REPORTRESEARCH

Coping with Culture-Based Conflict:

Implications for Counseling Research andPractice

EDWARD DUNBAR, ED.DJOYCE F. LlU

University of California at Los Angeles, National Research Centeron Asian Amnican Mental HealthANN-MARIE HORVATH, M.A.University of Hawaii at Manoa

Interpersonal conflict related to socioG1lllural group membe7;ship was examinedwith a mulliG1lllural university sample. The Social Group Conflict Scale

(SGCS), collective self-esteem (CSE), and Bradburn affect scale were adminis-tered to 248 university students. The G1lTTent study attempted to replicate andextend the findings on social group-based conflict recently proposed by Dun-

bal; Sue, and Liu. Results indicated that 51 % of the subjects reported en-

countering interpersonal conflict attributable to their social groupmembe7;shiPs, with ethnicity being the most frequently attributed group catego-

ry. Signijicant gender and ethnic differences were noted in coping approachemployed in responding to the conflict event. The G1lTTent findings are consid-

ered in regard to effectively assessing and responding to interG1lllural conflictfor mental health practice. iC) 1995 John Wil4J &' Sons, Inc.

.G1llture-based conflict. ethnic group membership

Social and culture-based conflict is a veryserious and pervasive problem found in con-temporary university settings (Carter, 1991).This problem has received a great deal ofattention in the study of university life in the1980s and 1990s (Astin, Trevino, & Wingard,1991). For researchers and counseling prac-

.Reprint requests should be directed to Edward Dunba1; Ed.D., Department of Psychology,University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90024.

Cultural Diversity and Mental Health, Vol. 1, No.2, 139-148 (1995)~ 1995 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. CCC 1 077-341 X/95/020139-1 0

titioners, this issue poses unique challengesconccrning how to assess and effectively re-spond to the victims of stereotyping. adversebias. and hate crimes.

Research has suggested that stereotypingand adverse out-group attributions are fre-quently related to social group categories

COPING WITH CULTURE BASED CONFLICT 141

received credit for participating in the cur-rent study. The materials were administeredto classes ranging in size from 20 to 80.Study subjects completed a release to partic-ipate in the current study. There were notime limits imposed in the administration.

Measures

Social Group Conflict Scale

The Social Group Conflict Scale (SGCS)(Dunbar et al., 1994) was administered. Thisscale consists of items which examine.a spe-cific conflict situation which the respondenthas experienced with an individual, group,or institution (the conflict domain). The re-spondent designates which social group cat-egories (race, ethnicity, gender, age, sexualorientation, and/or religious group mem-bership) served as the conflict attribute-i.e., was a causal factor of the conflict event.The SGCS included 21 items concerning theexperience of culture-based conflict (e.g., "Iwas excluded from a group activity."). Theseitems were written to reflect conflict experi-ences related to social exclusion, access toinformation and resources, and participa-tion in group-based experiences; the itemsmeasure social conflict experiences ratherthan acts of physical aggression or violence.The items used in the current study em-ployed a three-point Likert rating, indicat-ing whether a specific action occurred "aloti" "somewhat," or "did not occur." Thefive factor dimensions of culture-based con-flict identified by Dunbar et al. (1994) wereemployed in the current study. The five fac-tors included "Personal Provocation," whichwas characteristic of the affective provoca-tion of the target person (reliability alphacoefficient was .85). The second conflict fac-tor, concerning the withholding of informa-tion for personal achievement, was termed"Gatekeeping." (The internal coefficient.-al-pha was .76.) The third conflict factor, re-lated to the ignoring and marginalizing ofthe individual, was termed "Personal 1nvisi-

ence of the victim, recognizing the psycho-logical characteristics which facilitate ahealthy coping response, and examininghow the frequency and severity of the con-flict experience vary among social groups.Toward this end, the following research andpractice issues were considered:

1. What forms of social group-basedconflict are most frequently encoun-tered and are of greatest concern tothe target person?

2. Are there notable differences for in-group social identity between personswho report experiencing social group-based conflict and those who do not?

