, 2005, De Santos, 2004; Straffon, 2003; Olson and Kroeger, 2001).
The level of intercultural sensitivity according to participants’ origin showed significant differences with a confidence level of 99%, in that the foreigner group was more sensitive than the Spanish-born group, a situation described previously by Sanhueza and Cardona (2009) or Vilà (2006), who also note more positive responses from foreign than Spanish-born participants.
In relation to the two above-mentioned variables, we can therefore confirm that contact with a range of cultures encourages the development of intercultural sensitivity.
Regarding the number of languages spoken, the bilingual option was ruled out in this geographical context since it is a common dimension whose influence on intercultural sensitivity can not be adequately determined. For this reason, we considered the group who spoke more than four languages, finding that in the lowest profile fewer people met this condition (4%), while the largest number of people speaking four or more languages (15.6%) fell within the highest sensitivity profile. Our study lends support to a premise that has been widely studied previously (Olson and Kroeger, 2001; Vilà, 2005); Vilà has proposed this indicator as a predictor of intercultural sensitivity, since the number of languages spoken increases in proportion to the intercultural sensitivity index score.
Context variables: In this case, the context variables are highly diverse and are linked to factors occurring in the subject’s immediate environment.
The first variable studied was the employment situation, since it conditions the individual’s projects for the future, especially those whose migration was determined by the search for employment. This study has shown that higher job stability leads to greater intercultural sensitivity. However, this situation may depend on the status of origin, as in the case of the foreigner group we have not been able to confirm this premise. This may be due to a sampling error, since a very high unemployment rate was revealed in the foreigner group, which could have led to bias. Or it may raise another issue that calls for further research to learn whether foreign or employment status has a greater effect on the development of intercultural sensitivity.
In this study, the family situation variable, in both general and origin specific situations, does not allow adequate discrimination with regard to intercultural sensitivity. In terms of the profiles, it helps to give a better picture of each case, but this variable can not be identified as a facilitator of intercultural sensitivity or otherwise.
In conclusion, the input variables gender and age, and the process variables level of training, experience of living in another country, foreigner status and number of languages spoken, were all identified as facilitators of intercultural sensitivity. The context variables employment and family status do not appear to have any involvement in the development of this attitude.
Finally, future research lines associated with this line of study could supplement this information with qualitative methodologies and data obtained, for example, through in-depth interviews with people who identify with these profiles, thereby corroborating and enriching the factors that have allowed this attitude to develop.
Aguaded, E. (2006). La educación de competencias básicas para el desarrollo de la ciudadanía intercultural en la ESO. Actas del V Congreso Internacional “Educación y Sociedad: Retos del s. XXI” (pp. 1-8). Granada: Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación, Universidad de Granada.
Allport, G.W. (1935). Attitudes. En Murchison (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology. Worcester, Clark University Press.
Anderson, P.H., Lawton, L., Rexeisen, R. J. & Hubbard, A. C. (2006). Short-term study abroad and intercultural sensitivity: A pilot study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30, 457-469.
Belay, G. (1993). Toward a paradigm shift for international communication: new research directions. Communication Yearbook, 16, 437-457.
Bennett, J. M. (1986). A Developmental Approach to training For Intercultural Sensitivity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10, 179-196.
Brofenbrenner, U., Harding, J. & Gallwey, M. (1958). The measurement of skill in social perception. In Mc. Clelland, D.C. (Ed.) Talent and Society. N.Y.: Van Nostrand.
Buendía, Leonor, González González, Daniel, Pozo, Teresa & Sánchez Núñez, Christian A. (2004). Identidad y competencias interculturales. RELIEVE, v. 10, n. 2. http://www.uv.es/RELIEVE/v10n2/RELIEVEv10n2_1.htm
Chen G.M. & Starosta W. (1996). Intercultural communication competence: a synthesis. Communication Yearbook 19, Pp. 353-383.
Chen G.M. & Starosta W. (1998). A review of the concept of intercultural sensitivity. Human Communication, 1(1), Pp. 27-54.
Chen G.M. & Starosta W. (2000). The development and validation of the intercultural sensitivity scale. Human Communication, 3(1), 2-14.
De Santos Velasco, F. (2004). Desarrollo de la Competencia Intercultural en Alumnado Universitario: Una propuesta formativa para la gestión en empresas multiculturales. Tesis Doctoral. Mide. UB. Barcelona.
Ferrández, R.; Callejo, G.; Ibáñez, S. & Vidal, J. (2006). Análisis de la sensibilidad de los jóvenes ante la seguridad vial. Bases para la elaboración de un programa. RELIEVE, v 12, 2. pp. 1-19. http://www.uv.es/RELIEVE/v12n2/RELIEVEv12n2_7.htm
García, R., Ferrández, R, Sales, Mª. A. & Moliner, Mª. O. (2006). Elaboración de instrumentos de medida de las actitudes y opiniones del profesorado universitario hacia la ética profesional docente y su papel como transmisor de valores. RELIEVE, v. 12, n. 1, pp. 129-149. http://www.uv.es/RELIEVE/v12n1/RELIEVEv12n1_8.htm
González Such, J.; Jornet, J.M.; Pérez Carbonell, A. & Ferrández, R. (1994). Factores intervinientes en la valoración del profesor por parte del estudiante. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 2323, pp. 292-300.
