54
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Is acculturation unidimensional or bidimensional? A head-to-head comparison in the prediction of personality, self-identity, and adjustment.

      , ,
      Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
      American Psychological Association (APA)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The unidimensional model of acculturation posits that heritage and mainstream culture identifications have a strong inverse relation, whereas the bidimensional model posits that the 2 identifications are independent. The authors compared these models in 3 samples of ethnic Chinese (ns = 164, 150, and 204), 1 sample of non-Chinese East Asians (n = 70), and one diverse group of acculturating individuals (n = 140). Although the unidimensional measure showed a coherent pattern of external correlates, the bidimensional measure revealed independent dimensions corresponding to heritage and mainstream culture identification. These dimensions displayed patterns of noninverse correlations with personality, self-identity, and psychosocial adjustment. The authors conclude that the bidimensional model is a more valid and useful operationalization of acculturation.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
          Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
          American Psychological Association (APA)
          1939-1315
          0022-3514
          2000
          2000
          : 79
          : 1
          : 49-65
          Article
          10.1037/0022-3514.79.1.49
          10909877
          4bfea1cd-bc97-497a-8855-1e6e7e867667
          © 2000
          History

          Comments

          Comment on this article