3. How does active coping in responseto social group-based conflict vary byethnic/gender groups?

Sample

Subjects consisted of an ethnically mixedgroup of 248 university students enrolled inpsychology courses at the University of Ha-waii at Manoa. The sample consisted of 168women and 81 men. Classification of thesubjects by race/ ethnic group category re-vealed that there were 6 African-Americans,138 Asian-Pacifics (this included 38 personsof Chinese heritage, 79 persons of Japaneseheritage, 17 persons of Filipino heritage,and 4 persons of Vietnamese heritage), 55Whites of European heritage, and 47 per-sons of mixed race heritage (including 11persons primarily of Hawaiian heritage).The median subject age was 22 years (S.D. of6.6 years) with a range of 16-62. Thirty-four(13.7%) of the subjects reported being non-U.S. born; this group reported a median of7years residing in the U.S. (S.D. of 6.5 years).

Procedure

All participants were enrolled in under-graduate psychology courses for which they

COPING WITH CULTURE BASED CONFLICT

'43

enced social conflict (the "conflict" group)and those who had not (the "no-conflict"group). As reported in Table I, a significantdifference was found between the no-conflict and conflict groups for negativewell-being (t = 2.18; p < .05), but not forcollective self-esteem.

The relationship of the Conflict Fre-quency and Conflict Concern ratings was ex-amined with the five Conflict Types. A 2 x 5multivariate ANOVA (MANOVA) (ConflictFrequency and Conflict Concern by ConflictType) was computed with the Conflict Fre-quency and Concern ratings employed asthe dependent variables. Results revealed asignificant multivariate effect (F 5,119 =5.29; P < .001); univariate ANOVAs for Con-flict Frequency (F 5,119 = 6.84; P < .001)and Conflict Concern (F 5,119 = 4.30; P <.001) were also significant. The Conflict Fre-quency ratings were significantly related tothe Co-Option conflict type (t = 4.03; P <.001), while the Conflict Concern rating wassignificantly related to the Personal Invisi-bility conflict type (t = 2.87; P < .005). TheMANOVA results are reported in Table 2.

Pearson correlation coefficients were in-

TABLE 1 Collective Self-Esteem and Subjective Well-Being Differences by ConflictStatus Groups

Reports CultuTe

ConflictExperience(N = 125)

Does Not Report

Culture Conflict

Experience(N = 123)

ProbabilityS.D. Mean S.D. t-ValueMean

Collective self-esteemPublic recognitionPrivate identityAscribed identityGroup membership

Affect statesPositive well-beingNegative well-being.

4.764.165.144.38

20.8922.4318.4121.44

4.274.264.574.13

.75

.53

.64

.42

.45

.59

.53

.67

20.4722.1418.8121.66

3.932.48

1.291.65

1.282.18

.20

.03

4.132.95

1.071.63

Note. higher scores on both the collective self-esteem and Bradburn scales reflect greater endorsement of the dimension

measured..0 < .05 (tWOotailed test).

dependently computed for the conflict typesand subjective well-being for the Asian-Pacific,Mixed Race/Ethnic, and Euro-White groups.Results indicated that for Asian-Pacific suI>-jects, the Opportunity Gatekeeping (r =-.40; P < .05) and Personal Invisibility (r =-.34; P < .05) conflict types were negativelyrelated to positive well-being. For MixedRace/Ethnic subjects, negative well-beingwas related to the Personal Invisibility (r =.43; P < .05) and Opportunity Gatekeeping(r = .40; p = .05) conflict types. For Euro-

Whites, negative well-being was related tothe Social Isolation (r = .31; P < .05) con-

flict type.Several relationships were observed be-

tween the conflict variables and the ActiveCoping scale. Active Coping was positivelycorrelated with Conflict Concern (r = .31; P< .01) and Conflict Frequency (r = .24; P <

.01). Results of a 1 X 4 X 2 (active copingresponse by race / ethnicity by gender) fullfactorial MANOVA revealed a significantmultivariate effect for gender (F 5,122 =

3.90; P < .05) but not for race / ethnicity (F5,122 = .52; P < .59). As reported in Table 3,

significant differences were noted for spe-

COP NG WITH CULTURE-nASED CONFLICT 145

cific gender and race/ethnic groups, withAsian-Pacific and Euro-White men reportinggreater active coping and women of MixedRace/Ethnicity reporting significantly lessactive coping.

