“Knowledge Strategies” for Indigenous Studies on Intercultural Communication in Non-Western Countries in the Global Power Structure

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This theory essay is well written, well structured, and all argued. The author did a nice job of explaining key concepts throughout the paper, allowing the readers to easily follow the argument. Arguments process in a logical order. Literature cited is relevant, with effective and robust use of Foucault's theory on power and knowledge. It is also a timely contribution to the field of global culture studies.

 

Below are a few suggestions for the author to consider while revising the essay:

 

--The author might want to list methodology as one of the "How to." Most methodologies used by scholars are established and legitimized by Western academia. A breakthrough in theory cannot fully accomplish without a breakthrough in methodologies.

 

--Another major issue that should be discussed is the dominance of the English language. Does the author have some insights on that?

 

--While this is a theoretical essay, it will benefit from some specific examples. 

 

--The points in the essay seem applicable to many research topics and disciplines. What makes intercultural communication stand out? Any unique conditions related to intercultural communication studies?

 

--Public ethics of humankind seems to be a central idea to the author's argument. More discussion on that would be better. 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English writing is mostly proficient. There is some occasion wordiness and minor lack of clarity. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your meticulous review of our manuscript. Your insightful comments have been invaluable in refining our work and significantly enhancing its academic rigor and relevance. We have carefully considered each point and made revisions across five key areas as per your suggestions:

1. Recognizing the critical role of methodological advancements in fostering theoretical innovations, we have dedicated a paragraph in the conclusion section (Section 5) to outlining recommendations at the methodological level.
2. Responding to your observation, we have incorporated a discussion on the influence of English language dominance on intercultural communication research within the third paragraph of the introduction (Section 1).
3. Following your advice, we have enriched the third section of our manuscript by incorporating specific examples to support our discussion of "knowledge strategies." These examples serve to clarify and contextualize our theoretical framework, making it more accessible and compelling for readers.
4. As you rightly pointed out, intercultural communication transcends mere interactions between cultures; it embodies a profound humanistic concern for the future of humanity from a cultural perspective. We have therefore emphasized this aspect in the opening paragraph of the conclusion section (Section 5), highlighting how intercultural communication knowledge can safeguard local cultures and counter cultural hegemony.
5. Recognizing the centrality of 'public ethics of humankind' as a conceptual pillar in our work, we have significantly expanded its coverage, primarily in the conclusion. We now delve into the concept's significance from both pragmatic and symbolic perspectives, acknowledging its pivotal role in shaping our understanding of the ultimate goals of intercultural communication while acknowledging its place within the broader context of our analysis.

 

Once again, we are deeply appreciative of your thoughtful feedback and the valuable insights it has provided. We hope that our efforts in addressing your comments meet with your approval and contribute to enhancing the quality of our manuscript.

Best wishes,

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Despite the interest and relevance of the topic, there is no methodological design that brings us new data/results for academic and scientific knowledge.

This article presents a good theoretical exploration of intercultural communication and its importance in today's global society, but it does not present concrete data on how power structures are linked to intercultural communication in indigenous studies.

 

On the other hand, it also seems to me that this topic does not meet the interests of the Journalism and Media journal, as it neither explores journalism nor studies the media.

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English language is ok.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I am deeply appreciative of your thorough review of our manuscript and the invaluable suggestions you have offered. Your unique and insightful perspective has undoubtedly provided us with fresh avenues for contemplation. Upon careful consideration of your feedback, I realize that some of our core concepts and principles in intercultural communication studies might not have been fully captured due to the interdisciplinary nature of our field or the intricacies inherent in this specialized area. Hence, I would like to take this opportunity to briefly introduce and clarify some key characteristics of our discipline, fostering a shared understanding and facilitating a more profound exploration of these issues.

Firstly, intercultural communication studies encompass both quantitative and theoretical analytical approaches. Quantitative methods, often involving surveys, generate data to summarize cultural traits, with Geert Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory, derived from IBM employee surveys, serving as a notable example. While quantitative methods offer scientific rigor, many researchers, particularly those from non-Western backgrounds, have noted their inherent Western bias, leading to ethnocentric findings that may perpetuate stereotypes. In contrast, theoretical analyses in intercultural communication delve into macro-level historical or social structures to gain insights into the interrelationships between cultures, emphasizing reflexivity and critique. Here, the focus shifts from data to the power dynamics and relationships between cultures, reflecting a profound humanistic concern aimed at preserving local cultures and countering cultural hegemony. Consequently, theoretical analysis, alongside data analysis, constitutes a pivotal method in intercultural communication research. Our paper, being theoretical in nature, employs a similar approach to Max Weber's "ideal types" to interpret and reflect on current strategies in local intercultural communication research, offering a novel perspective for researchers in non-Western contexts while advocating for humanistic awareness. Naturally, the data concerns you've raised are crucial, and we will continue to study and explore these aspects, refining our understanding of research methodologies.

