Asian Journal of Arts and Culture

Asian J. Arts Cult. 2026; 26(1): 7

Personality Traits in Relation to Sociocultural Adaptation of International Students in Thailand and New Zealand

June Bernadette D’souza^1,*, Anusorn Nampradit¹ and Krisda Tanchaisak²

¹Faculty of Education and Liberal Arts, Department of Education, Sarasas Suvarnabhumi Institute of Technology,

Bangkok 10540, Thailand

²Institute of International Studies, Ramkhamhaeng University, Bangkok 10240, Thailand

(^*Corresponding author’s e-mail: [email protected])

Received: 29 May 2025, Revised: 3 September 2025, Accepted: 5 September 2025, Published: 29 September 2025

Abstract

Etic studies on international students who venture into higher education in a culture distinct from their own create an impetus for perusing their personality traits and adeptness to the new culture, apropos to working harmoniously, reducing culture shock and acculturative stress, and obtaining the anticipated aspirations. The objective was to explore personality traits as a culture-specific aspect and examine how international students select a country to pursue education contingent upon Eastern and Western sociocultural variations. Harnessing the convenient sampling technique, this quantitative paper used the in-person drop method to gather data from 200 international students from one international university in Christchurch, New Zealand, and one international university in Bangkok, Thailand. The relationship between personality traits adapted from Noe et al., (2015), an instrument to measure the Big Five personality traits, constituting 25 items, and the Sociocultural Adaptation Scale adapted from Wilson (2013), constituting 21 items, was hypothesized. Results of the structural equation modeling, MANOVA, and ANOVA post hoc analysis fully or partially endorsed the prognosis hypothesized, denoting a relationship between the Big Five personality traits and sociocultural adaptation as well as differences on the dimensions of the Big Five personality traits and sociocultural adaptation between international students pursuing education in two diverse cultures. Evolving changes to personality traits could be arduous; albeit, immersing students in orientation programs prior to enrolment could result in mastery of skills required for acculturation.

Keywords: Personality traits, Sociocultural adaptation, International students in Thailand and New Zealand

Introduction

“Different people bring out different aspects of one’s personality.” (Dunn, n.d.)

Personality attributes are crucial for success across cultural boundaries (Leung et al., 2014). Ang et al. (2006), postulated that the Big Five traits and cultural intelligence serve as a harbinger of an individual’s intercultural effectiveness. International students are exposed to a culture that contrasts with their own; ergo, the comprehensive, diverse milieu varies in terms of cultural pragmatics. Behavior manifested can be imposed from a host culture, although often exhibiting behaviors from your endemic background and culture of origin is tolerated. Conformity to a culture diverse from your own is riddled with hardships of exposure to a new language, searching for a job, and buildings, which could accumulate anxiety (Wang et al., 2021). It is common for psychological disorders like tension and depression to increase suicide attempts among international students across the globe (An & Chiang, 2015; Razgulin et al., 2023). Zhang et al. (2010), reiterated that differences in cultural adaptation resulted from the interaction of the individual and the surroundings and are contingent upon personality. Host receptivity, host conformity pressure, and ethnic group strength have an impact on the adaptation process (Kim, 2017). An expeditious headway to the new culture can be discouraging (Bochner, 2003), and certain characteristics sustain individuals to adapt to changes in the new cultural environment (Huang et al., 2014).

A culture like Thailand attracted over 28.15 million international tourists in 2023, with numbers increasing in 2024, placing it as one of the most visited destinations worldwide (The Nation, 2023). Post COVID-19 in 2022, an influx of over 30,000 international students enrolled in Thai universities, moving up from 25,100 in 2019 (Office of the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research, and Innovation, 2023). The Country Report (2019) of the Master Plan for ASEAN Connectivity 2025 pays attention to academic and labor pliability by promoting a multitude of trade-off programs, issuing qualification attestations, and granting credit transfers. Immersion with Thai and other, international students can pave the way for a melting pot from a global perspective. On the other hand, being Western culture and ranking 4th on the Global Peace Index as one of the safest countries in the Asia-Pacific (Global Peace Index 2023), New Zealand is a great choice for international students who wish to broaden their experiences academically and who are adventurous due to it being voted as one of the most beautiful countries in the world (World Population Review, 2023). In addition, all 8 of the public universities that are funded are rated in the top 3% of the QS World Rankings of 2022, and these accomplishments are acknowledged worldwide (Gilliham, 2022).

Ahead of confronting the test of time to further studies in a novel culture, international students from various destinations may need to subsist with cultural dimensions of the new environment to mitigate culture shock. Studies indicate diminishing levels of sociocultural adaptation often generate elevated anxiety, poor well-being, and psychosomatic symptoms like anxiety, migraine, and general fatigue. (Jiang et al., 2003; An & Chiang, 2015; Razgulin et al., 2023). Subsequently, when exposed to the new culture, the commencement of a person’s internal transformation occurs (Kim, 2001), consequently leading them to stay or pull out of the host culture. Etic studies on personality traits and sociocultural adaptation are nascent, especially in vastly different domestic climes (Albrecht et al., 2018). Addressing this research gap is pertinent for educators to promote students’ emigration contingent upon traits displayed subsequently, often permitting the process to be less cumbersome. The matter in question for the research is “Are there differences in personality traits that impact the successful sociocultural adaptation of international students in two different host cultures?”

The concept of personality traits

The trait perspective suggests that personality is the outcome of genetic makeup passed down through generations. A trait is defined as “a relatively stable pattern of thinking, feeling, and acting that an individual display across situations” (Diener & Lucas, 2014). Personality traits relate to individual temperaments that predispose human behavior that could be difficult to change over time (Cervone & Pervin, 2018). An insight into differences among persons’ behaviors could be accounted for by making attributions about personality traits (Migali & Zucchelli, 2017).

The earliest investigation of personality traits began with Gordon Allport, who concurred that traits were correlated with a person’s values and motivation, leading to a compiled list of over 4000 traits characterized as cardinal, central, and secondary (Allport, 1937). The introduction of factor analysis later helped Raymond Cattell (Cattell, 1946) to retrieve 171 of the common traits, characterizing them into surface and source traits and further reducing them to 16 source traits, which he referred to as the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF). Employing factor analysis, Eysenck retrieved the extraversion/introversion, neuroticism/emotional stability, and psychoticism clusters, which evolved as the “three dimensions of personality” (Eysenck, 1970).

The onward movement of statistical procedures like factor analysis contributed to the emergence of the Big Five traits that constitute a person’s personality, leading to research resonance (Barenbaum & Winter, 2008), and an agreement on these attributes emerged (John et al., 2008). Research consensus is that the Big Five Model is the most contemporary and frequently used structural measure of personality in a multitude of settings (John et al., 2008). Researchers posited that traits are relatively stable over a person’s life span (McCrae & Costa, 1994, 1997, 1999; Gosling et al., 2003), although not all research is conclusive (Cobb-Clark & Schurer, 2012; Soto et al., 2011), and universal across cultures (McCrae et al., 2005; Thalmayer & Saucier, 2014). Traits can be attributed to both nature and nurture, implying that inborn, innate characteristics and external incidents impact personality (McCrae & Costa, 2008).

The concept of sociocultural adaptation

The process of adaptation transpires when individuals respond to the demands of the environment (Berry, 1997). Psychological adaptation is maintaining good mental health and an achievement of internal personal satisfaction with the host culture (Berry, 2006) and is often evaluated according to the Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener et al., 1985). Sociocultural adaptation is assessed by competencies for dealing with external factors in the host culture like work and family life (Berry, 1997) and measures the self-reported difficulties with daily tasks (Wilson et al., 2017).

Previous research asserted that cultural adaptation was a unidimensional concept (Torbiorn, 1982). The identification of different dimensions of adaptation in due course prompted the multidimensionality of the concept (Black & Gregersen, 1991a), and the creation of a questionnaire measuring general adjustment includes living conditions like housing, transportation, climatic factors, medical benefits, educational facilities, etc.; work adjustment, including job specification and description and performance in the job; and interactional adjustment, which emphasizes communication potential. The assessment of cultural adaptation is often flexible and multifaceted, relating to the traits of the sojourners and the cultural background in which data is collected (Ward & Kennedy, 1999). Although a multitude of scales with varying lengths are available, the popular ones have a limit of 20 to 23 items (Ward & Rana-Deuba, 2000) used in a variety of settings.

In hindsight, it is desirable to get an extensive idea of dimensions of personality and aspects of sociocultural adaptation to examine cultural maintenance and marginalization (Sam & Berry, 2010), since students are not immersed in an actual job. Sociocultural adaptation should be highlighted owing to the relationship with stress (Araiza & Kutugata, 2013; Deuchar, 2022) so as to maintain emotional resilience, flexibility, and coping strategies for adjustment as well as psychological well-being (Luthans et al., 2015).

