.5aannmmn 44.1.“... 4.2.5.: "r “a ngmo ‘ . . I. I n . .. In»; . u . A 511:...“ $2.}...bxknfiuuu x%., 3g~ 5‘.1.. 12:5; ‘KSaz2. . . . r ) n.u an ..z 07" y: . . i"asr .6. . !I ‘l f. 1;. ‘- L t (3.... 3.7.1.. I... .I 3.. I l l 51:. "n frnmn. .r .r “M. ”2,5 . a... . , .. 1...... I... 5; .l .‘n 3.5!... Quiz I 1.3 - ..¥..v,h...:nd..§.. {$39th cl 5... xv: ’ 0:17:15: ti: . I -a {3.3..~§:?x Qinaflrhx.“ » .I: :. liu‘k!...glo il») Iv 3|. . \ . .‘tfii?! .«uy$IIII.IYL-L$. .5?! .‘n .c l 9'}; ti}. 133.2! K V g {Icisfihf it! .IItl.‘ 5“ l) a. )ll o\il||...l. lll’.av‘t‘!5hv r Viveo. i n I‘V! .\ {5‘11 5 . t\.|.}«.| MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRAR NW \\|\\\\\l\\l\\\\\\lllllllllll ill 3 1293 01421 0706 r T1 This is to certify that the thesis entitled BRIDGING THE MANY WORLDS OF VIETNAMESE ADOLESCENTS: A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ACCULTURATI‘ON AND ADJUSTMENT Date 0-7639 presented by Huong H. Nguyen has been accepted towards fulfillment M ‘ A ° degree in Nov. 17, 1995 of the requirements for PSYCHOLOGY MS U i: an Aflirntative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution r LIBRARY Michigan State University PLACE ll RETURN BOX to remove thle checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before dete due. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE J I l MSU le An Nflnnotive Actionfiquel Opportunity lnetltmlon W ans-9.1 * __._._____ BRIDGING THE MANY WORLDS OF VIETNAMESE ADOLESCENTS: A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ACCULTURATION AND ADJUSTMENT by Huong H. Nguyen A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Psychology 1995 ABSTRACT BRIDGING THE MANY WORLDS OF VIETNAMESE ADOLESCENTS: A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ACCULTURATION AND ADJUSTMENT by Huong H. Nguyen This study accomplished 2 objectives: (1) to develop a two-dimensional acculturation scale for Vietnamese adolescents and (2) to assess how their acculturation styles and cultural involvements related to various aspects of adjustment (i.e., psychological symptomatology, depression scores, family/parent relationships, self-esteem, and GPA). Results suggested that among a sample of 182 Vietnamese adolescents--students surveyed throughout 8 junior-high and high schools in Lansing, Mchiganuthose with Assimilated styles or high levels of involvement in the US. culture functioned more positively overall. In contrast, those with high levels of Vietnamese involvements reported more "mixed" fimctioning. Compared to their less ethnically-involved peers, these latter students reported higher adjustment in family/parent relationships but lower adjustment in symptomatology, depression, and self-esteem. Such findings not only provide insight into the factors through which cultural involvements may help vs. hinder the adolescent's adjustment, but they also help to address the apparent contradictions and conceptual errors of past research by substantiating a more useful, 2-dimensional framework for exploring acculturation. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS They say that achievement occurs only with those who stand on somebody's shoulders to see and grasp beyond what can otherwise not be grasped. Ifthis is the case, then it is truly the strength and support of numerous shoulders with which I can even near the completion of this enormous project. To the following, I owe my abiding gratitude: To Dr. Gary Stollak, my co-chairperson, who supported me since square one, since the seminal discussions of acculturation. Thank-you for your generous encouragement and accessibility, and for your challenging, thought-provoking perspectives these past years. Thank-you also for caring. VVIthout your guidance, I would not be where I am today-mboth personally and professionally. To Dr. Larry Messe, my co-chairperson, whose meticulous attention, input, and direction has, without a doubt, elevated the quality of this project to new heights. Thank- you for your unwavering assistance throughout all aspects of the research, and thank-you too, for modeling for me what it means to be an enthusiastic scholar and scientist. To Dr. Ruben Rumbaut, whose expertise, knowledge, and light-heartedness, I always look forward to hearing. And to whose work, I deeply respect. Thank-you for all the helpful suggestions and wonderful stories. Thank-you, also, for your votes of confidence along the way. To Dr. Joel Aaronoff, who has taught me to develop my voice among the sea of scientific research. Thank-you for believing that what I have to say is important and for encouraging me to always search for the meaning behind my work. It is the continual discovery of such meaning that have encouraged me to row through the sometimes turbulent waters. ‘ To Dr. Gordon Wood for his financial support not only with the recruitment of the adolescents but also with the seminars on SPSS. I appreciate your kindness and am gratefiil that we have a department chairperson who is so invested in the development of its students. Additionally, I would like to extend thank-you's to all those in the Lansing Research office-especially, to Karen Smith whose cheerful voice, helpful recommendations, and prompt data lists have made recruitment all the more pleasant. Also, thank-you to the many principals, counselors, teachers, and staff in the schools throughout Lansing that have generously opened their classrooms and offered their time and energies. Your accommodations were sincerely appreciated. Special thanks, too, to Lelio Casola, the BIC instructor at Eastern H.S., for your generous assistance with the pilot studies and for your thoughtfulness in our conversations regarding minority students. Additionally, thank-you to the three interpreters, Hoa Nguyen, Hanh Dinh, and Trong Le, whose devoted service were essential to the administration process, and still, many thanks to Mr. Tran, from Catholic Services, for your careful and enthusiastic willingness to translate the consent letters, and still, many thanks Additionally, special thanks to all the students involved: To my 490 students (Heather Bosch, Tim Grinon, J.P. Machuta, Sandy Phan, Jennifer Beavers, Lydia Kim, Chad O'Kulich, Ed Bosch, Roberta Kline, Connie Park, and Yoko Takabayashi) for your help in managing all the essential details of the project. And to all the MSU students whose helpful feedback in the pilot studies still echo throughout the questionnaires in this thesis. . iii Finally, a very special thank-you to my dear fi'iends and family: To John Dickason, whose incredible love, support and confidence have been a continual source of replenishment. To Linda Juang, who among many other things, has taught me how to transcend the daily hassles of work and to maintain a more well-rounded, balanced perspective in life. To Dave Waldschmidt, whose careful counsel and willingness to listen I deeply appreciate. And, of course, to Hanh, Hung, and Hien Nguyen who always remind me of the importance in staying firmly grounded in who I am and where I come from, while, at the same time reaching as I high as I can. To all of you, I extend my heartfelt gratitude. It has truly been the strength of your shoulders that we can even begin to construct any "bridge” at all. Sincerely, -j A“ (L C " {KM/J45. j, 4, , ’) I: ' 1 {T in- -~/ : :1" iv "Man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun, I take culture to be those webs, and the analysts of it to be...an interpretive one in search of meaning. " Geertz TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ................................................. vii LIST OF TABLES .................................................. viii VIETNAMESE ADOLESCENTS ....................................... 2 Adolescence .................................................. 2 Refiigee Won/status .......................................... 4 Vietnamese adolescents in Lansing area ............................. 6 ACCULTURATION AND MENTAL HEALTH ........................... 8 Positive relationship ............................................ 8 Negative relationship ........................................... 9 Cutvilineet relationship ........................................ 10 Discussion of findings I Measurement problems ...................... 12 CONCEPT OF ACCULTURATION .................................... 13 MEASUREMENT OF ACCULTURATION .............................. 16 Single criterion ............................................... 16 Bipolar, unidimensional lassimilationist) model ---------------------- 18 Two-dimensional I (culturally-pluralistic) model ..................... 22 OBJECTIVES & RA'UONALE OF STUDY .............................. 32 Objective 1: Developing a two-dimensional scale .................... 32 Objective 2: Exploring the relationships ........................... 3 5 NIETHODS ....................................................... 44 Measures ................................................... 44 Procedures .................................................. 48 Participants .................................................. 50 RESULTS ........................................................ 51 Reliability of measures ......................................... 51 Validity of The Acculturation Scale .............................. 51 Relationship between the scales .................................. 54 Plan of analyses .............................................. 54 Overall findings .............................................. 56 Findings of each eriten'on ....................................... 59 DISCUSSION ..................................................... 52 Objective 1: Developing a twoodimensional scale .................... 62 Objective 2: Exploring the relationships ........................... 63 Implications . . . . ; ............................................. 68 Limitations .................................................. 70 Future Research .............................................. 72 LIST OF REFERENCES ............................................. 74 APPENDIX ....................................................... 81 vi u 30939999.” LIST OF FIGURES Bipolar, Unidimensional Model of Acculturation ......................... 20 Szapocznick's Acculturation Mode .......... , .......................... 24 Montgomery's Two-Dimensional Acculturation Matrix .................... 26 Berry's Four Acculturation Attitudes ................................... 29 Proposed Two-Dimensional Acculturation Model ........................ 33 Proposed Two-Dimensional Model with Acculturation Style ................ 34 Contexts of Adolescents ............................................ 41 Components of Acculturation ........................................ 42 Full Ecological Model .............................................. 43 N99§PP LIST OF TABLES Reliabilities of All Measures .......................................... 53 Criterion Validity for Acculturation Subscales ............................ 54 Correlations of All Measures ......................................... S7 ANOVAResults ................................................... 59 Regression Results ................................................. 60 Regression Analyses of Interaction for Self-Esteem ........................ 63 Exploration of Hypotheses ........................................... 66 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF LITERATURE The existence, interface, and interaction of difi‘erent cultures are significant aspects of America's increasingly diverse society (U .8. Census Bureau, 1990). Not only do the difi‘erent cultures ofl‘er us a rich variety of traditions but also the study of acculturation helps us understand the dynamic processes of adaptation in our cultures and subcultures. The downside, however, is the resulting conflicts created by such diversity. These conflicts can be exemplified by the prejudice and racism between different ethnic groups as well as by the family discord and personal conflicts within groups and within individuals. This thesis focuses specifically on the problems within groups and individuals, particularly within Vietnamese adolescents. What happens to Vietnamese youths growing up in our increasingly diverse society? How do they navigate the many worlds of home, school, and peers, and, more importantly, what kind of implications does this "navigation“ have on their overall well-being? It is possible that some answers to these questions can be achieved by exploring the concept of acculturation, which, in brief, is defined as the process of change and adaptation that results fi'om continuous contact between those of different cultures (Redfield, Linton, & Herskovitch, 1936; Berry, 1991). The concept of acculturation is significant in this discussion because it provides a connection, a link between individuals and their social institutions. It helps to explicate our understanding of how exposure to new and different and diverse sociocultural environments can influence (and be influenced by) psychological changes within the person. Altogether, there are five sections in this literature review. The first section discusses the unique characteristics of Vietnamese adolescents/refugees; the second discusses the relevance of studying acculturation, drawing specifically on its relationship 2 to mental health. The third and fourth sections review, respectively, the concept and measurement of acculturation, and, finally, the fifih section specifies the objectives of the present study. W Before delving into the implications of acculturation, it is essential to understand the background and unique characteristics of the population of interest: Vietnamese adolescents. Even though the mass exodus of Vietnamese refugees occurred over 20 years ago, there is still little knowledge regarding the long-term adaptation of these people and their descendants in the United States. Most acculturation studies thus far have focused on Hispanic adults. Indeed, there are few studies involving Asians and fewer still involving Asian refirgee children, particularly, Vietnamese adolescents. Yet the need to study these youths is great because such an understanding can carry numerous political and psychological implications (e. g., multicultural policies and identity development) for the understudied population. Two characteristics that make this group especially interesting are: (1) their adolescence and (2) their refugee status and/or afiliation with refugee parents and family members. Adolescence Adolescence can be a dimcult developmental period for many individuals. It is a time marked by physical and psychological changes, as well as by waves of instability and insecurity (Ghuman, 1991). It is a time when individuals search for a new identity through attempts at defining and redefining themselves (Matsuoka, 1990). In so doing, adolescents have to navigate the difl‘erent expectations, roles, and values of the worlds in which they participate. Bridging the worlds at home and in the larger society is an arduous task, however. It may be even more arduous for ethnic adolescents who face a wider gap between these worlds (Santrock, 1993). As Santrock stated: 3 For ethnic minority individuals, adolescence is often a special juncture in their development. Although children are aware of some ethnic and cultural difl‘erences, most ethnic minority individuals first consciously confront their ethnicity in adolescence. In contrast to children, adolescents have the ability to interpret ethnic and cultural information, to reflect on the past, and to speculate about the future. (p. 311) Not only are minority adolescents more likely to be aware of their ethnicity at this stage in their life, but they are also more likely than their majority-group American peers to be subjected to the conflicting demands of two cultures (Ghuman, 1991). These demands can result fi'om attitudinal and behavioral difl‘erences in areas such as dating, friendships, religion, filial piety, career choices (Lee, 1988), as well as in issues regarding individual autonomy, family responsibility, gender equality, and the traditional role of women (Ghuman, 1991). For example, adolescents from Vietnam may often find their traditional values incongruous with those of the American society. This contrast can be further exemplified by the fact that the adolescents ”have little choice about their moral values...Traditionally, the culture and society have reinforced the morality taught in the family (Matsuoka, 1990, p.344)" Because of their communal system, adolescents in Vietnam are said to achieve their identity or sense of worth mainly through their family, specifically through close relationships with family adults and through membership in an extended family system (Matsuoka, 1990). In contrast, majority-group American adolescents are defined more by their peers (Matsuoka, 1990). This peer orientation is partly reflective of their autonomy and individuality-oriented culture. Thus, it is no surprise that for most Anglo-Americans, adolescence is a time where issues of separation- individuation from parents are highly salient and where identity is derived primarily from one's peers and non-familial activities. Interestingly, this contrast can be demonstrated even more concretely through the introduction of one's names (which, by no coincidence, is a very tangible expression of one's identity). A traditional Vietnamese individual, for example, would normally 4 introduce herselfwith her last name or family name, first (e.g., Nguyen Huynh Huong), thus symbolizing the primacy of her family. In contrast, a more “Americanized" individual would likely state her given name first (i.e., Huang Nguyen), thus signifying the importance or primacy of her individuality. The manner in which adolescents attempt to accommodate to such conflicting demands in their many worlds of home, school and peers (as those mentioned above) are importantbecausetheirinabilitytodosocanleadto seriousfamilydiscordandindividual conflicts. Given their ”limited personal freedom," for example, some Vietnamese adolescents may be attracted to the autonomy and independence of their American peers and hence, may try to be independent and disengage fiom their family. They may refiise parental guidance and/or do things without parental consent. Such behaviors may be unacceptable to their parents and, consequently, set the stage for family problems, intergenerational conflict, and individual distress even greater than those found among American adolescents and their families (Matsuoka, 1990; Charron & Ness, 1981; Szapocznik & Kurtines, 1993). Unfortunately, navigation between the different worlds of home, school and peers is like walking an intricate tightrope. Although, healthy mediation is possible, it is dificult to meet the presses of the difl‘erent worlds and to emerge with a completely healthy outcome. In their study, for example, Charron and Ness (1981) found a catch-22 situation where Vietnamese adolescents who were not forming fiiendships with American peers were at risk for emotional distress, while at the same time, those who did have ”success" in these friendships were at risk for family conflicts. WW8. Just as the ”adolescence component” provides Vietnamese teens with characteristics distinct fi'om adults, so does their particular 'refirgee filiation/status' provide characteristics distinct fiom other immigrant groups. In general, long journeys involve great psychological distress; (hence, the similar etymology between ”travel" and ”travail'aPortes & Rumbaut, 1990). For refugees and their 5 children. thougltthereisagreateramountofdistress. Incontrasttoimmigrantswhoare “pulled” to the new environment for economic or educational purposes, refugees are “pushed" out by political upheavals, wars, etc. The retirgee's departure and arrival is markedbytraumeviolence, abruptness, lackofpreparationandpossiblyrefistanceto severing ties with the homeland (Stein, 1986). Although there is a wide range