There are many aspects to our identities, such as our family histories, religious affiliation, and nationality. A major component of our identities can be our ethnicity and cultural heritage. In this section, we will consider various aspects of ethnic identity, and how it can change over time.

5.5.1 Jean Phinney’s Model of Positive Ethnic Identity

The researcher Jean S. Phinney defines ethnic identity as a sense of self that is derived from a sense of belonging to a group, a culture, and a particular setting. Aspects of ethnic identity can also include a person’s knowledge of an ethnic group they identify with, and how valuable or significant it is to be a member of an ethnic group (Tajfel, 1981). Ethnic identity is a multidimensional construct that can change over time and context (Phinney, 2003). Ethnic identity can be developed and reinforced by engaging in activities associated with one’s culture or ethnic group, such as associating with members of one’s group or speaking a shared language. But, ethnic identity can also exist as an internal structure, independent of such behaviors (Phinney & Ong, 2007).

Components of ethnic identity also include in-group attitudes, towards one’s own ethnic group, as well towards other groups:

• Positive ethnic identity:a positive self-attitude derived from a sense of belonging to groups that are meaningful to a person (Phinney, 1989; Tajfel & Turner, 1986).
• Intra-group affinity: a positive, or affirming sense of one’s own ethnic identity can create a sense of pride in one’s ethnic identity. Possessing intra-group affinity has been linked to reduced depressive symptoms among youth from minoritized communities (Smith & Silva, 2011), and is associated with positive
• Inter-group affinity: positive attitudes towards ethnic groups other than a group where an individual has ascribed membership. Inter-group affinity has been linked to reduction of inter-group conflict among youth from minoritized ethnic groups (Phinney & Ferguson, 1997).

5.5.2 John W. Berry’s Model of Acculturation

Our lives are increasingly defined by technology and globalization that allow us to interact with people on the other side of the world, as well as learn about and internalize components of many cultures. When individuals and families are exposed to new cultures, they go through a process of acculturation, or adapting to a new culture (Berry, 2003). Figure 5.11 shows a model of acculturation proposed by John Berry (1980) anticipates that acculturating individuals face two issues: (1) the dominant culture orientation, of the extent to which acculturating individuals are involved with the receiving or host culture, and (2) the heritage cultural orientation, or the extent to which individuals are involved with their heritage, ethnic, or nondominant culture (Nguyen & Benet-Martínez, 2013).

Figure 5.11. John W. Berry’s Model of Acculturation Strategies. Figure 5.11 Image Description

One helpful framework to understand acculturation is a model developed by psychologist John W. Berry. His model examines four acculturation strategies: assimilation, integration, separation, and marginalization (Berry, 2003).

Assimilation strategy is utilized when an individual does not seek to maintain their cultural identity, and instead pursues close interaction with other cultures. The person may adopt the cultural norms, values, and traditions of the new society.

Integration strategy is utilized by those who wish to maintain one’s original culture, as a member of an ethnocultural group. At the same time, they may also participate as a member of the dominant society. In this way, the person both maintains aspects of their original culture, while also incorporating aspects of a newer culture into their cultural knowledge and practices. This strategy has been found to be the most adaptive, and is linked to better psychological and sociocultural adaptation (Liebkind, 2001; Sam et al., 2008).

The separation strategy is chosen by those who place a high value on maintaining the integrity of their original cultural identity, and avoid interaction with those of the new society. The marginalization strategy consists of placing a low value on cultural maintenance, and also avoiding interactions with those of the new society, sometimes due to experiences of exclusion or discrimination. This strategy has been found to be the least adaptive.

A person may utilize different strategies, depending on context and circumstances, as the strategies are not static. The attitudes of the larger society towards the immigrants, and/or the types of settlement policies the larger society prefers towards acculturating groups can influence which strategy gets adopted. Generally, integration is the preferred strategy for optimal outcomes, whereas marginalization is the least preferred strategy (Berry, 2003).

Of all the strategies described, integration, or biculturalism, has the strongest association with socio-cultural and psychological adaptation (Nguyen &, Benet-Martınez, 2013). Immigrants who experience higher perceived instances of discrimination may prefer separation, whereas those who experience less perceived instances of discrimination might prefer assimilation. Interestingly, research suggests that integration is more common in settler societies (i.e., a society that encourages and welcomes immigration, such as Canada and Australia), than in non-settler societies (i.e., where immigration is regarded a necessity aimed at assisting less-privileged people, such as France, Germany, and the United Kingdom) (Berry et al. 2006).

