“The general terms "high context" and "low context" (popularized by Edward Hall) are used to describe broad-brush cultural differences between societies” (Beer). These are the things that we discuss in the next section.
High context societies or groups are observed to have close connections over a long period of time. In this context, we see that “many aspects of cultural behavior are not made explicit because most members know what to do and what to think from years of interaction with each other” thus a family is a fit example for this (Beer). On the other hand, “low context refers to societies where people tend to have many connections but of shorter duration or for some specific reason. In these societies, cultural behavior and beliefs may need to be spelled out explicitly so that those coming into the cultural environment know how to behave” (Beer). Conflict resolution will differ according to the level of context the group has. Conflict in a low context group might might resort to adherence to certain rules in resolving conflict. This means a strict or rigid written rule. On the other hand, conflict in a high context group such as the family, can be resolved with understanding and patience. This does not necessitate an arbiter or a written code but patient and compassionate understanding of others’ faults.
The key concepts, such as honor, shame and saving face will also differ across cultures. Honor can be of varying level according to culture. For some like the Japanese, authorities are regarding with highest honor so that submission easily follows from the subordinates. More liberal countries such as America or even the Third World country such as the Philippines encourage citizen’s freedom thus authorities are ostracized such as done during mass rally and political revolution. Resolving with authorities in a culture such as Japan would necessitate paying much honor to the authorities. On the other hand, “shame is a common form of