González Such, J.; Jornet, J.M.; Suárez, J.M. & Pérez Carbonell, A. (1999). Análisis tipológico de Calidad docente a partir de un cuestionario de evaluación del profesorado universitario. Bordón, Vol. 51, Nº 1, 95-113.
Hammer, M. R., Bennett, M. J., & Wiseman, R. L. (2003). Measuring intercultural sensitivity: the intercultural development inventory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27, 421-443.
Jornet, J., Suarez, J. & Perales, M.J. (2003). Eurodialogue Evaluation. Guía Práctica para la evaluación de programas de formación profesional, ocupacional y continua. Valencia: Fundación Universidad-empresa de Valencia. ADEIT.
Jornet, J.M.; Suárez, J.M. & Belloch, J.M. (1998). Metodología para la Evaluación de Programas de Formación Profesional, Ocupacional y Continua. Valencia: Adeit.
Jornet, J.M.; Suárez, J.M. & Carbonell, A. (2000). La validez en la evaluación de programas. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 18, 2, pp. 341-356.
Kalton, G. (1983). Introduction to survey sampling. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Lamas, M. (1996). El género: la construcción cultural de la diferencia sexual. PUEG/ Miguel Ángel Porrúa, Colección las Ciencias Sociales, Estudios de Género, México.
Olson,C. & Kroeger, K. (2001). Global competency and intercultural sensitivity. Journal of Studies in international education, 5 (2), 116-137.
Ruiz Bernardo, M. P. (2012). Estudio documental del constructo sensibilidad intercultural en las políticas y prácticas socio-comunitarias. Pulso, v. 35. (En prensa)
Sanhueza, S. & Cardona, M. (2009). Evaluación de la sensibilidad intercultural en alumnado de educación primaria escolarizado en aula culturalmente diversas. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 27 (1), 247-262.
Straffon, D.A. (2003). Assessing the intercultural sensitivity of high school students attending an international school. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27, 487-501.
Stufflebeam, D.L. & Shinkfield, A. (1987). Evaluación Sistemática. Guía teórica y práctica. Madrid: MEC – Paidós.
Thomas, W. & Znaniecki, F. (1918). The polish peasant in Europe and America, Vol.1. Univ. Chicago Press.
Vilà, R. (2003). La competencia comunicativa intercultural en educación secundaria obligatoria: Escala de Sensibilidad Intercultural. En Soriano-Ayala (Coord.), Perspectivas Teórico-Prácticas de la educación intercultural (pp.103-112). Almería: Servicio de Publicaciones, Universidad de Almería.
Vilà, R. (2005). La competencia comunicativa intercultural. Un estudio en el Primer Ciclo de la ESO.O. Tesis Doctoral. Facultat de Pedagogia Departament de Mètodes d’Investigació i Diagnòstic en Educació. Universidad de Barcelona.
Vilà, R. (2006). La dimensión afectiva de la competencia comunicativa intercultural en la Educación Secundaria Obligatoria: Escala de Sensibilidad Intercultural. Revista de Investigación Educativa, Vol. 24, n.º 2, pp. 353-372.
Impact of Study Abroad on Students’ Intercultural
Communication Skills: Adaptability and Sensitivity.
of Studies in International Education. Vol.
This research project forms part of f MAVACO (Modelo de Análisis de Variables de Contexto), funded by MICINN (Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation), reference EDU2009-13485, led by J.M. Jornet
ABOUT THE AUTHORS / SOBRE
PhD in Education in the Jaume I
University in Castellón, Spain. Postgraduate degree on
Intercultural Mediation in the University of Valencia. She
is professor in the Department of education and researcher
in the MEICRI research group (Education Improvement and
Critical Citizenship) in the Jaume I University in Castellón.
Her main research activity is related to intercultural and
inclusive education. Her mail address is: Facultad de
Ciencias Humanas y Sociales. Campus de Riu Sec.
