Hypothesis 1. Language Interpretation problems (LI), Contect problems (CO), Cultural difference problems (CU), and Information problems (IN) increase communication breakdowns in intercultural business communications via email.

Hypothesis 2. LI, CO, CU, IN problems in intercultural business communications via email decrease participants' ability to get work done.

Hypothesis 3. LI, CO, CU, IN problems in intercultural business communications via email decrease (adversely affect?) participants' working relationship.

Hypothesis 4. Communication breakdowns in intercultural business communications via email decrease ability to get work done.

Hypothesis 5. Communication breakdowns in intercultural business communications via email adversely affect participants' working relationship.

Hypothesis 6. Simplified Language (SL), Changed Words (CW) and Requests for Clarification (CL) are the solutions most frequently used to correct communication breakdowns in interculteral business communications via email.

Hypothesis 7. _X_ is most effective in solving problems encountered with intercultural business communication via email.

Hypothesis 8. When participants did not find a solution to intercultural business communication via email, they most frequently used a workaround (WA), meaning they used less current data obtained previously or contacted a different receiver.

Frequency of Problems Analysis ToP

Problem Frequency.

Results.frequency.pdf. Here is an introductory writeup of the frequency results. These are the same as those which address Hypothesis 1, written before forumlating in the Hypothesis framework.

Solutions Employed ToP

Solution topic.

Solution topic. (see Hypothesis 6)

Causes ToP

Regression and Correlation analysis on Causes

Mode node 5