Discussion

An additional issue not adequately ex-plored in the current study is the experienceof Mrican-Americans in the state of Hawaiiand on-campus at the University of Hawaii.As has been noted by Takara (1991), thecultural heritage of Mrican-Americans is notwidely understood nor a part of the socialhistory of Hawaii. Mrican-Americans at theUniversity of Hawaii constitute a very smallminority, comprising less than 1 % of the stu-dent body (Takara, 1992). As such, Mrican-Americans constitute one of several culturalout-groups-and one which is less promi-nent than that of other race/ ethnic groups,such as multiracial "hapa" persons.

Another salient dimension of culture-based conflict concerns the role of gender.The current findings indicated that the em-ployment of an active coping response toculture-based conflict varied significantly be-tween men and women. In the currentstudy, Asian-Pacific and Euro-White men re-ported a more active coping response whencompared to women of mixed racial/ ethnicheritage. This gender and race-related dif-ference in coping styles is largely consistentwith the prior exploratory work of Dunbaret al. (1994). However, while the currentfindings suggest that men are more likely torespond actively to the conflict event, it doesnot imply that they are more effective orsatisfied with their solution. It may be that amore active response style in the face of situ-ations which are beyond the individual's per-sonal control may heighten the subjectivedistress of the target person. Related to thisconcern is the unexplored question of theaffective sequela of culture-based conflict.Specifically, while the experience of bias andprejudice typically does not imply seriousphysical injury or threat, as is found withpost-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), theemotional response to racism and sexism, assuggested in the current study, frequentlyincludes feelings of fear, helplessness, a,ndshock. In this sense, the experience of thetarget person appears to be closely alignedwith the criteria for PTSD and acute stressdisorder, as proposed in the DSM-IV (Ameri-

This study has attempted to replicate andextend the study of social group-based con-flict recently proposed by Dunbar, Sue, andLiu. The current study sought to determinewhether culture-based conflict varied signifi-cantly for different race and ethnic groups.Additionally we sought to determine wheth-er social in-group identity varied betweenpersons who have and have not reported en-countering culture-based conflict.

In the current study it was found thatpersons who reported having experiencedculture-based conflict also reported greaternegative well-being; also they were not moreidentified with their social in-groups thanpersons who did not report experiencingculture-related conflict. This last point mayreflect the realities of the social context ofrace and ethnic relations in Hawaii (wheretraditionally there has been more recogni-tion of the salience of race and ethnicity)and may indeed be very different in main-land V.S. environments. As such, the repli-cation of the current findings may not beobserved in traditionally less culturally di-verse communities. The sociopolitical roleof Asian-Pacific persons in Hawaii is distinctlydifferent from that traditionally found else-where in the V.S. This is specifically true inregard to Asian-Pacific persons holding posi-tions of economic power and social status ingovernment and business, particularly sincethe end of the Second World War (Dawes,1968; Zalburg, 1979). As such, the perceivedsocial support, social group empowerment,and societal acknowledgment of Asian-Pacifics may facilitate more effective copingresponses to culture-based conflict than'found in most V.S. mainland communities.

COPING WITH CULTURE-BASEQ CONFLICT147

argued, is particularly true when issues ofsocial group identity are a causal factor in

the conflict experience.

Acknowledgments--

This study was supported in part by the Na-

tional Research Center on Asian American

Mental Health (NIMH # RO1 MH 44331)and the University of California Asian-

American Ethnic Studies Center.

References

American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnos-tic and statistical manual of mental and nervousdisorders (4th edition). Washington, DC:American Psychiatric Press.

Asamen,J. K., & Berry, G. L. (1987). Self-<:oncept,

alienation, and perceived prejudice: Implica-tions for counseling Asian-Americans. jour-nal of Multicultural Counseling and Develop.

ment, 15, 146-160.

Ashmore, R. D., & Del Boca, F. K. (1976). Psycho-

logical approaches to understanding inter-group conflicts. In P. A. Katz, (Ed.), TowarcLsthe elimination of racism (pp. 73-123). NewYork: Pergamon.