Related literature

The link between personality and culture is varied and corresponds with an individual’s attitudes, values, and behaviors (Berry, 2002; Bullough et al., 2022; Rosselli et al., 2022). Persuasive arguments are provided by Allik et al. (2023)and Mehta et al. (2023), that personality and culture are related. The dilemmas experienced by international students before transitioning to a new culture can be either physical, mental, or social, and dispositions can determine the means used to interact with others in the new milieu (Zhang et al., 2010). Almlund et al. (2011), concur that potential outcomes are weighed by freshmen prior to the selection of a university, often taking days or months, subject to information stored in perspective schemas, which can be traced to personality traits. The selective emigration process is intricate, implying that attraction to a country occurs in line with compatibility of needs and personality traits (Rentfrow et al., 2013).

A plethora of research exists about cross-national differences in personality traits (Thalmayer & Saucier, 2014; Bühler et al., 2023), concluding that not all dimensions of personality traits are predominant across different cultures (Saucier et al., 2014), nations, and geographic areas (Kajonius, 2017). Similarities in the mean levels of personality traits exist across neighboring cultures in proximity rather than countries dispersed (Allik & McCrae, 2004). An ongoing debate regarding national culture and the emergence of an individual’s traits continues (Hofstede & McCrae, 2004; McCrae & Terracciano, 2005a; Stackhouse, Rickley, Liu & Taras, 2024), but theorists assert the association between cultural values and personality (Allik et al., 2023; Mehta et al., 2023). An endemic approach emerged in response to the preeminence of Western methods to study personality traits in non-Western cultures (Cheung et al., 2011). East Asian countries exhibited lower extraversion in contrast to Europeans, with the exception of Finland (Kajonius, 2017). Similar findings revealed Southeast Asians displayed lower extraversion and conscientiousness and higher agreeableness in contrast to Westerners (Bühler et al., 2023). The gaps in literature keep in mind the nuances of the Big Five personality traits and sociocultural adaptation in Western and Eastern cultures, inferring studies conducted previously.

Extraverted persons are vibrant, talkative, sociable, and affectionate versus those who are shy, reserved, timid, and prefer solidarity. (Soto & John, 2017). Owing to characteristics of overconfidence and optimism, a person chases and longs for social interaction (DeYoung, 2015), sailing at ease with acculturation (Azadipour, 2019a), by embracing the novel culture (Ramakrishnan et al., 2018). Allik and McCrae (2004), research on 36 cultures indicated that the US and Europe displayed additional levels of extraversion and openness in contrast to Asian and African cultures, which tended to be introverted. Consistency exists with prior findings by Costello et al. (2018), describing US respondents performing extraverted actions like being outgoing and confident more than Singaporeans.

Conscientious persons are diligent, organized, dependable, and time-conscious compared to persons who are lazy, disorganized, and have poor time management (Soto & John, 2017). The literature on the willingness to acculturate for conscientious persons is mixed due to the fact that they are overconcerned about their family and community (Paulauskaitė et al., 2010). East-West differences by Costello et al. (2018), described US respondents manifesting more traits of conscientiousness, like being industrious, organized, and dependable, compared to Singaporeans, who scored higher for being careful. Conscientiousness is prevalent in western-educated samples like Germany and the US (Bühler et al., 2023), indicating similar findings in developing countries too (Laajaj et al., 2019).

Agreeable individuals like teamwork, are tolerant and accepting of others, and are forgiving and sympathetic versus those who do not like teamwork and are less tolerant, revengeful, belligerent, and selfish (Soto & John, 2017). Agreeable persons are likely to go with the flow and have emotional stability that promotes regulation of their negative emotions in adverse and strenuous situations (Shirazi et al., 2012). Thailand and Vietnam scored higher on the means for agreeableness in contrast to their Western counterparts like Germany, Australia, and the US (Bühler et al., 2023). Schmitt et al. (2007), revealed higher overall scores for agreeableness in Southeast Asians.

Neuroticism describes persons who are anxious, worried, tense, and nervous versus persons who are calm, emotionally balanced, self-confident, and in control of negative situations (Soto & John, 2017). Schmitt et.al. (2007), extensive data on 56 cultures using the Big Five inventory stipulated that East and Southeast Asian countries were inclined to have higher neuroticism and lower openness to experience scores. Vietnamese scored lowest on average for emotional stability, but Thai fell between the Germans and Australians (Bühler et al., 2023). Neuroticism revealed the lowest mean and highest variation versus agreeableness with the highest mean and lowest variation in research on 22 global nations (Kajonius & Giolla, 2017).

Openness to Experience depicts persons who are creative, artistic, dig technology, enjoy taking risks versus persons who are less conventional, lower risk takers, have narrow interests, and enjoy being practical (Soto & John, 2017). Openness is characterized by a proclivity for exploring new ideas and adventures with fewer prejudices rather than routines and traditional activities (McCrae & Greenberg, 2014). European countries display higher openness than East Asian countries in research on 22 global nations (Kajonius & Giolla, 2017). A multiple survey on US, German, Australian, Vietnamese, and Thai samples found rural Thais manifested high levels of openness to experience, albeit after the US sample. Thais and Vietnamese displayed low extraversion in contrast to industrialized countries, and Vietnamese scored the lowest for emotional stability, indicating heterogeneity in personality traits exists across cultures in proximity (Bühler et al., 2023).

International students try hard to modify and build their lives and careers to adapt both physiologically and psychologically to align with new cultural transitions riddled with changes in political, social, and economic shifts in multicultural and multiethnic so-called ‘new societies’ to create cultural uniformity (Molina & Rodriguez, 2018). Personality traits of extraversion, openness to experience and emotional stability unquestionably drive the person towards curiosity and building better networks to assist adaptation in the host culture (Krishnapriya, 2024). International students in a host culture who seek novelty and excitement and are enthusiastic, confident and have a vivid imagination to explore the new environment display extraversion and have better levels of sociocultural adaptation. Students who established better relationships with the locals scored higher on agreeableness and exceptionally better on sociocultural adjustment. Immigrants with neuroticism experienced greater levels of anxiety and depression, leading to accelerated levels of acculturative stress, which in turn impacted sociocultural adaptation (Chen & Zhang, 2023).

Ryder et al. (2000), concluded that identification with the mainstream culture was linked to higher conscientiousness, extraversion, and openness to experience, whereas identification with the heritage culture was linked with lower neuroticism and higher conscientiousness. Panicacci and Dewaele (2017), discovered that pliability and emotional solidity were negatively linked to the heritage culture, but social vigor, open-mindedness, and cultural empathy were positively linked to adaptation to the mainstream culture. Schmitz and Schmitz (2022), meta-analysis exhibited low neuroticism and higher levels of extraversion and openness with integration into a new culture. A meta-analysis conducted by Wilson et al. (2013), exhibited a positive and significant relation of conscientiousness, extraversion, and agreeableness to sociocultural adaptation. Migrants in Sweden disclosed that extraversion and exposure to the host culture are related to higher sociocultural adaptation (Atmoko & Mustafa, 2023). Research supports the fact that higher extraversion and lower neuroticism lead to better sociocultural adaptation, but contrarily for Singaporean students residing in Australia, it was related to higher agreeableness and conscientiousness (Ward et al., 2004).

A person’s culture of origin affects sociocultural adaptation in the host culture (Güzel & Glazer, 2019; Simic-Yamashita & Tanaka, 2009). Wilsons (2013), five dimensions of sociocultural adaptation like interpersonal communication (social and interpersonal contact), academic performance (goal achievement), personal interests (community activities and hobbies), ecological adaptation (general environment and pace of life), and language proficiency (speak and understand the local language), permit persons to adapt to the new culture on a day-to-day basis (Sam & Berry 2010). Sociocultural components like language ability, social interactions, cultural distance, and time spent in the host country of international students in China impacted cultural adaptation (Hou & Abu, 2024). Migrants in Sweden disclosed that extraversion and exposure to the host culture are related to higher sociocultural adaptation (Atmoko & Mustafa, 2023). The comparisons of sociocultural adaptation in Eastern and Western cultures are contingent upon political and economic systems, including norms and customs, and are the product of individual and social learning, resulting in varied ways of adjusting to the changes in the features of the milieu. Western cultures have higher individualism, independence, egalitarianism, and lower context-dependence in contrast to Eastern cultures, in which collectivism, interdependence, and logical discussions are more prevalent (Chang et al., 2011).

