This study undertakes a cross-cultural examination of corporate risk reporting to test for convergence and divergence perspectives on risk communication. It asks whether the frequencies of risk topics communicated by globalizing organizations from different national cultures become isomorphic or remain culturally distinct. It analyzed longitudinal data on risk factors reported by Japanese and U.S. corporations in their annual reports. It focused on the effects of time and national culture on the frequencies of risk topics. The results provided evidence to support the convergence perspective for the risk topics and the divergence perspective for one of the topics, respectively.

This study examines how Japanese students perceive the qualities of written arguments that were constructed to have different forms. Based on the theoretical dimensions of verbal communication styles that Gudykunst and Ting-Toomey (1988) proposed, the research questions asked whether the respondents would perceive direct arguments to be of higher quality than indirect arguments. They also asked whether they would perceive elaborate arguments to be of higher quality than succinct arguments. Japanese college students voluntarily responded to a questionnaire. The results revealed that they gave higher ratings to direct arguments than to indirect arguments for both of the two indicators, and higher ratings to elaborate arguments than to succinct arguments for two indicators out of the three. The results were discussed and implications were offered.