5.5.3 Belonging

While there are many definitions and conceptualizations of belonging, one definition is when a person experiences a subjective feeling that they are an integral part of their surrounding systems, including one’s friends, family, school work environments, communities, cultural groups, and physical places (Hagerty et al., 1992). According to Allen et al. (2021), the need for belonging, “to connect deeply with other people and secure places, to align with one’s cultural and subcultural identities, and to feel like one is a part of the systems around them or connect deeply with other people,” is a very basic human need (p. 2). Connection with others, physical safety, and wellbeing are inextricably linked, and are crucial for survival (Boyd & Richardson, 2009). Belonging is created “because of and in connection with the systems in which we reside” (Kern et al., 2020, p. 709). A greater sense of belonging is associated with positive psychosocial outcomes.

The benefits and potential protective factors derived from a sense of belonging are especially potent for individuals who identify with marginalized and/or minoritized groups, including people who identify as sexually or gender diverse, people with disabilities, or those who experience mental health issues (Gardner et al., 2019; Harrist & Bradley, 2002; Rainey et al., 2018; Spencer et al., 2016; Steger & Kashdan, 2009). Among college students from minoritized communities, social belonging interventions are associated with positive impacts on academic and health outcomes (Walton & Cohen, 2011). Other positive effects include having a healthy sense of belonging, including more positive social relationships, academic achievement, occupational success, and better physical and mental health (e.g., Allen et al., 2018; Goodenow & Grady, 1993; Hagerty et al., 1992).

In contrast to the benefits of feeling a sense of belonging, a lack of belonging has been linked to an increased risk for mental and physical health problems (Cacioppo et al., 2015). The health risks associated with social isolation can be the equivalent to smoking 15 cigarettes a day, and are twice as harmful as obesity (Holt-Lunstad et al., 2015). Social isolation across the lifespan is associated with poor sleep quality, depression, cardiovascular difficulties, rapid cognitive decline, reduced immunity increased risk for mental illness, lowered immune functioning, antisocial behavior, physical illness, and early mortality (e.g., Cacioppo & Hawkley, 2003; Cacioppo et al., 2011; Choenarom et al., 2005; Cornwell & Waite, 2009; Hawkley & Capitanio, 2015; Holt-Lunstad, 2018; Leary, 1990; Slavich, O’Donovan et al., 2010).

Belonging can be fostered at the individual and social level. Figure 5.12 provides a framework for understanding and fostering belonging. A sense of belonging can be impacted by one’s competencies, opportunities, perceptions, and motivations, as well as social, cultural, and temporal contexts and experiences (Allen et al., 2021).

Figure 5.12. An integrative framework for understanding, assessing, and fostering belonging. (Adapted from Allen, Kern, Rozek, McInerney, & Slavich, 2021)

Image description

Competencies refers to having a set of skills and abilities that are needed to connect and relate to others, develop a sense of identity, ensure one’s behavior aligns with social norms and cultural values. Competencies can be fostered by learning multiple cultural repertoires for different contexts, acquiring verbal and nonverbal communication skills, practicing active listening, and possessing emotion and behavioral regulation.

Opportunities to belong come from the availability of groups, people, places, times, and spaces to connect with others in ways that allow belonging to occur. Individuals from isolated or rural areas, first and second-generation immigrants, and refugees may experience circumstances that limit opportunities to foster belonging. The lack of Opportunities for belonging was sharply felt during the COVID-19 pandemic, when shelter-in-place orders and social distancing measures limited human interactions. But, despite opportunities to connect in-person, technologies such as gaming and social media quickly became opportunities for connection, especially for youth, those who are shy, or people who experience social anxiety (Allen et al., 2014; Amichai-Hamburger et al., 2002; Davis, 2012; Moore & McElroy, 2012; Seabrook et al., 2016; Seidman, 2013).

Motivations to belong consist of the need or desire to connect with others, or the real, fundamental need to feel accepted, belong, and seek social interactions and connections (Leary & Kelly, 2009). Individuals can experience varying levels of motivations, as they can vary by personality type, mental health, and one’s previous experiences that may include repeated rejection.

A person’s perceptions of belonging are related to one’s subjective feelings and cognitions regarding their experiences, such as a sense of satisfaction. Perceptions about one’s experiences are informed by past experiences , such as repeated rejection and or feeling left-out. A person’s negative perceptions of self or others and stereotypes can affect the desire to connect with others.

5.5.4 Overlapping Cultures and/or Religions Within a Family

Religiosity, or the attachment to and practice of religious practices, can be beneficial for families. For example, for immigrant and refugee families in the US, religiosity can be a protective factor against the potentially deleterious effects of acculturation. Religiosity and spirituality, often integrated with one’s ethnic identity, rituals, and traditions, appear to play a significant role as a protective factor in the immigrant paradox among Latino/a and Somali youth (Areba, 2015; Ruiz & Steffen, 2011). Also, participation in a religious community was a key means of connecting children of Vietnam refugees with their ethnic heritage and building cultural capital (Tingvold et al., 2012).

What happens when there are overlapping, or even conflicting religions or cultures within a family? People who grew up in families where parents had different religions, and who had dissimilar participation in their respective religious communities,overall report less overall religiosity (McPhail, 2019). Petts and Knoester (2007) found that couples that have different religions may experience more marital conflict, and that children whose parents have different religions are more likely to engage in marijuana use and underage drinking than children with religiously homogamous parents. But, these associations occur only in families where one parent is not religious (does not affiliate with a religion), or where both parents identify with different religions).

5.5.5 Assimilation versus acculturation

As previously discussed, assimilation is a strategy utilized when an individual does not seek to maintain their cultural identity, and instead pursues close interaction with other cultures, including adopting the cultural norms, values, and traditions of the new society. With respect to policies applied to immigrant communities in the US, however, assimilation takes on a different meaning. Alba and Nee (2009) describe assimilation as a multidimensional process of boundary brokering and reduction, in which ethnic distinctions, and the social and cultural differences and identities associated with them, are blurred or dissolved.

At the group level, “assimilation may involve the absorption of one or more minority groups into the mainstream,” whereas at the individual level, “assimilation denotes the cumulative changes that make individuals of one ethnic group more acculturated, integrated, and identified with the members of another (Rumbaut, 2015, p. 2). This approach has been used to justify selective, state-imposed policies and practices with the goal of eradicating minoritized cultures and the “benevolent” conquest of other peoples. One striking example is the effort to “Americanize,” Christianize, and “civilize” Native-American children by forcibly removing them from their families and sending them to residential schools, such as the Chemawa Indian School in Salem, Oregon. Around 270 children died while in custody at the Chemawa Indian School between 1880-1945 (Pember, 2021).

Another startling example is the 1898 “Benevolent Assimilation” policy of the United States to pursue imperial interests in the Philippines, under the guise of idealized purpose and benevolence, meant to colonize and pacify a people who were seeking independence from imperialism and colonization (Miller, 1982). It should be noted that both examples were supported by the Dawes Act of 1887. As described by Rumbaut (2015), “the ideal of assimilation, more often tied to the metaphor of the ‘melting pot,’ has sought to dramatize, legitimize and celebrate the consensual integration of immigrants and their descendants into a common national life—while ignoring the realities, inequalities, and potentialities of conflictual intergroup relations marked by enduring segregation, discrimination, marginalization and exclusion” (p. 2; emphasis added).

Race, ethnicity, and socio-economic status are critical determinants of the measure of assimilation, in that they can delimit forms of social contact and augment social contrasts and conflict. Assimilation and upward social mobility can be achieved through intermarriage, and being identified as belonging to a race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status that allow individuals and groups to have intimate contact with the dominant social group, so as to acquire “the language and social ritual of the native community…[and] participate, without encountering prejudice, in the common life, economic and political” (Park, 1930, p. 281). If a person or group of people are regarded as perpetual foreigners, however, that group can be subject to exclusionary policies and systematic state persecution, such as the aforementioned examples. “A fraught concept like ‘assimilation,’ weighted by the normative baggage of its past and by its insistent if inclusive expectation of progress and homogenized national cohesion, seems ill-suited to grasp these complex dynamics and to focus critical attention on enduring structural inequalities and persistent ethnic and pan-ethnic formations in a ‘permanently unfinished’ society” (Rumbaut, 2015, p. 12). Perceptions of strong assimilationist pressures in schools create tensions and can lead to separation (Niens et al., 2013). In environments that tend towards assimilation, cultural maintenance in ethnic minorities can lead to lower levels of life satisfaction (Kus-Harbord & Ward, 2015). In contrast, policies and practices that allow individuals, families, and groups to create communities of belonging and practice their heritage cultures, can promote equity.

5.5.6 Creating Communities of Belonging

Whether a person is a college student who moved to a new area to attend college in a community they are unfamiliar with, or a person who immigrated to a host country and has yet to get to know the new receiving community, people tend to seek or create community by utilizing anchoring practices. Like an anchor of a boat, meant to keep a boat in a specific place, and not be moved by tides, currents, or winds, anchoring practices are the behaviors, efforts, and actions people carry out to seek, create, and maintain a sense of community and rootedness.

When a person, a family, or a group of people move to a new community, there is a human need to create a sense of belonging. Immigrant and refugee families recently arriving to a receiving community can experience challenges like isolation and loneliness (Campbell, 2008; Narchal, 2012). Families can make use of existing social networks within a community to tap into community groups, or they may have to create entirely new spaces. For example, Somali refugee families in Boston utilized existing religious organizations, family support, and community organizations to tap into existing communities, thus benefiting from peer and family support, religious faith, and social support networks to make new lives for themselves (Betancourt et al., 2014). Connections with family members help immigrants and refugees retain a sense of identity within their culture and family (Lim, 2009). People who move to a new community may have access anchoring practices that have already be established through family members or friends who are already settled in a community, religious organizations (e.g., mosques or churches), schools, cultural or community centers, and non-profit organizations aimed at helping immigrant and refugee families (e.g., Centre of African Immigration and Refugees (CAIRO)).

Other anchoring practices could include forming spaces of community when those spaces do not exist, or if there are gaps. For example, in Corvallis, Oregon, a small group of Mexican immigrant families got together to form a group folkloric Mexican dance, so that the children’s positive cultural identity could be supported, and parents could mutually support each other (Figure 5.13).

The ways immigrant and refugee individuals, families, and communities seek, create, and maintain support vary widely. They may draw on family and community resilience to find ways to continue to survive and, in many cases, thrive.

Figure 5.13. Three dancers perform the folkloric Mexican dance “Los Machetes de Jalisco.”

5.5.7 Community, Culture, and Belonging as Resistance

In this section, we highlight examples of family and community practices that reinforce cultural identities, despite direct or indirect pressure to discontinue the practices as a part of the assimilation process.

Individuals, families, and communities strive to promote and maintain positive cultural identity, often through activities and practices associated with creating a sense of belonging and community. In some ways, the practices of maintaining a sense of community and shared cultural identity can resist assimilation ideologies and/or policies that promote a sense of societal/cultural uniformity. Assimilationist policies and/or ideologies can fail to address, or even worsen, complex societal and structural inequalities that persist among pan-ethnic groups, in a society as diverse as the United States (Rumbaut, 2015).

An extended example of community building and cultural maintenance as resistance to cultural erasure is highlighted in the section about the revival of native Hawai’ian language and culture. Among Black Caribbean immigrants, gatherings of family and friends called “liming” sessions reinforce family and cultural identities through storytelling (Brooks, 2013).

Throughout U.S. history, among the many horrific ways Native Americans were treated, one strategy to de-ligitimize their cultures is paper genocide, or state and federal recognition titles used to determine Native Americans’ significance, presence, and legacy in U.S. history and society, or to refute their identity. There are strict criteria for a tribe to be federally recognized, and it can be difficult for some Native communities to “obtain enough tangible historic resources to prove their ancestry or community” (Nguyễn & Tribal Nation, E. P., 2020, p. 5). An example of paper genocide, or use of law and policy to remove Native American’s presence in US history and society, is the 1887 Dawes Act. Because of this law, Native communities experienced cultural erasure through children being removed from their communities and sent to residential or boarding schools, where they were punished for speaking languages other than English, and stripped of their cultural heritage. In 1975, the U.S. government passed the Indian Self-Determination Act, providing Native communities the option to create their own schools and curriculum, which has been instrumental in language and cultural revival programs, and shaping their own future (Manuelito, 2005).

The Eastern Pequot Tribal National Archeology Field School in Pennsylvania is a clear example of a community outright resisting cultural erasure while building community in a culturally affirming way. As a part of this revival effort, and to combat cultural erasure, the Eastern Pequot Tribal Nation Archaeology Field School provides tangible items from the past which grounds the Tribal members to their reservation that has been established for hundreds of years. Items such as arrowheads, musket bullets, and scissors show that the Eastern Pequots’ ancestors lived with their European colonizers from the 17th to the 19th centuries a s their Native presence was enough to resist colonization. Over 99,000 artifacts found throughout the 15 Field School seasons dismantle the common misconception of how Native Americans lived during the beginning of the United States’ history and redefines modern beliefs about how Natives survived European colonization. The Field School transforms the brief binary description of Native history into a more complicated and dynamic story that elaborates on Native struggle, survival and resistance (Nguyễn & Tribal Nation, E. P. 2020).

5.5.9 References

Alba, R. D., & Nee, V. (2009). Remaking the American mainstream. In Remaking the American mainstream. Harvard University Press.

Allen, Kern, M. L., Vella-Brodrick, D., Hattie, J., & Waters, L. (2018). What Schools Need to Know About Fostering School Belonging: a Meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9389-8

Allen, Kern, M. L., Rozek, C. S., McInerney, D. M., & Slavich, G. M. (2021). Belonging: a review of conceptual issues, an integrative framework, and directions for future research. Australian Journal of Psychology, 73(1), 87–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049530.2021.1883409

Amichai-Hamburger, Wainapel, G., & Fox, S. (2002). “On the Internet No One Knows I’m an Introvert”: Extroversion, Neuroticism, and Internet Interaction. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 5(2), 125–128. https://doi.org/10.1089/109493102753770507

Areba, M. E. (2016). Divine solutions for our youth: a conversation with Imam Hassan Mohamud. Creative Nursing, 22(1), 29-32.

Berry, J.W. (1974). Psychological aspects of cultural pluralism. Culture Learning, 2, 17–22.

Berry, J. W. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaptation. In A. M. Padilla (Ed.), Acculturation: Theory, models, and some new findings (pp. 9-25). Boulder, CO: Westview.

Berry, J. W. (2003). Conceptual approaches to acculturation. In K. M. Chun, P. B. Organista, & G. Marín (Eds.), Acculturation: Advances in theory, measurement, and applied research (pp. 17-37). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Berry, J. W., Phinney, J. S., Sam, D. L., & Vedder, P. E. (2006). Immigrant youth in cultural transition: acculturation, identity, and adaptation across national contexts. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Betancourt, T. S., Abdi, S., Ito, B. S., Lilienthal, G. M., & Agalab, N. (2014). We left one war and came to another: Resource loss, acculturative stress, and caregiver-child relationships in Somali refugee families. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 21(1), 114-125. doi: 10.1037/a0037538

Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (2009). Culture and the evolution of human cooperation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1533), 3281–3288.https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0134

Brooks, L. J. (2013). The Black survivors: Courage, strength, creativity and resilience in the cultural traditions of Black Caribbean immigrants. In J.D. Sinnott (Ed.) Positive Psychology (pp. 121-134). New York: Springer.

Cacioppo, J. T., & Hawkley, L. C. (2003). Social isolation and health, with an emphasis on underlying mechanisms. Perspectives in biology and medicine, 46(3), S39-S52.

Cacioppo, J. T., Hawkley, L. C., Norman, G. J., & Berntson, G. G. (2011). Social isolation. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1231(1), 17–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06028.x

Cacioppo, S., Grippo, A. J., London, S., Goossens, L., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2015). Loneliness: Clinical import and interventions. Perspectives in Psychological Science, 10(2), 238–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615570616

Campbell, W. S. (2008). Lessons in resilience undocumented Mexican women in South Carolina. Affilia, 23(3), 231-241.

Cornwell, E. Y., & Waite, L. J. (2009). Social disconnectedness, perceived isolation, and health among older adults. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 50(1), 31–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/002214650905000103

Davis, K. (2012). Friendship 2.0: Adolescents’ experiences of belonging and self-disclosure online. Journal of Adolescence, 35(6), 1527–1536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.02.013

Gardner, A., Filia, K., Killacky, E., & Cotton, S. (2019). The social inclusion of young people with serious mental illness: A narrative review of the literature and suggested future directions. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 53(1), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004867418804065

Goodenow, C., & Grady, K. E. (1993). The relationship of school belonging and friends’ values to academic motivation among urban adolescent students. Journal of Experimental Education, 62(1), 60–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1993.9943831

Hagerty, B. M., Lynch-Sauer, J. L., Patusky, K., Bouwsema, M., & Collier, P. (1992). Sense of belonging: A vital mental health concept. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 6(3), 172–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9417(92)90028-h

Harrist, A. W., & Bradley, K. D. (2002). Social exclusion in the classroom: Teachers and students as agents of change. In Improving academic achievement (pp. 363-383). Academic Press.

Hawkley, L. C., & Capitanio, J. P. (2015). Perceived social isolation, evolutionary fitness and health outcomes: a lifespan approach. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 370(1669), 20140114. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2014.0114

Holt-Lunstad, J. (2018). Why social relationships are important for physical health: A systems approach to understanding and modifying risk and protection. Annual Review of Psychology, 69, 437–458. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011902

Kern, M. L., Williams, P., Spong, C., Colla, R., Sharma, K., Downie, A., Taylor, J. A., Sharp, S., Siokou, C., & Oades, L. G. (2020). Systems informed positive psychology. Journal of Positive Psychology, 15(4), 705–715. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2019.1639799

Kus-Harbord, L., & Ward, C. (2015). Ethnic Russians in post-Soviet Estonia: Perceived devaluation, acculturation, well-being, and ethnic attitudes. International Perspectives in Psychology: Research, Practice, Consultation, 4(1), 66. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2352-250X(15)00247-X/sbref0660

Leary, M. R. (1990). Responses to social exclusion: Social anxiety, jealousy, loneliness, depression, and low self-esteem. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9(2), 221–229. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1990.9.2.221

Leary, M. R., & Kelly, K. M. (2009). Belonging motivation. In M. R. Leary & R. H. Hoyle (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in social behavior (pp. 400–409). Guilford Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2009-12071–027

Liebkind, K. (2001). Acculturation. In R. Brown & S. Gaertner (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 386–406). Oxford, United Kingdom: Blackwell.

Lim. (2009). Loss of Connections Is Death. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40(6), 1028–1040. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022109346955

McPhail, B. L. (2019). Religious heterogamy and the intergenerational transmission of religion: A cross-national analysis. Religions, 10(2), 109. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel10020109

Manuelito, K. (2005). The role of education in American Indian self-determination: Lessons from the Ramah Navajo community school. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 36(1), 73–87.

Miller, S.C., 1982. Benevolent Assimilation: The American Conquest of the Philippines, 1899-1903. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.

Moore, K., & McElroy, J. C. (2012). The influence of personality on Facebook usage, wall postings, and regret. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), 267–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.09.009

Narchal, R. (2012). Migration loneliness and family links: A case narrative. In Proceedings of World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology (No. 64). World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology.

Nguyen, A. M. D., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2013). Biculturalism and adjustment: A meta-analysis. Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 44(1), 122-159.

Nguyễn, L. H., & Nation, E. P. T. (2020). Pequot Warriors Combating Paper Genocide: How the Eastern Pequot Tribal Nation Uses Education to Resist Cultural Erasure. Journal for Undergraduate Ethnography, 10(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.15273/jue.v10i1.9945

Niens, U., Mawhinney, A., Richardson, N., & Chiba, Y. (2013). Acculturation and religion in schools: the views of young people from minority belief backgrounds. British Educational Research Journal, 39(5), 907-924.. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2352-250X(15)00247-X/sbref0605

Park, R.E., 1930. Assimilation, Social, in: Seligman, E.R.A., Johnson, A. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, Vol. 2. Macmillan, New York.

Pember, M. A., & Today, I. C. (2022, December 27). Deaths at Chemawa. North Coast Journal. https://www.northcoastjournal.com/humboldt/deaths-at-chemawa/Content?oid=21797482

Petts, R.J. & Knoester, C. (2007). Parents’ Religious Heterogamy and Children’s Well-Being. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 46(3), 373–389. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4621986

Phinney, J. (1989). Stages of ethnic identity development in minority group adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 9, 34-49.

Phinney, J. (2003). Ethnic identity and acculturation. In K. Chun, P. Organista, & G. Marin (Eds.), Acculturation: Advances in theory, measurement, and applied research (pp. 63-81 ). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association

Phinney, J., Ferguson, D., & Tate, J. (1997). Intergroup attitudes among ethnic minority adolescents: A causal model. Child Development, 68, 955–969.

Phinney & Ong, 2007. Conceptualization and Measurement of Ethnic Identity: Current Status and Future Directions Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(3). 271 – 281. DOI: I0.1037/0022-0 167.54.3.271

Rainey, K., Dancy, M., Mickelson, R., Stearns, E., & Moller, S. (2018). Race and gender differences in how a sense of belonging influences decisions to major in STEM. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0115-6

Ruiz, J. M., & Steffen, P. R. (2011). Latino health. In H. S. Friedman (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Health Psychology (pp. 807–825). New York: Oxford University Press.

Rumbaut, R. G. (2015). Assimilation of immigrants. James D. Wright (editor-in-chief), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences,, 2, 81-87.

Sam, D.L., Vedder, P., Leibkind, K., Neto, F., & Virta, E. (2008). Migration, acculturation and the paradox of adaptation in Europe. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 5, 138–158.

Seabrook, E. M., Kern, M. L., & Rickard, N. S. (2016). Social networking sites, depression, and anxiety: a systematic review. JMIR mental health, 3(4), e5842. https://doi.org/10.2196/mental.5842

Seidman, G. (2013). Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: How personality influences social media use and motivations. Personality and Individual Differences, 54 (3), 402–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.10.009

Slavich, G. M., O’Donovan, A., Epel, E. S., & Kemeny, M. E. (2010). Black sheep get the blues: A psychobiological model of social rejection and depression. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 35(1), 39–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.01.003

Smith, T. B., & Silva, L. (2011). Ethnic identity and personal well-being of people of color: a meta-analysis. Journal of counseling psychology, 58(1), 42.

Spencer, S. J., Logel, C., & Davies, P. G. (2016). Stereotype threat. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 415–437. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-073115-103235

Steger, M. F., & Kashdan, T. B. (2009). Depression and everyday social activity, belonging, and well-being. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 56(2), 289–300. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015416

Tajfel, H. ( 1981 ). Human groups and social categories. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.

Tingvold, L., Hauff, E., Allen, J., & Middelthon, A. L. (2012). Seeking balance between the past and the present: Vietnamese refugee parenting practices and adolescent well-being. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, (36), 536-574.

Walton, G. W., & Cohen, G. L. (2011). A brief social-belonging intervention improves academic and health outcomes of minority students. Science, 331(6023), 1447–1451. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1198364

Image Description for Figure 5.11:
John W. Berry’s Model of Acculturation Strategies

A rectangle is divided into four quadrants. The axes have arrows pointing both directions. A plus sign and the word high are on one end of the axes, while a minus sign and the word low are on the other end. The Y axis is labeled Issue 1: relationships sought among groups. The X axis is labeled Issue 2: maintenance of heritage and cultural identity.

The low seeking of relationships and low maintenance of heritage and cultural identity quadrant is labeled marginalization.

The high seeking of relationships and low maintenance of heritage and cultural identity quadrant is labeled assimilation.

The high maintenance of heritage and cultural identity and low seeking of relationships quadrant is labeled separation.

The high maintenance of heritage and cultural identity and high seeking of relationships quadrant is labeled integration.

Based on ideas from Sam, D. L., & Berry, J. W. (2010). Acculturation: When individuals and groups of different cultural backgrounds meet. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(4), 472–481. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610373075

Design by Monica Olvera and Michaela Willi Hooper, Open Oregon Educational Resources, CC BY 4.0.

[Return to Figure 5.11]