Thai society is described as a collectivist, high power-distance culture embedded with behavior conformity, harmony (Hofstede, 1991; Minkov et al., 2024), and a portion of Buddhist philosophy inserted into educational values (Pitiyanuwat & Sujiva, 2000). Ergo, high loyalty within groups is emphasized (Dimmock, 2000), resulting in individual participation being rare without the backing of their peers to ‘save face’ (Phutsiri, 2014), and a preference for ‘we’ rather than ‘I’ orientation (Samovar & Porter, 2004). In western egalitarian cultures, power distance is lower; hence, student-centeredness is initiated, and freedom to question the teacher is common (Phutsiri, 2014). New Zealand/Aotearoa is a western multicultural society that welcomes migrants regardless of race (Simon-Kumar, 2015), the largest population being Europeans, totaling 3,297,864, followed by Māori, totaling 775,836, and Asians, totaling 707,598 (Census Stats NZ, 2018). Māori, being the indigenous population of New Zealand, play a significant role in national life and culture (Orange, 2015). New Zealand is a ‘Western’ culture that provides an English-speaking environment (Zhong, 2014) and is described as an individualistic, low-power-distance, flexible-conformity culture (Hofstede, 1991). International students can socialize with Pacifica and Māori, whose social values are collective, but they differ in their emphasis on individualism, self-sufficiency, and assertiveness. International students from eastern cultures in New Zealand belong to different educational systems, have different norms and expectations, and prefer passive learning styles in contrast to the active learning style of western students with different norms and expectations. International students feel that teachers who lack cultural awareness are ethnocentric and are indifferent to adapting to an inclusive learning environment (Brunton & Jeffery, 2014).

It is plausible for Asian students adapting to western cultures to possess special sociocultural ability owing to the intricacies of the host culture (Valenti et al., 2022), as well as pay closer attention to the significance of living using these contemplations to reduce the pressure of cultural adjustment (Hurst & Carson 2021). International students find the process of adapting to the teaching and learning techniques and evaluations arduous, leading to stress, adaptation, and communication inadequacies of diverse ethnicities (Novoselova et al., 2020). Subsequently, students affiliate with each other rather than with local students while staying in the host culture (McFaul, 2016), although having social interactions with domestic students can improve cultural adaptation through means of social support (Bethel et al., 2020; Nair et al., 2024; Sheng et al., 2022). The main objective of this research is to discover if certain personality traits of international students for sociocultural adaptation are predominantly different in two distinct cultures so as to provide insightful suggestions for parents and students prior to embracing the milieu for dwelling and studying.

Objective of the research

The broad objective of this research is to discover if personality traits and sociocultural adaptation of international students’ adaptation are predominantly different in two distinct cultures so as to provide insightful suggestions for parents and students prior to embracing the milieu for dwelling and studying

On the basis of these three hypotheses were generated as follows:

Hypothesis 1: The Big Five personality traits of international students in Thailand and New Zealand are related to sociocultural adaptation.

Hypothesis 2: There are differences in the Big Five personality traits of international students in Thailand and New Zealand.

Hypothesis 3: There are differences in the sociocultural adaptation of international students in Thailand and New Zealand

Methodology

Research instruments

Implementing an etic perspective, a descriptive inquiry utilizing a 3-part questionnaire was distributed to international students in two cultures, namely Thailand and New Zealand.

At the onset, the Big-Five Personality Scale, adapted from Noe et al. (2015), an instrument to measure the Big Five personality traits, constituting 25 items using a five-point Likert scale, was distributed to international students from New Zealand and Thailand. The students were asked to do a self-examination and determine their personality traits on all items in the scale. The higher the scores for the statements in a category, the more likely you are to possess the associated trait. The mean scores ranged from 2.5 to 3.3, surpassing the midpoint of 2.5 for all facets of the Big Five personality traits.

Part 2 measured sociocultural adaptation adapted from Wilson (2013), constituting 21 items using a five-point Likert scale. The participants were told to reflect on life in the present culture and respond to the scale. The mean scores ranged from 3.1 to 4.0, surpassing the midpoint of 2.5 for all facets of sociocultural adaptation.

Part 3 congregated the demographic data of the sample. The initial draft of both questionnaires distributed in English only to international students was screened for content validity by experts, and unclear vocabulary was changed to avoid linguistic ambiguity in Thailand and New Zealand. Reliability was ascertained using item-to-total analysis simultaneously with the exploratory factor analysis. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the Big Five and sociocultural adaptation were .90 and .88, respectively. Subsequently, the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed to determine the validity of the measurement items.

Part 4 inserted the total of 46 measurement items in the EFA model; 25 items measured the Big Five personality traits, and 21 items measured sociocultural adaptation. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin of 0.931 (> cutoff point of 0.5) and significant Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity (x2=11688.950; p<0.05), displayed the sample appropriateness of 400. Out of the 25 items of the Big Five personality scale, five items were deleted from the Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient reliability analysis due to a weak correlation with items in the same construct, the values being 0.098, 0.884, 0.743,0.715 and 0.737. Out of 21 items for the sociocultural adaptation scale, four items were deleted due to a weak correlation with items in the same construct, the values being 0.641, 0.661, 0.781 and 0.773. Factor loadings for all other items were accepted (p < 0.001). Factor loadings for both the BIG Five personality traits and sociocultural adaptation are shown in Table 1. Subsequently, the 46 items were put through the CFA model. The data set of 400 resulted in a satisfactory outcome for the 6 fit indices, i.e., χ²/df, GFI, TLI, CFI, RMSEA, and SRMR, and was used to determine the fit of the CFA.

Participants and sampling

The formula advocated by Zinkmund et al. (2013), was exploited to ascertain the sample size yielding a 95% level of confidence, generating a z score of 1.96. In entirety, 400 questionnaires, 200 in each of the international universities, were handed out using the in-person drop method whereby the questionnaire was submitted on completion. Using the convenient sampling method, only 4th-year international students from the Bachelor of Business Administration studying in any major were chosen. All students were between the ages of 20 and 30 with a proficiency in English, having completed the Test of English as a Foreign Language. The sample in New Zealand consisted of 36% Indians, 28% Chinese, 7% Japanese, 3% Vietnamese, 10% Thais, 5% Singaporeans, 4% Burmese, 3% Indonesians and 4% New Zealanders of European descent. Only 28% were naturalized New Zealanders, and the rest had been residing in New Zealand for 3 ½ years and over. The sample in Thailand consisted of 15% Indians, 40% Burmese, 35% Chinese, 2% East Timor-Leste, 2% Laos DPR, 2% Cambodian and 4% Europeans of German descent. The international student’s sample in Thailand had been residing in the country for 3 ½ years and over, except for 4% who were born in Thailand.

Design and procedure

Demographic information analysis for each of the dimensions, i.e., Big Five personality traits and sociocultural adaptation, was a prerequisite for the descriptive data analysis. Table 1 and Table 2 depict the means and standard deviations of each of the dimensions of the Big Five personality traits and sociocultural adaptation, respectively. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, item-to-total, alongside exploratory factor analysis, succeeded for verification of the reliability and validity of the data. Consequently, the model fits of each group were tested, and the recommended values of each fit index, i.e., χ²/df, GFI, TLI, CFI, RMSEA, and SRMR, were utilized to judge the fit of the CFA, as depicted in Table 4.

Subsequently, the data was subjected to the Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to scan the good fit of the model along with testing hypothesis 1 for the relationship of the Big Five with sociocultural adaptation of Thais and New Zealanders. For hypotheses 2 and 3, initially the data was subjected to multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) to test the differences for Thais and New Zealanders on both major facets, i.e., Big Five personality traits and sociocultural adaptation. Subsequently, the post hoc analysis of variance (ANOVA) was tested for the approximation of differences in the means of each dimension of the Big Five personality traits and sociocultural adaptation for Thais and New Zealanders.

Ethical considerations

The international students from both nations were requested to provide a written consent to participate in this study prior to the commencement of this research, guaranteeing that they would incur no harm and all outcomes would be anonymous and confidential to comply with the Privacy Act of New Zealand.

Results and discussion

Table 2 indicates that the obtained values of the means for three dimensions of the Big Five personality traits of international students in New Zealand namely, extraversion, conscientiousness and openness to experience were higher (3.114, 3.340 and 3.067), with the exception of emotional stability and agreeableness (3.035 and 3.070) which were higher for international students from Thailand.

The literature review is consistent with these findings with recent research revealing that Southeast Asians displayed lower extraversion and conscientiousness and higher agreeableness in contrast to Westerners (Bühler et al., 2023). Allik and McCrae (2004), research on 36 cultures indicated that the US and Europe displayed additional levels of extraversion and openness in contrast to Asian and African cultures, which tended to be introverted. Thailand and Vietnam scored higher on the means for agreeableness in contrast to their Western counterparts like Germany, Australia, and the US (Bühler et al., 2023). Schmitt et al. (2007), revealed higher overall scores for agreeableness in Southeast Asians, with the exception of Finland (Kajonius, 2017). Western cultures have higher individualism, independence, egalitarianism, and lower context-dependence in contrast to Eastern cultures, in which collectivism, interdependence, and logical discussions are more prevalent (Chang et al., 2011).

It is possible that international students who choose to study in Thailand have given it careful though before the selection process implying that attraction to a country occurs in line with compatibility of needs and personality traits (Rentfrow et al., 2013). These international students also learn to modify their lives to adapt with Thai culture which emphasizes collectivist, high power-distance culture embedded with behavior conformity, harmony (Hofstede, 1991; Minkov et al., 2024), Ergo, high loyalty within groups is emphasized (Dimmock, 2000), resulting in individual participation being rare without the backing of their peers to ‘save face’ (Phutsiri, 2014), and a preference for ‘we’ rather than ‘I’ orientation (Samovar & Porter, 2004).

Table 1 Factor loadings of the big five personality traits and sociocultural adaptation.

							95% Confidence Interval		Standardized
Group	Latent	Indicator	Estimate	Std. Error	z-value	p	Lower	Upper	All	LV	Endo
THA	Agree1	AG1	1.000	0.000			1.000	1.000	0.824	1.080	0.824
		AG2	0.988	0.074	13.341	<0.001	0.843	1.133	0.813	1.066	0.813
		AG4	1.115	0.078	14.345	<0.001	0.963	1.268	0.855	1.204	0.855
		AG5	1.183	0.077	15.403	<0.001	1.033	1.334	0.903	1.278	0.903
	Consci1	CNS4	1.000	0.000			1.000	1.000	0.796	0.973	0.796
		CNS5	1.334	0.088	15.139	<0.001	1.161	1.506	0.937	1.297	0.937
		CNS6	1.290	0.087	14.835	<0.001	1.119	1.460	0.905	1.254	0.905
	Emotion1	ES1	1.000	0.000			1.000	1.000	0.737	0.932	0.737
		ES2	1.135	0.102	11.121	<0.001	0.935	1.335	0.810	1.057	0.810
		ES3	1.123	0.102	11.010	<0.001	0.923	1.323	0.801	1.046	0.801
		ES4	1.089	0.101	10.767	<0.001	0.891	1.287	0.784	1.015	0.784
		ES6	1.141	0.103	11.124	<0.001	0.940	1.342	0.810	1.063	0.810
	Extra1	E1	1.000	0.000			1.000	1.000	0.962	1.349	0.962
		E2	0.845	0.040	21.313	<0.001	0.768	0.923	0.877	1.141	0.877
		E4	0.708	0.042	16.716	<0.001	0.625	0.791	0.799	0.956	0.799
		E5	0.764	0.044	17.468	<0.001	0.678	0.850	0.814	1.031	0.814
		E6	0.648	0.038	16.868	<0.001	0.572	0.723	0.802	0.874	0.802
	Open1	OE1	1.000	0.000			1.000	1.000	0.803	1.000	0.803
		OE3	1.134	0.084	13.419	<0.001	0.968	1.299	0.857	1.133	0.857
		OE5	1.200	0.091	13.159	<0.001	1.021	1.378	0.843	1.199	0.843
		OE7	1.016	0.080	12.775	<0.001	0.860	1.172	0.823	1.016	0.823
	SocioAdapt1	IC	1.000	0.000			1.000	1.000	0.818	0.306	0.818
		AP	1.490	0.153	9.742	<0.001	1.190	1.790	0.770	0.456	0.770
		PI	0.619	0.182	3.397	<0.001	0.262	0.976	0.263	0.189	0.263
		EA	1.385	0.165	8.413	<0.001	1.063	1.708	0.639	0.424	0.639
		LP	1.629	0.229	7.125	<0.001	1.181	2.077	0.542	0.499	0.542
NZ	Agree1	AG1	1.000	0.000			1.000	1.000	0.828	1.103	0.828
		AG2	0.918	0.067	13.713	<0.001	0.787	1.049	0.841	1.012	0.841
		AG4	0.766	0.070	10.878	<0.001	0.628	0.904	0.707	0.844	0.707
		AG5	1.057	0.073	14.519	<0.001	0.914	1.199	0.885	1.165	0.885
	Consci1	CNS4	1.000	0.000			1.000	1.000	0.771	0.990	0.771
		CNS5	1.130	0.106	10.646	<0.001	0.922	1.338	0.836	1.119	0.836
		CNS6	1.107	0.106	10.433	<0.001	0.899	1.315	0.787	1.096	0.787
	Emotion1	ES1	1.000	0.000			1.000	1.000	0.772	0.873	0.772
		ES2	1.455	0.113	12.929	<0.001	1.234	1.675	0.854	1.270	0.854
		ES3	1.164	0.094	12.338	<0.001	0.979	1.349	0.821	1.017	0.821
		ES4	1.346	0.106	12.702	<0.001	1.138	1.553	0.841	1.175	0.841
		ES6	1.391	0.109	12.727	<0.001	1.177	1.605	0.842	1.215	0.842
	Extra1	E1	1.000	0.000			1.000	1.000	0.946	1.554	0.946
		E2	0.760	0.040	18.814	<0.001	0.680	0.839	0.846	1.180	0.846
		E4	0.743	0.037	20.042	<0.001	0.671	0.816	0.867	1.155	0.867
		E5	0.723	0.039	18.476	< 0.001	0.647	0.800	0.840	1.124	0.840
		E6	0.840	0.040	20.977	<0.001	0.761	0.918	0.881	1.305	0.881
	Open1	OE1	1.000	0.000			1.000	1.000	0.851	1.253	0.851
		OE3	0.902	0.062	14.515	<0.001	0.781	1.024	0.852	1.131	0.852
		OE5	0.933	0.069	13.465	<0.001	0.797	1.069	0.808	1.169	0.808
		OE7	0.847	0.062	13.692	<0.001	0.726	0.969	0.818	1.062	0.818
	SocioAdapt1	IC	1.000	0.000			1.000	1.000	0.708	0.284	0.708
		AP	1.418	0.170	8.352	<0.001	1.085	1.751	0.678	0.403	0.678
		PI	1.629	0.210	7.751	<0.001	1.217	2.041	0.624	0.462	0.624
		EA	1.756	0.189	9.300	<0.001	1.386	2.127	0.779	0.499	0.779
		LP	2.537	0.301	8.422	<0.001	1.946	3.127	0.685	0.720	0.685

Table 2 Descriptive statistics of the of the big five personality traits of international students in Thailand and New Zealand

Big Five Traits	E		ES		A		C		OE
	Thai	NZ	Thai	NZ	Thai	NZ	Thai	NZ	Thai	NZ
Valid	200	200	200	200	200	200	200	200	200	200
Mean	2.580	3.114	3.194	3.035	3.070	2.843	3.122	3.340	2.478	3.067
SD	1.112	1.303	1.085	1.162	1.214	1.095	1. 230	1.169	1.149	1.219

Note E: Extroversion, ES: Emotional Stability, A: Agreeableness, C: Conscientiousness, O: Openness to Experience

Table 3 Descriptive statistics of the of the of sociocultural adaptation of international students in Thailand and New Zealand

Socio-cultural Adapt	IC		AP		PI		EA		IP
	Thai	NZ	Thai	NZ	Thai	NZ	Thai	NZ	Thai	NZ
Valid	200	200	200	200	200	200	200	200	200	200
Mean	3.764	4.040	3.782	4.070	3.976	3.700	3.459	3.770	3.135	3.560
SD	0.375	0.402	0.594	0.595	0.723	0.743	0.666	0.642	0.923	1.054

Note: *: IC: Interpersonal communication, AP: Academic performance, PI: Personal interests: EA: Ecological adaptation and LA: Language proficiency

Table 3 indicates that the obtained values of the means for four dimensions of the sociocultural adaptation of international students in New Zealand namely, interpersonal communication, academic performance, ecological adaptation and language proficiency were higher (4.040, 4.070, 3.459 and 3.560), with the exception of personal interest which was higher for the international students in Thailand (3.9760).

The comparisons of sociocultural adaptation in Eastern and Western cultures are contingent upon political and economic systems, including norms and customs, and are the product of individual and social learning, resulting in varied ways of adjusting to the changes in the features of the milieu. It is plausible for Asian students adapting to western cultures to possess special sociocultural ability owing to the intricacies of the host culture (Valenti et al., 2022), as well as pay closer attention to the significance of living using these contemplations to reduce the pressure of cultural adjustment (Hurst & Carson 2021).

The literature review confirms that Western cultures have higher individualism, independence, egalitarianism, and lower context-dependence in contrast to Eastern cultures, in which collectivism, interdependence, and logical discussions are more prevalent (Chang et al., 2011). In addition, New Zealand is a ‘Western’ culture that provides an English-speaking environment (Zhong, 2014) and is described as an individualistic, low-power-distance, flexible-conformity culture (Hofstede, 1991). In contrast to Thai culture, the international students in New Zealand were forced to speak English which is the first language as well as interact closely with teachers who practice an active learning style (Brunton & Jeffery, 2014). In western egalitarian cultures, power distance is lower; hence, student-centeredness is initiated, and freedom to question the teacher is common (Phutsiri, 2014). On the other hand, Thai culture emphasizes loyalty to the groups to (Dimmock, 2000), resulting in individual participation being rare without the backing of their peers to ‘save face’ (Phutsiri, 2014), and a preference for ‘we’ rather than ‘I’ orientation (Samovar & Porter, 2004). This could result in in international students being compelled to affiliate and conduct activities in groups at the same time learning what is required from the high context-dependent culture like Thailand.

Table 4 Recommended and actual values of the CFA fit indices

Fit Indices	Chi square / df	CFI	GFI	RMSEA	TLI	SRMR
Criteria	< 3	> 0.95	> 0.95	< 0.07	> 0.95	< .05
Model value	1.34	0.969	0.990	0.041	0.965	0.043

Note: Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Goodness of Fit Index (GFI), Root Mean Square error of approximation (RMSEA), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), Standardized root mean square residual (SRMR). * Tucker Lewis index is a non-normed fit index; RMSEA=Root Mean Square Error of Approximation

Table 4 indicates that six fit indices, i.e. χ2/df, CFI, GFI, RMSEA, TCI AND SRMR were used to determine the fit of the CFA model. The recommended value of each fit index and the estimated value gathered from the analysis are shown. Satisfactory CFA results are illustrated. The chi-square per degree of freedom of 1.34 was less than the cutoff point of 3.0. All fit indices, i.e. CFI (=0.969), GFI (=0.990), TLI (0.965) exceeded the required level of 0.9. RMSEA (0.041), was less than the cutoff point of 0.07 and SRMR (0.043), was less than the cutoff point of .05. Good fits of the CFA were shown. This result would ensure the construct validity of the measurement model and indicated that the data from such measurement were qualified to perform the structural equation model used Min the next stage of the model. As the fits of the structural equation model fits well with the survey data, the coefficients of the structural paths in the model could be utilized to test the related hypotheses.

Figure 1 Graphical representation of the structural paths of Thailand

Figure 2 Graphical representation of the structural paths of New Zealand

Table 5 Estimated coefficients for structural paths

Structural Paths Thai Group		Estimated Coefficient	Critical Value (p)
Extraversion	Adaptation	-0.038	0.032 **
Openness to Experience	Adaptation	-0.054	0.031 **

Note: Unstandardized β is shown; standardized β is presented in parentheses.

Significance of the critical ratio is shown as ***p<0.001; **p<0.01; *p<0.05.

Table 5 illustrates that the Structural Equation Modeling partially supported hypothesis one, i.e., the relationship between the Big Five personality traits and sociocultural adaptation for international students in that two proposed relationships for international students in Thailand only were significant, the relationship between extraversion and sociocultural adaptation (β=-0.038; p<0.01) and between openness to experience and sociocultural adaptation (β=0.054; p<0.01). The other three dimensions, emotional stability, conscientiousness, and agreeableness, did not support the data and hence were not significant for the international student sample in Thailand as indicated in the structural path in Figure 1. The New Zealand international student sample did not support the data; hence, it showed no significant relationship of any dimension of the Big Five personality traits with sociocultural adaptation as indicated in the structural path in Figure 2.

The literature review inferred that students try hard to modify and build their lives and careers to adapt both physiologically and psychologically to align with new cultural transitions riddled with changes in political, social, and economic shifts in multicultural and multiethnic so-called ‘new societies’ to create cultural uniformity (Molina & Rodriguez, 2018). Ryder et al. (2000), confirmed the importance of conscientiousness, extraversion, and openness to experience for identification with the mainstream culture. These findings were supported by Panicacci and Dewaele (2017), discovery that pliability and emotional solidity were negatively linked to the heritage culture, but social vigor, open-mindedness, and cultural empathy were positively linked to adaptation to the mainstream culture.

Theorists assert the association between cultural values and personality (Allik et al., 2023; Mehta et al., 2023). Comparisons of sociocultural adaptation in Eastern and Western cultures are contingent upon political and economic systems, including norms and customs socially learned, resulting in varied ways of adjusting to the changes in the features of the milieu. Western cultures have higher individualism, independence, and egalitarianism, and lower context-dependence in contrast to Eastern cultures, in which collectivism, interdependence, and logical discussions are more prevalent (Chang et al., 2011).

Thai society is described as a collectivist, high power-distance culture embedded with behavior conformity and harmony in comparison to New Zealand (Hofstede, 1991). Ergo, high loyalty within groups is emphasized (Dimmock, 2000), prompting individual participation to be rare without the backing of their peers to ‘save face’ (Phutsiri, 2014), and a preference for ‘we’ rather than ‘I’ orientation (Samovar & Porter, 2004). International students find the process of adapting to the teaching and learning techniques and evaluations arduous, leading to stress, adaptation, and communication inadequacies of diverse ethnicities (Novoselova et al., 2020). Subsequently, students affiliate with each other rather than with local students while staying in the host culture (McFaul, 2016).

It is plausible that international students residing and studying in Thai culture are compelled to emulate the Thai way, which stresses logical communication, in-group or out-group, in order to experience the ‘we’ feeling alongside being open-minded and interdependent to create harmonious relationships predominant in a collectivistic society, if they intend to be successful with the learning process. The majority of the international students pursuing studies in Thailand in the present study were primarily Asians and Southeast Asians; thus, displaying traits of extroversion and openness to adapt to a high context-dependent culture like Thailand, which relies heavily on indirect, non-verbal, and situational context for communication, is common. Albeit international students, although constituting a majority of Asians and Southeast Asians in a Western low-context-dependent, egalitarian, individualistic, and independent culture like New Zealand, which relies heavily on explicit verbal and written communication, were not compelled manifest any particular traits for adaptation to the culture.

Table 6 Comparisons of the big five personality traits among international student groups in Thailand and New Zealand using ANOVA post hoc analysis

Big Five Traits	E			ES		A		C		OE

Valid	Thai 200	NZ 200		Thai 200	NZ 200	Thai 200	NZ 200	Thai 200	NZ 200	Thai 200	NZ 200
Mean	2.580	3.114		3.194	3.035	3.070	2.843	3.122	3.340	2.478	3.067
SD	1.112	1.303		1.085	1.162	1.214	1.095	1. 230	1.169	1.149	1.219
Mean squares among nations	28.516		2.528			5.176		4.767		34.810
F-Value	19.438**		1.999			3.873		3.312		224.813**
P-Value	< 0.001		0.158			0.050		0.070		< 0.001

Note E: Extroversion, ES: Emotional Stability, A: Agreeableness, C: Conscientiousness, O: Openness to Experience.

Numbers shown in the table are the average score. Standard deviations are shown. in italics

Significance of the critical ratio is shown as ***p<0.001; **p<0.01; *p<0.05.

The initial multivariate test performed in MANOVA indicated that there are statistically significant differences between international students who study in Thailand and New Zealand on the Big Five Personality Traits and Sociocultural Adaptation with the overall F= 15.166, df = 10, P < .001. This was proceeded with the AVNOVA post hoc analysis used to determine the differences for each variable of international students who study in Thailand and New Zealand, as shown below.

Table 6 illustrates that the ANOVA post hoc results for hypothesis 2 revealed significant differences in the mean scores for 2 dimensions of the Big Five traits personality, namely extraversion and openness to experience, of international students in Thailand and New Zealand. The F-value of 19.438 (p<0.001) for extraversion and 224.813 (p<0.001) for openness to experience for international students residing in New Zealand was higher than for international students residing in Thailand. The other dimensions of the Big Five personality traits, namely, emotional stability, agreeableness, and conscientiousness, revealed no significant differences between international students in Thailand and New Zealand.

The literature review endorsed the link between personality and culture and association with attitudes, values, and behaviors (Berry, 2002; Bullough et al., 2022; Rosselli et al., 2022), affirming the impact of interaction with others in the new milieu (Zhang et al., 2010). The existence of cross-national differences in personality traits is a debatable issue (Thalmayer & Saucier, 2014; Bühler et al., 2023), but theorists assert the connection between cultural values and personality (Allik et al., 2023; Mehta et al., 2023) as well as differences across different cultures (Saucier et al., 2014), nations, and geographic areas (Kajonius, 2017). East Asian countries exhibited lower extraversion in contrast to Europeans, with the exception of Finland (Kajonius, 2017). Similar findings revealed Southeast Asians displayed lower extraversion and conscientiousness and higher agreeableness in contrast to Westerners (Bühler et al., 2023). Allik and McCrae (2004). Research on 36 cultures indicated that the US and Europe displayed additional levels of extraversion and openness to experience in contrast to Asian and African cultures, which tended to be introverted. Consistency exists with prior findings by Costello et al., (2018), describing US respondents performing extraverted actions like being outgoing and confident more than Singaporeans. European countries display higher openness than East Asian countries in research on 22 global nations (Kajonius & Giolla, 2017). A study using multiple surveys on 5 countries found rural Thais manifested high levels of openness to experience, albeit after the US sample. Thais and Vietnamese displayed lower extraversion in contrast to industrialized countries. Vietnamese scored the lowest for emotional stability compared to the US, German, Australian, and Thai samples, confirming heterogeneity in personality traits across cultures in proximity (Bühler et al., 2023).

The majority of international students in this research were Asians and Southeast Asians residing and studying in New Zealand. It is imminent for Asian students adapting to Western cultures to possess special sociocultural ability owing to the intricacies of the host culture (Valenti et al., 2022), as well as paying closer attention to the significance of living using these contemplations to reduce the pressure of cultural adjustment (Hurst & Carson, 2021). In addition, previous studies imply that attraction to a place occurs in line with compatibility of needs and personality traits (Rentfrow et al., 2013). Extroverted persons are vibrant, talkative, sociable, and affectionate (Soto & John, 2017), long for social interaction (DeYoung, 2015). Openness to experience persons are creative, like technology and artistic (Soto & John, 2017), tend to explore new ideas and adventures with less prejudice rather than routines and traditional activities (McCrae & Greenberg, 2014).

Western cultures have higher individualism, independence, and egalitarianism, and lower context-dependency (Chang et al., 2011), creating an impetus for students to express and convey messages through precise, direct articulation of messages. The nature of low power distance in the western world additionally permits student-centeredness and freedom to question the teacher without inhibitions (Phutsiri, 2014). Owing to these reasons, it is not uncommon for students to exhibit traits of extraversion and openness in New Zealand.

Table 7 Comparisons of Sociocultural Adaptation among International Student Groups in Thailand and New Zealand using ANOVA Post hoc analysis

Socio cultural

Adapt

Thai

Valid

200

Mean

3.764

4.040

3.782

4.070

3.976

3.700

3.459

3.770

3.135

3.560

0.375

0.402

0.594

0.595

0.723

0.743

0.666

0.642

0.923

1.054

Mean squares

among nations

7.602

8.266

7.631

9.688

18.063

F-Value

P-Value

50.258**

< 0.001

23.363**

< 0.001

14.188**

< 0.001

22.662**

< 0.001

18.403**

< 0.001

Note *: IC: Interpersonal Communication, AP: Academic Performance, PI: Personal Interests EA: Ecological Adaptation and LA: Language Proficiency

Numbers shown in the table are the average score. Standard deviations are shown. in italics

Significance of the critical ratio is shown as ***p<0.001; **p<0.01; *p<0.0

Table 7 illustrates that the ANOVA post hoc results for hypothesis 3 revealed significant differences in the mean scores for all five dimensions of sociocultural adaptation of international students in Thailand and New Zealand. The F-value was 50.258 (p<0.001) for interpersonal communication, 23.363 (p<0.001) for academic performance, 14.188 (p<0.001) for personal interest, 22.662 (p<0.001) for ecological adaptation, and 18.403 (p<0.001) for language proficiency, respectively. All dimensions of sociocultural adaptation were higher for the international students in New Zealand except personal interest, which was higher for the international students in Thailand.

The literature review affirmed that a person’s culture of origin affects sociocultural adaptation in the host culture (Güzel & Glazer, 2019; Simic-Yamashita & Tanaka, 2010). The majority of international students in this research were Asians and Southeast Asians residing and studying in Thailand or New Zealand. This demographic could affect the results of the study since the international students in Thailand were perceived as studying in an Eastern culture in which large disparities between the culture of origin were minor as opposed to, international students staying in a Western culture like New Zealand. Comparisons of sociocultural adaptation in Eastern and Western cultures are contingent upon political and economic systems, including norms and customs, and are the product of individual and social learning, resulting in varied ways of adjusting to the changes in the features of the milieu.

New Zealand is an individualistic, low power distance, flexible conformity (Hofstede, 1991), ‘Western’ culture that provides an English-speaking environment (Zhong, 2014). International students can socialize with Pacifica and Māori, whose social values are collective, but they differ in their emphasis on individualism, self-sufficiency, and assertiveness. International students from eastern cultures in New Zealand belong to different educational systems, have different norms and expectations, and prefer passive learning styles in contrast to the active learning style of western students with different norms and expectations. They feel that teachers lacked cultural awareness, are ethnocentric and are indifferent to adapting to an inclusive learning environment (Brunton & Jeffery, 2014). On account of cultural features, international students in New Zealand had to exhibit good personal interactions, maintain academic scores, adapt to the pace of life, and meet challenges of an English-speaking environment to be culturally adept.

Limitations and recommendations

Etic research findings are vital for congregating information and comparing two diverse cultures, albeit with caveats of generalizations and interpretation discretions. Datum for quantitative analysis was sizeable and derived from structured, reliable questionnaires prioritizing English only to assure consistency, considering the diversity of the sample size, which consisted primarily of 96% Asians and Southeast Asians from various cultural backgrounds and 4% Europeans in both cultures, who, although possessing variations in their English proficiency, belonged to international universities and had completed the Test of English as a Foreign Language. As such, back-translation questionnaires in different languages can cause problems with interpretations owing to the diverse native languages of the sample. However, the sample indicated heterogeneity in sociocultural adaptation and personality traits in two cultures but with the possibility of underrating individual-level variability in personality traits and sociocultural adaptation.

The scope of the research was narrowed by virtue of a lack of data on other demographic data like gender, different age ranges, different faculties, socioeconomic status, religion, and details of ethnicity within a large culture which may act as moderators for enumerating a broader perspective pertaining to providing variability in the sociocultural adaptation. The researcher used the convenient sampling technique and included just one age range, from 20 to 30 and only one faculty of international students, which can hinder generalizability with other age groups and faculties. Gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status were excluded deliberately on account of the Privacy Act in New Zealand (Newshub, 2020), which grants persons the individual right not to disclose personal or impersonal information which can be linked back to them.

The seminal findings of this research can pave the way for a larger, more elaborate study by treating personality holistically and including mediators like cultural intelligence, emotional intelligence, psychological adjustment, self-efficacy and other pertinent traits for an in-depth cultural analysis. Besides self-reported data other qualitative data like interviews with samples, family members and peers can explore personality traits at an individual level for a comprehensive study. A test retest should be conducted to check reliability of personality traits since students’ responses to items could occur due to exposure to a culture.

Attributing differences to Eastern and Western national culture are insufficient; rather, an in-depth, culture-specific study can be conducted to identify disparities of each culture that dictate different social rules. Prior to departure, idiosyncrasies about cultures can be disseminated to international students, and orientation programs can be set up to coach students on aspects of sociocultural adaptation in view of cultural alignment so as to ‘fit in,’ for retention, and for goal achievement. Additionally, student’s personality traits can be analyzed to create a match between the traits and culture. The impact of sociocultural adaptation as a prerequisite for psychological adaptation in the new culture can help predict life satisfaction (Hou & Abu, 2024).

Data availability statement

The raw data substantiating the discussion and conclusions in this study can be shared by the author willingly.

Conflict of interest

The author claims that this study was not carried out for the benefit of any financial or commercial purpose that could be regarded as a conflict of interest.

References

Albrecht A.-G., Ones D. S., Sinangil H. K. (2018). Expatriate management (pp. 429-465). In Ones, D. S., Anderson N., Viswesvaran C., & Sinangil H. K. (Eds.). The SAGE handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology, London, UK: Sage.

Allik, J., & McCrae, R. R. (2004). Toward a Geography of Personality Traits: Patterns of Profiles across 36 Cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35(1),13-28.

Allik, J., Realo, A., & McCrae, R. R. (2023). Conceptual and methodological issues in the study of the personality and culture relationship. Frontiers in Psychology, 14 (1077851),1-19.

Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Almlund, M., Duckworth, A. L., Heckman, J. J., & Kautz, T. D. (2011). Personality psychology and economics. [Working Paper No. w16822]. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

An, R., & Chiang, S. Y. (2015). International students’ culture learning and cultural adaptation in China. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 36(7),661-676.

Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., & Koh, C. (2006). Personality correlates of the four-factor model of cultural intelligence. Group & Organization Management, 31(1),100-123.

Araiza, M. J., & Kutugata, A. (2013). Understanding stress in international students of higher education in a Mexican private university. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 106(2013), 3184-3194.

Atmoko, D.D., & Mustafa, F. (2023). Who is Adapting to a New Culture? Unmasking How Personality Traits Predict Acculturation Among Non-Western Immigrants in Sweden (Master’s thesis). Sweden: University of Lund.

Azadipour, S. (2019a). Personality types and intercultural competence of foreign language learners in an educational context. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 9(11),1-8.

Barenbaum, N. B., & Winter, D. G. (2008). History of modern personality theory and research (pp. 3-26). In John, O. P., Robins, R. W., & Pervin, L. A. (Eds.). Handbook of personality: Theory and research, New York: The Guilford Press.

Berry, J. W. (2006). Acculturative stress (pp. 287-298). In Wong, P. T. P., & Wong, L. C. J. (Eds.). Handbook of multicultural perspectives on stress and coping, Boston: Springer US.

Berry, W. J. (1997). Lead article: Immigration, Acculturation, and Adaptation. Applied psychology: An international review, 46(1),5-68.

Bethel, A., Ward, C., & Fetvadjiev, V. H. (2020). Cross-cultural transition and psychological adaptation of international students: The mediating role of host national connectedness. Frontiers in Education, 5(539950),1-12.

Black, J. S., & Gregersen, H. B. (1991a). Antecedents to Cross-Cultural Adjustment for Expatriates in Pacific Rim Assignments. Human Relations, 44(5),497-515.

Bochner, S. (2003). Culture Shock Due to Contact with Unfamiliar Cultures. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 8(1),1-12.

Brunton, M. & Jeffery, L. (2014). Identifying factors that influence the learner empowerment of international students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 43(1), 321-334.

Bühler, D., Sharma, R., & Stein, W. (2023). The Big Five model in rural Southeast Asia: Validation, stability, and its role in household income. Journal of Personality, 91(6),1364-1380.

Bullough A., Guelich U., Manolova T. S., & Schjoedt L. (2022). Women’s entrepreneurship and culture: Gender role expectations and identities, societal culture, and the entrepreneurial environment. Small Business Economics, 58(2),985-996.

Cattell, R. B. (1946). The description and measurement of personality. New York: World Book Company.

Census Stats NZ. (2018). Census ethnic groups dataset.

Retrieved from https://www.stats.govt.nz/2018-census/.

Cervone, D., & Pervin, L. A. (2018). Personality: Theory and research, fourteenth edition. New York: Wiley and Sons.

Chang, L., Mak, M. C. K., Li, T., Wu, B. P., Chen, B. B., Lu, H. J. (2011). Cultural Adaptations to Environmental Variability: An Evolutionary Account of East-West Differences. Educational Psychology Review, 23(1),99-129.

Chen, N., & Zhang, Y. (2023). An Analysis on How Personality Traits Influence Acculturation and Cross-Cultural Adaptation for International Students. Journal of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, 9(2023), 82-86.

Cheung, F. M., van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leong, F. T. L. (2011). Toward a new approach to the study of personality in culture. American Psychologist, 66(7), 593-603.

Cobb-Clark, D. A., & Schurer, S. (2012). The stability of Big Five personality traits. Economics Letters, 115(1), 11-15.

Costello, C., Wood, D., & Tov, W. (2018). Revealed traits: A novel method for estimating cross-cultural similarities and differences in personality. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(4), 554-586.

Country Report (2019). Master Plan on ASEAN Connectivity 2025. Retrieved from https://asean.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/09/Master-Plan-on-ASEAN-Connectivity-20251.pdf

Deuchar, A. (2022). The problem with international students’ ‘experiences’ and the promise of their practices: Reanimating research about international students in higher education. British Educational Research Journal, 48(3), 504-518.

DeYoung, C. G. (2015). Cybernetic Big Five theory. Journal of Research in Personality, 56, 33-58.

Diener, E., & Lucas, R. E. (2014). Personality traits and subjective well-being (pp. 757-769). In Havil and Jones, J. M., & Barrett, L. F. (Eds.). Handbook of emotions, New York: The Guilford Press.

Diener, E., Emmons, R.A., Larsen, R.J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction with Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71-75.

Dimmock, C. (2000). Designing the learning-centered school: A cross-cultural perspective. London: Falmer Press.

Dunn, T. (n.d.). Quotation. Retrieved from https://www.consultclarity.org/post/quotes-about-personality

Eysenck, H. J. (1970). The structure of human personality (3^rd ed.). London: Methuen.

Gilliham, T. (2022). Kaplan international pathways. Retrieved from https://www.kaplanpathways.com/

Global Peace Index. (2023). Measuring peace in a complex world. Retrieved from https://www.visionofhumanity.org/10-most-peaceful-countries

Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann Jr, W. B. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(6), 504-528.

Güzel, H., & Glazer, S. (2019). Demographic correlates of acculturation and sociocultural adaptation: Comparing international and domestic students. Journal of International Students, 9(4), 1074-1094.

Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill.

Hofstede, G., & McCrae, R. R. (2004). Personality and culture revisited: Linking traits and dimensions of culture. Cross-Cultural Research, 38(1), 52-88.

Hou, X., & Abu, B. (2024). Factors influencing cross-cultural adaptation among international students in China: an empirical investigation. Environment and Social Psychology, 9(8), 1-12. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/383689209_Factors_influencing_cross cultural_adaptation_among_international_students_in_china_an_empirical_investigation

Huang, J. L., Ryan, A. M., Zabel, K. L., & Palmer, A. (2014). Personality and adaptive performance at work: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(1), 162-179.

Hurst, R., & Carson, J. (2021). For whom the bell chimes: a synthesis of remarkable student lives. Mental Health and Social Inclusion, 25(2), 195-207.

Jiang, N., Sato, T., Hara, T., Takedomi, Y., Ozaki, I., & Yamada, S. (2003). Correlations between trait anxiety, personality, and fatigue: a study based on the Temperament and Character Inventory. Journal of psychosomatic research, 55(6), 493-500.

John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual issues (pp. 114-158). In John, O. P., Robins, R. W., & Pervin, L. A. (Eds.). Handbook of personality: Theory and research, New York: The Guilford Press.

Kajonius, P. (2017). Cross-cultural personality differences between East Asia and Northern Europe in IPIP-NEO. International Journal of Personality Psychology, 3(1), 1-7.

Kajonius, P., & Giolla, E. M. (2017). Personality traits across countries: Support for similarities rather than differences. PLoS ONE, 12(6), e0179646.

Kanakkassery, S. (2024). Personality, Perception, And Cultural Adaptation: A Scoping Review of Interpersonal Dynamics in Cross Cultural Contexts. Proceeding of the 9th International Conference on Research in Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(1), 15-28.

Kim Y. Y. (2017). Cross-Cultural Adaptation. Retrieved from https://oxfordre.com/communication/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228613-e-21

Kim, Y. Y. (2001). Becoming intercultural: an integrative theory of communication and cross-cultural adaptation. California: Sage Thousand Oaks.

Laajaj, R., Macours, K., Hernandez, D. A. P., Arias, O., Gosling, S. D., Potter, J., Rubio-Codina, M., &Vakis, R. (2019). Challenges to capture the Big Five personality traits in non-WEIRD populations. Science Advances, 5(7), eaaw5226.

Leung, K., Ang, S., & Tan, M. L. (2014). Intercultural Competence. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1, 489-519.

Luthans, F., Youssef-Morgan, C. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2015). Psychological capital and beyond. New York: Oxford University Press.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1994). The stability of personality: Observations and evaluations. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 3(6), 173-175.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal. American Psychologist, 52(5), 509-516.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (2008). The five-factor theory of personality (pp.159-181). In John, O. P., Robins, R. W., & Pervin, L. A. (Eds.). Handbook of personality: Theory and research, New York: The Guilford Press.

McCrae, R. R., & Greenberg, D. M. (2014). Openness to experience. (pp. 222-243). In Simonton, D. K. (Ed.). The Wiley handbook of genius. New York: Wiley Blackwell.

McCrae, R. R., & Terracciano, A. (2005). Universal features of personality traits from the observer’s perspective: Data from 50 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(3), 547-561.

McCrae, R. R., & Terracciano, A. (2005a). Personality profiles of cultures: Aggregate personality traits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(3), 407-425.

McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T., de Lima, M. P., Simões, A., Ostendorf, F., Angleitner, A., Marušić, I., Bratko, D., Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Chae, J.-H., & Piedmont, R. L. (1999). Age differences in personality across the adult life span: Parallels in five cultures. Developmental Psychology, 35(2),466-477.

McFaul, S. (2016). International Students’ Social Network: Network Mapping to Gauge Friendship Formation and Student Engagement on Campus. Journal of International Students, 6(1), 1-13. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v6i1.393

Mehta, S., Marathe, R. R., Ravindran, B., & Ramesh, R. (2023). Systematic literature review-unpacking values. How values change over time and link with personality traits and behaviors. Journal of Beliefs & Values, 46(1), 1-14.

Migali, G., & Zucchelli, E. (2017). Personality traits, forgone health care, and high school dropout: Evidence from US adolescents. Journal of Economic Psychology, 62, 98-119.

Minkov, M., & Schachner, M. (2024). Relationships between Big Five personality traits and individual-level cultural components. Personality and Individual Differences, 226(2024), 112691.

Molina, J.L., & Rodríguez-García, D. (2018). Ethnicity, multiculturalism, and transnationalism (pp. 1-10). In Callan, H. (Ed.). The International Encyclopedia of Anthropology. New Jersey, USA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Nair, A., Kalembo, F., Zhou, H., Ng, L., Hawley, G., Grogan, A., Leo, N., Wai, C., Judith, D., & Lim, E. (2024). Mental health and coping strategies among international health science students during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 19(1), e208-e216.

Newshub. (2020).What you need to know about the Privacy Act 2020”. Retrieved from https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2020/11/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-privacy-act-2020.html

Noe, R. A., Hollenbeck, J. R., Gerhart, B., & Wright, P. M. (2015) Fundamentals of human resource management. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Novoselova, N., Bondareva, V., Semanina, A., Chistyakov, A., & Zetkina, A. (2020). Adaptation of Foreign Pre-Graduate Students in the University Multicultural Educational Environment. Utopía y Praxis Latinoamericana, 25(5), 196-205.

Office of the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research, and Innovation (2023). Top 20 countries of international students attending higher education in Thailand. Retrieved from https://www.thailand.go.th/issue-focus-detail/001_06_011

Orange, C. (2015). The treaty of Waitangi (2^nd eds.). Wellington: Bridget Williams Books.

Panicacci, A. & Dewaele, J. M. (2017). A voice from elsewhere: Acculturation, personality, and migrants’ self-perceptions across languages and cultures. International Journal of Multilingualism, 2(1), 62-86.

Paulauskaitė, L., Šalčiūnaitė, L., Frazžinavičiūtė, V., & Endriulaitienė, A. (2010). Relationships between sensation seeking, risk-taking behaviors, and adolescent psychoactive substance use. Medicina, 46(7), 482-489.

Phutsiri, K. (2014). An investigation into foreign teachers’ awareness of Thai culture’s impact on the English language learning of Thai secondary students in Sukhothai province (Master’s Thesis). Thailand: Thammasat nUniversity.

Pitiyanuwat, S., & Sujiva, S. (2000). Civics and values education in Thailand: Documentary analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 20(1), 82-92.

Rachel Simon-Kumar, R. (2015). Neoliberalism and the new race politics of migration policy: Changing profiles of the desirable migrant in New Zealand. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41(7), 1-20.

Ramakrishnan, S., Barker, C. D., Vervoordt, S., & Zhang, A. (2018). Rethinking cross-cultural adaptability using behavioral developmental theory: An analysis of different migrant behaviors. Behavioral Development, 23(2), 138-152.

Razgulin, J., Argustaitė-Zailskienė, G., & Šmigelskas, K. (2023). The role of social support and sociocultural adjustment for international students’ mental health. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 893.

Rentfrow, P. J., Gosling, S. D., Jokela, M., Stillwell, D. J., Kosinski, M., & Potter, J. (2013). Divided We Stand: Three Psychological Regions of the United States and Their Political, Economic, Social, and Health Correlates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(6), 996-1012.

Rocha, P. (2024). Cultural Correlates of Personality: A Global Perspective with Insights from 22 Nations. Cross-Cultural Research, 59(2), 216-243.

Rosselli M., Uribe I. V., Ahne E., & Shihadeh, L. (2022). Culture, ethnicity, and level of education in Alzheimer’s disease. Neurotherapeutics: The Journal of the American Society for Experimental Neurotherapeutics, 19(1), 26-54.

Ryder, A. G., Alden, L. E., & Paulhus, D. L. (2000). Is acculturation unidimensional or bidimensional? A head-to-head comparison in the prediction of personality, self-identity, and adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(1), 49-65.

Sam, D. L., & Berry, J. W. (2010). Acculturation: When individuals and groups of different cultural backgrounds meet. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(4), 472-481.

Samovar, L. A., & Porter, R. E. (2004). Communication between cultures (5^th ed.). Beijing, China: Peking University Press.

Saucier, G., Thalmayer, A. G., Payne, D. L., Carlson, R., Sanogo, L., Ole-Kotikash, L., Church, A. T., Katigbak, M. S., Somer, O., Szarota, P., Szirmák, Z., & Zhou, X. (2014). A Basic Bivariate Structure of Personality Attributes Evident Across Nine Languages. Journal of Personality, 82(1), 1-14.

Schmitt, D. P., Allik, J., McCrae, R. R., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2007). The geographic distribution of big five personality traits: Patterns and profiles of human self-description across 56 nations. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38(2), 173-212.

Schmitz, P. G., & Schmitz, F. (2022). Correlates of acculturation strategies: Personality, coping, and outcome. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 53(7-8), 875-916.

Sheng, L., Dai, J., & Lei, J. (2022). The impacts of academic adaptation on psychological and sociocultural adaptation among international students in China: The moderating role of friendship. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 89(6), 79-89.

Shirazi, M., Khan, M. A., & Ansari, F. A. (2012). Mental health in relation to personality characteristics among professional and nonprofessional students. Journal of Arts, Science and Commerce, 3(3), 8-15.

Simic-Yamashita, M., & Tanaka, T. (2009). Exploratory factor analysis of the sociocultural adaptation scale (SCAS) among international students in Japan. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 29, 27-38.

Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2017). The next big five inventory (BFI-2): developing and Assessing a Hierarchical Model with 15 Facets to Enhance Bandwidth, Fidelity, and Predictive Power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(1), 117-143.

Soto, C., John, O., Gosling, S., & Potter, J. (2011). Age differences in personality traits from 10 to 65: Big five domains and facets in a large cross-sectional sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(2),3 30-348.

Stackhouse, M., Rickley, M., Liu, Y., & Taras, V. (2024). Homogeneity, heterogeneity, or independence? A multilevel exploration of Big Five personality traits and cultural values in 40 nations. Personality and Individual Differences, 230(112795), 1-13.

Stahl, G. K., Maznevskim M. L., Voigt, A., & Jonsen, K. (2010). Unraveling the effects of cultural diversity in teams: A meta-analysis of research on multicultural work groups. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(4), 690-709.

Thalmayer, A. G., & Saucier, G. (2014). The questionnaire big six in 26 nations: Developing cross-culturally applicable big six, big five, and big two inventories. European Journal of Personality, 28(5), 482-496.

The Nation Newspaper (2023). Foreign tourist arrivals in Thailand cross 27 million in 2023. Retrieved from https://www.nationthailand.com/thailand/tourism/40034268

Torbiorn, I. (1982). Living abroad: Personal adjustment and personnel policy in the overseas setting. New York: Wiley.

Valenti, G. D., Magnano, P., & Faraci, P. (2022). Evaluating the dimensionality of the sociocultural adaptation scale in a sample of international students sojourning in Los Angeles: What difference between eastern and western culture? European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology, and Education, 12(5), 465-477.

Wang, X., Lu, L., Wang, X., Qu, M., Yuan, L., Gao, Y., & Pan, B. (2021). Relationships between cross-cultural adaptation, perceived stress, and psychological health among international undergraduate students from a medical university during the COVID-19 pandemic: A Moderated Mediation Model. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12(2021), 783210.

Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1999). The measurement of sociocultural adaptation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23(4), 659-677.

Ward, C., & Rana-Deuba, A. (2000). Home and culture influences on sojourners’ adjustment. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24(3), 291-306.

Ward, C., Leong, C. H., & Low, M. (2004). Personality and sojourner adjustment: An exploration of the big five and the cultural fit proposition. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35(2), 137-151.

Wilson, J. (2013). Exploring the past, present, and future of cultural competency research: The revision and expansion of the sociocultural adaptation construct (Unpublished Doctoral dissertations). New Zealand: Victoria University of Wellington.

Wilson, J., Ward, C., & Fischer, R. (2013). Beyond culture learning theory: What can personality tell us about cultural competence? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(6), 900-927.

Wilson, J., Ward, C., Fetvadjiev, V.H., & Bethel, A. (2017). Measuring cultural competencies: The development and validation of a revised measure of sociocultural adaptation. Journal of CrossCultural Psychology, 48(10),1475-1506.

World Population Review. (2023). Most Beautiful Countries in the World 2023. Retrieved from https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/most-beautiful-countries-in-theworld.\

Zhang, J., Mandl, H., & Wang, E. (2010). Personality, acculturation, and psychosocial adjustment of Chinese international students in Germany. Psychological Reports, 107(2), 511-525.

Zhong, X. A. (2014). The perceptions of Mainland Chinese international students towards Auckland, New Zealand (Master’s thesis). New Zealand: Auckland University of Technology.

Zikmund, W., Babin, B., Carr, J., & Griffin, M. (2013). Business research methods (9^th eds.) Singapore: SouthWestern-Cengage Learning.