This study adopted a cross-sectional design and a group comparison (e.g., year of study) to study the IS of Medical, Nursing, and Dental students. Following ethics approval from the UFRO Research Ethics Committee (Ref Nº: 072/19), the study surveyed first and final year healthcare professions students using anonymous self-completed questionnaires, including the Intercultural Sensitivity Scale (ISS)(14). These cohorts’ selection allows an approximation (proxy) of length of exposure to explore the development of students’ IS over time.
Given the importance of intercultural sensitivity as a construct, different instruments have been developed to assess individuals’ IS. Chen and Starosta(8) developed the Intercultural Sensitivity Scale (ISS), a self-report scale that has been extensively used in different areas to assess the development of IS. The ISS was linguistically adapted and validated to be used in the Chilean context(11).
ISS assesses intercultural sensitivity as the affective dimension of intercultural competence. The theoretical structure of this scale was based on five dimensions, namely: interaction engagement; respect for cultural differences; interaction confidence; interaction enjoyment; and interaction attentiveness, as shown in Table 1. ISS is a 24-item scale organised in a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = neutral; 4 = agree; 5 = strongly agree). Some items are coded reversely in the scale. Negative questions were reversed to calculate the ISS score. Scale scores range from ‘1’, the lowest to ‘5’, the highest. There is not a cut-off value of the scale. A high score indicates higher intercultural sensitivity(15).
Due to the COVID 19 restrictions, the instrument was redesigned to be completed online. All first and final year students were briefed about the objectives of the study and invited to participate. Participants were requested to complete the online questionnaire anonymously, using a self-assigned code. Data collection was done via the QuestionPRo platform (https://www.questionpro.com).
Apart from the variables of age, sex, year of study (first and last of each career), and career (medicine, dentistry, or nursing), region of residence (out of the 16 Regions in which Chile is divided administratively, categorised as ‘Araucania’; ‘Los Lagos’; ‘Bio-Bio’; and ‘Other’). Students’ ethnicity was also collected (Broad Chilean; Mapuche; and. Other). Participants’ family group income was determined using seven monthly income levels in Chilean pesos (‘$300,000 or less’; ‘$300,001 to $600,000’; ‘$600,001 to $1,000,000’; ‘$1,000,001 to $1,500,000’; ‘$1,500,001 to $2,000,000’;’$2,000,001 to $3,000,000’; and ‘More than $3,000,000’). Participants were also asked about the type of secondary education. Secondary education in Chile has three types funding: ‘Private’; ‘Publicly subsidized private’; and ‘Municipal’. Municipal funds focus on lower SES individuals, while private education generally covers those in higher SES groups(16).
The dependent variable represented by the overall IS score and eight socio-demographic and study variables were included in the analysis. Five intercultural sensitivity scores were computed by calculating average responses across the five intercultural sensitivity dimensions. Additionally, an overall intercultural sensitivity score was computed by calculating average responses across all the five intercultural sensitivity factors.
The statistical analysis describes the distribution of the socio-demographic and study variables. To examine whether any independent variables (e.g., year of study) had the same pattern of ISS mean, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) (continuous measures) were employed. A significant ANOVA was followed by post-hoc comparisons using Tukey’s tests. To test if any combination of the various socio- demographic, and study variables, provided a multivariate explanation of the IS score, a linear regression model was fitted using a stepwise selection method. A probability value of 0.05 or smaller was considered to be statistically significant. Data manipulation and analyses were conducted using SPSS PC (Version 27.0).
Table 1. Intercultural sensitivity Scale (ISS).
Factor 1. Intercultural engagement
Item 1. I enjoy interacting with people from different cultures.
Item 11. I tend to wait before forming an impression of culturally-distinct counterparts.
Item 13. I am open-minded to people from different cultures.
Item 21. I often give positive responses to my culturally-different counterpart during our interaction.
Item 22. I avoid those situations where I will have to deal with culturally-distinct persons.
Item 23. I often show my culturally-distinct counterpart my understanding through verbal or nonverbal cues.
Item 24. I have a feeling of enjoyment toward differences between my culturally-distinct counterpart and me.
Factor 2. Respect of cultural difference
Item 2. I think people from other cultures are narrow-minded.
Item 7. I do not like to be with people from different cultures.
Item 8. I respect the values of people from different cultures.
Item 16. I respect the ways people from different cultures behave.
Item 18. I would not accept the opinions of people from different cultures.
Item 20. I think my culture is better than other cultures.
Factor 3. Interaction confidence
Item 3. I am pretty sure of myself in interacting with people from different cultures.
Item 4. I find it very hard to talk in front of people from different cultures.
Item 5. I always know what to say when interacting with people from different cultures.
Item 6. I can be as sociable as I want to be when interacting with people from different cultures.
Item 10. I feel confident when interacting with people from different cultures.
Factor 4. Interaction enjoyment
Item 9. I get upset easily when interacting with people from different cultures.
Item 12. I often get discouraged when I am with people from different cultures.
Item 15. I often feel useless when interacting with people from different cultures.
Factor 5. Interaction attentiveness
Item 14. I am very observant when interacting with people from different cultures.
Item 17. I try to obtain as much information as I can when interacting with people from different cultures.
Item 19. I am sensitive to my culturally distinct counterpart’s subtle meanings during our interaction.