Interactive acculturation

Last updated

The interactive acculturation model (IAM) seeks to integrate within a common theoretical framework the following components of immigrants and host community relations in multicultural settings:

Contents

  1. acculturation orientations adopted by immigrant groups in the host community;
  2. acculturation orientations adopted by the host community towards special groups of immigrants;
  3. interpersonal and intergroup relational outcomes that are the product of combinations of immigrant and host community acculturation orientations.

The framework of these established among a structural political/governmental environment. Ultimately, the goal of the model is to present a non-determinist, more dynamic account of immigrant and host community acculturation in multicultural settings. [1]

Essentially the model takes both sides of immigration (host and immigrant) and compares the values and desire to hold on to historical and cultural ties of the immigrant population versus the desire or degree to which the host population is willing to accommodate the immigrant influx. Examples of questions posed to the host population include:

  1. Do you find it acceptable that immigrants maintain their cultural heritage?
  2. Do you accept that immigrants adopt the culture of your host community?

The model derives two important pieces of data:

  1. the level to which the immigrant population is willing maintain its historical and cultural roots against;
  2. its desire (or lack thereof) to integrate and adopt the history and cultural traits of the host society.

The model essentially categorizes the population, based on the responses, as being in favor of integration, assimilation, or separation. When cross compared with the level of accommodation the host society is willing to provide, the model predicts whether the immigrant population will become fully assimilated, marginalized, or even isolated from the host society. [2]

State attitudes to immigration and acculturation

In the past, acculturation has been described in both a macro level where there is emphasis on processes and effects on populations and at a micro level where it describes the psychological effect on individuals. Bourhis et al. [1] reference the earlier work of both Graves and Berry [3] in the identification of individual psychological change that the immigrant experiences during their integration into a host culture. These changes are observed in the individual who is influenced by the new culture as well as participating and interacting within the new culture. To further understand the social and psychological effects of immigrant acculturation, the Bourhis team starts their model with an analysis of structural policies that address immigration, particularly in host nations.

State policies

The Bourhis et al. article delineates first the ideologies that make up the basis of the policies that are present in the host state. The study very much accepts the notion that these policies are very influential in the dynamics and the eventual acculturation process that goes on by the host and immigrant people. The Bourhis team categorized the host nation policies in the manner of Breton [4] into state immigration policies that spell out quantities, type and origin of allowed immigrants, conditions and rules and then go on further to define the living rules that immigrants must live by in the host country such as work permits, ability to naturalize, etc. In addition we also have identified state integration policies that addressed mechanisms to help immigrants with joining into the host culture as well as measures to aid in host country acceptance of immigrants. These two types of policies may be symbiotic or at odds with each other in terms of goals and focus. The Bourhis team was primarily concerned with Western countries and noticed that in these nations, the policies, research, implementation and responsibility for both immigration and integration often resided in one sole governmental agency. This agency was often chartered with duties of writing statues, enforcing immigration laws and very possibly may be the governmental focus for assimilation and integration policy. Based on international conventions and referencing previous work by Kaplan, [5] sovereign countries possess the right and responsibility to define the limits and scope of nationality. Each country is presumed to have the right to decide who is a national and what does it take to be a national of that nation. Nations will derive their immigration policies based on a multitude of factors but in the context of state and national attitudes toward the immigrant populations. These policies define not only numbers and bureaucratic processes but also address the illegal immigration and the methods of countering it. As with all state policy, the laws enacted reflect both the majority host nation attitudes as well as help form these attitudes. The Bourhis model is premised on the adaptation of four groupings for state policies. [4] [6] [7] The state integration policies are not exclusive and permanent to a particular host country. The ideologies exist as a combination of the state policies and the surrounding public support that it is deemed were the basis of these policies. The state policies are usually not codified into constitutional form and are modified over time to reflect the changing circumstances and attitudes of both the people and the government. The following are described by Bourhis in the explanation of the IAM:

Pluralist ideologies

A construct based on the idea that the host nation expects immigrant populations to adhere and adopt host nation public values such as democracy and individual freedom but are free to maintain individual and native cultural values as long as they are within the wide confines and boundaries of host laws (native language use is OK but polygamy would not be acceptable). The policies adopted by the state would reflect a positive view of immigrants maintaining their diverse cultures and would support these differences not only socially but possibly financially. It is this last detail of financial support or government enactment of positive policy that differentiates this from a more civic ideology and state policy. Some Scandinavian countries as well as other western democracies have at times leaned this way to encourage cultural diversity and set acculturation as a state goal.

Civic ideologies

These policies would also maintain the premise that immigrants adopt host nation public values and that individual values are not to be dictated or regulated by the host government. But in civic ideologies, there is no public financial support for these private values or for the continuation and flourishing of the particular culture. The cultural identities and values are allowed but not promoted by the host nation in a government policy of non-intervention. Many European countries and various Latin American countries espouse a civic ideology to some extent. These countries often witness flourishing immigrant populations that maintain a cultural identity and sometimes language.

Assimilation ideology

These are the set of beliefs and policies that support both the adoption of public values by the immigrant population but also of some private values of host nation dominant culture. We would expect these policies to dictate such aspects like a single language in the schools and encourage voluntary (sometimes mandatory) cultural integration at all levels to homogenize the expressions of the immigrant population with that of the host nation. This could not only be voluntary but encouraged or mandated and expected to happen over time. The US had essentially assimilation policies until the great influx of immigrants during the last half of the past century at which time the country has softened its attitudes and policies toward a more civic ideology. A variant to the assimilation ideology is the Republican ideology similar to that expressed in France as far back as the revolution that supposes a "universal man" that is able to suppress less desired, backward, cultural traits and require a "leveling out" in order to fully participate as an equal in the society.

Ethnist ideology

This is basically the idea that the state can mandate the whole of public and private values and make them a precondition to full citizenship. It occasionally is manifested in the mandatory taking of host country values as necessary by the immigrant populations or more often this ideology is expressed in a requirement to be part of an ethnicity, religion or race to be accepted as a citizen. Governments may enact blood relations requirement or parentage to conditions for citizenship. Witness countries like Switzerland, Israel and Japan where immigrants are not accepted as they lack the ethnic blood to become full members of the citizenry and can only be allowed a lesser status such as guest worker or second class citizen.

Immigrant population attitudes

The attitudes of immigrant populations that shape their acculturation and level of assimilation into the host society vary widely. One attitude in particular that has been explored is the concept of biculturalism. Under Gordon's (1964) proposal, he identifies a unidimensional model of acculturation that immigrant groups undergo over time as they strive to maintain equilibrium between their own culture/heritage against those of their adoptive host state. This equilibrium is essentially biculturalism, where the immigrant population retains features of their heritage culture while adopting key elements of the host’s culture. Biculturalism is transitory however, [8] [9] and over time, the immigrant population eventually assimilates into the culture of the host nation and becomes a "rightful member" of the majority, to fit into the existing social structure of the host society. [10]

Criticism

Critics of the unidimensional model cite the influx of technologically and culturally advanced European powers into less developed societies into the new world that in essence assimilated the host society. The unidimensional model fails to account for the fact that the host majority is also changed by the presence of culturally distinctive immigrants. [11]

Bidimensional model of acculturation

Efforts to explain further acculturation and assimilation among immigrant populations led to the formulation of the Bidimensional model of acculturation. Under this model, more importance is placed in viewing the importance immigrant populations identify with the aspects of their own culture. [12] [13] Under the Berry’s model of acculturation, immigrant’s attitudes are described as being focused on two points; 1) "Is it considered to be of value to maintain cultural identity and characteristics?" and 2) "Is it considered to be of value to maintain relationships with other groups?"

Various studies among Portuguese, Hungarian, Korean, and Lebanese immigrant in Canada and Indian Immigrants in the US found that the majority of these groups desired "integration" versus marginalization. [2] Further results off the study would go on to show that these groups who desired integration suffered less from "acculturation stress" than others. According to Berry, [14] the fact that integration was the most widely preferred mode of acculturation in his studies suggests that pluralism [where a state expects immigrants will adopt the public values of the host country (democratic ideals and criminal codes) but has mandate defining private values] may constitute the ideology that best reflects the orientation of many first-generation immigrants in North America. [15] It can thus be argued that immigrants desire to hold on to elements of their own culture but also assimilate aspects of their host culture, thus becoming "integrated" into their host society.

Notes

  1. 1 2 Bourhuis et al., 1997.
  2. 1 2 Bourhis et al., 1997, p. 377
  3. ↑ Berry, 2003
  4. 1 2 Breton, 1988
  5. ↑ Kaplan, 1993
  6. ↑ Drieger, 1989
  7. ↑ Helly, 1994
  8. ↑ Goldlust, Richmond, 1974.
  9. ↑ LaFromboise, Coleman and Gerton, 1993.
  10. ↑ Woldemikael, 1987.
  11. ↑ Taft, 1953
  12. ↑ Berry, 1974
  13. ↑ Berry, 1980.
  14. ↑ Berry et al., 2006
  15. ↑ Bourhis et al., 1997, p. 373.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Multiculturalism</span> Existence of multiple cultural traditions within a single country

The term multiculturalism has a range of meanings within the contexts of sociology, political philosophy, and colloquial use. In sociology and in everyday usage, it is a synonym for "ethnic pluralism", with the two terms often used interchangeably, and for cultural pluralism in which various ethnic groups collaborate and enter into a dialogue with one another without having to sacrifice their particular identities. It can describe a mixed ethnic community area where multiple cultural traditions exist or a single country within which they do. Groups associated with an indigenous, aboriginal or autochthonous ethnic group and settler-descended ethnic groups are often the focus.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Melting pot</span> Monocultural metaphor

The melting pot is a monocultural metaphor for a heterogeneous society becoming more homogeneous, the different elements "melting together" with a common culture; an alternative being a homogeneous society becoming more heterogeneous through the influx of foreign elements with different cultural backgrounds, possessing the potential to create disharmony within the previous culture. It can also create a harmonious hybridized society known as cultural amalgamation. Historically, it is often used to describe the cultural integration of immigrants to the United States. A related concept has been defined as "cultural additivity."

The libertarian perspective on immigration is often regarded as one of the core concepts of libertarian theory and philosophy. There is considerable disagreement among libertarians as to what stance towards immigration best accords with libertarian principles. Some hold that restrictions on immigration are an infringement of the rights of immigrants and other property owners and constitute a threat to individual liberty. Others maintain that open borders amount to a policy of forced integration on the part of the state, and that protecting the rights of property holders requires that present governments adopt much more discriminatory policies on who is allowed to enter a country.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Acculturation</span> Process of cultural and psychological change

Acculturation is a process of social, psychological, and cultural change that stems from the balancing of two cultures while adapting to the prevailing culture of the society. Acculturation is a process in which an individual adopts, acquires and adjusts to a new cultural environment as a result of being placed into a new culture, or when another culture is brought to someone. Individuals of a differing culture try to incorporate themselves into the new more prevalent culture by participating in aspects of the more prevalent culture, such as their traditions, but still hold onto their original cultural values and traditions. The effects of acculturation can be seen at multiple levels in both the devotee of the prevailing culture and those who are assimilating into the culture.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cultural identity</span> Identity or feeling of belonging to a group

Cultural identity is a part of a person's identity, or their self-conception and self-perception, and is related to nationality, ethnicity, religion, social class, generation, locality or any kind of social group that has its own distinct culture. In this way, cultural identity is both characteristic of the individual but also of the culturally identical group of members sharing the same cultural identity or upbringing. Cultural identity is a fluid process that is changed by different social, cultural, and historical experiences. Some people undergo more cultural identity changes as opposed to others, those who change less often have a clear cultural identity. This means that they have a dynamic yet stable integration of their culture.

Cultural assimilation is the process in which a minority group or culture comes to resemble a society's majority group or assume the values, behaviors, and beliefs of another group whether fully or partially.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ethnic enclave</span> Geographical spot with high concentration of certain ethnic groups

In sociology, an ethnic enclave is a geographic area with high ethnic concentration, characteristic cultural identity, and economic activity. The term is usually used to refer to either a residential area or a workspace with a high concentration of ethnic firms. Their success and growth depends on self-sufficiency, and is coupled with economic prosperity.

Forced assimilation is an involuntary process of cultural assimilation of religious or ethnic minority groups during which they are forced to adopt language, national identity, norms, mores, customs, traditions, values, mentality, perceptions, way of life, and often religion and ideology of established and generally larger community belonging to dominant culture by government. Also enforcement of a new language in legislation, education, literature, worshiping counts as forced assimilation. Unlike ethnic cleansing, the local population is not outright destroyed and may or may not be forced to leave a certain area. Instead the assimilation of the population is made mandatory. This is also called mandatory assimilation by scholars who study genocide and nationalism. Mandatory assimilation has sometimes been made a policy of new or contested nations, often during or in the aftermath of a war. Some examples are both the German and French forced assimilation in the provinces Alsace and Lorraine, and some decades after the Swedish conquests of the Danish provinces Scania, Blekinge and Halland the local population was submitted to forced assimilation, or even the forced assimilation of ethnic Teochews in Bangkok by the Siam government during World War I until the 1973 uprising.

Cultural conservatism is described as the protection of the cultural heritage of a nation state, or of a culture not defined by state boundaries. It is usually associated with criticism of multiculturalism, and opposition to immigration. Cultural conservatism is sometimes concerned with the preservation of a language, such as French in Quebec, and other times with the preservation of an ethnic group's culture such as Native Americans.

Social integration is the process during which newcomers or minorities are incorporated into the social structure of the host society.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Americanization (immigration)</span> Process of an U.S. immigrant becoming a person who shares American culture

Americanization is the process of an immigrant to the United States becoming a person who shares American culture, values, beliefs, and customs by assimilating into the American nation. This process typically involves learning the American English language and adjusting to American culture, values, and customs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ethnoburb</span>

An ethnoburb is a suburban residential and business area with a notable cluster of a particular ethnic minority population. Although the group may not constitute the majority within the region, it is a significant amount of the population. That can greatly influence the social geography within the area because of cultural and religious traditional values exhibited. Ethnoburbs allow for ethnic minority groups to maintain their individual identity, but that may also restrict their ability to fully assimilate into mainstream culture and society.

Integrative communication theory is a theory of cross-cultural adaptation proposed by Young Yun Kim. The first widely published version of Kim's theory is found in the last three chapters of a textbook authored by William Gudykunst with Young Yun Kim as second author. See acculturation and assimilation.

Criticism of multiculturalism questions the ideal of the maintenance of distinct ethnic cultures within a country. Multiculturalism is a particular subject of debate in certain European nations that are associated with the idea of a nation state. Critics of multiculturalism may argue against cultural integration of different ethnic and cultural groups to the existing laws and values of the country. Alternatively critics may argue for assimilation of different ethnic and cultural groups to a single national identity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Multiculturalism in Canada</span> Canadian social situation

Multiculturalism in Canada was officially adopted by the government during the 1970s and 1980s. The Canadian federal government has been described as the instigator of multiculturalism as an ideology because of its public emphasis on the social importance of immigration. The 1960s Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism is often referred to as the origin of modern political awareness of multiculturalism, resulting in Canada being one of the most multicultural nations in the world. The official state policy of multiculturalism is often cited as one of Canada's significant accomplishments, and a key distinguishing element of Canadian identity and Canadian values.

Multiculturalism in the Netherlands began with major increases in immigration during the 1950s and 1960s. As a consequence, an official national policy of multiculturalism was adopted in the early 1980s. This policy subsequently gave way to more assimilationist policies in the 1990s and post-electoral surveys uniformly showed from 1994 onwards that a majority preferred that immigrants assimilated rather than retained the culture of their country of origin. Even though the general acceptance of immigrants increased, opinion polls from the early 1980s and after showed that many were critical of immigration. Following the murders of Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh the political debate on the role of multiculturalism in the Netherlands reached new heights.

Bicultural identity is the condition of being oneself regarding the combination of two cultures. The term can also be defined as biculturalism, which is the presence of two different cultures in the same country or region. As a general term, culture involves the behaviors and belief characteristics of a particular social, ethnic, or age group. Within culture, we have cultural effects, which are the shared behaviors and customs we learn from the institutions around us. An example of a cultural effect would be how an individual's personality is strongly influenced by the biological and social norms he is exposed to. Another cultural effect would be that in some societies it would be more acceptable to dress or act in a certain way.

Second-generation immigrants in the United States are individuals born and raised in the United States who have at least one foreign born parent. Although the term is an oxymoron which is often used ambiguously, this definition is cited by major research centers including the United States Census Bureau and the Pew Research Center.

John Widdup Berry is a psychologist known for his work in two areas: ecological and cultural influences on behavior; and the adaptation of immigrants and indigenous peoples following intercultural contact. The first is broadly in the domain of cross-cultural psychology; the second is in the domain of intercultural psychology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Immigrant paradox in the United States</span>

The immigrant paradox in the United States is an observation that recent immigrants often outperform more established immigrants and non-immigrants on a number of health-, education-, and conduct- or crime-related outcomes, despite the numerous barriers they face to successful social integration.

References

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.