IDENTITY, ACCULTURATION AND ADAPTATION IN MIGRANT YOUTH
Colleen Ward
Centre for Applied Cross-cultural Research
Victoria University of Wellington
Research funded by Royal Society of New Zealand,James Cook Fellowship
INTERNATIONAL COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ETHNOCULTURAL YOUTH
• 13 nations• Over 30 ethnic
groups• 7000 migrant youth• 20 researchers
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
• How do immigrant youth live within and between two cultures?
• How well do immigrant youth deal with their intercultural situation?
• What is the relationship between HOW youth engage in intercultural relations and HOW WELL they adapt?
RESEARCH INSTRUMENT
• Demographic factors- e.g., gender, ethnicity, birthplace, citizenship
• Intercultural factors- e.g., language use and proficiency, national and ethnic identity, peer contacts, acculturation preferences
• Adaptation indicators- e.g., school adjustment, behavioural problems, psychological symptoms, life satisfaction
RESEARCH SAMPLE
935 migrant youth• 53% female• 12-19 years (M = 15.5)• 70% overseas born• 145 Chinese, 188 Korean, 147 Samoan, 102 Indian, 111
British, 101 South African, 141 others
510 national youth• 50% female• 12-19 years (M = 14.9)• 98% New Zealand born• 396 NZE and 114 Maori
KEY FINDINGS
HOW DO MIGRANT YOUTH LIVE WITHIN AND BETWEEN TWO CULTURES?
ACCULTURATION DIMENSIONS
Integration Assimilation
Separation Marginalisation
CULTURAL MAINTENANCE
YES NO
PARTICIPATION
YES
NO
ACCULTURATION PREFERENCES
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Int Assim Sep Margin
NZEMaoriMigrants
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
ACCULTURATION PROFILES
• Integrated (28.7%)
• National (28.8%)
• Ethnic (23.6%)
• Diffuse (18.8%)
INTEGRATED
• Strong ethnic and national identity
• Good English proficiency and frequent use of English
• Strong ethnic peer contacts
• Strong endorsement of integration
INTEGRATED PROFILE
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5Assimilation
Integration
Separation
Marginalisation
Parental obligations
Childrens rights
Ethnic Identity
National identity
National peer contacts
Ethnic peer contacts
English Language use
English language proficiency
Ethnic language proficiency
NATIONAL
• Moderately strong national identity and weak ethnic identity
• High proficiency in and frequent use of English
• Strong national peer contacts and weak ethnic peer contacts
• Strong rejection of separation
NATIONAL PROFILE
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5 Assimilation
Integration
Separation
Marginalisation
Parental obligations
Childrens rights
Ethnic Identity
National identity
National peer contacts
Ethnic peer contacts
English Language use
English languageproficiencyEthnic language proficiency
ETHNIC
• Moderately strong ethnic identity and weak national identity
• Poor proficiency in and infrequent use of English
• Good proficiency in ethnic language• Few national peer contacts and strong
ethnic peer contacts• Strong endorsement of separation
ETHNIC PROFILE
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5Assimilation
Integration
Separation
Marginalisation
Parental obligations
Childrens rights
Ethnic Identity
National identity
National peer contacts
Ethnic peer contacts
English Language use
English language proficiency
Ethnic language proficiency
DIFFUSE
• Very weak ethnic identity • Poor English proficiency • Endorsement of assimilation, separation
and marginalization
DIFFUSE PROFILE
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5Assimilation
Integration
Separation
Marginalisation
Parental obligations
Childrens rights
Ethnic Identity
National identity
National peer contacts
Ethnic peer contacts
English Language use
English language proficiency
Ethnic language proficiency
HOW WELL DO MIGRANT YOUTH DEAL WITH THEIR INTERCULTURAL SITUATION?
LIFE SATISFACTION
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
NZE Mao Sam Chi Ind Kor Brit SA
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
PSYCHOLOGICAL SYMPTOMS
1.9
2
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
NZE Mao Sam Chi Ind Kor Brit SA
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
SCHOOL ADJUSTMENT
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
NZE Mao Sam Chi Ind Kor Brit SA
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
BEHAVIOURAL PROBLEMS
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
NZE Mao Sam Chi Ind Kor Brit SA
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
DISCRIMINATION
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
NZE Mao Sam Chi Ind Kor Brit SA
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIPBETWEEN HOW MIGRANT YOUTH ENGAGE IN INTERCULTURAL RELATIONS AND HOW WELL THEY ADAPT?
LIFE SATISFACTION
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
Nat Eth Dif Int
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
PSYCHOLOGICAL SYMPTOMS
2.22.25
2.32.35
2.42.45
2.52.55
2.62.65
2.7
Nat Eth Dif Int
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
SCHOOL ADJUSTMENT
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
4
4.1
Nat Eth Dif Int
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
BEHAVIOURAL PROBLEMS
00.20.40.60.8
11.21.41.61.8
2
Nat Eth Dif Int
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
SUMMARY
• Both national and migrant youth prefer integration as an acculturation strategy
• Integration is not achieved to the extent it is desired• Overall, migrant youth adapt well• Both cultural maintenance and participation (social
inclusion) are important– Integration associated with better adaptive
outcomes– Diffusion linked to poorest outcomes
POLICY IMPLICATIONS: QUESTIONS FOR THE FUTURE
• What can be done to facilitate integration?• How can we promote greater participation and social
inclusion?• How do we address the issue of cultural
maintenance?• Who are our policies for?
For further information contact:[email protected]
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.