Astin, A. W., Trevino, J. G., & Wingard, T. L.(1991). The UCLA campus climate for diver-sity. Office of the ChanceUo7; Univmity of Califor-nia, I..os Angeles. Unnumbered technical re-

port.Boardman, S. K.' & Horwitz, S. V. (1994). Con-

structive conflict management and socialproblems: An introduction. journal of SocialIssues, 50, 1-12.

Bradburn, N. (1969). The structure of psychological

weU-Mng. Chicago: Aldine.Carter, R. T. (1991). Racial identity attitudes and

psychological functioning. journal of Multi-cultural Counseling and Development, 19, 105-114.

Dawes, G. (1968). Shoal of time: A history of theHawaiian islands. Honolulu, HI: University ofHawaii Press.

Donnellon, A., & Kolb, D. M. (1994). Construc':tive for whom? The fate of diversity disputes

in organizations. Journal of Social Issues, 50,

139-155.

Duubar, E. W., Sue, S., & Liu,]. (1994). Experienc-ing and coping with social group conflict. Paper

presented at the One-Hundred and SecondAnnual Convention of the American Psycho-

logical Association, Los Angeles, CA.

Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. (1988). Manualfor the

ways of coping questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA:

Consulting Psychologists Press.Johnson, S. D. (1987). Knowing that versus know-

ing how: Toward achieving expertise throughmulticultural training for counseling. The

Counseling Psychologist, 15, 320-331.Luthanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1992). A coilective

self-esteem scale: Self-evaluation of one's so-cial identity. Personality and Social Psychology

Bulletin, 18, 302-318.

Marsella, A.J., Bornemann, E., & Orley,]. (Eds.)(1994). AmitL5t peril and pain: The mentalhealth and well-being of the world's refugl'es. Hyat-tsville, MD: American Psychological Associa-tion.

Marsella, A. J., & Pedersen, P. (1980). Cross-cul-tural counseling and psychotherapy. New York:

, Pergamon.Miller, N., & Brewer, M. (1987). Categorization

effects on ingroup and outgroup perception.In J. F. Dovido and S. L. Gaertner (Eds.) ,

Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 209-230). San Diego, CA; Academic Press.

Neugarten, D. L., Havighurst, R.J., & Tobin, S. S.(1961). The measurement of life satisfac-tion. Journal of Gerontology, 16, 134-143.

Root, M. P. P. (1994). Understanding insidious rac-ism as a relevant context in diagnosis and treat-ment. Paper presented at the One Hundredand Second Annual Convention of theAmerican Psychological Association, Los An-geles, CA.

Schlosser, M. B., & Sheeley, L. A. (1985). Subjectivewell-being and the stress process. Paper pre-sented at the Ninety-Third Annual Conven-tion of the American Psychological Associa-tion, Los Angeles, CA.

Sherif, M. (1979). Superordinate goals in the re-duction of intergroup conflict: An experi-mental evaluation. In W. G. Austin & S.Worchel (Eds.) , The social psychology of in-

.tergroup relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks!Cole.

140

DUNBAR E

perceives and responds to culture-basedconflict.

Implications of Culture Based-Conflictfor Counseling

The need for mental health counselors to beresponsive and accommodating to socio-cultural differences is a well-recognized stan-dard of professional competence (Marsella& Pedersen. 1980;]ohnson. 1987). Sue andSue (1990) have suggested that counselorsmust recognize their own cultural assump-tions, attempt to understand differingworldviews of their clients. and develop cul-turally appropriate intervention modalities~In addition to these criteria. we advocate theneed of practitioners to accurately identifyand treat the psychological impact of socialgroup bias (e.g., racism. homophobia, andsexual harassment) on their clients. Specifi-cally. it is proposed that the current diagnos-tic nomenclature insufficiently recognizesthe role of discrimination in the creation ofpsychological problems for otherwise healthypersons. Social group-based conflict impactsthe affective, cognitive, and behavioral com-petencies of the victim (Wyatt, 1994). Differ-ences in conflict severity and frequency maymitigate against the development of moreadaptive coping responses (Asamen & Ber-ry, 1987; Root, 1994). For multicultural insti-tutions, identifying the impact of culture-based conflict holds implications for individ-ual and collective healing and change(Thomas, 1990; Donnellon & Kolb. 1994).

