3.1 P9: Ethnic Identity
Berry: Immigrant Youth – Acculturation, identity and adaptation
Addressing 3 key issues:
1. How do immigrant youth live within & between 2 cultures?
- Berry: 2 independent dimensions underlying process of acculturation:
individuals’ links to their cultures of origin & to their societies of settlement – can
be manifested through preferences for involvement in 2 cultures & behaviour (e.g.
language use)
- Phinney: bidimensional; individuals may have independent identities (culture of
origin vs. society of settlement)
- This framework: degree to which people wish to maintain their heritage culture &
identity, and degree to which people seek involvement w/larger society
- Assimilation = little interest in cultural maintenance, prefer interacting w/larger
society
Separation = prefer cultural maintenance, avoid involvement w/larger society
Marginalisation = neither cultural maintenance/involvement w/others is sought
Integration = both cultural maintenance & involvement w/others
2. How well do immigrant youth deal with their intercultural situation?
Ward: Psychological adaptation = personal well-being, good mental health
Sociocultural adaptation = individuals’ social competence in managing their daily
life in intercultural setting
3. Are there patterns of relationships between how adolescents engage in their
intercultural relations and how well they adapt?
- Combined involvement w/national & ethnic cultures, rather than involvement with
just one, predicted to be most adaptive mode of acculturation, best for well-being
- Orientation toward ethnic culture = better predictor of psychological adaptation
than orientation toward national culture. Orientation toward national culture =
better predictor of adolescents’ sociocultural adaptation
4. Role of perceived discrimination in acculturation
Perceived discrimination negatively related to immigrant adaptation
Method
Questionnaire:
- Acculturation attitudes
- Cultural identity (measured ethnic identity)
- Language proficiency & language use
- Ethnic & national peer contact
- Family relationship values
- Perceived discrimination
- Psychological adaptation
- Sociocultural adaptation
Results 1: How do immigrant youth acculturate?
, - Used person approach rather than variable approach (variable approach =
examines statistical relations among variables across individuals, vs. person
approach = individuals grouped into categories on basis of pattern similarity)
- Ethnic profile = orientation toward ethnic group, high ethnic identity, ethnic
language proficiency etc. Endorsed separation attitude, low on assimilation, low
involvement w/larger society
- National profile = orientation toward society where they were living. High on
assimilation, low on ethnic identity
- Integration profile = most frequent; high involvement in ethnic & national
cultures. Low endorsement of assimilation, separation, marginalisation
- Diffuse profile = high proficiency of ethnic language, but low ethnic identity.
Low proficiency in national language, low national identity. Endorsed
assimilation, marginalisation, separation (contradict each other). Shows that they
are uncertain about their place in society
Length of residence
- Integration & national profiles = longer residence
- Diffuse profile = lower residence (more recent arrivals)
- Ethnic profile equally frequent across all length of residence categories
Discrimination
- Integration & national profile = report less perceived discrimination
- Ethnic profile = reported more perceived discrimination
- Diffuse = reported most perceived discrimination
Neighbourhood ethnic composition
- Acculturation related to neighbourhood ethnic composition
- Integration profile strongly represented in all neighbourhoods except in those
consisting predominantly of one’s own group
- Ethnic profile dominated in neighbourhoods that consisted mostly of their own
group
Religion
- Integration profile = Judeo-Christian & Eastern religions, fewer Muslims
- Ethnic profile = Muslims
Gender
- Integrated = female
- Diffuse = boys
Parental occupational status
- National profile = parents w/higher status occupations
Settler vs. non-settler societies (settler = society established by immigrants vs. non-settler =
immigration more recent, e.g. European countries)
- Integration profile = settler societies
Results 2: How well do immigrant youth adapt?
- Sociocultural/psychological adaptation: weak but significant relationship to
gender
Boys: better psychological adaptation than girls, but scored lower on sociocultural
adaptation than girls
- Immigrant & national youth had similar levels of psychological & sociocultural
adaptation
Results 3: Is how immigrant youths acculturate related to how well they adapt?
Berry: Immigrant Youth – Acculturation, identity and adaptation
Addressing 3 key issues:
1. How do immigrant youth live within & between 2 cultures?
- Berry: 2 independent dimensions underlying process of acculturation:
individuals’ links to their cultures of origin & to their societies of settlement – can
be manifested through preferences for involvement in 2 cultures & behaviour (e.g.
language use)
- Phinney: bidimensional; individuals may have independent identities (culture of
origin vs. society of settlement)
- This framework: degree to which people wish to maintain their heritage culture &
identity, and degree to which people seek involvement w/larger society
- Assimilation = little interest in cultural maintenance, prefer interacting w/larger
society
Separation = prefer cultural maintenance, avoid involvement w/larger society
Marginalisation = neither cultural maintenance/involvement w/others is sought
Integration = both cultural maintenance & involvement w/others
2. How well do immigrant youth deal with their intercultural situation?
Ward: Psychological adaptation = personal well-being, good mental health
Sociocultural adaptation = individuals’ social competence in managing their daily
life in intercultural setting
3. Are there patterns of relationships between how adolescents engage in their
intercultural relations and how well they adapt?
- Combined involvement w/national & ethnic cultures, rather than involvement with
just one, predicted to be most adaptive mode of acculturation, best for well-being
- Orientation toward ethnic culture = better predictor of psychological adaptation
than orientation toward national culture. Orientation toward national culture =
better predictor of adolescents’ sociocultural adaptation
4. Role of perceived discrimination in acculturation
Perceived discrimination negatively related to immigrant adaptation
Method
Questionnaire:
- Acculturation attitudes
- Cultural identity (measured ethnic identity)
- Language proficiency & language use
- Ethnic & national peer contact
- Family relationship values
- Perceived discrimination
- Psychological adaptation
- Sociocultural adaptation
Results 1: How do immigrant youth acculturate?
, - Used person approach rather than variable approach (variable approach =
examines statistical relations among variables across individuals, vs. person
approach = individuals grouped into categories on basis of pattern similarity)
- Ethnic profile = orientation toward ethnic group, high ethnic identity, ethnic
language proficiency etc. Endorsed separation attitude, low on assimilation, low
involvement w/larger society
- National profile = orientation toward society where they were living. High on
assimilation, low on ethnic identity
- Integration profile = most frequent; high involvement in ethnic & national
cultures. Low endorsement of assimilation, separation, marginalisation
- Diffuse profile = high proficiency of ethnic language, but low ethnic identity.
Low proficiency in national language, low national identity. Endorsed
assimilation, marginalisation, separation (contradict each other). Shows that they
are uncertain about their place in society
Length of residence
- Integration & national profiles = longer residence
- Diffuse profile = lower residence (more recent arrivals)
- Ethnic profile equally frequent across all length of residence categories
Discrimination
- Integration & national profile = report less perceived discrimination
- Ethnic profile = reported more perceived discrimination
- Diffuse = reported most perceived discrimination
Neighbourhood ethnic composition
- Acculturation related to neighbourhood ethnic composition
- Integration profile strongly represented in all neighbourhoods except in those
consisting predominantly of one’s own group
- Ethnic profile dominated in neighbourhoods that consisted mostly of their own
group
Religion
- Integration profile = Judeo-Christian & Eastern religions, fewer Muslims
- Ethnic profile = Muslims
Gender
- Integrated = female
- Diffuse = boys
Parental occupational status
- National profile = parents w/higher status occupations
Settler vs. non-settler societies (settler = society established by immigrants vs. non-settler =
immigration more recent, e.g. European countries)
- Integration profile = settler societies
Results 2: How well do immigrant youth adapt?
- Sociocultural/psychological adaptation: weak but significant relationship to
gender
Boys: better psychological adaptation than girls, but scored lower on sociocultural
adaptation than girls
- Immigrant & national youth had similar levels of psychological & sociocultural
adaptation
Results 3: Is how immigrant youths acculturate related to how well they adapt?
