SpringerLink
Log in

Cultural considerations and rigorous qualitative methods in public diplomacy research

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Place Branding and Public Diplomacy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article examines how qualitative approaches to human-centered inquiry benefit public diplomacy (PD) scholarship. It argues that rigorous qualitative methods improve the frameworks guiding PD research. Tendencies for miscommunication permeate the encoding and decoding communication processes in international/intercultural contexts, with PD often transcending cultural boundaries and national borders. This article cautions against assuming conceptual, measurement, and semiotic equivalence of constructs and variables, based on influences from culture and language. Furthermore, the article advocates mixed methods, explicating how rigorous qualitative methods can better contextualize the statistics of quantitative methods, leading to more comprehensive understandings of PD.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albishri, Osama, Sophia Tarasevich, Pamala Proverbs, Spiro Kiousis, and Abdullah Alahmari. 2019. Mediated public diplomacy in the digital age: Exploring the Saudi and the U.S. governments’ agenda-building during Trump’s visit to the Middle East. Public Relations Review 45 (4): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arceneaux, Phillip, Jonathan Borden, and Guy Golan. 2019. The news management function of political public relations: A theoretical approach. In Political public relations: Concepts, principles and applications, 2nd ed., ed. Jesper Strömbäck and Spiro Kiousis, 126–145. New York: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Banks, Robert. 2011. A resource guide to public diplomacy evaluation. CPD perspectives on public diplomacy. Los Angeles: Figueroa Press.

  • Barnett, George A., and Meihua Lee. 2002. Issues in intercultural communication research. In Handbook of international and intercultural communication, ed. William B. Gudykunst and Bella M. Mody, 275–290. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnlund, Dean C. 1970. A transactional model of communication. In Foundations of communication theory, ed. KennethK. Sereno and C. Mortensen, 83–92. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, H. Russell. 2017. Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bier, Lindsey M. 2017. Investigating country identity and citizen diplomacy: The case of cultural mediators in Vietnam. Knoxville: University of Tennessee. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/4388/; https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5826&context=utk_graddiss. Accessed 15 Jan 2021.

  • Björkman, Lisa, Lisa Weeden, Juliet Williams, and Mary Hawkesworth. 2019. Interpretive methods. Final Report of Qualitative Transparency Deliberations. American Political Science Association. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3333463.

  • Brown, Katherine. 2017. Challenges in measuring public diplomacy. USC Center for Public Diplomacy. https://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/blog/ challenges-measuring-public-diplomacy. Accessed 15 Jan 2021.

  • Corbin, Juliet, and Anselm Strauss. 2014. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for develo** grounded theory, 4th ed. Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cortés, Juve J., and Thomas Jamieson. 2020. Incorporating research design in public diplomacy: The role of listening to foreign publics. International Journal of Communication 14: 1214–1231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowan, Geoffrey, and Amelia Arsenault. 2008. Moving from monologue to dialogue to collaboration: The three layers of public diplomacy. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616: 292–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716208314503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crilley, Rhys, Marie Gillespie, and Alistair Willis. 2019. Tweeting the Russian revolution: RT’s #1917LIVE and social media re-enactments as public diplomacy. European Journal of Cultural Studies 22 (3): 354–373. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549419871353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cull, Nicholas. 2008. The Cold War and the United States Information Agency: American propaganda and public diplomacy, 1945–1989. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Denizen, Norman, and Yvonna Lincoln. 2013. The landscape of qualitative research, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, Robert. 2007. The droning of strategic communication and public diplomacy. Military Review 87 (5): 124–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeWalt, Kathleen, and Billie DeWalt. 2011. Participant observation: A guide for fieldworkers. Lanham: AltaMira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dienlin, Tobias, Niklas Johannes, Nicholas David Bowman, Philipp K. Masur, Sven Engesser, Anna Sophie Kumpel, Josephine Lukito, Lindsey M. Bier, Renwen Zhang, et al. 2020. An agenda for open science in communication. Journal of Communication 71 (1): 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz052.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flyvberg, Bent. 2013. Case study. In Strategies of qualitative inquiry, ed. Norman K. Denizen and Yvonna S. Lincoln, 169–203. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagliardone, Iginio, Nicole Stremlau, and Daniel Nkrumah. 2012. Partner, prototype, or persuader? China’s renewed media engagement with Ghana. Communication, Politics and Culture 45 (2): 174–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gasiorek, Jessica. 2018. Message processing: The science of creating understanding. Mānoa: University of Hawai’i Pressbooks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geertz, Clifford. 1973. Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In The interpretation of cultures, ed. Clifford Geertz, 3–32. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginesta, Xavier, and Jordi de San Eugenio. 2021. Rethinking place branding from a political perspective: Urban governance, public diplomacy, and sustainable policy making. American Behavioral Scientist 65 (4): 632–649. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764220975066.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gioia, Dennis, Kevin Corley, and Aimee Hamilton. 2012. Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods 16 (1): 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112452151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golan, Guy, Phillip Arceneaux, and Megan Soule. 2018. The Catholic Church as a public diplomacy actor: An analysis of the Pope’s strategic narrative and international engagement. Journal of International Communication 25 (1): 95–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/13216597.2018.1517657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golan, Guy, Ilan Manor, and Phillip Arceneaux. 2019. Mediated public diplomacy redefined: Foreign stakeholder engagement via paid, earned, shared, and owned media. American Behavioral Scientist 63 (12): 1665–1683. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219835279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, Stuart. 1980. Encoding/decoding. In Culture, media, language, ed. Stuart Hall, Dorothy Hobson, Andrew Love, and Paul Willis, 128–138. London: Hutchinson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, John. 2014. Methodologies, the lifeworld, and institutions in cultural sociology. Qualitative Sociology 37 (1): 243–253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-014-9275-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamamura, Takeshi, Steven J. Heine, and Delroy Paulhus. 2008. Cultural differences in response styles: The role of dialectal thinking. Personality and Individual Differences 44 (4): 932–942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.10.034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, Anders, and David Machin. 2018. Media and communication research methods, 2nd ed. London: Macmillan International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harpaz, Itzhak. 2003. The essence of performing meaningful comparative international survey research. In Handbook for international management research, ed. BettyJane Punnett and Oded Shenkar, 17–48. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartman, Alexandra, Florian Kern, and David Thomas Mellor. 2018. Preregistration for qualitative research template. Center for Open Science. https://osf.io/j7ghv/.

