This paper summarizes the arguments and counterarguments within the discussion on the issue of cultural intelligence, bilingualism, and the relationship between language proficiency and cultural intelligence. The primary purpose of the research is to explore the relationship between bilingualism (or high language proficiency in two languages) and cultural intelligence. The systematization of literary sources and approaches for solving the problem indicates that a significant link between these constructs could be expected. The relevance of the decision of this scientific problem is that this relationship has not yet been the subject of any previous research. Investigation of the paper topic is carried out in the following logical sequence: a thorough look into a conceptual and theoretical framework of cultural intelligence, bilingualism and the link between cultural intelligence and language proficiency; in the second part of the paper two hypotheses are developed on the base of previous research, and the corresponding methodology is described. The theoretical model of the explored relationship is tested using the SmartPLS-SEM 3 program. The objects of the survey are 243 undergraduate students studying in the English study program at the University of Finance and Administration in the Czech Republic. The research empirically confirms and theoretically proves that there is a positive correlation between the level of foreign (non-native) language proficiency and cultural intelligence score. Language competence predicates the overall rating for CQ. The metacognitive and motivational factors of CQ play a substantial role within the framework of this relationship. On the other hand, data do not confirm a statistically significant difference between the group of bilingual and monolingual respondents. The results of the research can be useful for those who manage people across cultures and prepare students for working abroad or in international teams such as language teachers at universities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jurásek et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: