Reciprocity (Bao): The Balancing Mechanism of Chinese Communication (Report‪)‬

Of all elements of Chinese interpersonal communication, perhaps none so distinctly marks Chinese interactions as the principle of bao (return, recompense, revenge). A significant part of Chinese social life is built upon the notion that the help of another person (or, in its darker manifestations, the enmity of another) must be repaid (Chang&Holt, 1994; Holt&Chang, 2004). When you get a favor from someone, the principle of bao holds that you have taken upon yourself a "human feeling debt" because the other person has helped you out of human concern for your welfare. Therefore, it is incumbent upon you, as recipient of the favor, to recognize the human emotion tendered on your behalf and to return it based on the same principle. In this sense, the word "balance" in the themed title for this special issue is precisely on target. The demanding and considerable complexities of Chinese interpersonal life cannot be done away with or avoided, but they can be managed, or at least "manageable," so long as there is an overarching principle to refer to, to balance out competing claims and resolve difficulties. Bao is the perfect candidate for such a social mechanism. Anthropologists like Malinowski (1926) and Levi-Strauss (1963) have identified reciprocity as a bedrock social mechanism that ensures the orderly functioning of societies. Not only is reciprocity intrinsic to cultures of Chinese and many others, it is thought of as (assuming there really is one) possibly the best candidate for the status of universal social norm. As Weiss (1941), discussing the popular (though not entirely accurate) formulation of reciprocity, "The Golden Rule," puts it, "... its appeal is universal, both because it allows and even tempts as many interpretations as there are modes of self-regard and systems of ethics, and because it has a constant meaning, epitomizing a basic, inescapable truth" (p. 421).