of experiences among individuals within a group, the refugees, in gmeral, are said to experience more danga and undesirable changes than other acculturating groups (Rumbaut, 1991). In fact, refitgees are more likely to experience a double set ofcrises: a ”crisis of loss" and a ”crisis of load” (Rumbaut, 1991). The first crisis involves ”coming to terms with the past” whereas the latter involves "coming to terms with the present and immediate fixture." As Rumbaut explains, refugees face an acute sense of loss—of their i homeland, family, fiiends, social status, and material possessions as well as a loss of their meaningful sources of identity and self-validation. This ”crisis of loss” can be fiuther exacerbated by the ”crisis of load” or overwhelming demands of adjusting to a radically difi‘erent society (e. g., learning a new language, securing shelter and work, understanding new norms, etc). Knowledge of such crises is significant because the nature of one's journey, in terms of pre-, mid-, and post-migration/flight, influences how one acculturates to the new society. In the long run, these crises will likely afl‘ect one's psychological health. Given the distinctions of 'refugee-ness" in general (as compared to other immigrant groups), Vietnamese adolescents are afi‘ected by this refugee distinction in 2 ways in particular. (Hence, the title ”refugee afliliation Isratus'. ) Typically, Vietnamese students are afl‘ected because they are either ”children of survivors", affiliated with retirgee parents and/or family members or because they themselves are refugees (i.e., refirgee status). Inthefirstcasetheimpactoftherefugeeafliliationismoreindirectbecauseitis the adolescent's parents who have experienced the traumatic flight. Nonetheless, these 6 youths, these children of "survivors" may be subjected to powerful ramifications of their parent/s' experience. Some refugee parents, for example, may not be physically or emotionally available for their children. This unavailability may be due to the parents/familymembersbeing separated orldlledduringtheflightortoparents/family members dealing with emotional diffiarlties of their own (e. g., depression, anxiety, grieving, etc; Lee, 1988). ' Parents may also pass on their “refugee" sense of helplessness, depression and suspicion to their children (Westermeyer, 1991). In this way, the parent(s)‘ unavailability and increased distress can seriously afi‘ect the youth's adaptation. As Matsuoka suggests (1990): The emotional needs of children are prone to change with acculturation, and refugee parents may be ill prepared to address them, which places refugee youth in a high-risk situation. In other immigrant cultures, the transitional generation is the one most afi‘ected by cultural conflict and shows high degrees of delinquency, mental illness and anomie. (p. 343) Adolescents who are refirgees themselves face a double jeopardy, a situation worse than that of their adult counterparts. These adolescents have to deal with the usual physical and psychological changes of their developmental stage as well as the adjustment problems of being a refiigee (e.g., crises of loss and load) (Matsuoka, 1990). Although there is a wide array of refugee experiences in general, certain experiences, in particular, may subject youths to traumatic events (e. g., abuse, rape, massacres, etc.) that leave them especially vulnerable because of their impressionable age. Such experiences could give rise to a range of psychiatric disturbances including functional psychosis, depression, and conduct disorder (Williams & Westermeyer, 1983, 1991; Westermeyer, 1986). It is small wonder that case reports of refugee children and adolescents suggest a higher prevalence of mental disorders in this group than in the general population (Harding & Looney, 1986; Szapocznik, Cohen, and Fernandez, 1985; Williams & Westermeyer, 1983). WWW Just as ”adolescence” and ”refiagee affiliation/status" distinguish the focal population from other 7 immigrant groups, so does living in Ingham county distinguish this subset from Vietnamse people in other locations. What follows is a contextual/background description of this particular population According to the 1990 US. Census Bureau, there are approximately 703 Vietnamese persons (both adults and children) within Ingham County, with a subset of 418 in the city of Lansing and 99 in East Lansing. Altogether, they comprise .2 -.3% of the total population in the Lansing Area. The nature of their 'refirgee-experience" is somewhat varied; nonetheless, refitgees in the Lansing population tend to fall equally into one of three waves (according to P. Hepp, Director of Refugee Services; personal communication, September 1995). The first wave, occurring around the mass exodus of 1975, consists mostly of people who tend to be more educated and more motivated than their peers in the latter waves. The second wave, occurring between 1978-1982 (or thereabouts), consists mostly of "boat people”. Although the size of the three waves are relatively equal in the city as a whole, there is a slight preponderance of boat people. Finally, the third wave, occurring from 1991 to the present time, consists mostly of people whose arrival were/are supported by federal programs such as the Amerasian and the Orderly Departure Programs. People from these programs were screened and selected to enter the United States. Typically, they include Amerasian children, political prisoners, and spouses or children of Vietnamese people already living in the United States. Since their amt/are, most Vietnamese people have settled throughout the central city of Lansing, approximately 10% of which reside in the low-income housing projects. On the whole, Vietnamese residents have had little education. Although there is some range in professions, many belong to the working class, (with a particular preponderance in the service-industry fields—restaurants, etc.). Despite the working class bracket and little education of the Vietnamese adults, however, their children are becoming upwardly mobile (Refugee Services in Lansing, Michigan). WNW Given the unique characteristics and context of Vietnamese adolescents, how do researchers begin to understand the nature of their adaptation? The answer (at least as a first step) is through exploring the relationships between acculturation and psychological functioning. Although, their is a paucity of such research for Vietnamese youths, general findings from other minority populations help in such exploration. Next, follows a discussion of the various and diverging relationships between acculturation and psychological status. Overall, acculturation has been linked to a variety of issues ranging from educational achievement (Padilla, 1980), to personality characteristics (Sue and Kirk, 1972) and clinical symptomatology (Arce, 1982), to patterns of conflict resolution (Kagan, Zahn, and Geasly, 1977), utilization of psychotherapy resources (Szapocznik, Santisteban, Kurtines, Hervis, and Spencer, 1982), and drop-outs fi'om treatment (Miranda, Andujo, Caballero, Guerrero, and Ramos, 1976). Despite the many associations that research has uncovered, there are currently no discernible patterns among this body of findings. As a whole, it seems that our understanding of the relationship between acculturation and psychological firnctioning is a rather complicated, if not a confilsing and conflicted picture. Generally though, acculturation has been hypothesized to relate to adjustment and psychological distress in a variety of ways: linearly (both negatively and positively) as well as in a curvilinear fashion in which integration or biculturality is associated with optimal well-being (Rogler, Cortes, & Malgady, 1991). The evidence underlying these conclusions can be characterized in the following ways: WW5). Research findings documenting a positive relationship between acculturation level and psychological distress have linked high acculturation with various clinical disorders, including: major depression, phobia, dysthymia, suicide, and substance abuse/dependence (Bumham, Hough, Kamo, 9 Escobar & Telles, 1987; Sorenson & Golding, 1988; Caetano, 1987). Higher acculturation has also been linked with higher rates of delinquency and deviant behavior (Graves, 1967; Szapocznik & Kurtines, 1980a, 1993; Szapocznilg Kurtines & Fernandez, 1980). Similarly, elevated scores on MMPI (Padilla, Olrnedo & Loya, 1982) and anorexia questionnaires (Pumariega, 1986) have also been linked with high levels of acallturation. Still other studies have found that dificulties in relationships with parents and low levels of adjustment are associated with increases in acculturation (Charron & Ness, 1981; Ramirez, 1969; Szapocznik, Kurtines, & Fernandez, 1980; Rumbaut, 1991). Rumbaut's (1991), in his study of Indochinese adolescents, for example, discovered that youths who are "becoming American" may be proportionately less successful in academic attainment. A qualitative review of these findings suggests that increases in acculturation not only alienate the individual fiom his/her supportive ethnic group but they also gives rise to ethnic and self-hatred. For example, increases in acculturation can facilitate internalizations of damaging behaviors and beliefs that are a part of the dominant culture. These beliefs may include stereotypes, prejudices and discrimination toward the person's ethnicity. Consequently, such processes may result in self-deprecation, ethnic- and self-hatred, and a weakened ego structure (Rogler, Cortes, & Malgady, 1991). Psychological distress have also been linked to low levels of acculturation. Whether measured by length of residency, by loyalty to the culture, or by lack of verbal proficiency in English, separation has been associated with various problems, including depression, withdrawal and obsession-compulsion, (T orres-Matrullo, 1976) as well as somatic, combat stress, PTSD, and alcohol abuse/dependence symptoms (Escobar, 1983; Escobar, Randolph & Hill, 1986). Similarly, increased numbers of Negative Life Events (cg, divorce, death, hospitalizations) and Life Dissatisfaction (e. g., boredom, dreariness, sadness) and 10 low self-esteem have also been linked to low acculturation (Yu & Harburg, 1981; Salgado de Snyder 1987a). Researchers in this group of studies believe that when acculturating individuals have been uprooted fi'om traditional interpersonal relationships, they are more likely to experience loneliness and isolation in their new environment. Such challenges, coupled with an absence of instrumental skills (e.g., knowledge of the main language, access to difi‘erent resources) may prevent the separated individual fi'om becoming familiar, comfortable, and competent in her/his new world. Consequently, these predicaments may lower self-esteem and give rise to dysfirnctional behavior (Rogler, Cortes, & Malgady, 1991). CumilinsaLRslatinnahip. Researchers who have found curvilinear relationships between acculturation and psychological functioning have raised the possibility that distress increases at both acculturative extremes, and that healthy psychological functioning is achieved at an optimal balance point (i.e., at integration or biculturalisrn). Such balance requires an integration between the ethnic culture's supportive and ego-reinforcing elements and the host society's instrumental skills (Rogler, Cortes & Malgady, 1991). One verification of this argument comes from Lang et al.'s study of Hispanic adults (Lang, Nunoz, Bemadal, & Sorenson, 1982). Their findings suggest that bicultural Hispanics were better adjusted in terms of life quality, afl‘ect balance, depression, and psychological adjustment than were those who were either monoculturally Latino (traditional) or monoculturally United States mainstream (assimilated). Consistent with Lang's findings, Szapocznik et al., found that drug abuse was a function of monoculturality, specifically in ”over-acculturated” youths and ”under- acculturated" mothers of Cuban families. Interestingly, these youths were found to have elevated rates of drug abuse and impulsive and antisocial behavior while the less acculturated mothers were found to use more sedatives and tranquilizers and to exhibit 11 more neurotic personality profiles. Especially interesting is Szapocznik et al.'s caution that it is not the retention of the ethnic characteristics or the assimilation into the host society that is pathological per se. Rather, it is the lack of bicultural involvement that is maladjustive because it renders members of ethnic minorities inappropriately monocultural in a bicultural context. Hence, it is the exaggerated assimilation with the host society or the exaggerated maintenance of ethnic identity (separation), one to the exclusion of the other, that is detrimental to psychological functioning of immigrant groups. Biculturalism appears to be optimal for adjustment because it enables individuals to filnction at least ”adequately” in their difl‘erent, daily cultural contexts (Szapocznik & Kurtines, 1980). Biculturalism was also found to be associated with healthier psychological functioning among Indochinese refugees. In a study comparing the satisfaction and accrilturation of SE. Asian and Hispanic individuals, biculturalism was found to be the most satisfactory style, followed respectively by assimilation and separation (Wong-Rieger & Quintana, 1987). Similar results were also obtained in a study of Indochinese adults (Rumbaut, 1991; Portes & Rumbaut, 1990). As Rumbaut states, It appears that the most successfirl psychological adjustment is made not by those who remain unacculturated and alienated from the American milieu, nor by those who pursue a monocultural assimilative strategy, but by those who are oriented toward an additive style of acculturation, adapting to American ways while retaining their ethnic identity and attachments. (p. 81) Wings. Our understanding of the relationship between acculturation and psychological filnctioning is firrther complicated by mediating factors, such as gender, religion, age, and SES (Mavreas & Bebbington, 1990; Rumbaut, 1991; Ghuman, 1991; Caetano, 1987; Ortiz & Arce, 1984). In fact, SES is one of the most influential factors associated with acculturation style and psychological firnctioning (Moyerman & Forman, 1992); gender is another. In Mavreas and Bebbington's study (1990), for instance, there was an unpredicted gender effect where ”high acculturation” was related to increased 12 pathology for males but to decreased pathology for females. As the authors explain, such results underscore how outcomes of acculturation may be moderated by various factors in the individual's roles, circumstances, and characteristics. To compound these complexities, one research study did not find any reliable relationships between acculturation and psychological firnctioning. This study (Smither and Rodriquez-Giegling, 1979) concerning the marginality, modernity, and anxiety of Indochinese refugees (i.e., Vietnamese and Laotians). Here, marginality was defined as being on the edge of two cultures rather than well-integrated into either one, while modernity referred to the interpersonal style that welcomes change, variety, and challenge of new situations. In general, the Southeast Asian groups scored higher in marginality and anxiety and lower in modernity than the American sample. Interestingly, however, there was no relationship between marginality and anxiety for the Vietnamese group. Smither and Rodriquez-Giegling explain that these results may be partly due to the feelings measured in the Marginality Scale which were unrelated to anxiety in the refirgees and/or because the scale's validity for this particular population was questionable. DismasinnnfiEindinzaMcammcmhahlema As noted, acculturation is associated with a variety of psychological functioning issues. However, even with the evidence classified into these positive, negative, curvilinear and ”other” categories, no clear pattern emerges from the body of findings. Bicultural group seems somewhat healthy, but overall, results from these groups are themselves conflicting. For example, one group of findings suggests that ”high acculturation is associated with greater distress while at the same time, other studies suggests that ”high acculturation” is associated with greater psychological functioning (by virtue of low acculturation being associated with greater distress). Similarly, "low acculturation" is linked to greater distress as well as greater psychological functioning. To further the complexities still, additional studies suggest that ”medium acculturation” is related to optimal health while other findings report no relationship at all. 13 Part of the reason for such conflicting findings could be due to the ambiguous definitions and measurements of the constructs involved (i.e., acculturation and psychological functioning). Psychological firnctioning, for one, has been defined in difl‘erent and. divergent ways among the many studies, ranging from life-satisfaction to academic achievement to clinical symptomatology. Hence, it is conceivable for acculturation findings to appear inconsistent since results vary depending on the particular operationalization of “psychological functioning“. This divergence in adaptation variables, compounded with the complexities of acculturation makes our understanding of the two an especially difiicult task. It could be that the principal problem regarding acculturation studies is the conceptualization and measurement of acculturation itself. Because this construct is so complex and multi-dimensional, it is diflicult to define, let alone measure. As Keefe (1980) pointedly asserts, acculturation is a term that all social scientists use, yet very few agree on its meaning. It is this lack of agreement that poses difficulties in understanding the relationship between the acculturation and psychological functioning. With the goal of clearer understanding in mind, let us now examine more closely the many "meanings" of acculturation, focusing specifically on its conceptualization and measurement. W Currently there are two principal conceptualization or models among the numerous theories of acculturation: One model emphasizes assimilation and the other, cultural plurality (Dona & Berry, 1993). These models are significant because they influence the definition and consequently, the implications of acculturation studies. According to this assimilation perspective, the non-dominant group undergoes the most change. Here, the term acculturation more commonly refers to the process of change among minority individuals, specifically in their acquisition of the host society's values and behaviors (Franco, 1983). It is often used synonyrnously with the term assimilation, which has been 14 defined as the absorption of (or into) the host society's ”cultural tradition”. For example, a minority individual who has assimilated many of the dominant culture's behaviors and values is said to be ”acculturated” or ”highly acculturated" . Years ago, when the demographics of the US. were less diverse, most immigrants ”acculturated" mainly by assimilating into the host society. The assimilation model was most appropriate then because assimilation was the primary choice of adaptation for immigrant groups. There were less opportunities of maintaining one’s ethnic culture and to be timctionill, one truly needed to acquire the skills of the host society. However, this model is faulted today because it is not sensitive to the diverse demographics of contemporary times. Its conceptualization failed to change with the changing times. Compared to earlier eras, there is now more opportunity and receptivity in maintaining one's ethnic culture (more ethnic minorities to interact with, more appreciation for diversity, more ethnic communities fi'om which to draw resources, etc.) Hence, assimilation is not the only choice of adaptation. Consequently,.the assimilationist model, is now faulted because it does not fit the zeitgeist of today. In addition to its inappropriateness for current time and contexts, the assimilation model is also criticized for its bias toward the dominant culture. It suggests that ”good groups" are those that assimilate to the American culture (Dona & Berry, 1993) and that "bad groups" are those who try to maintain their ethnic traditions. Such dominant ideology has been countered by immigrants who have carved a “native” environment in their new community (\Vrckher & Schoch, 1987) and by those who have preserved their ethnic identity over time (Feagin, 1984). Theoretically, this definition is also problematic to the measurement of acculturation because it assumes a unidimensional, mutually exclusive process. Such implications willbefirllydiscussedinthenext section. Unlike the assimilationist approach, the second model asserts that an acculturating individual has more than the assimilated choice of adaptation. This model 15 is especially relevant in culturally pluralistic societies where an individual's cultural contact with the new society and cultural maintenance of the old/ethnic society can bothbeassessed. Itarguesthat theprocessofchangecanresultinmanydifl‘erent types of adaptation, ranging from assimilation, to integration, to traditionalism and musimlization In this study, the concept of acculturation is based on the latter model. Specifically, acculturation is defined as a process ofchange and adaptation that results fi'orn continuous, first-hand contact between individuals or groups of difl‘erent cultures- where change can involve a variety of attitudinal and behavioral domains and can result in several styles of adaptation (Redfield, Linton, & Herskovitch, 1936; Berry, 1991). In general, the acculturation process can be experienced by all types of people, fi'om refugees, immigrants, and sojoumers to "ordinary” people who are merely adjusting . to a new environment within their own society (e. g., first-year college students). According to Berry (1991), the process ofchange can occur at a group or individual level and can involve changes in a variety of domains. Changes may involve exogenous and endogenous domains (e. g., overt behaviors and covert traits), ranging fi'om language acquisition and food consumption to identity, values, and attitudes (Rogler, Cortes, & Malgady, 1991). They may also involve areas of music, religion, work, daily activities, fiiendship preferences, and dating relationships (Wong-Rieger & Quintana, 1987; Suinn & Lew, 1992; Berry, 1986; Szapocznik, Scopetta, Kurtines, & Aranalde, 1978). Although theareasinwhichchangecanoccurisnumerous, usuallythesechangesarebehavioral, attitudinal, or values-oriented in nature. In addition to difl‘erent domains, changes can also Occur at difl‘erent rates, to different degrees, and in different directions (W esterrneyer, 1986; Berry, 1986; Suinn & Lew, 1987; Ghuman, 1991; Rogler, Cortes, & Malgady, 1991). WWW Not only does acculturation have many different domains and levels, but it also has manydifi‘erentoperationalizations. Currently,therearethreemainapproachestothe measm'ementofacctdmration. Thetirstmeasuresacculturationonasinglecriterion, while thesecondusesthelinear,unidimensional approach, andthethird, atwo-dimensional model. It is important to difl‘erentiate “dimensional” quality stated here fiom that of the nmlti-dimensional domains used to represent different areas of change described previously. Here, "dimension" referstotheculturalmatrixoraxisinwhichtheoverall acculturation is conceptualized (e.g., Level of involvement in the culture of origin; Level ofinvolvement in the host culture); this issue will be more fully discussed later. Singlejndmt. An overwhelming number of studies have operationalized acculturation based on a single criterion (e. g., predominant language, generation level, year of residence in the host society, etc.). Although the particular criterion may be one that makes intuitive sense, it is insuflicient by itself. This is primarily due to the fact that a single criterion cannot fully account for the inherent complexities of the acculturation process and outcomes; as such, these measures inherently lack content validity. However, some of the most common indices used in acculturation studies are language preference, generation status, and length of residence in the host society. The rationale behind the first criterion, predominant language, is that ethnic minorities who can fluently speak, read, and write the language of the host society are well assimilated/”acculturated" into their new environment. This criterion is based on the idea that language acquisition is an instrumental tool that allows participation in the dominant culture. Although many researchers have argued for the merit of using “predominant language” as an indicator to a subject's acculturation style and although language undoubtedly plays a role in acculturation, the problems lie in using it as a sole indicator of the construct. And, while the language criterion seems logical, there are instances in which it does not hold; that is, language usage does not always result in assimilation. Core values and behaviors are not 16 17 necessarily incorporated by merely having the language abilities to attain than As Negy & Woods state (1992, p. 241), "...simply having lesmed the national language spoken in a host country hardly indicates the degree to which the individual has adopted core values inherent to the host culture." Furthermore, they argue that such indices should be considered ”proxy" measures-where one's acculturation level is implied rather than ascertained more directly. . Researchers using ”generational status” to measure acculturation style have facedsimilarcriticisms. Inthiscase,therationaleisthatincreasesingenerational status (e. g., 2nd-generation, 3rd-generation, etc.) are associated with ”increases” in acculturation (assimilation). Although this reasoning seems logical, it also fails to account for the context which may impede the acquisition of new behaviors or enhance the maintenance of traditional values. For example, Hispanics who live in a predominantly Hispanic communities/barrios (such as those in Southern Texas, along the Mexican border), where virtually all residents speak Spanish and share similar familial, religious, and traditional Mexican cultural values, may take longer to assimilate to American behaviors and values (Negy & Woods, 1992). Despite the fact that the community is within US. boundaries and that the subject may be a part of the 2nd or 3rd generations (i.e., born in the host society), such Mexican minorities can still be very traditional in their ethnic orientation. Thus, using generational status as the only measure for acculturation level is problematic because the indicator dismisses the impact of social contexts. As with generational status, “length of residence in the host society“ follows the same rationale: increases in time spent in the new society are associated with ”increases” in acculturation (assimilation). Although some studies have verified that behavioral and value acculturation can be linear functions ofthe amount oftime a person has been exposedtothehostculmre, thefindingsapplyonlyincertaincontexts($upocznik& Kurtines, 1980) and for certain groups (Celano & Tyler, 1990). Again, the contextual factors of the community can profoundly influence one's acculturation level. Minorities, 18 for example, can encounter immense dificulty assimilating into contexts which are not accepting of their ethnic group. This index (Le, length of residence in the host society) may therefore carry little relevance in communities where there is notable racism, prejudice, and segregation-”simply” because such discriminating practices (e.g., apartheid situations) may limit the individual’s ability or desire to assimilate into the dominant culture Hence, using length of residence in the host society as a sole index is problematic becauseitfailstoaccountthepowerfulinfiuenceofthecommunity. Insum,usingasingle criterion, (beitinpredominant language, generationalstatus, or years of residence), is not sufficient to measure an individual's acculturation style as it fails to acknowledge the multi-dimensional complexities of the context and concept of acculturation. Such indices, at best, are "proxy" measures which can only imply rather than directly assess the individual's acculturation style. development in the area of acculturation has progressed from the use of a single criterion to multiple sociocultural characteristics such as nationality, occupational status, and food, music, and language preferences. These behavioral, psychological, and attitudinal measures have been incorporated into unidimensional acculturation scales (Cuellar, Harris, & lasso, 1980). Among the most commonly used scales of this unidimensional model type are: The Acculturation Scale for Mexican Americans (ARSMA, Cuellar, Harris, & lasso, 1980), Children's Acculturation Scale (CAS, Franco, 1983), Suinn-Lew Asian Self- Identity Acculturation Scale (SL-ASIA, Suinn, Ahuna, Khoo, 1992), The Greek Immigrant Acculturation Scale (Madianos, 1984), and the Behavioral Acculturation Scale (BAS, Szapocznik, Scopetta, Kurtines, & Arandale, 1978). These scales typically conceptualize acculturation as a unidimensional, bipolar process where one’s own ethnicity is contrasted with that of the host society (e.g., Hispanicism vs. Americanism or more graphically, Hispanicism <----—--> Americanism) and judged as ”good” or ”bad”, ”functional" or ”dysfunctional", ”useful" or 19 "debilitating” to one's adaptation and goals. Under this model, acculturation is commonly referred to in terms of high vs. low acculturation (or acculturated vs. not acculturated). High levels of acculturation indicate extreme degrees of assimilation into the host society whereas low levels indicate maintenance of the traditional/ethnic culture. The problem with this type of conceptualization is its assumption of ”mutual exclusion“ (Rogler, Cortes, & Malgady, 1991); that is, where a strengthening of one culture requires a weakening of the other (See Figure 1). This model assumes that a strong ethnic identity is not possible among those who become involved in the mainstream society, and that as acculturation into the host society increases, a concomitant decrease or weakening of ethnic ties also occurs (Phinney, 1991). 20 Figure 1: Bipolar, Unidimensional Model <———————-> Low Acculturation High Acculturation (High Vietnamese (High American Involvement) Involvement) 21 There are two ways in which the assumption of ”mutual exclusion” reveals itself. in the structure of specific items and at the overall aggregate level. In the structure of specific items, questions are phrased in such a way that ”involvement in one culture necessarily diminishes involvement in the other culture" (Rogler, Cortes, & Malgady, 1991, p. 587). Typically, the items ofl'er a choice between two cultures, such as in languageusage—whaehnguageusageismeamredinawaythupreferuiceforone language is assumedtobenegatively relatedtotheotherlanguage. Forexample, anitem wouldaskthepersonwhichlanguages/hepreferstospeakandtheresponsechoicesmay be: (1) Spanish all of the time, (2) Spanish most of the time, (3) Spanish and English equally, (4) English most of the time, and (5) English all of the time (Szapocznik & Kurtines, 1980). Rogler, Cortes, & Malgady (1991) note that the presentation of items in this manner constrains the respondent's choice of alternative answers and presupposes a zero-sum model of competition between the two cultures. In reality, however, it is possible for individuals to fluently master two or more languages, and that an additive model of language preferences could be more useful in life. Hence, a better approach would be to assess the components separately (e. g., ”How comfortable do you feel speaking Spanish?” and ”How comfortable do you feel speaking English?"). The ”either-or” assumption is also evidenced at the aggregate level where the total acculturation score is calculated. At this level, there is a procedure where involvement in each culture is measured separately, but then, are subtracted flom one another to produce a score indicating one's overall acculturation level (Szapocznik, Kurtines, & Fernandez, 1980). Ifthe composite ethnic/minority score has a greater value than the majority score in the subtraction, then the individual is said to be ethnically oriented, but, if the opposite is true, if the majority score is larger, then the individual is said to be ”acculturated" (assimilated). If the degree of involvement in each culture is equivalent and the subtraction yields a 0, then the individual, evenly balanced between the two cultures, is said to be bicultural (Rogler, Cortes, & Malgady, 1991). There are conceptual problems 22 inthisprocedureaswell. Againthistypeofconceptualizationunnecessarilypitsthetwo cultures on opposite extremes and assumes that high involvement in one culture excludes involvement in the other. Another problem with the unidimensional model is its inability to distinguish between the ”true“ vs. ”mock“ bicultural person. Here, a “true” bicultural person is one whoiswell integratedintothetwoailtureswhilethe'mock' personisonewhois alienated from both cultures (Szapocznik 8t Kurtines, 1980). A linear model of acculturation can only report the “biculturality" in terms of equal involvement (i.e., when the subtraction yields a zero); however, the procedure cannot distinguish how involvements in each culture are equivalent-whether they are equally high (i.e., a true bicultural) or equally low (i.e., a mock bicultural—a marginalized person). Mavreas, Bebbington, and Der (1989), commented on this conceptual difficulty in terms of "being at ease” with the cultures involved. They assert that scales of this type '...do not tap the sense ofbeing culturally at ease, and this may be an important aspect ofliving in a novel culture. While at the individual level the concept of acculturation clearly covers movement between cultures, it is possible for someone to be at ease, or indeed ill at ease with aspects of both societies, and for this to be masked by the requirement to express a preference for one or other..." (p.240). Keefe and Padilla (1987) point to similar inadequacies of the unidimensional approach to the measurement of acculturation which has dominated research efl‘orts to develop scales. WWW). Advocates of the alternative, two-dimensional model counter the assumptions of mutual exclusion by asserting that ”the two cultures—the original's and the host society-are not necessarily...bipolar and that acculturative involvements in each of them could be measured separately” (Rogler, Cortes, Malgady, 1991, p. 587). Put another way, minority group members “can have either strong or weak identifications with both their own and the mainstream cultures, and a...[strong relationship] with one's ethnic culture does not 23 necessarily imply a weak relationship or low involvement with the dominant culture" (Phinney, 1990, p. 502). In contrast to the high vs. low (or acculturated vs. not acculturated) conceptualizations, this model purports, several difl‘erent acculturation styles. When presenting their Bicultural Involvement Scale, Szapocznik, Kurtines, and Fernandez (1980b) argued cogently for the need to measure constructs such as Hispanicism and Americanism separately. In addition, they suggested that individuals who were ”bicultural" could either (a) be well-grounded in both Hispanic and Anglo cultures or (b) feel a marginal status without strong roots in either culture. Thus, their scale was designed to measure the degree to which a person feels comfortable in each culture independent of the other. This 33-item scale, measuring different aspects of the immigrants social life (food, music, dance, etc.) is calculated on the basis of two separate dimensions: Biculturalism and Cultural Involvement. (Each dimension has two separate subscales, one measuring the degree of involvement in the host culture and the other, involvement in the ethnic culture.) The Biculturalism dimension measures the extent to which individuals are concurrently involved (or non-involved) in one or both cultures. It is based on a linear, bipolar model with monoculturalism on one end and biculturalism on the other. (See Figure 2.) A Cultural Involvement dimension was also incorporated so that ”true" and "mock" biculturality can be differentiated. This dimension, as its name implies, measures the extent of involvement in both cultures; it ranges fi'om cultural involvement to cultural marginality. Figure 2 shows the possible relationship between the two dimensions and their resultant acculturation styles, derived from combination (or charted) scores of the two dimensions (i.e., Marginal, Bicultural, Hispanicized and Marginal, and Fully Hispanicized or Americanized). 24 Eggs}; Szapocznick's Accultiu'ation Model (Szapocznick, Kurtines, & Fernandez, 1981). Cultural Involvement Hispanicized or Americanized youngsters. Bicultural Individuals fully involved in one culture only. Monoculturalism II I Biculturalism Individuals who are Marginalized individuals clearly Hispanicized, but who are equally involved who are nevertheless quite or uninvolved in marginal. both/either culture. 11 'l'ty 25 Thetwo-dimensionalaspectintheculturalmatrixof Szapoczniket. al'smeasure, especially the inclusion of cultural involvement, is a definite step towards a more sophisticated conceptualization. However, their model is a preliminary approach with many deficits. For one, the subtraction procedure Szapocznik et al. used to attain the overall acculturation score (as described earlier) limited the potential value of their distinction between the two cultures (Rogler, Cortes, & Malgady, 1991). Additionally, their conceptualization does not ofl‘er the clarity of acculturation styles when compared to other models. For example, their conceptualization, as it is graphed, does not distinguish Hispanicized fi'om Americanized individuals; instead they group the two in one ”monocultural” category (i.e., Category II. = Hispanicized or Americanized youngsters, fiilly involved in one culture only.) Another limitation still is that the model is somewhat confusing; it just does not make sense (i.e., Category I - Individuals who are clearly Hispanicized, but who are nevertheless quite marginal.) Montgomery's (1992) ”revised 2-D model” ofl‘ers more clarity in its dimensions of acculturation, for it distinguishes Hispanicized individuals from their Marginalized and Americanized counterparts. Rather than being pitted on one monocultural-biannual continuum, as in the previous approach, each culture in Montgomery's model is assigned its own dimension. Level of Comfort with Anglo Customs is on one dimension while Level of Comfort With Mexican Customs is on the other. The resultant acculturation styles are Anglo Orientation, Mexican Orientation, Accepts Both (Cultural Blend), and Rejects Both (Alienated) (See Figure 3). Despite the model's clear and comprehensive nature, there is currently no scale using this type of conceptualization. Montgomery proposed this model afier his work on validating a unidimensional acculturation scale for Mexican-Americans. His findings led him to move away fiom a unidimensional model of acculturation and toward a two-dimensional cultural matrix where multi-domains (e. g., behaviors, attitudes, values) are superimposed on the matrix's foundation. 26 am Montgomery's (1991) Two-dimensional Acculturation Matrix High LCA Anglo Accepts Both Orientation (Cultural Blend) Low LCM Rejects Both Mexican (Alienated) Orientation Low LCA LCA = Level of Comfort with Mexican Customs LCA = Level of Comfort with Anglo Customs 27 Montgomery (1992) asserts that in the past 10 years, the theoretical conceptualization of acculturation has undergone substantial develOpment and that currently, the best approach to measuring the concept would be the “composite of a revised two—dimensional model.” Because of its objectivity, practicality, and conceptual clarity, this type of approach holds great promise for fiiture studies. Celano & Tyler's (1990) work supports Montgomery's move away from the unidimensional and towards the two-dimensional model of acculturation While validating The Behavioral Acculturation Scale on Vietnamese Refugees (a unidimensional scale originally designed for Mexican-Americans), the researchers found that the process of behavioral acculturation was neither linear nor unidirectional as previous theorists had hypothesized. They suggested that researchers must conceptualize the minority and majority cultures as heterogeneous groups. Such a conceptualization seems to be essential, at the very least, to build an adequate theoretical framework of empirical examination of acculturation. ‘ Like Montgomery and Celano and Tyler, Berry also pr0poses a two-dimension conceptualization of acculturation. The main difl‘erences are that: (a) Berry measures acculturation attitudes rather than levels of involvements; and (b) his acculturation attitudes are phrased in terms of boxes or categories and are dichotomized by ”yes/no” responses rather than continuous measures on two axes (See Figure 4). In the derivation of his acculturation attitudes, Berry measures an individual's attitudes towards how she wishes to relate to those in his/her pluralistic society. Such attitudes are derived from two focal issues/dimensions facing all accculturating individuals: cultural contact (of the host society) and cultural maintenance (of the ethnic society). Specifically, his dimensions require participants to respond to 2 questions: First, ”Is my cultural identity of value and to be retained?” and second, ”Are positive relations with the larger society to be sought?” Depending on the combinations of ”yes/no” responses to these questions, four acculturation attitudes are assessed: Integration, Assimilation, 28 Separation or Marginalization (See Figure 4; Berry, 1989). (Incidentally, Berry's “Integration” is similar to 'Biculturality" used in other research; hence the two terms will be used interchangeably in this thesis.) Generally speaking, Integration/Biculturality is the identification with or synthesis of both old and new cultures, whereas marginality is the identification with neither (e. g., alienation fi'om both cultures). Assimilation, on the other hand, is the continuous move toward the dominant culture-signifying an identification only with the new society while Separation is the reafirmation of the traditional culture— an identification only with one's ethnic ties. (See Appendix 1 for a more elaborate description of Berry's (1986) acculturation styles.) 29 Figure 4: Berry's Four Acculturation Attitudes (1991) ISSUE 1 Is it considered to be of value to maintain cultural identity and characteristics? "YES" "NO" ISSUE 2 Is it considered to be " " ofvalue to maintain YES ___) INTEGRATION ASSIMILATION relationships with n " other groups? No ——> SEPARATION MARGINALIZATION 30 Like Szapocznik, Berry and colleagues have also devised scales measuring their conceptualizations. In their earlier scales, acculturation attitudes were measured directly (rather than computed from the two cultural dimensions). In other words, acculturation attitudesweremeasuredbycombiningina single statement, attitudestowardsthehost culture and attitudes towards one's ethnic culture (Dona & Berry, 1993). This type of approach, however, wasproblematicbecauseeachstatementconveyedmorethanone piece of information (i.e., it was double—barreled). In their recently revised scales, Dona and Berry (1993) employed a difl'erent approach; they measured attitudes towards the culture of origin and towards the Canadian . culture with separate items. This approach counters the double-barreled limitations of earlier questionnaires. Additionally, it required less items to determine a particular attitude. These revisions are a definite improvement not only because the shorter version makes the test more reasonable to take, and because it requires fewer subjects for appropriate exploration of the scale's psychometric pr0perties but also because it helps to clarify conceptualization of the acculturation questionnaires. ThevalidityofDonaand Berry'srevised scalewasassessed againstacculturative experience, cultural maintenance and values. As the authors suggest, ”during acculturation, individuals are confronted not only with difl'erent attitudinal options but also with new lifestyles and new values. Individuals holding difl‘erent attitudes engage in different amounts of contact with the host society...and difl‘erent amounts of cultural maintenance...They may also vary in the extent to which their values change to conform to those ofthe host society (1993, p. 4).” In summary, there is a tendency at the conceptual level to move toward a two- dirnensional model. Nonetheless, few scales have translated the idea into action—or the framework into actual measurement . Berry's Acculturation Scale, particularly the revised version, comes closest to this two-dimensional approach. However, the scale's limitation is that it examines only one's attitudes (rather than attitudes and behaviors). This narrow 31 focus presents a dimculty in measuring an individual's actual involvement, for attitudes toward an acculturation style do not necessarily lead to their corresponding behaviors (Fishbein, 1977; Azjen, 1982; Maker, 1971). Therefore, it is problematic to base one's involvement on a measure that merely assesses attitudes. The present study has built on Berry's work in the measurement of acculturation by adding a behavioral component and by extending the scale to Vietnamese adolescents in the United States. Revisions are discussed more specifically in the next chapter. WW Given the conceptual errors of acculturation scales, the conflicting findings of acculturation/psychological health research, and the lack of studies regarding Vietnamese adolescents in general, the objectives of the present investigation were two-fold: 1. To develop a two-dimensional acculturation scale that remedies conceptual errors of the bipolar approach and that builds upon current 2-D models 2. To explore how the 2 dimensions of acculturation (i.e., levels of involvement) and their resultant styles (i.e., Bicultural, Assimilated, Traditional, Marginalized) relate to various aspects of psychological functioning (particularly to: psychological symptomatology, depression scores, family/parent relationships, self-esteem, and GPA) among Vietnamese adolescents. WW Specifically, the present study sought to develop a 2-D Acculturation Scale for Vietnamese Adolescents by integrating Montgomery's 2-dimensional conceptualization, Celano and Tyler’s suggestions, and Berry's four acculturation styles. (See Figure 5 & 6 for the study's revised conceptualization.) Given the latest conceptual developments, it seems as if this integration is the next, logical step. Particular revisions/developments in the 2-D scale involved: a. Adding behavioral and values components to Berry's Acculturation Measurement. As mentioned earlier, Berry's revised scale is the closest form of measurement to the 2-D approach. Yet one of the limitations in Berry's scale is the fact that it measures only attitudes and that attitudes may not necessarily lead to their corresponding behavior. Hence, to measure an individual's acculturation style, it seems necessary to incorporate behaviors and values pertinent to the different cultures. b. Reconceptualizing Beny's model onto linear, continuous dimensions (rather than categories or boxes). Berry's model, because it is based on ”yes/no” dichotomization, seems likely to exclude meaningful information that could be better captured with continuous dimensions. Montgomery's linear levels of involvements (dimensions) seems more sensitive to subtle changes, and for this reason, his model is incorporated. (See Figures 5 and 6.) 32 33 am Proposed Two-Dimensional Model of Acculturation IUS IVN = Involvement with the Vietnamese Culture IUS = Involvement with the US. Culture 34 am Pr0posed Two-Dimensional Model with Acculturation Styles: An Integration of Berry's and Montgomery's Conceptualizations. Hish IUS Assimilated Bicultural Low . Marginalized Traditional Low IU S IVN - Involvement with the Vietnamese Culture IU S = Involvement with the US. Culture 35 c. Extending the scale to Vietnamese adolescents in the United States. The only acculturation scale that currently exists for Asian-Americans in the US. is the SL-ASIA Unfortunately, its sole normalization with college-students and its conceptual errors with the bipolar model make this scale less applicable to our interests. Berry's Acculturation Scale, even with its 2-dimensionality, is also less applicable. This is because Berry's Scale is normed only on Central- American Refiigees in Canada-and adult refugees at that. Presently, there are no scales (let alone 2-D scales) for Vietnamese adolescents. Because of their unique characteristics (e.g., adolescence, refiigee affiliation/status), the present scale seeks to be more sensitive/relevant to the age, ethnicity, and context of Vietnamese adolescents in the United States. d. Renaming Berry's ”separation” as “traditional” and "integration" as "bicultural”. Although these revisions are minor ones in comparison to the others, the word ”separation" seems to carry a negative connotation where minority groups are actively rejecting (or being rejected by) the host society. While this rejection is one possibility, it could also be true that the minority group value their own traditions and wish to cultivate aspects important to their ethnicity. Hence, “traditional” seems to be the less value-ladened term of the two. Moreover, the term ”integration" is renamed as ”bicultural", not because the "bicultural" has a more positive value, but because it more accurately represents the combinations of the two-dimensions. While an integration of cultures is perhaps ideal for bicultural individuals, such integration in not always the case. There may be individuals who alternate, (rather than integrate) between the difl‘erent cultures. All told, ”bicultural” seems the more veritable term for the construct measured within this two- dimensional model. tholosisaLfiinctioning. The second objective of this study was to explore how the dimensions of acculturation (i.e., the separate Levels of Involvement in the Vietnamese and US. cultures) and their resultant styles (i.e., Assimilation, Traditional, Bicultural, and Marginalized styles) related to various aspects of psychological functioning among Vietnamese adolescents. (For ease of communication, the levels of involvements will be hereby termed as IVN or IUS-for their respective Vietnamese or American culture.) Rationale for the hypotheses will be explicated once each hypothesis is articulated. Specific hypotheses were: 36 a Adolescents who have high levels of involvement in both the Vietnamese and US. cultures (i.e., Bicultural adolescents) will be the healthiest group among the four acculturation styles. More precisely, they will report lower symptomatology and depression scores, higher self-esteem and GPA, and stronger parent/family relationships than those who have lower IVN and IUS. b. Adolescents who are high in IUS but low in IVN (i.e., Assimilated youths) will be the second healthiest group in terms of all psychological functioning aspects except for the parent/family relationships (in which case, Traditional youths may be healthier). In other words, Assimilated adolescents will report less symptomatology and depression scores, higher self-esteem, and higher G.P.A than their Traditional and Marginalized peers. c. Adolescents, who are low in IUS and high in IVN (i.e., Traditional adolescents) will be healthier than those reporting a Marginalized style. Specifically, they will report less symptomatology and depression scores, higher self-esteem and GPA, and stronger parent/family relationships than their Marginalized peers (youths with low IVN and low IUS). d. IVN will be significantly related to family/parent relationships. That is, adolescents who are more involved in the Vietnamese culture (high IVN) will report stronger family/parent relationships. (However, it is uncertain how the direction or strength of IUS will relate to family/parent relationships. A more exploratory approach will be used in this regard. It seems that such relationship is contingent on the family context—or more specifically how Americanized the adolescent's family is. For example, a positive relationship between IUS and Relationships could indicate that the parents/family are somewhat Americanized and that the US. involvements (behaviors, values, attitudes) between the adolescent and those in his/her family are congruent. Consequently, this congruence/similarities in behaviors, values and attitudes could provide the necessary foundation for stronger family relationships. On the other hand, a negative relationship between TU S and family/parent relationships, could indicate that the adolescent's American involvements conflict with those in his/her more Traditional home, and thus weaken family relationships. Although these explanations are but a few among many, they are presented here only to explain my uncertainty and to articulate the possibility of different directions.) e. Additionally, adolescents who are more involved in the US. culture (high IUS) will report higher G.P.A.'s. (Similar to the hypothesis above, it is uncertain as to how IVN will relate to grade point averages. There are different possibilities. Hence, an exploratory approach will also be used in this regard.) 37 Rationale for the above hypotheses is best articulated in terms of an ecological model. Before presenting such an articulation, however, let me preface it with one point: The purpose of this thesis, and hence, the explication of the following model is not to test the model per se. Rather, it is to outline the contexts and interrelationships so that we can better understand factors influencing the adjustment of Vietnamese adolescents. I concur with Brofenbrenner (1979) and Lerner (1993, 1982) that ”nothing ever happens in a vacuum.” Therefore, to fully understand the adolescent's wellobeing, it is essential to acknowledge the difl‘erent contexts in which s/he is embedded. The following theory is based on an ecological model that incorporates the acculturation process into the national, state, city, and immediate contexts of Vietnamese adolescents. See Figures 7- 9 for visual depictions of the explanation that follows. ' Vietnamese adolescents today are embedded in many different contexts, in essence, many different systems. The outermost context or "macrosystem" (for our focus) is the United States. Vietnamese adolescents here live in a nation where diversity is increasingly salient. The process and product of such diversity is exemplified—not only in the changing demographics of recent years (U .8. Census Bureau, 1990) but also in everyday events: in events such as the coming of the Cuban refugees and the cataclysrn of the LA riots; in events such as the cacophony of the KKK demonstrations and in events such as the controversies about Aflirmative Action. Though tangential as they may seem, in reality, these events are pervasively pertinent to the study, for they depict a climate in which the adjustment of Vietnamese adolescents is embedded. Such events speak of the salience and sensitivity (or insensitivity) to multicultural issues; they speak of the powerfully prejudicial behaviors, the lack of understanding among ethnic groups, and the ensuing political and programmatic implications-us“ of which could directly and indirectly afl'ect one's well-being. Embedded within the culturally pluralistic macrosystem of the United States are smaller systems and subsystems: that of Michigan, that of Lansing, and finally, that of the 38 adolescents' familial, school, and peer contexts (See Figure7). (Embedded within this hierarchy of systems is the individual.) Though detailed descriptions of these systems are beyond the article's scope, it is speculated that the school and peer contexts of the Vietnamese adolescents in Lansing are primarily "American”. This is partly because Lansing’s Vietnamese p0pulation is only .2-.3% of the local population (as described earlier); hence, there may be less opportunities, interests, and salience for the Vietnamese culture in the local area. Additionally, it is speculated that the familial context of these adolescents will be somewhat ”Vietnamese". This speailation is based on the rationale that most Vietnamese parents, having emigrated as adults, will likely have beliefs more rooted in their Vietnamese culture. Such beliefs will likely transfer to their families and, accordingly, to the ”familial context” of the adolescent. Connecting/superimposed on the adolescent and his/her numerous systems is the process of acculturation. As stated earlier, acculturation is the link between the individual and his sociocultural environments. The underlying issue with acculturation, it seems, is one's ethnic identity. These terms seem almost interchangeable. Interestingly, closer analysis suggests that the operationalization of acculturation-4n terms of levels of involvement, and consequently, in terms of behaviors, values, and attitudes is similar to the components of ethnic identity. Although distinctions between these two constructs are beyond the scope of the manuscript, it may be meaningful to liken acculturation to the more familiar concept of ethnic identity, simply to enlighten our current understanding. The two dimensions of acculturation consists of its level of involvement in the Vietnamese culture and in the American culture (both of which are operationalized in terms of behaviors, values, and attitudes). Its resultant acculturation styles are derived fi'om various combinations of these dimensions; in essence, they are cognitive shorthands for the levels of involvement. Regardless of the various terms, be they with ethnic identity, acculturation styles, or levels of involvement, it seems that the issues central to the relationships between 39 acculturation and psychological functioning are: (a) one's cultural competence and (b) one's sense of connection or attachment (See Figure 8). Cultural competence refers to an individual's ability to function or navigate skillfiilly in the world/s in which s/he participates. It requires functional knowledge of the language, traditions, expectations, and demands salient in the individual's particular cultures or worlds. Attachment, on the other hand, is the sense of connection with those in his particular world/s. It implies a sense of a belongingness, a relationship to those of the same culture. Levels of involvement are essentially proxies to these issues, and these issues, in turn, are predictors to psychological functioning. In other words, individuals who are more involved in the Vietnamese culture may be more competent in a Vietnamese context and more connected to fellow Vietnamese people, and consequently, more adjusted than those less involved. It must be noted, however, that these concepts (cultural competence and cultural connection) are contextually contingent. That is, they vary with contexts. (Hence, the beauty of the ecological model.) For example, the definition of ”cultural competence” in Lansing, Michigan may differ drastically from its definition in Orange County, California, where enclaves such as "Little Saigon" enable Vietnamese individuals to live functionally for years without uttering a word of English. Similarly, one's ability to form attachments to those in the Vietnamese culture (as indicated by high IVN) may be futile when living in a predominantly Western neighborhood. Thus, it is not the culture itself but rather, the fit between the individual and his/her environment that facilitates or impedes appropriate psychological functioning. More precisely, it is the fit between the individual's cultural competence and connection and the demands and opportunities in his/her immediate environments that facilitates psychological functioning. In other words, monocultural individuals living in a daily, bicultural context (or in a difl‘erent monocultural context) may have problems because of their inability to flinction or relate to those in their immediate worlds. 40 Applying this model more specifically to Vietnamese adolescents in Lansing, I speculated that both the Vietnamese and US. cultures are salient to these youths but that the US. culture is more salient, given the small proportion of Vietnamese people (and thus, limited opportunities) in the local area As explained previously, it seems likely that the school and peer contexts of the Vietnamese adolescents are primarily “American" while their familial context is at least, somewhat ”Vietnamese". Given the ecological model and the above speculations and given Szapocznik et al.,. and Charron and Ness bicultural findings (partiailarly), it seems likely then that: individuals (Vietnamese adolescents in Lansing) with high involvement in both Vietnamese and US. cultures will show the most positive psychological functioning while those less involved will function the least well (i.e.,. Bicultural vs. Marginalized). Because of their predominantly ”American” peer and school contexts, it also seems likely that individuals with assimilated styles will be healthier, more functional than their traditional peers (in all respects except for family/parent relationships). In sum, the ecological model holds that an individual's acculturation and psychological functioning needs to be conceptualized in a set of contexts, because it is such contexts that influences the nature of acculturation-psychological functioning relationships. (Thus, the above hypotheses are based on speculations about the contextual matrix of Vietnamese adolescents in Lansing) Acculturation is a process that connects the individual with his/her contexts. Its ”levels” of involvement are proxies to one's cultural competence and connection, which, in conjunction with the demands of the particular contexts, is speculated to be important links to psychological functioning. And finally, just as different contexts can influence the adjustment of an individual, the adjustment of an individual can also influence the different contexts outside the adolescent. That is, implications of psychological functioning, may be more than just ”individual”; it may implicate those in the familial, school, and other societal contexts as well (as evidenced by intergenerational conflicts, disruption from school, and delinquency and other problems with the law, etc.). See Figure 9 for the fiill ecological model. 41 Figure 7: The many contexts of adolescents. / \ r \ 42 Figure 8: Components ofAcculturation A(3CLILTLJRAyTIQJL (Ethnic Identity) IVN IUS ......... Acculturation Styles-«m.- “Cultural Competence :Cultural Belongingness V MENTALHEALTH j 43 EM Full Ecological Model / United States W . Michigan /// K \ Lansing School ' Accul uration [WV IUS . ... “at ,. W thrmnmlb- on .. (s .,dsniands w' “J; ;' 9“"4 0 Quart-dame: nos clap: ‘ ) 0 CulatrallBelongingnes K Mental Health 1 Peers Iniplicattortsostntale Ons'sfimcdoning .. - midis . / Waxedbythcd m \ J CHAPTER II METHODS MEASURES Baskzmundlnfnnnatinn The student's background questionnaire was designed to tap 7 domains of information: 1) basic demographic data; 2) years of residence in the United States; 3) self-perceived English and Vietnamese language ability, 4) education and employment status of parents; 5) perceived discrimination in the United States; 6) sense of family structure and size; and 7) rating of cultural involvement/unportance (See Appendix 3 for a copy of this measure.) The majority of these questions were selected fi'om the Youth Adaptation and Growth Questionnaire used by Rumbaut and Portes in their study of children of immigrants. The remaining items were constructed by the author. All items were selected or constructed for one of two reasons: 1) to be used as criterion variables in the validation of the acculturation scale (i.e., length of time in the United States, language ability, ethnic identity) or 2) for their potential utility in understanding hypothesized relationships between acculturation styles and psychological distress. Assessment of factors such as living situation, parents' employment, and SES can help in developing our understanding of the context in which acculturation style is embedded. Such factors can help explicate the development of one's acculturation style, as well as its potential relationships with psychological fiinctioning. MW Overall, The Acculturation Scale assesses an individual's level of involvement in the Vietnamese and American culture and his/her resultant acculturation style (Bicultural, Assimilated, Traditional, and Marginalized style). (See Appendix 2 for a copy of this measure.) The scale consists of 76 items that comprise two 38 item subscales measuring (separately) the level of involvements in the two cultures (i.e., IVN--Involvement in the Vietnamese Culture and IUS—Involvement in 44 45 the American Culture). Each subscale consists of comparable statements regarding attitudes, behaviors, and values of difl‘erent domains of the two cultures (e. g., food, language, traditions, fiiendships, etc.). In other words, for every statement regarding music for the Vietnamese subscale, there is a comparable statement for the American subscale. Examples of such statements are: "I would like to keep the Vietnamese way of life. ", 'I would like to adopt the American way of life", ”How frequently do you eat Vietnamese food?", and ”How fi'equently do you eat American food?” Respondents are asked to rate on a 5-point Likert scale the extent to which they agreelengage in these various attitudes and behaviors procedure in determining a respondent's acculturation style is assessed by taking the average score of each subscale/level-of-involvements (IVN and IUS) and charting them on the 2-dimensional model shown in Figure 6. Because the scores in IVN and IUS range fiorn l to 5 (with 3 being the mid-point), individuals whose involvement score is 3 or less fell into the ”low involvement” section whereas those whose score is higher than 3 fell into the "high involvement” section . The particular acculturation style is derived fi'om the various combinations of these 2 involvements. A bicultural style consists of high scores in both IVN and IUS whereas a marginal style is comprised of low scores in IVN and IUS. An assimilated style, on the other hand, consists of high IUS and low IVN while conversely, a traditional style consists of high IVN and low IUS. W The development of the present acculturation scale involved a revision and conglomeration of several scales: Berry's acculturation attitudes scale, Berry's acculturative experience/cultural maintenance scale, and Nguyen and Williams (1988) traditional family values scale. The first 2 scales mentioned were used in Berry's latest investigation of Central-American refugee adults (Dona & Berry, 1993). As noted, Berry's assessment of acculturation is based solely on acculturation attitudes, specifically on acculturation attitudes of refugee adults in Canada 46 The present/revised scale is a departure from Beny's acculturation measure in 3 ways: 1) it includes assessments of attitudes, values, and behaviors; (2) it is designed more specifically for the Vietnamese adolescent population; and (3) it incorporates the United States as the host society (rather than Canada). In essence, the present measure is revised so that it can more accurately represent the attitudes, values, and behaviors of Vietnamese youths in the United States. For example, items concerning dating, school, and career choices have been added while statements such as "I enjoy soccerhce—hockey very much”. and "I would like to give my children an English name.” have been deleted or rephrased. r Other items added to the present acculturation scale were drawn from Nguyen and Williams' (1988) questionnaire assessing traditional family values. Example of such items are: ”The oldest girl in the family should help her parents take care of the house and the ‘ younger children whether she wants to or not.” and ”Grandparents should have more influence than parents in family matters”) Additional items measuring the adolescent's independence (regarding aspects such as dating, career choices, etc.) were also selected from Nguyen and “filliam's questionnaire. Finally, statements assessing the overall involvement in each culture were also added by the author. W The B81 is a self-report questionnaire used here to assess one's overall ”psychological symptom pattern” (Derogatis, 1992); (See Appendix 2). It consists of 53 statements in which respondents are asked to rate on a 5- point Likert scale the extent to which they felt distressed by various symptoms within the past 7 days. (Examples of such symptoms are: "Feeling easily annoyed“ and "Feeling fearful") The 53 B81 items assess 9 symptom dimensions in all: Somatization, Obsessive-Compulsive, Interpersonal Sensitivity, Depression, Anxiety, Hostility, Psychoticism, Phobic Anxiety and Paranoid Ideation. (Coefficient alphas and test-retest reliabilities for these dimensions range fi'om .71-.85 and 68-91, respectively.) Although the BSI has many levels of analysis (e.g., individual symptoms, syndromal representations, etc.) the global, superordinate measure of psychological status is the level of focus in the 47 present study. It is calculated via the Global Severity Index (681) and is derived by taking a mean of all the items. Of the different levels of analysis within this instrument, the G81 is the best single summary of an individual's distress. W The CES-D is a self-report checklist that measures psychological depression within the general population (Radlofl; 1977; See Appendix 2.). It consists of 20-items in which respondents are asked to rate how often they felt or behaved a certain way in the past week (e.g., "I felt lonely", "I enjoyed life", "I could not get 'going'. ", etc.). The internal consistency reliability alpha is quite high for high school students, ranging fi'om .87 to .92 (Roberts, Andrews, Lewinsohn, & HOps, 1990). W The Rosenberg Self-Esteem scale is a 10-item instrument which measures an individual's overall level of self-worth. Respondents are asked to rate on a 4-point Likert scale items such as: "I certainly feel useless sometimes.” The reliability and validity of the items are well established in this instrument (Rosenberg, 1965; See Appendix 2). EamilxlBaicmRrJatinnshins. The family/parent relationship questions were taken fi'om the Youth Adaptation and Growth Questionnaire used by Rumbaut and Portes in their study of immigrant children. Combined, it is a 9-item, 4-point Likert scale which measures the student's close relationships with their parents and family members Example of such items are: “My parents do not like me very much"; ”My parents have put me down for a long time"; ”We can express our feelings with our family"; and “Family members respect one another.” (See Appendix 2.) WW Finally, students' cumulative grade-point averages were obtained through school records from the central research office in charge of the Lansing school district. 48 PRQCEDIJRES PilatStudies Altogether, the procedures consisted of two pilot studies and one final study. The two pilot studies were conducted at Michigan State University and at Eastern High School. The purpose of these initial investigations were to: 1) evaluate the clarity and appropriateness of the items; 2) to determine the length in which it would take to complete the questionnaires; and 3) to investigate for logistical obstacles in the administration process. WWW Because the population of junior high and high school students in this area is relatively limited, the first pilot study was conducted with university students. In all, thirty-five MSU students (ages 18-25; M =20.5) were recruited fi'om the university phone book and flour the Vietnamese Student Association. The battery of questionnaires were administered in small groups (N=10) in which students took an average of 30 minutes to complete. Aside from these questionnaires, students also completed feedback sheets and held conversations with research assistants in which they discussed difl‘erent aspects of the surveys (parts that were irrelevant, confusing, ambiguous, redundant, etc.). Whom An additional pilot study was conducted with 8 students at Eastern High School to more closely examine the age-appropriateness, language difficulties, and logistical obstacles of administration for this younger group. Although there was a range of language abilities among these students, the majority of them were drawn fiom a separate classroom designed for those not as familiar/literate in English (from the Bilingual Instructional Center—BIC). Given that there are only English versions of the instruments, this author reasoned that those in the BIC classrooms would require the longest time of testing. Hence, recruitment fi'om the BIC classrooms was done specifically to assess the maximum time necessary for administration Instruments were given in group format, and students had the option of taking questionnaires quietly 49 by themselves or with the assistance of the bilingual worker who would read the items aloud. Overall, the administration time ranged from 1.5 to 2 hours. Once the pilot studies were finished, changes were implemented to make future administrations more efl‘ective and eflicient. FinalStudx Vietnamese students fiom 8 different junior-high and high-schools were recruited fi'om the Lansing and East Lansing areas. Lists ofVietnamese students as well as their addresses, phone numbers, and class schedules were obtained from the Lansing Research Oflice in charge of the school systems. Based on information fi'om these lists, students were summoned from class to meet in small groups where this author solicited their participation. The majority of students were recruited using this approach, However, I also recruited students by speaking in the BIC classrooms and the Asian-American clubs. All students were informed about the purpose of the study, the extent of their involvement, and the date and location of the administration. They were also told that each student who participates will receive a free gift (MSU folder, pencil, and candy-bar) as well as a chance to win cash awards (8100, $75, or $50). Additionally, students were given consent forms in both English & Vietnamese versions (See Appendix 3) and were instructed to bring completed forms to the time of testing. A couple of days before the administration, research assistants called students to remind them of the study and to follow-up on any concerns they or their parents may have. As in the pilot studies, students took the instruments in group format in a classroom or cafeteria within the school. The size of each group ranged from 15-45. Students were divided into 2 smaller groups depending on their ability and comfort level in taking the English-version-questionnaire. Those who were more comfortable in English took the questionnaires by themselves while those more comfortable in Vietnamese took the questionnaires by having their items translated aloud by an interpreter. The overall 50 time of administration ranged from 30 minutes to 1.5 hours. At the end of their sessions, students were given their fi'ee gifls and excused back to class. W8 Altogether, 182 Vietnamese students were recruited fi'om 8 difl‘erent junior-high andhigh-schoolsintheLansingandE.I..ansingschooldistricts. Theywereingrades6 through 12. Their mean age was 15, with a range from 10 to 23 years. Fifty-six percent were males and 44%-females. The majority of students (80%) were born in Vietnam, while 19%werebornintheUnited Statesand 1%werebominotherplacessuchas China Their mean years ofresidence or time spent in the United States was 6, with a range as great as 1 month to 18 years. Between the two school districts, the majority of the sample (98%) came flom the less aflluent areas of Lansing. Generally, these students came fiom a ”blue-collar” background where many of their parents were either unemployed (32%) or working in labor-type jobs (55%). Only 4% of parents were employed in professional occupations. Additionally, 75% of students reported the homes inwhichtheywerecurrentlylivingwererented (ascomparedtothe22%whoseparents “owned” the house and 3% who lived in ”other" places such as a relative's). Even with their "blue-collar" backgrounds, however, most students (69%) believed that their family's economic situation had improved within the past 5 years. CHAPTER III RESULTS W Table 1 shows a list of reliabilities for all measures involved in the study. Generally, all measures demonstrated high internal consistency for the Vietnamese sample, with the lowest standardized alpha being .71 and the highest being .95. In regard to The Acculturation Scale specifically, both IVN and IU S subscales show strong internal consistency (.92 and .90, respectively). WW Criterion validity for the acculturation subscales was relatively high (See Table 2). The correlation between IVN and Vietnamese Language (derived from an average in self- reported skills of reading, writing, speaking and understanding the Vietnamese language) was .57 (p < .001) while the correlation between IVN and Global Involvement-VN (a separate one item rating of overall involvement in the Vietnamese culture) was .51 (p < .001). Additionally, the correlation between IVN and Global Importance-VN (a separate one item rating of how important Vietnamese culture is to the youth) is .40 (p < .001). The correlations between the IUS and its criterion variables are also relatively high. For example, the correlations between IUS and English Language, Years of US. Residence, Years of US. Education, and Global Ratings of US. Involvement all appear between .45- .48 (p <.001). Additionally, the correlations between IUS and overall rating of importance of the US. culture (Global Importance-US.) is .16 (p < .05). 51 52 Table 1 Bl'l'l" ElllC' . ll Measure # of items N Standardized Alpha IVN Subscale 38 169 .92 IUS Subscale 38 169 .90 B81 53 171 ' .95 Rosenberg Self-Esteem 10 178 .71 Parent/Family Relationships 12 178 .87 53 Table 2 C' . 3511' E ! l . S] 1 [Bill lIIIS] We Criterion Zero-order Correlations Partial Correlations “nth IVN (rivn-otitetion) With IVN (rim-criterion, ins) Vietnamese Language .57‘" .44‘” Global Involvement-VNa .51’" 51"" Global Importance -VNb .40“* .34.