Secondly, I would like to clarify that we have long admired Journalism and Media for its professionalism and focus on journalism and communication studies. Traditionally, the journal has primarily centered on issues within these fields. However, we were delighted to discover this year's special issue dedicated to intercultural communication, which aligns perfectly with our research interests, creating a valuable forum for scholars in this niche area. We eagerly anticipate that our academic viewpoints will gain recognition from your esteemed reviewers and contribute to the development of research by a broader community. We appreciate the journal's broad scope and distinctive focus. We hope our manuscript finds favor and will continue to support and recommend Journalism and Media to fellow researchers.

Once again, we are deeply grateful for your constructive feedback. We hope that our efforts meet with your approval and contribute to the enrichment of the academic discourse.

Best wishes,

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The title and objective of the paper, as stated in the abstract, are quite clear. The statement from the abstract that the “study proposes ‘knowledge strategies’ for indigenous studies on intercultural communication in non-Western countries and introduces a third level of significance for intercultural communication beyond daily interaction and cultural interaction: community building” is promising, but the abstract does not provide any information about the methods used.

The reference Atal (2023) is missing from the reference list.

The assertion at the end of page 2 and the beginning of page 3 needs to be supported with relevant references: “Some scholars from non-Western countries have realized that the dominance of Western academic discourses is based on the political, economic, and technological advantages established by Western countries during the period of globalization.”

The entire article is built solely from Michel Foucault’s power/knowledge theory perspective, and even though the author(s) support their ideas with other references, the article resembles an opinion article for a newspaper rather than being structured according to the requirements for academic journal articles.

The political views of the author(s) are not being questioned. However, presenting opinions from only one perspective is not typical for academic articles, as the results from the research or literature analysis must be discussed from multiple angles and placed into context without being overinterpreted. For example, one passage on page 6 looks more like a manifesto than a conclusion derived from research: “When conducting indigenous studies, researchers in non-Western countries should utilize corresponding ‘knowledge strategies’ to update and diversify the main topics and basic frameworks of intercultural communication.”

In subsection 2.3, "Studying the Indigenous Knowledge from Other Non-Western Countries," the author(s) make some statements in the imperative form that could potentially be formulated as research hypotheses. Here are two examples:

1. Researchers in intercultural communication from non-Western countries need to recognize that the long-standing dominance of Western knowledge has led to a tendency for non-Western scholars to adopt Western theories, paradigms, and evaluation standards.

2. ...change the mindset of dependency on Western knowledge, imitation, and self-colonization.

As they are currently formulated, these statements looks more like personal opinions. If they were stated as research hypotheses and then confirmed/refuted through an extensive literature review, the article would resemble an academic article rather than an opinion piece.

Even though the author(s) stated at the end of their article that it underscored how non-Western countries can leverage intercultural communication to disseminate indigenous cultural experiences and values, the article does not provide answers to the "how?" question derived from research. There are only many sentences formulated in the imperative form on this topic.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you immensely for your meticulous review of our manuscript. Your insightful comments have been invaluable in refining our work and significantly enhancing its academic rigor and validity. Your feedback has highlighted the challenges in transitioning the thinking embedded in Chinese theoretical writing to an English context, particularly in avoiding a peremptory tone, which was never our intention. Rather, we aimed to present a suggestive approach, yet linguistic habits inadvertently caused some confusion. We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.