  • Harzing, Anne-Wil., B. Sebastian Reiche, and Markus Pudelko. 2013. Challenges in international survey research: A review with illustrations and suggested solutions for best practices. European Journal of International Management 7 (1): 112–134. https://doi.org/10.1504/EJIM.2013.052090.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, David, Rainbow Ho, and Siu Ng. 2006. Investigating research as a knowledge-generation method: Discovering and uncovering. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 36 (1): 17–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.2006.00294.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, Geert. 2001. Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holliday, Adrian. 2011. Intercultural communication and ideology. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, Zhao Alexandre, and Rui Wang. 2020. ‘Panda engagement’ in China’s digital public diplomacy. Asian Journal of Communication 30 (2): 118–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/01292986.2020.1725075.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingenhoff, Diana, Giada Calamai, and Efe Sevin. 2021. Key influencers in public diplomacy 2.0: A country-based social network analysis. Social Media + Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120981053.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jandt, Fred. 2017. An introduction to intercultural communication: Identities in a global community. New York: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jia, Ruixue, and Weidong Li. 2020. Public diplomacy networks: China’s public diplomacy communication practices in Twitter during Two Sessions. Public Relations Review 46: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karnowski, Veronika, Thilo von Pape, and Werner Wirth. 2011. Overcoming the binary logic of adoption: On the integration of diffusion of innovations theory and the concept of appropriation. In The diffusion of innovations: A communication science perspective, ed. Arun Vishwanath and George Barnett, 57–76. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Jarim. 2015. Public relations and public diplomacy in cultural and educational exchange programs: A coorientational approach to the Humphrey Program. Public Relations Review 42 (1): 135–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2015.09.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Hwajung. 2017. Bridging the theoretical gap between public diplomacy and cultural diplomacy. Korean Journal of International Studies 15 (2): 293–326. https://doi.org/10.14731/kjis.2017.08.15.2.293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Hun Shik, and Seow Ting Lee. 2020. Peace talks: Public diplomacy and place branding in the 2018 Trump-Kim Summit in Singapore. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-020-00163-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell, Howard. 1948. The structure and function of communication in society. The Communication of Ideas 37 (1): 136–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Seow Ting, and Hun Shik Kim. 2020. Nation branding in the COVID-19 era: South Korea’s pandemic public diplomacy. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-020-00189-w.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Jerry W., Patricia S. Jones, Yoshimitsu Mineyama, and **nwei Esther Zhang. 2002. Cultural differences in responses to a Likert scale. Research in Nursing and Health 25 (4): 295–306. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.10041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindlof, Thomas, and Bryan Taylor. 2019. Qualitative communication research methods, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, James. 2013. Asian epistemologies and contemporary social psychological research. In The landscape of qualitative research, ed. Norman K. Denizen and Yvonna S. Lincoln, 443–474. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCracken, Grant. 1988. The long interview. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mook, Douglas. 1983. In defense of external invalidity. American Psychologist 38 (4): 379–387. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.38.4.379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, David L. 2018. Living within blurry boundaries: The value of distinguishing between qualitative and quantitative research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 12 (3): 268–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689816686433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noels, Kimberly A., Tomoko Yashima, and Ray Zhang. 2012. Language, identity and intercultural communication. In The Routledge handbook of language and intercultural communication, ed. Jane Jackson, 52–66. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nöth, Winfried. 1995. Handbook of semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oren, Ido. 2016. A sociological analysis of the decline of American IR theory. International Studies Review 18 (4): 571–596. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viw028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pamment, James. 2012. New public diplomacy in the 21st century. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Panocová, R. 2020. Theories of intercultural communication. Košice: Pavol Jozef Šafárik University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Passow, Tanja, Rolf Fehlmann, and Heike Grahlow. 2005. Country reputation—From measurement to management: The case of Liechtenstein. Corporate Reputation Review 7 (4): 309–326. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, Michael. 2002. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pogosyan, Marianna. 2017. How culture wires our brains. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/between-cultures/201701/how-culture-wires-our-brains. Accessed 22 Nov 2020.

  • Regier, Terry, and Xu. Yang. 2017. The Sapir–Whorf hypothesis and inference under uncertainty. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 8 (6): 1140. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruggiano, Nicole, and Tam E. Perry. 2019. Conducting secondary analysis of qualitative data: Should we, can we, and how? Qualitative Social Work 18 (1): 81–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325017700701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saideman, Stephen. 2018. The apparent decline of the IR paradigms: Examining patterns of publications, perceptions, and citations. International Studies Review 20 (4): 685–703. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viy011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schramm, Wilbur. 1997. The beginnings of communication study in America. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shannon, Claude, and Warren Weaver. 1949. The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sevin, Efe, Emily T. Metzgar, and Craig Hayden. 2019. The scholarship of public diplomacy: Analysis of a growing field. International Journal of Communication 13 (1): 4814–4837.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sevin, Efe, Kadir Jun Ayhan, and Diana Ingenghoff. 2020. Analyzing country images through networks: Case of South Korea. Asian International Studies Review 21 (2): 95–119. https://doi.org/10.16934/isr.21.2.202012.95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, Nancy. 2016. Japan’s information war. New York: CreateSpace Independent Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, Nancy. 2020. Rethinking public diplomacy in the 2020s. In Routledge handbook of public diplomacy, 2nd ed., ed. Nancy Snow and Nicholas J. Cull, 3–12. New York: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sommerfeldt, Eric, and Alexander Buhmann. 2019. The status quo of evaluation in public diplomacy: Insights from the US State Department. Journal of Communication Management 23 (3): 198–212. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCOM-12-2018-0137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tingting, Yuan. 2014. Diploma serves diplomacy: China’s “donor logic” in educational aid. China: An International Journal 12(2): 87–109. https://www.muse.jhu.edu/article/553150.

  • Vanc, Antoaneta, and Kathy Fitzpatrick. 2016. Scope and status of public diplomacy research by public relations scholars, 1990–2014. Public Relations Review 42 (3): 432–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2015.07.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Velikaya, Anna A. 2020. Soviet public diplomacy. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-020-00193-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei, Cao. 2020. Public diplomacy: Functions, functional boundaries and measurement methods. In Heritage, ed. Daniela Turcanu-Carutiu, IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.92664.

