1. ACCULTURATION AND ADAPTATION : SOCIAL IDENTIFICATION APPROACH

2. SOCIAL IDENTIFICATION
Identity
Belongingness
Pride
Centrality
Behaviours
Intergroup Relations

3. INTERNATIONAL COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ETHNOCULTURAL YOUTH
13 nations
Over 30 ethnic groups
7000 migrant youth
20 researchers

4. 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?
Intercultural question
Adaptation question
Cross-cultural question

5. 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

6. RESEARCH SAMPLE 935 migrant youth 510 national 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
Others: other Pacific, Asian, European, African

7. KEY FINDINGS

8. HOW DO MIGRANT YOUTH
LIVE WITHIN AND BETWEEN
TWO CULTURES?

9. NATIONAL AND ETHNIC IDENTITY

10. NATIONAL AND ETHNC IDENTITY OVER GENERATIONS

11. ACCULTURATION DIMENSIONS
CULTURAL MAINTENANCE
YES NO
YES
Integration Assimilation
Separation Marginalisation
PARTICIPATION NO

12. ACCULTURATION PREFERENCES
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

13. ACCULTURATION PROFILES
Integrated (28.7%)
National (28.8%)
Ethnic (23.6%)
Diffuse (18.8%)

14. INTEGRATED Strong ethnic and national identity
Good English proficiency and frequent use of English
Strong ethnic peer contacts
Strong endorsement of integration

15. INTEGRATED PROFILE

16. 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

17. NATIONAL PROFILE

18. 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

19. ETHNIC PROFILE

20. DIFFUSE Very weak ethnic identity Poor English proficiency
Endorsement of assimilation, separation and marginalization

21. DIFFUSE PROFILE

22. HOW WELL DO MIGRANT
YOUTH DEAL WITH THEIR
INTERCULTURAL SITUATION?

23. LIFE SATISFACTION Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
Indian significantly more satisfied than all other groups except British & SA
British more satisfied than Koreans, Chinese and NZE & Maori
NZE and Maori are only different from Brit and Indian--
SO NO MIGRANT DISADVANTAGE
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

24. PSYCHOLOGICAL SYMPTOMS
Symptoms highest in NZE but significantly greater than Chinese, Indian, British
Indian has significantly less symptoms than all groups except British
NO MIGRANT DISADVANTAGE
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

25. SCHOOL ADJUSTMENT Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
Indian significantly better adjustment than all other groups except Koreans
Maori more school adjustment problems than other groups and NZE less school adjustment than migrants groups with the exception of Samoan
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

26. BEHAVIOURAL PROBLEMS Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
Analyses control for age gender and proportion of life in NZ
Maori report more behavioural problems than all other groups and NZE more than all migrant groups expect Samoans
Asian groups do particularly well
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

27. DISCRIMINATION Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
BRITISH reported least discrimination although it was not significantly different from white groups- perceived discrimination appears more a function of race than migrant status
Korean most discrimination and signifcanlty more than all other groups except Maori
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

28. WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN HOW MIGRANT YOUTH
ENGAGE IN INTERCULTURAL
RELATIONS AND HOW WELL
THEY ADAPT?

29. LIFE SATISFACTION Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
Integrated and national are more satisfied than ethnic and diffuse
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

30. PSYCHOLOGICAL SYMPTOMS
Diffuse display more psychological symptoms than other groups
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

31. SCHOOL ADJUSTMENT Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
Diffuse has poorer school adjustment than all other groups
Integrated has better school adjustment than ethnic (no difference from national)
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

32. BEHAVIOURAL PROBLEMS Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)
Integrated and ethnic youth have fewer behavioural problems than national and diffuse
Diffuse have more behavioral problems than all other groups
Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

33. 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
It is the only strategy that engenders agreement
2. AS evidenced by national, ethnic and diffuse groups
diffusion is linked to negative adaptation outcomes

34. 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?