Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email
Answers.com

Trans-cultural diffusion

 
Encyclopedia of Public Health: Diffusion and Adoption of Innovations
Home > Library > Health > Public Health Encyclopedia

Diffusion is the process by which an innovation is communicated through certain channels, over time, among the members of a social system. It is a special type of communication concerned with the spread of messages that are perceived as new ideas and which will necessarily be received with some degree of uncertainty. The four main elements in the diffusion of new ideas are: (1) innovation, (2) communication channels, (3) time, and (4) the social system.

The Innovation

An innovation is an idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new. The characteristics of an innovation, as perceived by members of a social system, determine its rate of adoption. Some innovations diffuse relatively slowly, while other innovations diffuse rapidly. The characteristics that determine an innovation's rate of adoption are its relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability.

The relative advantage of an innovation reflects the degree to which it is perceived as better than the idea it supercedes. The degree of relative advantage may be measured in economic terms, but social prestige, convenience, and satisfaction are also important factors. It does not matter so much if an innovation has a great deal of objective advantage. What does matter is whether individuals perceive the innovation as advantageous. The greater the perceived relative advantage of an innovation, the more rapid its rate of adoption will be.

Compatibility is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as being consistent with the existing values, past experiences, and needs of potential uses. An idea that is incompatible with the values and norms of a social system will not be adopted as rapidly as an innovation that is compatible. The adoption of an incompatible innovation often requires the prior adoption of a new value system, which is a relatively slow process. Technological compatibility may be involved in cases where a particular software program cannot be used because it will not work with a computer's operation system.

Complexity refers to the degree to which an innovation is perceived as difficult to understand and use. Some innovations are readily understood by most members of a social system; others are more complicated and will be adopted more slowly. New ideas that are simpler to understand are adopted more rapidly than innovations that require people to develop new skills and understandings.

Trialability is the degree to which an innovation may be experimented with on a limited basis. New ideas that can be tried on an installment plan will generally be adopted more quickly than innovations that are not divisible. An innovation that is trialable represents less uncertainty to the individual considering using it and who can learn by doing.

Observability is the degree to which the results of an innovation are visible. The easier it is for individuals to see the results of an innovation, the more likely they are to adopt it. Such visibility stimulates peer discussion of a new idea, as friends and neighbors of a user of a product often request information about it.

Overall, innovations that are perceived by individuals as having greater relative advantage, compatibility, trialability, and observability, and as less complex, will be adopted more rapidly than other innovations.

Communication Channels

The second main element in the diffusion of new ideas is the communication channel. Communication is the process by which participants create and share information with one another to reach a mutual understanding. A communication channel is the means by which messages get from one individual to another. Mass media channels are more effective in creating knowledge of innovations, whereas interpersonal channels are more effective in forming and changing attitudes toward a new idea, and thus in influencing the decision to adopt or reject a new idea.

Most individuals evaluate an innovation, not on the basis of scientific research by experts, but through the subjective evaluations of peers who have adopted the innovation. So the diffusion process is essentially social in nature, driven by individuals talking to others and giving meaning to an innovation through a process of social construction.

Time

The third element in the diffusion of new ideas is time. The time dimension is involved in three ways.

First, time is involved in the innovation-decision process. This is the mental process through which an individual (or other decision-making unit) passes from first knowledge of an innovation to forming an attitude toward the innovation; then to a decision to adopt or reject it; then to implementation of the new idea; and finally to confirmation of the decision to adopt the innovation. An individual seeks information at various stages in the innovation-decision process in order to decrease uncertainty about an innovation's expected consequences.

The second way in which time is involved in diffusion is in the innovativeness of an individual or other unit of adoption. Innovativeness is the degree to which an individual or other unit of adoption is relatively earlier in adopting the new ideas than other members of a social system. There are five adopter categories, or classifications of the members of a social system on the basis of their innovativeness. These categories are: (1) innovators, (2) early adopters, (3) early majority, (4) late majority, and (5) laggards.

Innovators are defined as the first 2.5 percent of the individuals in a system to adopt an innovation. Venturesomeness is almost an obsession with innovators. This interest in new ideas leads them out of a local circle of peer networks and into more cosmopolitan social relationships. Control of substantial financial resources is helpful to absorb possible losses from an unprofitable innovation. The ability to understand and apply complex technical knowledge is also needed. The innovator must be able to cope with a high degree of uncertainty about an innovation at the time of adoption. While an innovator may not always be respected by the other members of a social system, the innovator plays an important role in the diffusion process.

Early adopters are the next 13.5 percent of the individuals in a system to adopt an innovation. Early adopters are a more integrated part of a social system than are innovators. Whereas innovators are cosmopolites, early adopters are localites. This adopter category, more than any other, has the greatest degree of opinion leadership in most systems. Potential adopters look to early adopters for advice and information about an innovation. Early adopters are the embodiment of the successful use of new ideas, and they know that to continue to earn the esteem of colleagues and to maintain a central position as an opinion leader they must make judicious innovation decisions.

The early majority category contains the next 34 percent of individuals in a system to adopt an innovation. The early majority adopt new ideas just before the average member of a system. They interact frequently with their peers, but seldom hold positions of opinion leadership in a system. The early majority's unique position between the very early and the relatively late to adopt makes them an important link in the diffusion process.

The late majority is the next 34 percent of the individuals in a system to adopt an innovation. The late majority adopt new ideas just after the average member of a system. Like the early majority, the late majority make up one-third of the members of a system. Adoption may be the result of increasing network pressures from peers. Innovations are approached with a skeptical and cautious air, and the late majority do not adopt until most others in their system have done so. The weight of system norms must definitely favor an innovation before the late majority are convinced. The pressure of peers is necessary to motivate adoption.

Laggards are the last 16 percent of the individuals in a system to adopt an innovation. They possess almost no opinion leadership. Laggards are the most local in their outlook of all adopter categories; many are near isolates in the social networks of their system.

The third dimension in which time is involved in diffusion is in rate of adoption. This is the relative speed with which an innovation is adopted by members of a social system. The rate of adoption is usually measured as the number of members of the system that adopt the innovation in a given time period.

The Social System

The fourth main element in the diffusion of new ideas is the social system. A social system is defined as a set of interrelated units that are engaged in joint problem solving to accomplish common goals. The members or units of a social system may be individuals, informal groups, organizations, and/or subsystems. The social system constitutes a boundary within which an innovation diffuses. Diffusion is affected by norms, which are the established behavior patterns for the members of a social system, and by opinion leadership, which is the degree to which an individual is able to influence the attitudes or overt behavior of other individuals in a desired way with relative frequency.

A key concept in understanding the nature of the diffusion process is the critical mass, which occurs at the point at which enough individuals have adopted an innovation so that the innovation's further rate of adoption becomes self-sustaining. The concept of the critical mass implies that outreach activities should be concentrated on getting the use of the innovation to the point of critical mass. These efforts should be focused on the early adopters, who are often opinion leaders and serve as role models for many other members of the social system. Early adopters are instrumental in getting an innovation to the point of critical mass, and, therefore, they are instrumental in the successful diffusion and adoption of an innovation.

(SEE ALSO: Communication for Health; Communication Theory; Diffusion Theory; Health Promotion and Education; Social Cognitive Theory; Social Networks and Social Support; Sociology in Public Health; Transtheoretical Model of Stages of Change)

Bibliography

Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations, 4th edition. New York: Free Press.

— EVERETT M. ROGERS


Search unanswered questions...

Enter a question here...
Search: All sources Community Q&A Reference topics

Wikipedia: Trans-cultural diffusion
Top
Home > Library > Miscellaneous > Wikipedia

Cultural diffusion, as first conceptualized by the famous Alfred L. Kroeber in his influential 1940 paper Stimulus Diffusion, or trans-cultural diffusion in later reformulations, is used in cultural anthropology and cultural geography to describe the spread of cultural items—such as ideas, styles, religions, technologies, languages etc.—between individuals, whether within a single culture or from one culture to another. It is distinct from the diffusion of innovations within a single culture.

Diffusion across cultures is a well-attested and uncontroversial phenomenon. For example, the practice of agriculture is widely believed to have diffused from somewhere in the Middle East to all of Eurasia, less than 10,000 years ago, having been adopted by many pre-existing cultures. Other established examples of diffusion include the spread of the war chariot and iron smelting in ancient times, and the use of cars and Western business suits in the 20th century.


Contents

Types of cultural diffusion

  • Expansion diffusion: an innovation or idea that develops in a source area and remains strong there, while also spreading outward to other areas.
  • Relocation diffusion: an idea or innovation that migrates into new areas, leaving behind its origin or source of the cultural trait.
  • Hierarchical diffusion: an idea or innovation that spreads by moving from larger to smaller places, often with little regard to the distance between places, and often influenced by social elites.
  • Contagious diffusion: an idea or innovation based on person-to-person contact within a given population.

Mechanisms for inter-cultural diffusion

Inter-cultural diffusion can happen in many ways. Migrating populations will carry their culture with them. Ideas can be carried by trans-cultural visitors, such as merchants, explorers, soldiers, diplomats, slaves, and hired artisans. Technology diffusion has often occurred by one society luring skilled scientists or workers by payments or other inducement. Trans-cultural marriages between two neighboring or interspersed cultures have also contributed. Among literate societies, diffusion can happen through letters or books (and, in modern times, through other media as well).

There are three categories of diffusion mechanisms:

  • Direct diffusion is when two cultures are very close to each other, resulting in intermarriage, trade, and even warfare. An example of direct diffusion is between the United States and Canada, where the people living on the border of these two countries engage in hockey, which started in Canada, and baseball, which is popular in American culture
  • Forced diffusion occurs when one culture subjugates (conquers or enslaves) another culture and forces its own customs on the conquered people. An example would be the conquistadors that took over the indigenous population and made them practice Christianity.
  • Indirect diffusion happens when traits are passed from one culture through a middleman to another culture, without the first and final cultures ever being in direct contact. An example could be the presence of Mexican food in Canada, since they have a huge country in between them.

Direct diffusion is very common in ancient times, when small groups, or bands, of humans lived in adjoining settlements. Indirect diffusion is very common in today's world, because of the mass media and the invention of the Internet.

Of interests also is the work of american historian and critic Daniel J. Boorstin in his book The Discoverers, in which he provides an historical perspective about the role of explorers in History in the diffusion of innovations between civilizations (arab civilization, chinese civilization, western civilisation, ...).

Diffusion theories

The many models that have been proposed for inter-cultural diffusion are

  • Heliocentric diffusionism—the theory that all cultures originated from one culture. (see Grafton Elliot Smith)
  • Culture circles diffusionism (Kulturkreise)—the theory that cultures originated from a small number of cultures.
  • Evolutionary diffusionism—the theory that societies are influenced by others and that all humans share psychological traits that make them equally likely to innovate, resulting in development of similar innovations in isolation.
  • Mallory's "Kulturkugel" (a non-existent German compound meaning "culture bullet"), a term suggested by JP Mallory[1] to model the scale of invasion vs. gradual migration vs. diffusion. According to this model, local continuity of material culture and social organization is stronger than linguistic continuity, so that cultural contact or limited migration regularly leads to linguistic changes without affecting material culture or social organization.[2]

A concept that has often been mentioned in this regard, which may be framed in the evolutionary diffusionism model, is that of "an idea whose time has come" — whereby a new cultural item appears almost simultaneously and independently in several widely separated places, after certain prerequisite items have diffused across the respective communities. This concept has been invoked, for example, with regard to the development of calculus by Newton and Leibnitz, or the inventions of the airplane and of the electronic computer.

The theory applied to medieval Europe

One of the most remarkable examples of diffusion theory is the claim that there was a massive infusion of new technology into Europe in the period 1000 to 1700 AD. During the previous period, still called the Dark Ages by some, Byzantine and Asian cultures were far more advanced than Europe: however, the era beginning in the High Middle Ages reversed that balance and resulted in a Europe which greatly surpassed Asian, Byzantine and Muslim cultures in pre-industrial technology[3].

In the so-called Dark Ages, so the claim goes, many important basic inventions had their roots elsewhere, notably gunpowder, clock mechanisms, shipbuilding, paper and the windmill; however, in each of these cases Europeans not only adopted the technologies, but improved the manufacturing scale, inherent technology and applications to a point clearly surpassing the evolution of the original invention in its country of origin. However, recently many historians have questioned whether Europe really owes the development of such inventions as gunpowder, the compass, the windmill or printing to the Chinese or other cultures.[4][5][6] It is a matter of record that by the late eighteenth century, European fleets, armed with advanced cannon, decimated Arab and Chinese fleets, paving the way for unfettered domination of the seas that led to the colonial era.

Diffusion disputes

While the concept of diffusion is well accepted in general, conjectures about the existence or the extent of diffusion in some specific contexts have been hotly disputed.

An example of such disputes is the proposal by Thor Heyerdahl that similarities between the culture of Polynesia and the pre-Columbian civilizations of the Andes are due to diffusion from the latter to the former—a theory that currently has few supporters among professional anthropologists[citation needed].

Attempts to explain similarities between two cultures by diffusion are often criticized for being ethnocentric, since they imply that the supposedly "receptors" would not be capable of innovation. In fact, some authors made such claims explicitly—for example, to argue for pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact as the "only possible explanation" for the origin of the great civilizations in the Andes and of Central America.

Those disputed are fueled in part by the overuse of cultural diffusion, starting in the late 19th century, as a blanket explanation for all similarities between widely dispersed cultures. The most famous proponent of this theory was William Graham Sumner, who argued that civilization first formed in Ancient Egypt and then diffused to other places.

Diffusion theories also suffer from being inherently speculative and hard to prove or disprove; especially for relatively simple cultural items like "pyramid-shaped buildings", "solar deity", "row of standing stones", or "animal paintings in caves". After all, the act of diffusion proper is a purely mental (or at most verbal) phenomenon, that leaves no archaeological trace. Therefore, diffusion can be deduced with some certainty only when the similarities involve a relatively complex and partly arbitrary collection of items—such as a writing system, a complex myth, or a pantheon of several gods.

Another criticism that has been leveled at many diffusion proposals is the failure to explain why certain items were not diffused. For example, attempts to "explain" the New World civilizations by diffusion from Europe or Egypt should explain why basic concepts like wheeled vehicles or the potter's wheel did not cross the ocean, while writing and stone pyramids did.

Theory contributors

Major contributors to inter-cultural diffusion research and theory include:

Notes

  1. ^ in the context of Indo-Aryan migration; Mallory, "A European Perspective on Indo-Europeans in Asia". In The Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Peoples of Eastern and Central Asia. Ed. Mair. Washington DC: Institute for the Study of Man (1998)
  2. ^ the term is a 'half-facetious' mechanical analogy, imagining a "bullet" of which the tip is material culture and the "charge" language and social structure. Upon "intrusion" into a host culture, migrants will "shed" their material culture (the "tip") while possibly still maintaining their "charge" of language and, to a lesser extent, social customs (viz., the effect is a diaspora culture, which depending on the political situation may either form a substratum or a superstratum within the host culture).
  3. ^ Carlo M. Cipolla, Before the Industrial revolution: European Society and Economy 1000-1700, W.W. Norton and Co., New York (1980) ISBN 0-393-95115-4
  4. ^ Peter Jackson: The Mongols and the West, Pearson Longman 2005, p.315
  5. ^ Donald F. Lach: Asia in the Making of Europe. 3 vols in 9, Chicago, Illinois, 1965-93; I:1, pp. 82-83
  6. ^ Robert Bartlett: The Making of Europe. Conquest, Colonization and Cultural Change 950-1350, Allen Lane, 1993

References

See also

External links

  • "Diffusionism and Acculturation" by Gail King and Meghan Wright, Anthropological Theories, M.D. Murphy (ed.), Department of Anthropology, College of Arts and Sciences, The University of Alabama.

This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)

 
 

 

Copyrights:

Encyclopedia of Public Health. Encyclopedia of Public Health. Copyright © 2002 by The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.  Read more
Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Trans-cultural diffusion".  Read more