artículos de esta autora en
Google Académico / Find
other articles by this author in
ABOUT THE AUTHORS / SOBRE LOS AUTORES
Ruiz-Bernardo, Paola (firstname.lastname@example.org). PhD in Education in the Jaume I University in Castellón, Spain. Postgraduate degree on Intercultural Mediation in the University of Valencia. She is professor in the Department of education and researcher in the MEICRI research group (Education Improvement and Critical Citizenship) in the Jaume I University in Castellón. Her main research activity is related to intercultural and inclusive education. Her mail address is: Facultad de Ciencias Humanas y Sociales. Campus de Riu Sec. 12071-Castellón (Spain). Buscar otros artículos de esta autora en Google Académico / Find other articles by this author in Scholar GoogleFerrández-Berrueco, Reina (email@example.com). Degree and PhD in Educational Research. Is Professor of Research Methodology in Education and Educational Assessment at the Universitat Jaume I in Spain. She has collaborated in different research projects about diversity, inclusion and multicultural education developing the role of assessment expertise. Her main research activity is related to Quality Assessment and Quality Management in Higher Education. As professional, started and carried out the Institutional Assessment process in the Universitat Jaume I Holding the position of Head of the Quality Office in that university from 1995 to 2001. She also performs as external evaluator for several National and International Quality Agencies. Her mail address is: Facultad de Ciencias Humanas y Sociales. Campus de Riu Sec. 12071-Castellón (Spain). Buscar otros artículos de esta autora en Scholar Google / Find other articles by this author in Scholar Google
Sales-Ciges,María-Auxiliadora (firstname.lastname@example.org). Senior Lecturer in the Department of Education at the Universitat Jaume I (Castellón, Spain). She is the coordinator of Research Group MEICRI (Mejora Educativa y Ciudadanía Crítica). Her research focuses on intercultural and inclusive education, attitudes and values training and planning, developing and evaluating measures of attention to diversity in schools. Her mail address is: Facultad de Ciencias Humanas y Sociales. Campus de Riu Sec. 12071-Castellón (Spain). Buscar otros artículos de esta autora en Scholar Google/ Find other articles by this author in Scholar Google
ARTICLE RECORD / FICHA DEL ARTÍCULO
Ruiz-Bernardo, Paola; Ferrández-Berrueco, Reina & Sales-Ciges, María-Auxiliadora (2012). Application of the CIPP model in the study of factors that promote intercultural sensitivity. RELIEVE, v. 18, n. 2, art. 4. DOI: 10.7203/relieve.18.2.1993
Title / Título
Application of the CIPP model in the study of factors that promote intercultural sensitivity . [Aplicación del modelo CIPP en el estudio de los factores que favorecen la sensibilidad intercultural].
Authors / Autores
Ruiz-Bernardo, Paola; Ferrández-Berrueco, Reina & Sales-Ciges, María-Auxiliadora
Review / Revista
|RELIEVE (Revista ELectrónica de Investigación y EValuación Educativa), v. 18, n. 2|
Publication date /
Fecha de publicación
2012 (Reception Date: 2011 July 05 ; Approval Date: 2012 October 23. Publication Date: 2012 October 25)
Abstract / Resumen
The present study proposes a group of factors (related to self, context and process) favouring the development of intercultural sensitivity. A social diagnosis was performed in the Spanish province of Castellón in order to identify these factors by means of a correlational study. A non-probabilistic but representative sample consisting of 995 people from 37 different countries living in this province was used. Data were collected by means of an adaptation of the scale proposed by Chen and Starosta (2000) for the assessment of intercultural sensitivity. Results showed four profiles, and their main characteristics were studied. Variables such as country of origin, gender, academic background, number of languages spoken, or the experience of living in a foreign country revealed to have a positive influence on the development of this attitude.
El presente artículo propone un conjunto de los factores (personales, contextuales y de proceso) que favorecen el desarrollo de la sensibilidad intercultural. Para identificar dichos factores se ha realizado un diagnóstico social en la provincia de Castellón (España). Este estudio de tipo descriptivo de carácter correlacional se ha concretado con una muestra de 995 personas de 37 nacionalidades diferentes, constituyendo una muestra representativa, caracterizada por ser de tipo fortuito o accidental. Para recoger la información se ha utilizado una adaptación de la escala de sensibilidad intercultural de Chen y Starosta (2000). El análisis de datos ha permitido identificar cuatro perfiles, de los cuales se han estudiado sus principales características y se ha podido concluir que variables tales como la condición de origen, el sexo, la formación, la cantidad de lenguas que habla o el haber vivido en otro país influyen positivamente para el desarrollo de esta actitud.
Keywords / Descriptores
Intercultural sensitivity; Cultural diversity; Social indexes; Profiles of intercultural sensitivity; Social diagnosis.
Sensibilidad intercultural; Diversidad cultural; Indicadores sociales; Perfiles de sensibilidad intercultural; Diagnóstico social.
Institution / Institución
Departament of Education. Universitat Jaume I (España).
Publication site / Dirección
Language / Idioma
Español & English version (Title, abstract and keywords in English & Spanish)
Volumen 18, n. 2
© Copyright, RELIEVE. Reproduction and distribution of this article is authorized if the content is no modified and its origin is indicated (RELIEVE Journal, volume, number and electronic address of the document).
© Copyright, RELIEVE. Se autoriza la reproducción y distribución de este artículo siempre que no se modifique el contenido y se indique su origen (RELIEVE, volumen, número y dirección electrónica del documento).
[ ISSN: 1134-4032 ]
Revista ELectrónica de Investigación y EValuación Educativa
E-Journal of Educational Research, Assessment and Evaluation