We have taken your scientific criticisms to heart and made the following six key revisions to address your points:

1. We have expanded the abstract to include a more detailed account of our methodology. Additionally, we have corrected the misattribution of the reference from Atal (2023) to the correct author, Alatas (1993), throughout the text and in the reference list.
2. We have added relevant references to substantiate the claims made at the end of page 2 and the beginning of page 3.
3. For the statement on page 6 regarding the utilization of 'knowledge strategies' by non-Western researchers in intercultural communication, we have supplemented it with additional citations to bolster our position.
4. In the section on 'Knowledge Strategies' for Indigenous Intercultural Communication Studies, we have removed the sentence “Researchers in intercultural communication from non-Western countries need to recognize that the long-standing dominance of Western knowledge has led to a tendency for non-Western scholars to adopt Western theories, paradigms, and evaluation standards”, as it was already adequately addressed earlier in the text with appropriate literature support.
5. Regarding the sentence advocating a shift away from dependency on Western knowledge “...change the mindset of dependency on Western knowledge, imitation, and self-colonization” , we agree that its phrasing was overly subjective. We have deleted this sentence without compromising the overall logic of the section.
6. As you noted, we emphasized at the end of the article the role of intercultural communication in disseminating indigenous cultural experiences and values from non-Western countries. However, we failed to address the "how" question raised in our research. Section 4, "The 'Three Levels' of Intercultural Communication," provides the answer. The "dual structures" broaden communication channels for nations, organizations, and individuals, though they also pose challenges. For non-Western countries, these three levels - Daily Interaction, Cultural Interaction, and Community Building - can facilitate the dissemination of their indigenous cultural experiences and values. Accordingly, Section 4 has been updated with relevant content.

Once again, we are deeply grateful for your constructive feedback. We hope that our efforts meet with your approval and contribute to the enrichment of the academic discourse.

 

Best wishes，

 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I thank and congratulate the authors for the substantial improvements to the paper. Nevertheless, Paer's central problems prevail, i.e. there is no methodological rigour in his analysis of intercultural communication with power structures in indigenous studies. 

In my view, this work is more of a reflection and lacks a sustained and concise methodological design. For example, the authors have even added objectives, but they don't explain how they are going to achieve these objectives, nor do they clarify in the conclusion whether or not they have achieved the objectives they set out to achieve in this paper.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

We sincerely appreciate your time and effort in reading our revised manuscript, and for providing further valuable suggestions regarding the research methodology. After careful consideration of your feedback, we realized that the methodology aspect of our paper was not adequately addressed.

 

Firstly, from the perspective of publication type, this paper is classified as a Review. According to the definition provided on  journal's website, "Reviews offer a comprehensive analysis of the existing literature within a field of study, identifying current gaps or problems. They should be critical and constructive and provide recommendations for future research. No new, unpublished data should be presented. The structure can include an Abstract, Keywords, Introduction, Relevant Sections, Discussion, Conclusions, and Future Directions." This type of manuscript does not require an extensive discussion or exploration of research methods and data. The basic structure of our paper aligns with the guidelines for a review paper.

 

Secondly, from the perspective of research objectives, our study aims to analyze existing literature and offer constructive suggestions for future research in cross-cultural communication through the lens of Foucault's theory. Therefore, the research focus of our paper also conforms to the definition of a review .

 

In summary, although there is a lack of detailed discussion or application of research methodology and data, our paper meets the requirements for a review paper in terms of structure and research objectives.

 

Therefore, to maintain logical rigor and better align the paper with the definition of a review, we have removed sentences related to methodology from the literature review section. In the conclusion part of the paper, we have included suggestions on the application of intercultural communication methodology, which aligns with the core purpose of a Review paper: providing constructive suggestions for future research.

 

Thank you again for your valuable suggestions. We will give more attention to data and methodology issues to further enhance our research quality.

 

Best wishes,

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The new version successfully addressed all the concerns and suggestions from the first phase of the review. However, it is recommended that the authors support some of the ideas and statements with relevant references. For example, the second paragraph on page 2, even with the addition of new text, needs improvement by adding references. Simply writing that "Researchers may tend to use English literature and data for analysis and argumentation, overlooking research resources and perspectives from other languages and cultures" is not sufficient without providing references from authors who have reached the same conclusion. The same issue of not providing references for readers who wish to delve deeper into the presented ideas is evident in the newly introduced text on page 7: "For example, the Confucian concept of 'the Doctrine of the Mean' advocates for harmonious development between humans and nature." For readers unfamiliar with Confucius' philosophy, a translation where the concept of "the Doctrine of the Mean" is present or a text explaining this concept should be added as a reference.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

We deeply appreciate your time and effort in reviewing our revised manuscript and for providing further valuable suggestions regarding the references. After carefully considering your feedback, we realized that the additional content in the paper lacked sufficient references to support our viewpoints. Therefore, on pages 2 and 7 of the paper, we have added references to the sentences you queried, in order to clarify and support our arguments.

 

Thank you again for your invaluable suggestions!

 

Best wishes,