Acculturation

Acculturation

David L Sam , in International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition), 2015

Group versus Individual-Level Phenomenon

Although acculturation as a concept was first proposed as a group-level phenomenon, it was also recognized as an individual-level phenomenon. Graves (1967) coined the term psychological acculturation, which has been defined as "the changes an individual experiences as a result of being in contact with other cultures, or participating in the acculturation that one's cultural or ethnic group is undergoing" (Berry, 1990: p. 203). A distinction between acculturation as a group-level phenomenon and acculturation as an individual-level phenomenon is important; the kinds of changes that take place at the two levels tend to be different. Moreover, not every group or individual enters into, participates in, or changes in the same way during acculturation. Vast individual differences in psychological acculturation exist, even among individuals who have the same cultural origin and reside in the same acculturative context.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780080970868240348

Acculturation

J.W. Berry , in Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 2004

1 Acculturation Concept

The initial interest in acculturation grew out of a concern for the effects of European domination of colonial and indigenous peoples. Later, it focused on how immigrants (both voluntary and involuntary) changed following their entry and settlement into receiving societies. More recently, much of the work has been involved with how ethnocultural groups relate to each other, and to change, as a result of their attempts to live together in culturally plural societies. Nowadays, all three foci are important as globalization results in ever larger trading and political relations. Indigenous national populations experience neocolonization; new waves of immigrants, sojourners, and refugees flow from these economic and political changes; and large ethnocultural populations become established in most countries.

Early views about the nature of acculturation are a useful foundation for contemporary discussion. Two formulations in particular have been widely quoted. The first, from Redfield and colleagues in a 1936 article, is as follows:

Acculturation comprehends those phenomena which result when groups of individuals having different cultures come into continuous first-hand contact, with subsequent changes in the original culture patterns of either or both groups. … Under this definition, acculturation is to be distinguished from culture change, of which it is but one aspect, and assimilation, which is at times a phase of acculturation.

In another formulation, the Social Science Research Council in 1954 defined acculturation as

culture change that is initiated by the conjunction of two or more autonomous cultural systems. Acculturative change may be the consequence of direct cultural transmission; it may be derived from non-cultural causes, such as ecological or demographic modification induced by an impinging culture; it may be delayed, as with internal adjustments following upon the acceptance of alien traits or patterns; or it may be a reactive adaptation of traditional modes of life.

In the first formulation, acculturation is seen as one aspect of the broader concept of culture change (that which results from intercultural contact), is considered to generate change in "either or both groups," and is distinguished from assimilation (which may be "at times a phase"). These are important distinctions for psychological work and are pursued later in this article. In the second definition, a few extra features are added, including change that is indirect (not cultural but rather "ecological"), is delayed (internal adjustments, presumably of both a cultural and a psychological character, take time), and can be "reactive" (i.e., rejecting the cultural influence and changing toward a more "traditional" way of life rather than inevitably toward greater similarity with the dominant culture).

In 1967, Graves introduced the concept of psychological acculturation, which refers to changes in an individual who is a participant in a culture contact situation, being influenced both by the external culture and by the changing culture of which the individual is a member. There are two reasons for keeping these two levels distinct. The first is that in cross-cultural psychology, we view individual human behavior as interacting with the cultural context within which it occurs; hence, separate conceptions and measurements are required at the two levels. The second is that not every individual enters into, and participates in, a culture in the same way, nor does every individual change in the same way; there are vast individual differences in psychological acculturation, even among individuals who live in the same acculturative arena.

A framework that outlines and links cultural and psychological acculturation and identifies the two (or more) groups in contact is presented in Fig. 1. This framework serves as a map of those phenomena that the author believes need to be conceptualized and measured during acculturation research. At the cultural level (on the left of the figure), we need to understand key features of the two original cultural groups (A and B) prior to their major contact, the nature of their contact relationships, and the resulting dynamic cultural changes in both groups, and in the emergent ethnocultural groups, during the process of acculturation. The gathering of this information requires extensive ethnographic, community-level work. These changes can be minor or substantial and can range from being easily accomplished to being a source of major cultural disruption. At the individual level (on the right of the figure), we need to consider the psychological changes that individuals in all groups undergo and their eventual adaptation to their new situations. Identifying these changes requires sampling a population and studying individuals who are variably involved in the process of acculturation. These changes can be a set of rather easily accomplished behavioral shifts (e.g., in ways of speaking, dressing, or eating; in one's cultural identity), or they can be more problematic, producing acculturative stress as manifested by uncertainty, anxiety, and depression. Adaptations can be primarily internal or psychological (e.g., sense of well-being or self-esteem) or sociocultural, linking the individual to others in the new society as manifested, for example, in competence in the activities of daily intercultural living.

FIGURE 1. A general framework for understanding acculturation.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B0126574103003846

Cultural Assimilation

P. Boyer , in International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2001

The tension between participation in the wider forum, often seen as a condition for survival, and the preservation of identity, informs American debates about the depth, meaning, and consequences of the cultural assimilation of minorities. In Europe, romantic nationalism and the enlightenment offered contrasting views of the relation between nature and culture. Many European nations are now searching for a political solution to problems of combining cultural autonomy for ethnic groups with citizen-based participation. The phenomenon of worldwide cultural integration has led to established nations and cultures being faced with an assimilation process. It is noted that experimental social psychologists have documented subtle cognitive differences between various groups.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B0080430767003648

Nativity and Migration

Gayle Y. Iwamasa , ... Ann-Marie Yamada , in Handbook of Multicultural Mental Health (Second Edition), 2013

1 African Americans/Blacks

Enculturation, the explicit socialization into one's cultural group (Kim, Atkinson, & Umemoto, 2001), is more commonly the focus of studies of nonimmigrant African Americans. Nonetheless, three psychometrically sound African American acculturation measures have been reported in the literature. Landrine and Klonoff (1994) developed and validated the first African American Acculturation Scale (AAAS), a unidimensional scale consisting of eight theoretical subscales. Although a valid and reliable measure, the AAAS was criticized on two fronts—length and perceived racist contents—resulting in the shortened form, AAAS-33 (Landrine & Klonoff, 1995) and the African American Acculturation Scale Revised form, respectively (AAAS-R; Klonoff & Landrine, 2000). The second African American acculturation measure was developed by Snowden and Hines (1999) as a 10-item research measure assessing media preference, social interaction, and attitudes. Research is limited on this measure with preliminary data showing sound psychometric properties (Reid, Brown, Peterson, Snowden, & Hines, 2009). As these aforementioned measures provide a unidimensional framework to assess acculturation, the Measurement of Acculturation Strategies for People of African Descent (MASPAD; Obasi & Leong, 2010) represents the first bidimensional measure that assesses preferences for both African American heritage and for social contact with other ethnic groups. Initial assessment of the MASPAD revealed a valid and reliable acculturation measure; however, only one study exists on the measure necessitating future research.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780123944207000096

Minority Groups and Addictions

Arthur W. Blume , in Principles of Addiction, 2013

Acculturation and Enculturation

Acculturation and enculturation levels have been found to be important predictors of the therapeutic alliance and for treatment outcomes for minorities engaging in the addictive behaviors, and are critical variables to account for when developing effective treatment plans. Acculturation level is the degree to which a person from a minority group functions and interacts competently within the majority culture. High levels of acculturation are associated with high levels of competence in understanding and using majority culture beliefs and practices and engaging successfully in majority culture functions. Highly acculturated minorities often are proficient at use of majority language, have received advanced education in majority culture schools, employed by majority culture entities, and are able to function competently on a daily fashion in the majority culture. Low levels of acculturation, on the other hand, would be associated with little engagement in majority culture activities, little understanding of majority culture beliefs or practices, and sometimes little use of majority culture language. People low in acculturation often have not received education from a majority culture institution, therefore are often at a competitive disadvantage for employment opportunities in majority culture.

Enculturation level is the degree to which a person from a minority group functions and interacts competently within her/his minority culture. High levels of enculturation are associated with high levels of competence in understanding and using minority culture beliefs and practices and engaging successfully in minority culture functions. Highly enculturated minorities are proficient at use of her/his ethnic language and are able to function competently on a daily fashion in the minority culture. Low enculturation would be associated with little engagement in minority culture activities, little understanding of minority culture beliefs or practices, and little use of minority culture language.

Researchers have found that having high levels of both acculturation and enculturation is a protective factor for minorities from addictive behaviors. Having high levels of both acculturation and enculturation has been referred to as bicultural competence for personal expertise in majority and one minority culture, or multicultural competence for personal expertise in majority and more than one minority culture. Many culturally relevant addictive behaviors prevention and treatment programs used with minority clients include skill training components to enhance bi- and multicultural competence in participants to improve outcomes.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780123983367000164

Racial and Ethnic Minorities, Counseling of

Edward A. Delgado-Romero , ... Charles R. Ridley , in Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 2004

3 Acculturation and Counseling

Acculturation can be defined as a process of attitudinal and behavioral change experienced by individuals who live in multicultural societies or who have come in contact with a different culture due to colonization, invasion, political change, globalization, and the increased mobility of society due to technological advances. Acculturation refers to the balance between changing attitudes and behaviors as a result of contact with a dominant group and retention of existing cultural values, beliefs, and traditions. In the United States, institutions such as the educational system and the media are a part of the acculturation process. Another component of the acculturation process may include the acceptance of the need for counseling. The degree of acculturation to a dominant culture may also play a role in preference for the ethnicity of one's counselor or the client's willingness to discuss racial, ethnic, or cultural issues. For example, a client who has low levels of acculturation may not view counseling as an option and instead prefer to rely on family or other culturally sanctioned sources of support. On the other hand, a highly acculturated individual may be very receptive to counseling and may even prefer to work with a White counselor.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B0126574103005468

The Assessment, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Mental Disorders among Muslims

Farah A. Ibrahim , Jianna R. Heuer , in Handbook of Multicultural Mental Health (Second Edition), 2013

C Acculturation Assessment

Immigrant acculturation has been described by sociologists as multidimensional and multidirectional, and essentially disrupting the accepted developmental process ( Berger, 2007; Phinney et al., 2006). The issue of acculturation is closely linked to identity development in the host culture. This makes understanding acculturation as a singular concept difficult because we have to identify how the client's identity developed in the host culture. Considering traditional Muslim socialization from the Middle East, Africa, Asia, and Europe, it is clear that migration can disrupt several aspects of the developmental path. Established relationships get disrupted. First, there is the issue of attachment (Bowlby, 1980), and how this process can get disrupted, by either arriving in the host culture as a child without family as a refugee, or losing parental support by trying to adapt and adjust to US peer culture, and encountering conflict with family members. Second, during adolescence when there is so much stress and strain to develop an identity, we find Muslim immigrant parents fear American culture because they consider it toxic to adolescents because of racial prejudice, violent gangs, addictive drugs, sexy clothes, materialistic values, and boundless selfishness (Berger, 2007). The process of developing an identity and acculturation can take several paths as a result of these pressures. To add to this, the host culture in the West may see the adolescent as a threat and create conditions that may lead to depression, anxiety, or fantasizing about seeking revenge.

To assess acculturation status, we need to also consider the specific identity status of the client. Marcia (1966) based his theory of adolescent identity development on Erikson's (1950/1980) theory of psychosocial identity development and identified four identity statuses: identity diffusion, identity foreclosure, identity moratorium, and identity achievement. To combine these with acculturation, let us consider Berry and Sam's (1997) bidirectional model of acculturation. They propose that immigrants need to address the following questions as they adjust to the new culture: Do I want to accept and work with the new culture (adaptation)? Or do I want to stay with the cultural assumptions I have brought with me (separation)? (Van de Vijver & Phalet, 2004). The first approach leads to bicultural acculturation, the second to separation from host culture. Two other outcomes are possible, assimilation, where one chooses to give up original culture and adopts the culture of host culture, and marginalization, where the person no longer remains connected to the culture of origin or parents' culture, and is unable to establish strong ties with the host culture. We contend that the combinations in Table 19.1 are based on identity status in the host culture.

Table 19.1. Identity Status and Acculturation

Identity Status Acculturation Status
Diffusion Marginalization
Foreclosure Separation
Moratorium Undecided
Achievement Bicultural

The relationship between acculturation status and identity formation relates to the developmental process occurring in immigrants as they try to make sense of their new culture. Identity diffusion would lead to marginalization, since the person would end up not connecting with the culture of origin or the host culture, due to indecision. Identity foreclosure would lead to marginalization because after trying to use one's own culture and then the host culture as a guide but not succeeding with either would lead to being marginal to both cultures. Moratorium is the status where the person is still trying to ascertain what would be meaningful, due to conflict of values between the host culture and the culture of origin. This status could lead to bicultural acculturation with identity achievement, or marginalization. Staying too long in diffusion can create confusion for the person and frustration for others, because the behavior is seen as unpredictable and erratic and would isolate the person. Bicultural acculturation and identity achievement are the healthiest outcome, since elements of the culture of origin that are important to the person are retained, and elements of the host culture that are meaningful and useful for success are adopted. This would lead to a useful and meaningful identity and acculturation outcome. Van de Vijver and Phalet (2004) note that in some countries, generally, second and third generation youth will show marginalization because they cannot connect with their parents' culture and values, and they are not able or allowed to establish their own identity.

Van de Vijver and Phalet (2004) recommend that measures for specific cultural groups need to be developed to assess acculturation based on the recommendations of the American Psychological Association's Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (2011). In reviewing the literature on acculturation instruments for Muslims from Asia, Africa, the Middle East, or Europe, none were found (Taras, 2008). This process would involve clinical judgment based on immigrant identity development and acculturation processes, as identified in Table 19.1. Another aspect that can impede or facilitate acculturation is cultural or racial identity. Immigrants with a cultural or racial identity that is at the Achieved Identity status could adapt really well to the host culture as they move toward bicultural identity and acculturation status. This perspective is based on the assumption that Achieved Identity status would parallel the final phase of racial identity development (Cross, 1995; Helms, 1990). In this phase, a person has come to terms with their race/culture and can appreciate the positive aspects of their own culture and can make conscious decisions about what aspects and values to adopt to be functional in the host or dominant culture. Other identity statuses may impede this level of development given the confusion in identity statuses associated with Identity Diffusion and Identity Moratorium. Identity Foreclosure is already limited by an inability to move past parental or culture of origin beliefs, values, and assumptions.

Olds (2009) has proposed that religiousness and acculturation may be related; if a person is very committed to her or his faith, and migrates to another country where the immigrant's religion may not be valued, this will lead to significant acculturative stress, and the person may choose to acculturate by separation from the host culture. Positive acculturation occurs only if the immigrant feels welcome and valued, increasing chances of an integrative acculturation or bicultural acculturation

Olds (2009) modified a version of the Bicultural Identity Integration Scale (BIIS; Benet-Martanez & Haritatos, 2005) for use with Muslims, called Religious-Cultural Identity Integration Scale (Olds, RCIIS, 2009). The BIIS examines the way in which individuals deal with the challenge of reconciling disparate cultural identities. Some may deal with this challenge by keeping these two cultures distant and distinct. Others may perceive a conflict and feel torn between these cultural identities. A positive aspect of the BIIS (Benet-Martinez & Haritatos, 2005) is that it examines identity integration from a nonhierarchical perspective. This approach is conducive to examining forms of identity integration that fall outside of the traditional ethnic immigrant-focused investigations of acculturation. Although these are promising developments, both scales need further research for reliability and validity, and should be used with caution.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780123944207000199

On the Alternative Five-Factor Model: Structure and Correlates

P.G. Schmitz , in On the Psychobiology of Personality, 2004

2.1.1 Differences in acculturation strategies

An acculturation model developed by Berry (1997) and applied by many researchers has been useful in scientific research to investigate differences in acculturation strategies (Berry et al. 1977). The acculturation model refers to two dimensions that relate to different forms of cognition, communication, and interaction that migrants have with the society and culture of the immigration country or host society as well as with their own cultural group. Dimension I can be described as "contact and interaction with the host society" and dimension II as "maintenance of the culture of origin." The former relates to the question "Are the own cultural identity and customs of value to be maintained?" and the latter to the question "Are positive relations with the host society or other socio-cultural groups considered to be of value, and are they to be maintained?" Both dimensions are considered continua and individual differences of acculturative behavior are normal-distributed on each dimension (Schmitz 2003). When we artificially dichotomize each dimension to simplify matters for methodological reasons and combine both dichotomized dimensions then we will obtain a four-field table and each cell refers to a different prototype of acculturation strategy: integration, assimilation, separation, and marginalization (see Figure 6).

Figure 6. Acculturation styles, Integration, Assimilation, Separation, Marginalization, defined by the quality of the relationship to their the own ethnic group and the majority in the immigration country.

If we restrict the answers to our questions to "yes" or "no" we can define the four acculturation strategies as follows: answering "yes" to both questions we call integration. Integration can be defined as maintenance of the own cultural identity to a great extent and an effort towards becoming an integral part of the larger societal framework. Culture and customs of the host society are positively evaluated and parts of it are taken over and integrated in the own behavior and value system.

Assimilation means the abandonment of the own culture of origin and the maintenance of positive relations with the host society, with cultural values and behavior patterns being adopted. The aim is often to become a person whose behavior patterns and life style cannot be distinguished from that of a "real" member of the host society.

Separation is defined as maintenance of the own cultural identity and showing little interest in building up positive relations with other cultural groups and in taking over customs or accepting the host society's values. Interactions are restricted to a minimum of communication and social contacts.

Marginalization can be described as a type of reaction that develops when migrants give up their own cultural identity while at the same time they are not interested in maintaining close contact with either the host society or other socio-cultural groups living in the host country.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780080442099500063

Music Cognition

Barbara Tillmann , in Encyclopedia of Social Measurement, 2005

Tonal Acculturation

Tonal acculturation is one example of the cognitive capacity to become sensitive to regularities in the environment. Implicit learning processes enable the acquisition of highly complex information, without complete verbalizable knowledge of what has been learned. Music and language are examples of highly structured systems that are learned in an incidental manner: native speakers and nonmusician listeners internalize the regularities underlying linguistic and musical structures with apparent ease merely as a result of exposure. Just by listening to musical pieces in everyday life, listeners become sensitive to regularities of the musical system (e.g., strong regularities on the pitch dimension). Listeners acquire implicit knowledge of the structural patterns used in the musical system, and this knowledge facilitates the processing of music conforming to these patterns. Even nonmusician listeners are "musically expert," as has been shown in numerous behavioral and neurophysiological studies. Tonal acculturation shapes listeners' expectations about the continuity of a musical piece. It allows listeners to detect "wrong" notes in a performance and to judge an unfamiliar musical phrase as incomplete when it stops in the middle. Most contemporary research has used Western tonal music, based on its classical foundations, mainly from the 18th and 19th centuries. Regularities between musical elements also exist in other musical systems (e.g., Indian or Arabic music), and cultural learning and familiarity with these systems lead to auditory experiences different from those of a native Western listener.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B0123693985005417

Crime, Immigration, and Ethnicity

Sandra M. Bucerius , Katherine Hancock , in International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition), 2015

Generational Differences

The acculturation thesis described by Sutherland remains relevant and supported by many studies on generational differences (for an overview on generational differences, see Berardi and Bucerius, 2013). In spite of improved conditions relative to the first-generation, second-generation immigrants tend to fare more poorly with regard to crime rates (see Berardi and Bucerius, 2013; Picot and Hou, 2011; Portes and Fernandez-Kelly, 2008; Rumbaut and Ewing, 2007). This downward trend may be partly explained by the process of acculturation. Rumbaut and Ewing (2007) describe a 'paradox of assimilation.' The process of assimilation is often touted as a positive transformation for immigrants (e.g., gaining English language proficiency, education, job skills) that facilitates their settlement and eventual success in the economy and society of the host country. Ironically, assimilation appears to have a sinister aspect as well. Immigrants' criminal behavior and health status worsen and mimic those of the native-born population. Mirroring Sutherland's findings, second- and third-generation immigrants have greater risk of incarceration relative to the first generation. First-generation immigrants' risk of incarceration also increases along with their stay in the United States.

In a longitudinal study of neighborhood in Chicago from 1995 to 2002, first-generation immigrants of several racial and ethnic groups were nearly 50% less likely to violently offend than third-generation comparators (Sampson et al., 2005). As would be expected from the acculturation thesis, second-generation immigrants were more likely to commit violent crime than the first generation, but less likely than the third generation. Racial group differences observed between black and whites could also be explained by immigrant status, which was identified as a protective factor against violence. For example, whites in the study were more likely to be recent immigrants than blacks, and blacks demonstrated increased violent crimes. Controlling for immigrant generational status, the disparity in violence shrunk. The limited research on immigrant involvement in delinquency and substance abuse in the United States is fairly consistent with research findings on violence – first-generation immigrants tend to be less likely delinquent or use illicit drugs than the second generation (see examples, Vega et al., 1993; Bui, 2009; Gfroerer and Tan, 2003).

Exceptionally, second-generation Asian-Americans are less likely than the first generation to commit homicide, suggesting that they might also score lower on other types of crime in comparison to their parents' generation. Factors like cultural norms, parental oversight, and structural forces may account for the success achieved by Asian immigrants in academics and crime avoidance; the so-called 'Asian advantage' (Zhou and Kim, 2006; Min and Kim, 2009) has been used to explain why second-generation immigrants of Asian heritage tend to outperform other immigrant and native-born populations academically.

The trend for first-generation immigrants to be less violent and involved in crime than native born and subsequent generations is generally true for most ethnic groups in the United States. First-generation immigrants who consciously choose to immigrate to a new country may be more dedicated to succeed in the new country and prepared to defer short-term gratification (which crime might offer) with this objective in mind (Berardi and Bucerius, 2013). First-generation immigrants attribute their experiences of exclusion as exceptional and the fault of individuals (Viruell-Fuentes, 2007). Subsequent generations of immigrants seem to be more affected by experiences of exclusion than the first generation and more readily identify these incidents as evidence of systemic discrimination and social exclusion (Bucerius, 2011).

Another explanation could be that first-generation immigrants compare their living situation in the host country to their country of origin. The second generation may refer to a different comparator – the native born. Having no (or limited) exposure to their parents' country of origin, the second-generation immigrants may suffer more by the unequal distribution of opportunities. Feelings of deprivation may propel the second generation to innovate ways to achieve successes that are precluded for them (Merton, 1938). While these explanations offer some insight into the generational increase in crime rates, they cannot fully account for the relationship of generation and offending; some second-generation immigrants do not show elevated crime rates. Additional factors such as opportunity structures (Engbersen et al., 2007), family structure (Portes and Zhou, 1993; Portes and Rumbaut, 2001), and neighborhood (Shaw and McKay, 1969) may also be impactful.

Countries with immigrant incorporation policies that promote integration can reduce the likelihood of immigrants becoming involved in crime. Research from Sweden shows that the country's inclusive immigration policies help reduce second-generation offending (Bucerius, 2011). Specifically, studies have shown that second-generation immigrants experience disadvantage and exclusion in education (Portes and Rumbaut, 2001; Farley and Alba, 2002; Bucerius, 2009), suggesting that the school system is one important area in which carefully considered incorporation policies can make a significant difference (Bucerius, 2009). Telles and Ortiz (2008), for example, demonstrated that Mexican immigrants have faced systemic exclusion for multiple generations in the United States and suggest that this group could benefit from attention. Dinovitzer et al. (2009) also attributed education as being protective against criminal involvement for certain immigrant groups. Subsequently, some researchers have recommended that policy makers aiming to reduce immigrant crime redirect their attention to bridging the educational gap between second-generation immigrants and nonimmigrants.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780080970868320542