For the target person, effectively manag-ing and coping with the conflict experienceis of utmost importance. It is therefore allthe more interesting how very little is knownabout how persons respond to and deal withculture-based conflict. Examining how per-sons effectively cope with social conflict andbias should be part of the research agendaof researchers concerned with social grouprelations. Areas of particular concern in-clude understanding the subjective experi-

such as race, ethnicity, or gender (Mill~r &Brewer, 1987). The study of social group-based conflict has been linked to contrast-ing behaviors, affects, and cognitions ofmembers of diverse sociocultural groups(Boardman & Horowitz, 1994). At the sametime, it has been argued that there has beengreater attention given to the psychologicalexperience of the stereotyping person thanto the victim of the stereotype (Steele & Ar-onson, 1994).

As has been suggested by Dunbar, Sue,and Liu (1994), a signifying characteristic ofsocial group-based conflict is the causal attri-bution made between one's social groupmemberships and the conflict experience.In their analysis, Dunbar et al. identified fivesalient characteristics of the conflict experi-ence. These were: (1) the personal provoca-tion and affective challenge of the, targetperson, (2) the experience of interpersonalinvisibility, (3) the exclusion or "gatekeep-ing" of the individual from learning andwork opportunities, (4) the social isolationand exclusion of the target person fromgroup membership, and (5) the controllingor "co-option" of the individual's achieve-ments and intellectual property. These con-flict factors were found to be related to sub-jective well-being and perceived societalsupport for one's social group member-ships.

Of related interest in understanding thephenomena of culture-based conflict is therole of the target person's social identity inthe appraisal of the conflict event. The so-cial identity status-i.e., the conscious iden-tification ~th one's sociocultural groups-may play an important role in the attribu-tion of conflict as being culture- or gender-related (Tzeng &Jackson, 1994). It has beensuggested that persons highly identified withtheir social in-groups may interpret events asbeing salient to their group membershipsmore so than persons who are less in-groupidentified (Smith & Zarate, 1992). Accord-ingly, strength of identification with one'ssocial group may reflect how the individual

142

DUNBAR ET A

4.21; alpha = .81), and for the public CSEscale 20.69 (S.D. = 5.64; alpha = .83).

Subjective Well-Being

The Bradburn Mfect Balance Scale (Brad-burn, 1969) is a 10-item measure of positiveand negative affect as related to current lifesatisfaction. The Bradburn scale is a widelyused measure of subjective well-being andhas been employed in national quaiity-of-lifestudies (Neugarten, Havighurst, & Tobin,1961) and in the field of health psychology(Schlosser & Sheeley, 1985). The scales re-flect independent ratings of positive andnegative affect states. In our study, the coef-ficient of internal reliability for the PositiveMfect scale was .67 and .67 for the NegativeMfect scale. These internal reliability scoresare similar to those reported in the 1969 textby Bradburn.

bility"; the reliability alpha for this factor inthe current study was .78. The fourth factorwas characteristic of the taking over of theiqeas or achievements of the target individu-al as was termed "Co-Opting of Achieve-ment"; with the current sample the internalcoefficient alpha was .60. The fifth factorwas related to the isolation of the personfrom others in work and social contexts andwas labeled "Social Isolation» and had a re-liability alpha of .73. Ratings of Conflict Fre-quency and Conflict Concern were scoredon a 5-point Likert scale. with higher scoresindicating greater conflict incidence and ex-pressed concern.

The SGCS included an 8-item scale' ofthe coping mechanisms employed to re-spond to the conflict situation. The itemswere based upon the Ways of Coping Ques-tionnaire factor dimensions reported byFolkman and Lazarus (1988). The copingitems employed a 5-point rating scale andwere aggregated to form a single measurerepresenting an active coping response tothe conflict situation. Higher scores on thecoping scale reflect greater awareness andengagement with the conflict situation. Theinternal reliability (alpha) coefficient forthe coping scale was .70. The scale mean was18.50 (S.D. = 3.76).

Results

Collective Self-Esteem

The Collective Self-Esteem (CSE) scale is ameasure of multigroup social identity (Lu-thanen & Crocker, 1992). The CSE consistsof four measures; these are: (1) membershipCSE, (2) private CSE, (3) public CSE, and(4) identity CSE. Each measure consists offour items, employing a 7-point Likert-typerating, with higher ratings indicating greaterendorsement of the CSE dimensions. Withthe current sample, the descriptive statisticsand internal reliabilities (coefficient alpha)are as follows: for the membership scale themean was 21.56 (S.D. = 4.25; alpha = .78),for the identity scale 18.23 (S.D. = 4.86; al-pha = .74), for private CSE 22.31 (S.D. =

For the entire sample, 51% (125) of the sub-jects reported having encountered (that is,been the target of) culture-based conflict.The Conflict Domain was reported as occur-ring in either interpersonal (57%, n = 110)or small group (38%, n = 74) contexts. Re-sults indicated that the target person's eth-nicity (51.6%) was the most frequently iden-tified Conflict Attribute (i.e., the socialgroup category) related to the conflict expe-rience. Attributions for race (17.2%), gen-der (16.4%), age (10.7%), religion (2.5%),and sexual orientation (1.6%) were rela-tively less frequently reported. Results of aunivariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) forthe Conflict Severity Index (the dependentvariable) and the Conflict Attribute were sig-nificant (F5,123 = 2.53; P < .03); however,none of the Conflict Attributes varied signifi-cantly among one another.

The experience of social group-basedconflict was examined for differences in so-cial group identity and subjective well-beingof persons who had reported having experi-

144 DUNBAR ET AL

TABLE 2 Multivariate Analysis of Variance Res~ts for Conflict Frequency and ConflictConcern with Conflict Type

F Ratio Significance Adjusted R2 Be/a t-Value Probability

Multivariate effectConflict Frequency

Conflict factors:Personal

ProvocationOpportunity

GatekeepingPersonal

InvisibilityCo-Opting of

AchievementSocial

IsolationConflict ConcernConflict factors:

PersonalProvocation

OpportunityGatekeeping

PersonalInvisibility

Co-Opting ofAchievement

SocialIsolation

5.29

6.84.001

.001 19

.01

.04 .32 .74

.14 .23 1.88 .06

-.13 1.57-.22 12

.45 .47 4.03 .00

-.04 -.05 .50 .62

4.30 .001

.12

.01 .01 .01 .99

.01 .05 .42 .67

.14

.41

2.87 .005

-.08 -.14 1.21 .23

.02 .05 .45 .65

TABLE 3 Multivariate Analysis of Variance Results for Active Coping Responseby Race/Ethnicity and Gender

S.D.F Ratio Significance Mean

.52

3.90.06

.59

.05

.90

Race / ethnicity

Gender

Race/ethnicity by genderAsian-Pacifics: men

Asian-Pacifics: women

Mixed race ethnicity: men

Mixed race ethnicity: women

Whites: men

Whites: women

19.14

17.96

17.82

16.4218.80

17.63

3.43.2.853.04

3.56.2.78.2.62

.p < .05 (tWo-tailed test).

146DUNBAR ET AL

can Psychiatric Association, 1994). Clearlythere is a need to define and therapeuticallyresp°l!d to the affective disturbance second-ary to' social group-based conflict.

In the current study, the relationship be-tween well-being and conflict frequency andconcern underscores how different race/ethnic groups appraise and respond toculture-based conflict. Conflict experiencescharacteristic of the disregard and dismissalof the individual (the "invisibility" of the per-son) were most consistently related to poor-er subjective well-being. This same dimen-sion of culture-based conflict was of greatestexpressed concern to the target person.This suggests that experiences of alienation,exclusion, and avoidance by culturally differ-ent persons may constitute a particularlyproblematic form of intercultural conflict.at least for university students.

Implications for Counseling Practice

An unresolved issue raised by the currentstudy concerns how to therapeutically re-spond to victims of stereotyping and preju-dice. 'While there has been significant atten-tion given to the need for counselors to beculturally competent, very little has beenproposed regarding how to therapeuticallyrespond to the victims of hate crimes, ran-dom acts of adverse bias, and social and in-stitutional racism (Ashmore & Del Boca,1976).

In this regard, this study has examinedhow actively and assertively the target per-son responded to the conflict event. This, itcould be argued, presupposes that the indi-vidual "did the right thing" by engaging withthe situation or aggressing party.. This basicassumption may well prove to be inaccurateor at least incomplete with respect to whatconstitutes an effective counselor interven-tion. Toward this end, it is proposed thatthree conditions must be addressed with thetarget person, in determining the efficacy ofresponding to culture-based conflict. Theseare: (1) the role of culture in the conflictevent must be salient to the target person,

(2} the conflict event must be seen as signifi-cant for both the aggressor and the targetperson (Sherif, 1979), and (3) there mustbe adequate support available to the targetperson to alleviate the problem. As has beenpointed out by Root (1994), in the absenceof adequate social and organizational sup-port for culture conflict remediation, the in-dividual may experience heightened distressin seeking redress of the situation-in es-sence replicating the feelings of powerles.~ness and helplessness engendered by theconflict. In the absence of extrapsychic sup-port for intervention, the counselor mayfind it desirable to explore alternative solu-tions to the problem situation. These in-clude reducing contact with the perpetrat-ing party, reframing the victim's awareness,and/ or seeking consultation from membersof the target individual's social milieu.

The counselor is also advised to considerthat members of social groups who have his-torically been politically and economicallydisenfranchised may employ solutions toculture-based conflict other than what issuggested by traditional assertion trainingmodels. Furthermore, provision of psycho-logical services with refugee and immigrantpopulations may be further complicated byprevious trauma experienced in the counu.yof origin as well as the psychosocial stress ofcultural immersion (Marsella, Bornemann,&: arley, 1994). When put in this context,client problems of dissociation and behav-ioral disengagement may not signify avoid-ance, poor self-esteem, or learned helpless-ness, but may indicate a survival strategy forinteracting with a chronically hostile socialenvironment.

The impact of prejudice and bias uponour cultural institutions is substantial. Ac-cordingly, the need for counseling practi-tioners to address the needs of persons whoare targets of cultural conflict and prejudiceis great. It is particularly important for thecounselor to consider the relationship of theunique characteristics of the individual andsocioculturally proscribed behaviors in re-sponding to interpersonal conflict. This, it is

148 DUNBAR ET AL

Center for Oral History, Social Science Re-search Institute, University of Hawaii at Man-oa, xix-xxiii.

Thomas, R. (1990). From affirmative action LOaffirming diversity. Harvard Business Review,90,107-117.

Tzeng, O. S., &'Jackson,J. W. (1994). EffecLS ofcontact, conflict, and social identity on inter-ethnic group hostilities. International journalof Inlm'Ultural Relations, 18, 259-276.

Wyatt, G. E. (1994). Impact of racism on psychologi-cal functioning. Paper presented at the OneHundred and Second Annual Convention ofthe American Psychological Association, LosAngeles, CA.

Zalburg, S. (1979). A sparl!. is struck!:jack Hall andthe ILWU in Hawaii. Honolulu, HI: Universityof Hawaii Press.

Smith, E. R., & Zarate, M. A. (1992). Exemplar-based model of social judgment. PsychologicalReview, 99, 3-21.

Steete, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1994). Stereotypevulnerability and intellectual performance.Paper presented at the annual convention ofthe Western Psychological Association,Kona, Hawaii.

Sue, D.W., & Sue, D. (Eds.) (1990). Counselingtheculturally different client, 2nd edition. New

York: Wiley.

Takara, K. W. (1991). The politics of survival. InM. Tehranian (Ed.) Restructuring for ethnicpeace: A public debate at the University of Hawaii.onorable Spark Matsunaga Institute forPeace, 85-91: Honolulu, Hawaii.

Takara, K. W. (1992). Mrican-Americans in Ha-

waii. In Oral Histories of African-Americans.