Edward T. Hall’s model

Hall’s model turns around 3 concepts: Context, Space, and Time.

Context

High context or low context refers to the amount of information that is in a given communication as a function of the context in which it occurs. A highly contexted communication is one in which most of the meaning is in the context while very little is the transmitted message. A low context communication is similar to interacting with a computer –if the information is not explicitly stated; and the program followed religiously, the meaning is distorted. In the Western world, the law is the context, in comparison with daily transactions of an informal nature. People who know each other over a long period of years will tend to use high context communication. From Hall, E. T. (1983) The Dance of Life. New York, NY: Anchor Books

Thus a culture where most things are explicitly stated is a low context culture. Hall gives the American societies as an example this type of culture. He contrasts American culture with the Japanese and French culture which are high context, that is, where a lot of the information is in the context, in the "untold" (le non-dit), in what "everybody knows." These cultures tend to be harder to understand and to penetrate than low context cultures.

Space All cultures have "invisible boundaries," which are part of what a French anthropologist (Raymonde Carroll) calls "Evidences invisibles". These boundaries are expressed in the following ways:o Territoriality: The term relates to ownership and power. Some places are

reserved for people in power. For example, in the US, those in power usually live on the upper floors and have the largest offices. This is not the case in some other cultures where people in power will be at the center, with other people "gravitating" around them.

o Personal space: In most Western cultures, people do not touch each other unless they have a fairly intimate relationship. This is not the case in other cultures where taps on the shoulder or accolades may be fairly common during first encounters.

o Reactions to spatial differences (Proxemics):This relates directly to the previous point. The distance one keeps with the other person may influence the response one will get. Indeed, if you are too close to a person who is used to keeping a certain physical distance in conversation, this person may feel threatened. Conversely, if you keep the same distance with a person who is used to physically closer interaction, physical distance may be interpreted as psychological distance.

o Multisensory space: Spatial boundaries extend to the five senses. In some cultures, speaking loud is interpreted as violating other people’s space; in other cultures, loud conversations are expected to take place; therefore, they are not interpreted as infringing on others.  

Time

Hall distinguishes two types of time: Polychronic and Monochronic.

o Monochronic time (M-time) refers to a sequential and linear organization of time. It is a "one-thing-at-a-time" organization.

o Polychronic time (P-time) is "many-things-at-once." Things are done concurrently and simultaneously.

Hall and Hall contrast monochronic and polychronic people in the following way:    

Monochronic people Polychronic people 

do one thing at a time concentrate on the job view time commitments as critical are low context and need information are committed to the job adhere religiously to plans emphasize promptness   are accustomed to short-term relationships 

do many things at once are highly distractible and subject to interruptions view time commitments as objectives are high context and already have information are committed to people and human relationships change plans often and easily base promptness on the importance of and significance of the relationship have a strong tendency to build lifetime relationships 

According to Hall, Northern European cultures tend to include monochronic people while people from Mediterranean and Latin American cultures tend to be polychronic. It should be noted, however, that cultures are not always exclusively monochronic or polychronic. The Japanese for example are polychronic in their dealings with other people on a daily basis, but monochronic in their approach to official business.