  • Widerquist, Karl. 2018. A critical analysis of basic income experiments for researchers, policymakers, and citizen. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wimmer, Roger, and Joseph Dominick. 2014. Mass media research: An introduction, 10th ed. Boston: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, Yifan. 2020. Looking inward: How does Chinese public diplomacy work at home? The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 22 (3): 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148120917583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, Robert K. 2018. Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yousaf, Salman, and Huaibin Li. 2015. Social identity, collective self esteem and country reputation: The case of Pakistan. Journal of Product and Brand Management 24 (4): 399–411. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-04-2014-0548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaharna, Rhonda. 2012. The cultural awakening in public diplomacy. In CPD perspectives on public diplomacy. Los Angeles: Figueroa Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Miami University, Oxford, USA

    Phillip Arceneaux

  2. University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA

    Lindsey M. Bier

Authors
  1. Phillip Arceneaux
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lindsey M. Bier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Phillip Arceneaux.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Authors

Journal

Article Title

Method

Altman and Shore

Australian Journal of Anthropology

Paradoxes of “Public Diplomacy”: Ethnographic Perspectives on the European Union Delegations in the Antipodes

Ethnography

Bier and White

Place Branding and Public Diplomacy

Cultural Diplomacy as Corporate Strategy: An Analysis of Pasona Group’s “New Tohoku” Program in Japan

Interviews

Buhmann and Sommerfeldt

International Communication Gazette

Drivers and Barriers in Public Diplomacy Evaluation: Understanding Attitudes, Norms, and Control

Interviews

Crilley, Gillespie, and Willis

European Journal of Cultural Studies

Tweeting the Russian Revolution: RT’s #1917LIVE and Social Media Re-enactments as Public Diplomacy

Focus Groups

Davis Cross and La Porte

Hague Journal of Diplomacy

The European Union and Image Resilience During Times of Crisis: The Role of Public Diplomacy

Interviews

Dubinsky and Dzikus

Journal of Applied Sport Management

Israel’s Strategic and Tactical Use of the 2017 Maccabiah Games for Nation Branding and Public Diplomacy

Ethnography

Gagliardone, Stremlau, and Nkrumah

Communication, Politics, and Culture

Partner, Prototype or Persuader? China’s Renewed Media Engagement with Ghana

Ethnography

González and Lester

Communication and Society

“All for One, One for All”: Communicative Processes of Cocreation of Place Brands Through Inclusive and Horizontal Stakeholder Collaborative Networks

Interviews and Focus Groups

Kim

Public Relations Review

Public Relations and Public Diplomacy in Cultural and Educational Exchange Programs: A Co-orientational Approach to the Humphrey Program

Interviews

Matiza and Oni

Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences

Nation Branding as a Strategic Marketing Approach to Foreign Direct Investment Promotion: The Case of Zimbabwe

Interviews

McConachie

Australian Journal of International Affairs

Australia’s Use of International Education as Public Diplomacy in China: Foreign Policy or Domestic Agenda?

Interviews

O’Loughlin

Review of International Studies

Images as Weapons of War: Representation, Mediation, and Interpretation

Interviews, Focus Groups, Ethnography, and Textual Analysis

Pryor and Grossbart

Place Branding and Public Diplomacy

Creating Meaning on Main Street: Toward a Model of Place Branding

Ethnography

Schatz and Levine

International Studies Quarterly

Framing, Public Diplomacy, and Anti-Americanism in Central Asia

Focus Groups and Experimental Design

Sommerfeldt and Buhmann

Journal of Communication Management

The Status Quo of Evaluation in Public Diplomacy: Insights from the US State Department

Interviews

Tingting

China: An International Journal

Diploma Serves Diplomacy: China’s “Donor Logic” in Educational Aid

Interviews

Wright and Hurley

International Feminist Journal of Politics

Navigating Gender, Power and Perceptions When Researching NATO: A Conversation

Ethnography

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Arceneaux, P., Bier, L.M. Cultural considerations and rigorous qualitative methods in public diplomacy research. Place Brand Public Dipl 18, 228–239 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-021-00232-4

Download citation

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-021-00232-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation