BIB_12: Hall, M., De Jong, M., & Steehouder, M. (2004). Cultural differences and usability evaluation: individualistic and collectivistic participants compared. Technical Communication, 51(4), 489-503.

In this article, Hall et al. concern examine the effects of the participants' cultural background characteristics on usability evaluation. The authors draw on Hofstede's cultural dimensions--masculinity vs. femininity, strong vs. weak uncertainty avoidance, high vs. low power distance, individualism vs. collectivism, and long-term vs. short-term orientation--to classify the participants' cultural characteristics. They then conducted a study comparing two groups of participants' evaluation of a website using think aloud protocol. The results led the authors to conclude that cultural background of the participants is a relevant variable that may affect the feedback from the participants collected using various usability methods. It is also a factor that affect the discrepancy between behavior and self-reported results.

This is an interesting article. Actually, it support my criticism of the article by Donker-Kuijer et al. that examines the effect of color temperature on web usability. This article should be read with Vatrapu & Pérez-Quiñones's (2006) article that also looks at the cultural factors that affect the rigor of usability studies and choice of methods.

BIB_11: Cardon, P. W. (2008). A critique of Hall's contexting model. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 22(4), 399-428.

This is a meta-analysis of 224 articles published in business and technical communication journals between 1990 and 2006 on Hall's theory of contexting, a model that has been used widely in international/cross-cultural technical and business communication. Cardon concludes that there is no empirical support for the theory, and therefore, the theory is unsubstantiated and requires further research to support it. Cardon offers five recommendations for the future research in this area:

1. Develop measures or instruments for contexting
2. Include more countries and cultures in studies of contexting model
3. Develop categories or dimensions of contexting
4. Focus on the circumstances in which various cultures use both HC and LC messages
5. Focus on areas of contexting other than directness

This is a good article that critiques the widely used contexting model. The high-context and low-context models remains problematic epistemologically and methodologically. This article mostly addresses the lack of methodological rigor in the studies of this model. The recommendations are useful, but Cardon has neither pointed out a way for technical communicators to use the model, nor argued that we should stop using contexting model (i.e., completely discredited it).