“ W Zero-order Correlations Partial Correlations wrth IUS (r ins-criterion) “’“h IUS (fins-criterion, ivn) English Language .48‘" .27“ Years of Residence in US. .48‘" .26" Years of US. Education .46‘” 32"" Global Involvement-USP . .45"" .49" Global Importance -U.S." .16"I .14c ‘p<.05, "p<.01, m95.001, cn-ns ' GlobalRatingsof involvement in‘VretnarneseandUS. culttu'es. b GlobalRafingsofhowimponamVietnameseandU.S.udmresaretoparficipants. W A correlation matrix showing the relationships between all scales and subscales is depicted in Table 3. Overall, the magnitude of these correlations range between .01 to .66 (with varying directions and significance levels); of most note the correlation between the IVN and IUS is -.44 (p < .001). W The procedure described in the Methods section was used to determine the youths acculturation styles. Of the 182 participants, 132 adolescents reported an Bicultural style while 33 reported an Assimilated style and 18—a Traditional style. There were no adolescents who reported a Marginalized style. WIS ANOVA analyses, Student Newman-Kerris post-hoe tests, and linear regression procedures were used to assess the hypotheses. ANOVA analyses and the post ad hoc- tests were specifically conducted to compare and differentiate acculturation styles on the various criteria of psychological functioning. Additionally, linear regression was used to examine how the separate dimensions of IVN and IUS related to functioning. The regression approach enabled a more meaningful, continuous examination of the data, and given the lack of adolescents with marginalized styles (thus no fourth group in the ANOVA analyses) regression procedures also provided a helpfirl supplement to understanding the link between acculturation dimensions and psychological fiinctioning. To discern whether there was an additive or interactive effect between the two dimensions, two regression models were assessed: (1) the additive model where IVN and IUS were regressed onto the particular criterion; and (2) the fiill model where IVN, IUS, and INRXN (the interaction between IVN and IUS) were regressed onto the criterion 54 55 Table3 WW Measures BSI DEP RELP SE GPA IUS IVN BSI 1.00 DEP 66"" 1.00 RELP -.l7‘I -.21"“I 1.00 SE -.34"" -.43"" .10 1.00 GPA -.12 -.20" .01 .12 1.00 IUS -.30*" -.31“" .11 45"" .20” 1.00 IVN 39"" .23" .36‘” -.29""""' -.09 -.44‘" 1.00 s n< .05, as p<.01, m p_< .001 SE - Rosenberg Self-Esteem DEP - Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale BSI - Brief Symptom Inventory IUS B Involvement in US. Culture (Acculturation Subscale) GPA= GradePoint Average IVN - Involvement in Vietnamese Culture (Acculturation Subscale) REIP-ParentlFamilyRelationships 56 W Wits Overall, ANOVA and subsequent Student Newman Keuls tests (where appropriate) suggested that adolescents with Assimilated styles reported the highest scores on the well-being measures, followed respectively by those with Bicultural and Traditional styles. This is true for all criteria measures (i.e., psychological I symptomatology, depression scores, and self-esteem) except G.P.A (where there were no significant differences between the groups) and for Family/Parent Relationships (where the Bicultural group was the most positive, followed by Traditional and Assimilated groups). (See Table 4.) . Regressionkesnlts. Overall, it appears that IVN and IUS are additive predictors of the various criteria of psychological functioning. F-ratios for the additive model were significant for all the criterion measures. Regression of IVN and IUS on these scales indicate that, in general, high involvement in the US. culture is significantly related to greater psychological functioning (this is true for all criterion measures) while conversely, high involvement in the Vietnamese culture is related to decreased psychological functioning (this is true for all variables except G.PA and Family/Parent Relationships). Though the interactive regression model was significant for all criteria (except G.PA which was very close to significance with p < .06), its INRXN predictor was significant only for self-esteem. (See Table 5.) The following section discusses the ANOVA and regression results for each of the criterion measures. (Refer to Tables 4 and 5 for the ensuing discussion.) 57 Table 4 Wits Criterion AROMA WWI: Measure F-ratio (PostAd-hocTests) [I-IierarchyofStyles] BSI E (2, 178) Assimilated group has significantly Assimilated BSI = .84 ' 8 4.39 ‘ less psychological symptomatology Bicultural BSI = 1.16 than Bicultural & Traditional groups. Traditional BSI = 1.32 Nosignificantdifl’erencebetween [Al/B T] Bicultural and Traditional styles. DEP E (2, 178) Assimilated group is significantly Assimilated DEP .- 1.72 ‘ = 3.64 ‘ less depressed than Bicultural Bicultural DEP - 1.91 and Traditional groups. Traditional DEP - 2.04 Nosignificantdifl‘erencebetween [Al/B T] Bicultural and Traditional styles. RELP E (2, 179) Bicultural group has significantly Bicultural RELP =- 3.51 “ a 11.38"" stronger Family/Parent Traditional RELP = 3.21 Relationships than Traditional Assimilated RELP 3.04 &Assimilatedgroups. No [B ”T A] significant difl’erence between Traditional & Assimilated styles. SE F. (2, 179) Assimilated group has significantly Assimilated SE - 2.98 ‘ = 7.05 " higher self-esteem than Bicultural Bicultural SE - 2.77 ‘ and Traditional groups. Bicultural Traditional SE - 2.53 ‘ grouphas significantly higher [A II B // T] self-esteem than Traditional group. GPA E (2, 151) No two groups are significantly Bicultural GPA - 3.10 = .1002 difl’erent at the .05 level. Assimilated GPA - 3.10 Traditional GPA = 3.01 [ no difl‘erence ] ‘ p < .05, “ p< .01, ‘” p_< .001, “" p,< .0001, l/ - significantly difl’erent B, A, T, M - Bicultural, Assimilated, Traditional, & Marginalized Styles respectively. CBS-D - Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale GPA - Cumulative Grade-Point Average RELP - Parent/Family Relationship BSI - Brief Symptom Inventory SE -RcaenbergSelf-Esteem 58 Table 5 RegressionResults Criterion 130811119 Water Water INRXNb W Measure Regression F-ratio F-ratio Regression F-ratio Model (Beta) (Beta) Model (Beta) BSI E (2, 178) 18.95“" 4.16“ E (3, 177) .50 = 18.83“" .33 -.15 = 12.68““ .36 DEP E (2, 178) 2.19 c 11.06" E (3, 177) 3.22 = 10.71"" .12 -.26 = 8.30““ .95 RELP E(2, 179) 45.20"" 19.08“" E(3, 178) .05 = 23.88“” .50 .32 = 15.85“” .11 GPA E (2, 151) 0.00 5.01" E (3, 150) 1.62 = 3.15‘ .00 .20 = 2.65 ° -.75 SE E (2, 179) 2.36 d 29.25““ E (3, 178) 7.27“ = 23.95"“ -.11 .40 = 18.95“" -l.33 I"n<.05, “p<.01, ""‘p_<.001 “""n_<.0001, °p=.14, dn=.13, °p SE = Rosenberg Self-Esteem BSI = Brief Symptom Inventory GPA= Cumulative Grade-Point Average IU S = Involvement in US. Culture (Acculturation Subscale) RELP = Parent/Family Relationship IVN = Involvement in Vietnamese Culture (Acculturation Subscale) a = IVN/IUS Regression Model: Regression of IVN & IUS on criterion measure. b = INRXN Regression Model: Regression of IVN, IUS, and INRXN on criterion measure. W Depressinnandjymplomatum Although BSI and CES-D scores are separate meamreatheywiflbediswuedtogethahuebecauseoffinulupanunsmthdrremhs. Incidentally, it is worth noting that B81 and CES-D, although overlapping in their assessment of depression (i.e., Depression subscale in BSI), are 2 distinct measures. Analyses of the BSI without the Depression subscale demonstrated similar patterns of significanceasthatoftheentireBSI. Thus, significantresultsintheBSIisnotafiinction of the Depression subscale alone; other symptomatology within the BSI are also significantly associated with acculturation. ANOVA analyses indicated that Assimilated youths reported significantly less psychological symptomatology [E (2, 178) = 4.39, p < .05] and depression scores [E (2, 178) = 3.64, p < .05] than their Bicultural and Traditional peers; however, there were no significant difl‘erences between the Bicultural and Traditional groups. Regression analyses suggests a pattern similar to that of the overall picture—where IUS is significantly related to lower symptomatology [a =- -.15, p < .05 ] and lower depression scores [3 = -.26, p < .01 ] while IVN, on the other hand, is related to higher symptomatology [fl = .33, p < .0001 ] and higher depression scores [[1 = .12, p = .14 ]. Though IVN is not significantly related to depression score, it is related in the same direction as the BSI (and it is relatively close to significance). Self-Em The ANOVA results for self-esteem shows a similar hierarchy of acculturation styles as that of B81 and Depression scores: Assimilated youths had significantly higher self-esteem than their Bicultural and Traditional peers. However, with self-esteem, there are also significant differences between the latter 2 groups-that is, with Bicultural youths reporting higher self-esteem than their Traditional peers [E (2, 179) = 7.05, p < .001]. 59 60 Analyses of the additive regression model suggest that IUS was significantly related to higher self-esteem [fl = .40, p < .0001 ] while IVN was related (though not significantly so)to lower self-esteem [fi=-.11, [18.13 ] . Inthe interactivemodel, itappearsthatthemmpredictorwasalso significantlyrelatedtothisciiterion [E - -1.33, p < .001 ]. There appears to be an interactive or multiplicative efl‘ect between IUS and IVN on selfeesteem where IUS was positively related to self-esteem only for those with low or medium levels of IVN. Conversely, IVN was significantly related to self-esteem only for those with high levels of IUS (See Table 5). In contrast to the additive regression model, the interactive model shows that both IUS and IVN were significant predictors of self-esteem, overall [IUS: £8 1.55, p < .001 ; IVN : fi= 1.20, p<.001]. (LEA. ANOVA results show that there was no significant G.PA difference among the three acculturation styles [E (2, 151)= .10, p = .90]. Likewise, regression analyses revealed no relationship between IVN and grades [[1 = .00, p = 1.00 ]; however, analyses did yield a significant positive relationship between IUS and GPA [B =.20, p < .05]. WW Unlike previous criteria, Parent/Family Relationship was the only criterion which demonstrated a different hierarchy of acculturation styles. Here, Bicultural youths showed significantly stronger family and parent relationships than their Traditional and Assimilated peers [E (2, 179) = 11.38, p < .0001]. In addition, Traditional youths had somewhat stronger relationships than their Assimilated peers, although not significantly so. Regression of IVN and IUS showed that both predictors were positively related to strong parent/family relationships [IVN: fl = .50, p < .0001 ; IUS : a = .32, p < .0001 ]. Interestingly, family/parent relationship is the only criterion in which high levels of IVN is related to better psychological states, and yet it has the strongest beta weight among all the relationships. 61 Table 6 Group RegressionanIlSonSrlf-Fateem F-ratio Beta Low IVN F (1, 58)== 22.51 “W" .53 Med IVN 1= (1, 62)= 10.66 .. .38 High IVN F(l,64)= 3.31 c .22 W F-ratio Beta Low IUS F(1, 62)= .47 -09 Med IUS F(1,61)= .64 -.10 High IUS F(1,61)= 5.91 r -29 ‘p<.05, ”n<.01, m p_<.001, rm p_<.0001, °p - .07 CHAPTER IV DISCUSSION WSW Overall, The Acculturation Scale demonstrated strong reliability and validity. This isevidencedbythesubscales' high alphas ('mthe .90's), aswellasbytheirnumerous associations with difl‘erent criterion variables, ranging from language, education, and years of US. residence to global ratings of cultural involvement and importance. In addition to the strong reliability and validity, correlations within the Acculturation Scale also seem to substantiate the two-dimensional conceptualization The correlation between IVN & IUS, for instance, was -.44 (p, < .05). Though empirically, IVN may be negatively related to. IUS, the relationship is not a perfect one as the bipolar model assumes. This imperfect association, coupled with diverging relationships of IUS and IVN with various criterion variables, suggest that the dimensions need to be assessed separately. Where bipolar measurements may mask such diverse associations, the two- dimensional approach seems better able to ascertain the complexities demonstrated in the results. This approach helps to delineate the positive, negative, additive and/or multiplicative intricacies of the dimensions. And, in so doing, it may help to clarify the apparent contradictions in current acculturation research (noted in the literature review). 62 W Iestsflfitheflmheses For the most part, hypotheses were supported for at least one criterion or another. Table 7 summarizes the exploration of each hypothesis, showing which ones were or were not supported as a fiinction of the individual criterion Following is a brief list and status of each hypothesis: a. The hypothesis that the Bicultural style is better than either the Assimilated or the Traditional styles was supported for parent/family relationships and partly supported for self-esteem (but not for any other variables). b. The hypothesis that the Assimilation style would be associated with more positive functioning than the Traditional style was supported for all criterion variables (i.e., psychological symptomatology, depression scores, self-esteem, parent/family relationships) except G.PA. c. The hypothesis that the Traditional style would be associated with more positive functioning than the Marginalized styles, could not be examined because there were no marginalized adolescents with whom to compare. d. The hypothesis that IVN would be significantly related to parent/family relationships, was supported. e. And finally, the hypothesis that IUS would be significantly related to G.P.A, was also supported. 63 Iablel. ExplorationnLHmothesesma Criterion Baa H‘Jl. Hui Had Has Measure B/IATM Al/TM Tl/M IVN-RELP IUS-GPA BSI NS SUPPORTED -- .... .... DEP NS SUPPORTED --- .... .... SE Partly Supported‘ SUPPORTED .... -... .... GPA NS NS .... .... mm) RELP SUPPORTED ~— -- SUPPORTED --- ‘ Bicultural styles have higher self-esteem than Traditional but not Assimilated styles. B, A, T, M = Bicultural, Assimilated, Traditional, & Marginalized Styles respectively. IVN -= Involvement in Vietnamese Culture (Acculturation Subscale) IUS '3 Involvement in US. Culture (Acculturation Subscale) RELP '- Family/Parent Relationships GPA - Grade-Point Average NS - not supported. -- - not applicable 65 Wits Overall, results indicated that adolescents with Assimilated styles were the most adjusted, followed respectively by those with Bicultural and Traditional styles. In terms of levels of involvements, it seems too, that youths with high IUS tended to be the most adjusted, generally, while those with high IVN, the least adjusted. As noted earlier, involvement in the US. culture was positively related to psychological fiinctioning for all criterion variables (for psychological symptomatology, depression scores, parent/family relationships, self-esteem, and G.PA). The reasons for such associations are not clear. One possibility is that healthier psychological status facilitates involvements in the US. culture. Perhaps those who are healthier are more likely to explore other worlds and thus, more likely to get involved in cultures outside their own. Hence, these individuals are more likely to have higher IUS. A second possibility is the converse of this rationale. Because the data are correlational (and not causal), it could also be that IUS leads to healthier functioning. Consistent with speculations of the ecological model and consistent with the predominantly Western context of Lansing, it could also be possible that high IUS moderates a sense of cultural competence and connection which, in turn, leads to higher psychological status. This author favors this latter interpretation since it is more consistent with (some) findings in the current literature (Rogler, Cortes & Malgady, 1991). In contrast to other findings, the results of this study do not suggest that increases in acculturation (high IUS) alienate the individuals from their ethnic group and facilitate internalization of damaging behaviors and beliefs that may result in self- deprecation , ethnic- and self-hatred, and a weakened ego-structure (Rogler, Cortes & Malgady, 1991; Burnham, Hough, Kamo, Escobar & Telles, 1987; Pumaiiega, 1986). At least for the group of Vietnamese adolescents in Lansing, it appears that increases in US. involvements lead to healthier functioning in all criteria measured. 66 Relationships with IVN, on the other hand, do not provide as consistent a picture as does IUS. Nevertheless, IVN‘s divergent associations with the criterion variables are intriguing. What does it mean to be ”Vietnamese” in a primarily American context? What are some of the implications? Generally speaking, IVN is negatively associated with psychological firnctioning—particularly in terms of depression, self-esteem, and psychological symptomatology. (However, IVN also has no associations with G.PA and a robust positive association with parent/family relationships.) There are several interpretations for IVN's negative associations. One possibility is that distress leads to higher involvements in the Vietnamese culture. That is, distressed adolescents may be more likely to cling to the traditional customs, behaviors, and values in which they feel most familiar and secure. Conversely, it could also be that IVN leads to distress. Perhaps it is difficult to be Vietnamese in the primarily ”American" contexts of Lansing. Those who are highly involved in the Vietnamese culture may not fit into their more Western worlds. Their competencies in the Vietnamese culture and their ability to connect with Vietnamese people may be rendered useless in a society which has no need or outlet for such skills. (This may be especially true if they lack ”American” skills as well.) Such ”futility", in turn, could lead to great psychological distress. Again, this author favors the latter interpretation since it is more consistent with (some) findings in the current literature (Rogler, Cortes & Malgady, 1991). IVN's divergent types of relationships-as evidenced by its lack of association with G.P.A, its positive relationship with parent/family relationships, and its negative associations with psychological symptomatology, self-esteem, and depression—underscore the challenging complexities youths may face in ”being Vietnamese”. These divergent relationships suggests a type of ”catch-22" situation where high IVN indicates impaired firnctioning in some areas while low IVN indicates impaired functioning in other areas. In this study, family/parent relationships are often pitted against other aspects of psychological functioning. For instance, those who are highly involved in the Vietnamese 67 culture may have stronger family/parent relationships while at the same time, may be at greater emotional risks for depression and other psychological symptoms. And conversely, those who are less involved in the Vietnamese culture may have higher self- esteem and yet struggle with afflicted relationships at home. Though the variables are somewhat different, these results are also consistent with Charron and Ness's "catch-22" findings (1981): where Vietnamese adolescents who were not forming friendships with American peers were at risk for emotional distress; while at the same time, those who did have ”success” in these friendships were at risk for family conflicts. Be it in Michigan or in Connecticut (where Charron and Ness' study was conducted), it seems that navigation between the different worlds of home, school, and peers can be an intricate process, and although healthy navigation is possible, it is often difficult to successfully meet the presses of the different worlds and emerge with completely healthy outcomes. Aside from catch-22 situations, the divergent types of relationships exemplified with IVN associations resonate with the seeming contradictions of general acculturation research. IVN seems to demonstrate a positive, negative, and zero relationship with different aspects of "psychological functioning" (in the same way that the overall pattern of acculturation research does in the literature review). This pattern suggests, as speculated in the introduction, that part of the reason for such contradictions is the diversity of criterion variables that have been examined. In other words, perhaps our difficulty in understanding the conflicts of acculturation findings is because researchers fail to acknowledge the complexities of relationships that may vary with different operationalizations of ”psychological functioning". The fact that IVN relates differently to different variables helps to explicate such "contradictions", thus leading us to take a first step toward a more sophisticated understanding of the acculturation process. In contrast to numerous research suggesting the healthiness of biculturality 68 (Rumbaut, 1991; Portes & Rumbaut, 1990; Snpocznik & Kurtines, 1980; Wong-Rieger & Quintana, 1987; Lang, Nunoz, Bernadal & Sorenson, 1982), this study did not support such an interpretation (for most of the criterion variables at least). The lack of findings relating bicultural styles to psychological functioning is mostly due to IVN's negative associations with the criterion variables; (IU S, as the other component of biculturality, seems to be related in the predicted positive direction). Biculturalism was speculated to bethehealthiest style, bothinpreviousresearchasinthisonebecausesuchastyle enables individuals to function adequately in either cultural context. As Szapocznik & Kurtines (1980) suggested, the lack of bicultural involvement is maladjustive because it renders ethnic minorities monocultural in a bicultural context. However, the major assumption in this argument is that individuals are, in fact, living in a bicultural context. It is possible that the specific bicultural hypothesis tested in this research was not supported because the adolescents' contexts were not as ”bicultural" as hypothesized. Although the adolescents' family may be somewhat Vietnamese (as suggested by the positive association between IVN and family/parent relationships), perhaps such a context may not be as ”Vietnamese" as we think (parents could also become Americanized), or perhaps the family context, despite its ”Vietnamese influence”, may not be very salient/important to adolescents at this stage in their development (when peers and school may take precedence). W This study offers several implications-both theoretically and practically. The most important theoretical contribution is its support of the 2odimensional approach toward understanding acculturation. As noted, part of the contradictory findings of current acculturation research is their divergence in measurements of acculturation (and of adjustment). The conceptual errors of the bipolar, unidimensional model, especially, may mask the complexities of relationships that actually occur in the acculturation process. The need for independent measurements of cultural involvements can be likened to the 69 concepts of femininity and masculinity. Just as the gender concepts are two separate concepts, so are the levels of involvements in the US. and Vietnamese cultures two separate levels. (For example, just as one can be ”ambitious” and ”nurturing" or ”athletic” and "compassionate" atthesametime, onecanalsobefluentinVietnameseandin English-at the same time.) As evidenced by the data, the independent measurements of involvements are necessary to understand the acculturation/mental-health relationships. This two-dimensional approach seems better able to explicate the intricate relationships- the positive, negative, additive and/or multiplicative complexities of the acculturative dimensions. In so doing, it may help not only to clarify the seeming contradictions in past research but also to lead future research and future “understanding” to a more comprehensible body of findings. A related theoretical contribution (in the understanding of acculturation 'contradictions") is the study's delineation of the different criterion variables. As suggested earlier, the divergence with which ”psychological functioning" is measured also contributes to seeming contradictions. As with the use of the 2-D approach, the use of difi‘erent psychological functioning variables in this study also helps to clarify and integrate the complexities of acculturation in a‘more comprehensible fashion. It underscores the complexities without making them any more confusing. Finally, a third theoretical contribution is the suggestion that mental health or psychological functioning is not just an individual factor. Findings in this study- specifically, the many relationships with cultural involvementucaution researchers and clinicians to acknowledge the ofien neglected contextual/cultural influences of mental health (as suggested by the ecological model). Practical implications of this study include the development of the 2-D scale as well as the understanding of adjustment in Vietnamese adolescents. Although there have been some assertions for the superiority of the 2-D conceptualization, there have been very few scales developed to validly test such assertions. The development of the present 70 2-D Acculturation Scale provides researchers an actual tool in measuring acculturative involvements and styles in Vretnamese adolescents. A final practical implication of this study is its contribution towards understanding the adjustment of Vietnamese adolescents. Be it with involvements in the us. wlture, or the Vietnamese culture, or the ”catch-22" situations, parents, teachers, administrators, and politicians alike can benefit fi'om this knowledge. Such knowledge can help parents and teachers to be more responsive to the needs and struggles of Vietnamese adolescents, and it can help administrators and politicians, to design multicultural policies in a way that is more helpful to these adolescents. W As grand as these implications may be, the present investigation is not without its limitations. Three, in particular, merit mention: the disproportion or absence of groups among the acculturation styles; the lack of standardization among the criterion scales; and the difl'erent (and perhaps incomparable) methods of administration. The first limitation in this study involves the absence of subjects with a Marginalized style and the preponderance of those with a Bicultural style. The lack of Marginalized subjects precluded full ANOVA testing of the hypotheses and precluded the assessment of main effects and interaction between the two cultures. Additionally, the disproportionate amount of subjects with Bicultural styles have rendered group comparisons problematic. However, the use of regression analyses with separate IVN, IUS predictors helped to explore some of the questions that could not be addressed via ANOVA The second limitation involves the extent to which criterion measures have been standardized for Vietnamese adolescents. Some scales, in fact many scales, are not normed for Vietnamese youths. Hence, the assessment of ”mental health” and consequently, its relationship with acculturation, may be biased towards more “Western” definitions. However, despite their lack of standardization, many of these scales have been 71 used in other research involving Vietnamese students (in Rumbaut's study, for one). And as a side note, findings of these scales do ofi‘er a sense of ”predictive validity“. Though they may not guarantee a perfect ”content validity", they do ofi‘er a sense of how well these adolescents will function in their "American" contexts, with ”American“ standards. The last limitation of this research is a methodological one. It involves the fact that some students read the questionnaires quietly to themselves in English while others had the questionnaires read aloud to them in Vietnamese. This methodological difference was dificult to avoid since there were only English versions of the questionnaires (and the resources to translate and back-translate the questionnaires into Vietnamese were well beyond the capacities of this project). An attempt was made to have a verbal administration for the English group as well. Nevertheless, such an attempt was unsuccessful since students went ahead on their own anyways. In general, this methodological difference may have adversely affected results. However, the extent and nature of such efi‘ects, if any, are uncertain. W Future research could take a variety of directions. Some of which may include a longitudinal studytodiscemwhetherculturalinvolvements influenceorareinfluencedby psychological firnctioning Given the correlational findings discussed above, it is dificult to determine the direction of cause and efl‘ect. A longitudinal study will help ascertain the casual nature of this relationship, as well as help explore the change in acculturation styles and cultural involvements with age. Another direction for future research could involve a theoretical comparison between the constructs of acculturation and ethnic identity. It would be helpful to examine the extent to which ethnic identity relates to acculturation styles. For example, what are the similarities and differences among these two constructs, and do they, in fact, have the same implications on ”mental health/psychological functioning"? Can the incorporation of ethnic identity truly enlighten our understanding of acculturation research (or vice versa)-as the ecological model suggests? A third direction for research may involve the assessment of acculturation and psychological health among other minority groups. How do these findings for Vietnamese adolescents compare to those for other ethnic adolescents? Are there similar processes of acculturation occurring in all minority children? In what way and to what extent do findings here difi‘er for other refirgees, other Asians? Or Hispanics? Or Native- Americans? Or Afiican-Americans, etc.? Are there common processes that link and transcend the experience of all minority youths? Still another direction for firture research is an in-depth exploration of the familial and peer contexts of Vietnamese youths. How do the difi‘erent acculturation styles compare among family members? Among adolescents and their parents? Among peers? And to what extent does the congruence or discrepancies in these styles relate to the functioning of the family, the peer groups, and their members overall? 72 CONCLUSION In sum, acculturation is an instrumental concept that has many implications in our increasingly diverse world. Past research reveal its numerous associations with psychological health, ranging from clinical symptomatology, to educational achievement, to family harmony. Despite the uncovering of such associations, our overall understanding of the relationships between acculturation and psychological adjustment is a conflicted one. This is partly due to the complexities of the concept itself, and consequently, to the conceptual errors of its measurement. Findings fi'om this research have helped to clarify such conflicts by suggesting that a two-dimensional approach-an independent measurement of different cultural involvements-would be, perhaps, a more fitting fi'amework in which to understand the complexities of acculturation. It is the separation of these cultural involvements, of IVN and IUS, that could help researchers to build a broader, more fruitful base in understanding the adjustment of Vietnamese adolescents. Ironically, such separation may be the first step in bridging the many worlds of Vietnamese adolescents, and potentially, the many worlds of all minority children 73 REFERENCES Area, A (1982). Discussion: Cultural aspects of psychological firnctioning care for HispanicAmericans. InAGaw(Ed.,) Wain. Littleton,MA John Wright Berry, J .W. (1970). Marginality, stress and ethnic identification in an acculturated aboriginal community. Inumalnfflmsszmlmmkmhnlnn. 1, 239-252. Berry, J. W. ( 1980) Acculturation as varieties of adaptation Wand.) Wm. 139-159). Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Berry, J. W. (1986). The acculturation process and refugee behavior. In C. L Williams & J. Westermeyer (Ed.) ' (p. 25-37). New York: Hemisphere. Berry, J. W. (1991). Refugee adaptation in settlement countries: An overview with an emphasis on primary prevention. In F. Ahearn & J. Athey (Ed). W W (p. 20-38). Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Berry, J. W. (1992). Acculturation and adaptation rn a new society. Intcnminnal Migratirm. 30, 69-79 Berry, J. W. ,Kim, U., Minde, T. ,Mok, D. (1987). Comparative studies of acculturative stress. IntemaliohalMsrationRexienL 21(3), 491-511. Berry, J. W. ,Kim, U, Power, S. Young, M., Bujaki, M. ,.(1989) Acculturation attitudes in plural societies. Intematidnalhmratidnkm'm 38(2) 185-206 Brofenbrenner. U- (1979). WWW andflssisn. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. Buriel, R., Calzada, S., & Vazquez, R (1982) The relationship of traditional Mexican- American culture to adjustment and delinquency among three generations of Mexican American male adolescents. HispanialnumalnffirhayinralSciences. 4, 41-55. Burnham, M. A, Hough, KL. ,,Kamo M, Escobar, J I & Telles, C. A (1987). Acculturation and lifetime prevalence of psychiatric disorders among Mexican Americans In Los Angeles. .Inumalgffiealthandfimialfiahaidm. 9,105-130. Caetano, R (1987). Acculturation and drinking patterns among US. HispaniaLBritish Immalanddictinn. 82, 789-799. 74 75 Carlin, J. E. (1979). The catastrophically uprooted child: Southeast Asian refirgee children. In J. D. Noshpitz, J. D. Cohen, and R L. Berlin (Ed) Wandhmkfot ChllthQdfisxchlalm. Vol. (1) (p. 290-300). New York: Basic Books. Charron, D.W., & Ness, RC. (1981). Emotional distress among Vietnamese adolescents: A statewide survey. loumalofRefirgeeResettlement. 1, 7-15. Celano, M. & Tyler, F. (1990). Behavioral Acculturation among Vietnamese Refirgees m the United States. Ihelaumalfifinciallsxcholnsy, 131(3), 373-385. Cuellar, I. ,Lorwen, H., Jasso, R. (1980). An acculturation scale for Mexican American normal and clinical pOpulations. WWW 2(3),199-217 Derogatis, LR. (1992). BSI (Brief Symptom Inventory). Dona G. & Beny, J. (1993). Acculturation attitudes and acculturative stress of Central American refugees. Memalinnmmhalm 28(4). Dressler, W., & Bemal, H. (1982). Acculturation and stress in low income Puerto Rican community. lournalnfflumanfitness. 8 32-38. Escobar, J. I. ,Randolph, E. T, & Hill, M. (1986). Symptoms of schizophrenia rn Hispanic and Anglo veterans. Wm 10, 259-276 Escobar, J.I., Randolph, E.T., & Puente, G., Spiwak, F ., Asamen, J.K. Hill, M., & Hough, R. (1983). Post-traumatic stress disorder in Hispanic Vietnam veterans: Clinical phenomenology and sociocultural characteristics. lQumamfiNsmnuund Esxchologicalfirnctioning. 171, 586-596 Feagin, J. R. (1984). RaciaLand_ethnic_relatinns_(2nd_edJ. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Fishbein, M., & Azjen, I. (1974). Attitudes toward objects as predictive of single and multiple behavioral criteria. W 81, 59-74. Franco, J. (1983). An acculturation scale for Mexican-American children. Ibelaumalgf fimeralfisychology, 108, 175-181. Graves, T. (1967). Acculturation, access, and alcohol in a tti-ethnic community. AmericanAmhmnolngist.69, 396-421 Ghuman, P. (1991). Best or worst of two worlds? Eduminnalficseamhlolume, 33(2), 121-132. '76 Kagan, S. ,Zahn, G., and Geasly, J. (1977). Competition and school achievement among Anglo-American and Mexican American children. Wham 69, 432-441. Keefe, S. E. (1980). Acculturation and the extended family among urban Mexican- Americans. InAM Padilla. (Ed.,) AmrlmminnfleonLMQdelaandSnmeflm Bindinsup 85-110). Boulder, co: Westview. Keefe, 315-. & Padilla, AM- (1937). Chicannfihnicins Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. Kinzie,M., Boehnlein,J., Leung,P., Moor, L. ,.,Riley,C &Smith,D. (1990). The prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder and its clinical significance among southeast Asian refugees. IheAmeficanlnnmalnEPsuchiatry. 147, 913-917. Kroll, J., Habenicht, M., Mackenzie, T., Yang, M., Chan, S., Vang, T., Nguyen, T., Ly, M, Phommasouvanh, B. ,Nguyen, H., Vang, Y, Sovannsoth, L., Cabugao, R (1980). Depression and post-traumatic stress disorder rn southeast Asian refugees. The Americanlnumalansxmiatnr. 146(12), 1592-1597. Lang, J. G., Munoz, Rf, Bernal, G., & Sorensen, J. L. (1982). Quality oflife and psychological well-being m a bicultural Latino community. Hispanmloumalgf Behardoraljcienaes. 4. 483-450 Lee, E. (1988). Cultural factors in working with Southeast Asian refugee adolescents. Immalandnlescence. 11. 167-179- Lerner, R & Jacobson, L. (1993). Timing, process, and the diversity of developmental trajectories in human life: A developmental contextual perspective. In G. Turkewitz & D. Devenny(F-d) Dexelnpmemalfimundflming (p. 41-59). I-IillsdaleNJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Lerner, R. (1982). Children and adolescents as producers of their own developments. DexelapmentalRevim 2. 342-3 70. Lin, K. ,Tazuma, J, & Masuda, M. (.1979) Adaptations] problems of Vietnamese Refugees. W 36, 955-961. Madianos, M (1984). Acculturation and psychological firnctioning of Greek imrrrigrants in USA In V. Hudolin (Ed), W (p. 549-557). New York: Plenum Matsuoka. J., (1990). Difi‘erential acculturation among Vietnamese refugees. Social Work, 35(4), 341-345. 77 Mavreas, V., & Bebbington, P. (1990). Acculturation and psychiatric disorder: a study of Greek Cypriot immigrants. EmhelesieaLMedieine. 20, 941-951. Mavreas, V. ,Bebbington, P. ,& Der, G. (1989). The structure and validity of acculturation. Analysis of an acculturation scale. Waffle W 24, 233-240. Merton, RK. (1987). Three fiagrnents fi'om a sociologist's notebook: Establishing the phenomenon, specified rgnorance and strategic research materials. Wei Sedelegy. 13.1-28. Miranda, M, Andujo, E. Caballero, 1., Gerrero, C., and Ramos, R (1976). Mexican- American dropouts rn psychotherapy as related to level of acculturation. In M Miranda (Ed), ‘ - - sentieedelixefx. Monograph No. 3. Spanish Speaking Psychological functioning Research and Development Program, UCLA Montgomery, G. (1992). Comfort with acculturation status among students from South Texas. Hispanieleumalnfhahaflonlficienees. 14(2), 201-223. Moyerrnan, D. R. and Forman, B. (1992). Acculturation and Adjustment: A Meta- Analytic Study. HispanieleumaLofBehardnraLScienees. 14(2). 163-200. Negy, C., woods, D., The importance of acculturation in understanding research with Hispanic-Americans. Hiananielnumamfflahalflmalfieimeea. 14(2). 224-247- Nicassio, P., LaBarbera, J ., Cobunr, P., & Finley, R. (1986). The psychosocial adjustment of the Amerasian refugees. IheleumalflfflemeuaandMenfalDiaeaae. l 74, S41 -S44. Nguyen, N. A, & Williams, H. ,.(1988) Transition fi'om East to West: Vietnamese adolescents and their parents. leumaleflfheAmsfleanAeadmnthildand W28M), 505-515. Nguyen,L..,T &Henldn, AB. (1982). VietnameserefugeesintheUJS Adaptationand transitional status. 1mmal.e£Ethnic.Shrdies.9, 101- 116. Ortiz, V., & Arce, C. H. (1984). Language orientation and psychological functioning status among persons of Mexican descent Hispanieleumaleffirhardoralfieimees. 6,127-143. Padilla, A (1977). Measuring ethnicity among Mexican-Americans. lenmalnflSeeial W105. 179-187. 78 Padilla, A (1980). The role of cultural awareness and ethnic loyalty rn acculturation In A Padilla (Ed..) . . . . . - . -. . CO: Westview Press. Padilla, ER, Olrnedo, E.L.,,& Loya, F. (1982). Acculturation and the MMPI performance of Chicano and Anglo college students. W m 4, 451-466. Patterson, G., Debaryshe, B., & Ramsey, E. (1989) A Developmental perspective on antisocial behavior. Amefleanhxcheleaisf. 329-335. Phinney, J. (1990). Ethnic identity rn adolescents and adults. Review of research, We. 108(3), 499-514. Phinney, J. (1991). Ethnic identity and self-esteem: A review and integration. Hispanic 1eumaln£Beharderal§eieneeal3(2),193-208 Portes, A & Rumbaut, R (1990). WW1. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press. Pumariega, AJ. (1986). Acculturation and eating attitudes rn adolescent girls: A comparative correlational study. leumalnftheAmmicanAeademLQLChild Psychiatnr. 25, 276-279. Ramirez, M. (1969. Identification with Mexican-American values and psychological adjustment rn Mexican-American adolescents. InfemaflenalleumaLeflSneial Emhiafrx. 15,156. Redfield, R, Linton, R, & Herskovits, MT. ' (1936). Memorandum for the study of acculturation. AmerieanAnthmpnlnsist. 38, 149-152. Roberts, R, Andrews, J. ., Lewinshohn, P. ,,Hops H. (1990). Assessment of Depression in Adolescents Using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale. leumalnf Cnnsultinundflinieslhxehelm 2(2),122-128 Rodgers, W., & Bachman, G. (1988). The subjective well-being of young adults-trends and relationships. WW (p232). Ann Arbor, MI: Survey Research Center for Social Research. Rogler, L. J., Cortes, D. E., & Malgady, R. G. (1991). Acculturation and psychological functioning status among Hispanics. Convergence and new directions for research. Amefleaanhnleainmm, 585-597. Rosenberg, M. (1965). SneiemandjheAdeleseenLSdf. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University. 79 Rumbaut, R (1991). The agony of exile. A study of the migration and adaptation of Indochinese refugee adults and children. In F. Ahearn & J. Athey (Ed). Refine: mm 53-91). Baltimore, MD: TheJohns Hopldns University Press. Santrock, J., (1993). AdeleaeeneezAnlnfmduefien Dubuque, IA: Brown and Benchmark Publishers. Salgado de Snyder, V.N. (1987a). Factors associated with acculturative stress and depressive symptomatology among married Mexican immigrant women Emhelen nfflemenfluartedy. 11. 475-488- Salgado de Snyder, V. N. (1987b). The role of ethnic loyalty among Mexican irmnigrant women. HispanieleurnalnffirhayinraLSeimees. 9 287-298 Smither, R, & Rodriguez-Giegling, M. (1979). Marginality, modernity and anxiety in Indochinese refugees. leumalnfmssfiulmalnmhelea. 10, 469-478. Sorenson, S. B.. ,Golding, J. M. (1988). Suicide ideation and attempts in Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites: Demographic and psychiatric disorder issues. .Suieideandlrife Meningflehayier. 18, 205-218. Stein, B. (1986). The experience of being a refugee: Insights fi'om the research literature. InC.LWilliarns&J. Westenneyer(ED.)Refirsee£sxeholoaiealfirnetioningin ResettlemenfEmnffles (p. 5-21). New York: Hemisphere. Sue, D., (1981). WWW NY: Wiley. Suinn, RM. Ahuna, & Khoo (1992). The Suinn- Lew Asian Self-identity Acculturation scale: Concurrent and factorial validity. Edueafienalandhxehelesieal Measurement. 52(4), 1041- 1046. Suinn, RM. Ri,ckard-Figueroa, K., Lew, S. ,&ngl, P. (1987). The Suinn- LewAsian self-identity acculturation scale: An initial report. .EdueatienaLandPsxeholeaieal Measumnent. 47. 401-407 Szapocznik, J., & Kurtines, W. (1993). Family psychology and cultural diversity: Opportunities for theory, research and application. Amedeanzsycholngist, 4, 400-407. Szapocznik, J, Santisteban, D. ,Kurtines, W. ,Hervis, O., and Spencer, F. (1982). Life enhancement counseling. A psychosocial model of services for Cuban elders. In E. Jones& 8. Korchin (Eds), Mneflmasxchelesiealfimeflenins. NY: Praeger. 80 Szapocznik, J., & Kurtines, W. (1980). Acculturation, biculturalism and adjustment among Cuban Americans. WQ. 139-159). Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Szapocznik, J., & Kurtines, W. ,& Fernandez, T. (1980). Bicultural involvement tn Hispanic American youths. IntrmatinnallnumalnflntemlfuralRelatiens. 4, 353-365. Szapocznik,J., Scopetta,M, &Kurtines,W., &Arnalde,MA (1978). Theory and measurement of acculturation. WW 1978, 12, 113- 130. ' Torres-Matrullo, C. (1976). Acculturation and psychopathology among Puerto Rican women in mainland United States. Amefleanleumalnflkthepsxehiatna 46, 710-719. Wicker, AW. (1979). An examination of the ”other variables" explanation of attitude-behavior mconsistency. leumalflffiemnahmandfimmfisyeham 19,18-30. Williams, C., & Westermeyer, J. (1983). Psychiatric problems among adolescent southeast Asian refugees: A descriptive study. humalnfliemeusandefal Disease 171(2), 79-85. Westermeyer, J. (1986). Migration and Psychopathology. In C. L Williams & J. Westermeyer (Ed) ' - - - . . ‘ (p. 39-59). New York: Hemisphere. Westermeyer, J ., Bouafirely, M., Neider, J ., Callies, A (1989). Somatization among refugees: An epidemiologic study. Esyhosnmatics. 30, 34-43. Westermeyer, J. (1991). Psychiatric Services for Refugee children: An overview. In F. Ahearn&J. Athey(Ed..) W (p. 127-162). Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Wong-Rieger, D., & Quintana, D. (1987). Comparative acculturation of southeast Asian and Hispanic immigrants and sojoumers. Mmammlmmmmm 18, 345-362. Wickher, H., & Schoch, H. (1987). Refugees and psychological functioning: South East Asian refirgees 111 Switzerland. ID. Miserez (Ed), Reflmpaxehelesiealfimeflening inmnlemenfmunfflea (p. 5-23). Washington. Hemisphere. Yu, L., Harburg, E., (1981). F ilial responsibility to aged parentustress of Chinese Americans. International. .lnumalnfifimnplensiens. 11, 47-58. 81 Appendiu Descriptions of Berry's Acculturation Attitudes (1986) Assimilafien is relinquishing cultural identity and moving into the larger society...this can take place by way of the absorption of a nondominant group into an established ”mainstream”, or it can be by way of the merging of many groups to form a new society (the ”melting pot”)...there are subvarieties or processes: most important among these are “cultural or behavioral assimilation” in which collective and individual behaviors become more similar, and ”structural assimilation" in which the nondominant groups penetrate the social economic systems of the larger society. Other forms...include marital identification, and civic assimilation, by way of intermarriage, ethnic identification and the reduction of power conflict. Integration implies the maintenance of cultural integrity as well as the movement to become an integral part of a larger societal fi'amework. . .the option taken [here] is to retain cultural identity and move to join the dominant society. In this case, there is a large number of ethnic groups, all cooperating within a larger social system (the ”mosaic”). Such an arrangement may [involve] some degree of “structural assimilation” but little ”cultural and behavioral assimilation". Separation or rejection refers to self-imposed withdrawal fi'om the larger society. However, when imposed by the larger society, it becomes one of the classical forms of segregation. Thus, the maintenance of one's traditional way of life outside firll participation in the larger society may be due to a desire on the part of the group to lead an independent existence (as in the case of ”separatist” movements), or it may be due to power exercised by the larger society to keep people in ”their place” (as in slavery or ”apartheid” situations). Marginality is accompanied by a good deal of collective and individual confusion and anxiety. It is characterized by striking out against the larger society and by feelings of alienation, loss of identity, and what has been termed as acculturative stress. [This] is where groups are out of cultural and psychological contact with both their traditional culture and the larger society. When imposed by the larger society, it is tantamount to ethnocide. When stabilized in a non-donrinant group, it constitutes the classical situation of 'marginality"...where individuals are poised in psychological uncertainty between two cultures. (p. 29) 82 Appendix 2: The Questionnaire Battery 12. l3. 14. 15. 16. 17. 19. 20. 2 l. 24. 25. 26. 27. . Howwelldoyoumd Vietnamese? Background Information Full name (please print cleuly): Whatgradeaeyouin? 3.Whatschoola'eyouin? Sex (Check one): Male _ Female _ 5. Age: yrs. Birthdate (month/daylyear): Where were you burn? (City. cormtry) HowoldwereyouwhenyoufirsteametotheUnitedStases? . yrs HowlonghaveyoulivedintheUnitedSmes? yrs. Howoldwereyouwhenyoufirstst-tedaehoolintheUnitedStnes? yrs. . HowrnarryyeushaveyouattendedschoolintheUnitedSmes? yrs. Z of Not Fairly Very very well well well How well doyoumdemlndfinglish?Checkone: How well do you M English? How well do you w English? How well do you mite English? How well do you W Viennese? How well do you ml; Vietnamese |||| Illli Howwelldoyoum Viennese? N .No Depeopleinyorn'hornespeakViemunese?(Checkons.) 1.Yes__ ll-IowofiendothepeopleinyourhornespeakVietnarnesewhartheymtalkingtoeachother?(€heckone.) __l. Seldom _____2. Fromtirnetotime 3. Ofien 4. Always Whenyoutalkmyornpaurts(urguudims)whatlnguagedoyuuuse.nnstofien? (Writeonlyml-rguage.) Whaler-pagedoyouaremeakmnnhefime? (WritemtelmsuasemeJ How do you identifir yourself? What is your ethnic identity? (Examples: Vietnamese. Vietnamese-American. American. Chinese-Americas. etc.) (Write in.) How import-rt is this identity (reported in #24) to you? (Check one.) ___1. Not at all __4. Important ____2. Slightly ' _5. Very Important ___3. Moderately Onasealeofl toS.hewi-portantistlreVietnanreseculnnetoyou? (Cir-sienna.) l 2 3 4 5 not very mutant input-at Onasealeofl toS.howinrportantistheAner-iealculturetoyou? (Circleone.) l 2 3 4 5 nut my imp-tram mutant 28. On a scale of l to 5. how involved/identified are you in the Vietnamese culture overall? (Circle one.) 29. Onascaleofl t05.how involved/identifiedareyouintheAr-erieancultueoverall? (Circleone) 83 I 2 3 4 not . involved 1 2 3 4 not involved Usedredefiniflonsofdreseculnnalstylestomswerthenernthreequesfions a. Personisinostlyinvolved/idenfifiedindreAnerteanadtuebunothrthevmwnne. b. Person is mostly involved/identifiedin theVietnaneae culture, butnotintheAmericmtculture. c. PersonislnvolvedlidentifiedinhoththeViemamesendAmericanculnne. (1. Person is not really involved/identified in either the Vietnamese or American culture. 5 “'7 involved 5 “'7 involved 0. Which cultural style listed above bestdescribesyorr? a b e d 31. Which stylebestdescribesyou mother? a b c d 7 2. Which stylebestdescribes you father? a b c d Pleasecirclemnneachmnentistrueforyou. Ale- aunt Onascaleofl-IWMMMW (Circleone) 40. 33. HowofiendoyoupreferArnericanwaysofdoingthings? 1 2 3 34. How often do your parents (or adults with whom you live) prefer American ways of doing things? 1 2 3 35. And how often do you get in trouble because you way of doing things is different fi'orn that of your parents? 1 2 3 ‘ 36. How often do you feel that you would ratha be more American if you had a choice? I 2 3 37. Howoftendoyougetupsetatyouparentsbecause they don't know American ways? 1 2 3 38. How often have you had problems with you family because you prefer American customs? - l 2 3 39. How often do you feel uncomfortable having to choose between Vietnamese & non-Vietnamese ways of doing things? 1 2 3 SchoolsshouldhelpuslearnAmericanwaysofbehaving&become more like the American children in the neighborhood. M "'3: 234567 sun-e: 4.2 41. Wemayadaptouselvesto American societyinordertoearnalivingbut we (as Vietnamese) must stay together as a group to preserve ou heritage. 2. The American way ot'life may begood for others. but not for me. I 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 67 67 84 Parents: The following questions arc about your WM:- 43. Doeayour father live with you? __ I.Yea _ 2. No __ 3. Fatherdecasedmot living) _ at. Fathermltnown 44. lfnotdienwheredoeshelive? (Checkout. Narnec'ayorcotnnryifaecearary.) _ I.Sameeity _zAnotherc'nyinMicla'ganNamec _ 3.Anotheraateorcotmtry. Name: 45. lnwhatcomuywasyourfatherbom? _a UnitedStatea _b. Othercountry. Name: _ e. Don‘tltnow 46. HowmnryyeushasyoufatherlivedindleUnitedStues? yrs. 47. W Whudoeayowfuhahrstepfdhuoraduhmfivingwithyouwoforaliving? Mibedoea: mum: 48. kheworkingnow?(Checltone.) l.Yer_ 2.No_ 49.Whatisthehighe£educatioulevelthlheharcompleted?(€heckone.) _l. Elernentarysehoolorless _5. Somecolleueortal'va'a'ty __2. Middleschooluaduateorlasa _6. Colagegrarhnteorrnore _3. Somela’ghsehool ___7. Other: _4. magnum WMWIBMMW 50. Doeryourmotherlivewithyou? _ LYea _2 No __ 3. Mother-deceasedmotliving) _4. Motherlmknowa 5|. lfnotthenwheredoasbelive? __ I. Samecity _2. AnothecityinhficliganJflme: __ 3. Anather'stateorcotuary. Name: 52. lnwhatcoumrywasyourmothaborn? _ a. UnitedStatea __ b. Othercourary. Name: __ c. Don'tlmow 53. HowmaryyeushasyourmotherlivedintbeUnitedStata? Yrs: 54. WhydidyompuentscometotheUnitedStates? (Checkone.) _l. Toimprovetheireconomicsinration _4. Forpolitiealreasons(war.etc.) _2. Toreunitewithhmily _5. Don'tItnowIDoesnotapply _3. Other. PleaseExplain: 55. 57. 58. 59. 6|. 62. 85 W: Whatdoesyourmodiamrstep-moduoradultwonmwholiveawithyouMoforaliving? Mil shedoes: mmworlts: lssheworltingnow? I.Yes_ 2.No__ Whaisthehigheeteducalionleveldiatshehascompleted? (Cbcckone) _l. Elementaryschoolorleas _5. Somacollageoruu‘vcsity _2. Middleschoolgraduneorleas __ .Colegeuathmormore ____3. Somehighschool _1. Other: _. 4. Highschoolgraduate Doyotnpcentuoraduhgutdinswwucrrandiehomeormwhaeyouhve? _l. Own 2R“ _3. Other. (mm) CompcedtoSyeu'squoyoudiinkdtnyowfaruly'seconomicsiunioais: (Cheekoaa) ___l. Muehbetter ___2. Better ___3. Aboutthesame _4. Worse ___5. MuchWorae Whichoftheaebestdescribeyotucurreatlivingsittnion? (Pleaaercadthewholelistbeforacheclt'mgtbemgory diatbestqrpliestoyou.) _a llivewithmybiologicaloradoptivefatherandmother. _b. llivewithmyfatherandstep-motber(orotherfemaleadult). _e. llivewithmymotherandstephtheflcrothamaleadult). _d. llivewithmyththeralone. ___e. llivewithmymotheralone. _f. llivewithotheradultpardinshmuncleaete.) Plaaseatpln'n: 3. Other. Pleaseexplain: haddifionmyomp-morgudimwhiehofdiefollowingpeoplehvewithyou? Checltallthatqrply. aBrothersorstepbrothers _ flown-1y? _ b. Sistersorstep-sisters __ How many? __ cGrandfather/grandmotber _ l-lowrnany’? _ dAuntsorunclea _ Hownnny’? _ aOtherrelatives __ Howrnany? __ f Non-relatives _ l-lowmany? _ Howm-Iypeopleliveinthesunehousewithym.(donotcotmtyotusel0? Number: Please continue on the next page. a 86 The Acculturation Scale BelowaestatementsabouttheVietnameaemdAmeriemculnae. Mdlmwmwim each statement. Usethe following scale to circlethentunberdiatbestappliestoyou. Answeralltheitems. l- Strong Disagree 2' Disagree 3- Nelther Agree nor Dhagree (Neutral) 4- Agree 5- Straagly Agree . lwouldliketowatchmoreAmerietmTV I would to to more music. . I like to retain (or ) . I would like to to American or clubs. . It all to their own career. . I want to at home. should follow their wishes I like students who ' came Vietnun an J humnm . l to eat Vietnamese food. . It is to dress like other American students. . I would like to watch more Vietnamese W or movies . It is Vietnamese to to date . l thatlshoulddowhatisbestforrne. . l is to learn about Vietnlnese I had the . I like to travel should ' about . It is for Vietnamese to to date I should live themselves as soon a . I would like to to Vietnamese or Most closest are Americans. . l at ease with American . matters should be handled . As as behaviors and values. I am " l Vientameae or .R mama I want to (or take ) the American . It is the children's ' to take cue their room is decorated in Vietnamese to American members should to be with ach other. . ltis tometo' Americanvalues . I think should live with their until . I it is to learn about American and traditions. I think that in out should be . It is to one's elders in homes. I like to eat American food. . It is to me to 87 Neither A... M cur Dhgrea w ”EB—El! menu-n 62 an ’ 40 I think it is okay if Vietnamese people date or marry other Americans. I 2 3 4 5 4 I. Grandparents should have more influence than parents in family matters. I 2 3 4 5 42. I enjoy going to Vietnamese gatherings/parties. I 2 3 4 5 3 Children should follow their parents wishes about marriage (when & whom to marry).| 2 3 4 5 44. Girls over the age of 18 should be allowed to move away- from borne to go to college and/or to take a job. | 2 3 4 5 45. i would like to listen to more American music. | 2 3 4 5 46. Becauseofdneuage.wisdommdexpenence,|dunkeldersdesaverespect._fl l 2 3 4 5 47. As far as behaviors—a} values. I am 'Vietrnamese." l 2 3 4 5 48. My room is decorated in American style. | 2 3 4 5 9. Parents always know what is best I 2 3 4 5 50. |believethatmyactionsshouldbebeedmainlyoutbewe|lobehng of the family. (I should do what is best for any family.) I 2 3 4 5 5|. Most ofmy closest fiiends are Vietnamese. 1 2 3 4 5 52. ltisallrightforboyslgirlsovertheageofl8todecidewhenlndwhomtomany. l 2 3 4 5 53. Whenaboy/girl reachestheageofl6. itisallriglntforhimllner to decide whernawhonntodate. l 2 3 4 5 54. I feel at ease with Vietnamese people. | 2 3 4 5 55. Tlneoldestgirl inthefarnily shouldhelpherfunilytdtecareofthehouse and the younger childrern whether she wants to or not. I 2 3 4 5 56. lwanttospeakVietrnameseathome l 2 3 4 5 Tlnenextquestionsarealittlebl’tdl'fi‘erentti'omtlnoseabove. Why. 11neyareaboutyour beltsvior's-mmnyouengageincertainactivities. Usethefollowingscaletocircletheanswerthlbestlitsyou: l- Never 2- Rarely 3- Sorlnetilles 4- 00e- 9- Always Sin-e- Never Rarely times Often Always gr. How often do you listen to Americarn music? | 2 3 4 5 E8. How ofien do you watch American movies orJ‘ll'V pnggams? l 2 3 4 5 [59. How often do you go to Vietnamese gatherings/Mes? l 2 3 4 5 507. How frequently «Wu eui Vietnurnese food? I 2 3 4 5 [6|. How often do you speak English? | 2 3 4 5 I62. Howoflendoyoutrytoleunmoreaboutthe Vietnamese culture (history. traditions. customs. etc. )? l 2 3 4 5 [63. How often do you participate in American groups (sports. hobbies. clubs. etc.)? l 2 3 4 5 [64. How oflen do you read Vietnamese newspapers or magazines? I 2 3 4 5 [35. How frequently do you eat American food? ‘ l 2 3 4 s [66. How often do you interact with Vietnamese people? | 2 3 4 5 [7. How ofiendoyoutrytoleammoreaboutthe American culture (history. MdonS. customs. etc)? I 2 3 4 5 [68. How oflen do you hang out with Vietnamese fi'iends? l 2 3 4 5 [69. How oflen do you read American newspapers or magazines? I 2 3 4 5 70. How oflenn do you participate in Vietnamese groups (Sports. hobbies. clubs. etc)? 1 2 3 4 5 7n. How ofien do you speak Vietnamese? ' l 2 3 4 s 72. How oflen do you interact with American people? I 2 3 4 5 73. How often do you go to American gatherings/parties? m m l 2 ‘ —3 4 5 74. How often do you listen to Vietnamese music? | 2 3 4 5 75. How often do you watch Vietnamese speaking movies or TV programs? I 2 3 4 5 76. How ofielndoyouhimgoutwith American friends? I 2 3 4 5 88 88! Instructions: ' Ontlnetnextpageisalistofproblemspeoplesometimeshave. Pleasereadeachornecarefully,andcincletlne number that best describes HOW MUCH THAT PROBLEM HAS DISTRESSED OR BOTHERED YOU DURING THE PAST 7 DAYS INCLUDING TODAY. Circle one amwer for each problem & do not skip any items. lfyouchangeyoluminderaseyourfnrstmarkcarelinlly. lfyoulnaveanyquestionspleaseaskthem. 89 BSI llowmuehwereyoudistnssedby: l. Nervousnessorshakinessinside Faintnessordiainess 'l‘lneideathatsomeoneelsec-ncontrolyoutlnoaghts . Feeling othersareto blame formostoflour troubles Trouble remembering things . Feeling easilyunnoyedorirritaed . Pains in heartorchest 8. Feelingafraidirnopeaspacesoroathestreets 9. Thoughtsofendirngyoulife l0. Feelingtlnnmostpeoplecmotbetnsted ll. Poorappetite l2. Suddenlyscaredfornoreason l3. Temperoutbuststhatyoucouldnotcontrol l4. Feeling lornelyevernwhenyoulewitlnpeople l5. Feeling blockedingettingth'mgsdoue l6. Feeling lonely l7. Feeling blue l8. Feelingnointerest'unthinp l9. Feeling fearful 20 You feelings being sally hurt #09 agents > i . 2|. Feelirng that people are unfriendly ordislikeyou 22. Feeling inferior to others 23. Nausea or upset stomach 24. Feeling tlnatyouuewatclnedorulkedfioubyotlners 25. Trouble falling asleep 26. Having iodleekanddouhlechectwhnmdo 27. Difficulty making decisions. 28. Feeling afraid to travel on buses. subways or trains 29. Trouble getting you breah 30. Hot or cold spells 3|. Having to avoid eernafntln'ngsplacesoractivitiesbeeausetlneylliglaeuyou 32. You mind going blarnk 33. Numbness or tingling in puts of you body 34. 11neideathatyoushouldbeptanishedforyousins 35. Feeling hopeless about the insane 36. Trouble concentrating 37. Feeling weak in parts of you body 38. Feeling ternse or keyed up 39. thoughts ol'damh or dying 40. Having urges to beat. injure. or l-rn sonneorne 4|. Having urges to break or smash things 42. Feeling very self-conscious with others 43. Feeling uneasy in crowds. such a shoppingoraamovie 44. Never feeling close to another person 45. Spells of terror or parnic 46. Getting into frequent rguments 47. Feeling nervous when you me let! alone 48. Others not giving you credit for you achieverrnernts 49. Feeling so restless you couldn‘t sit still 50. Feelings of wortlnlessrness 5l. Feeling that people will line Mot‘you ifyou let them 52. Feelings of guilt 53.1‘lneideathatsomethingiswrongwithyoumind I 600°C OOOOOOOOGOOOGOOOOOGOOOOOGOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0°00‘1 -——-—-—-———-—-—_———--~.—_~—-———--———-—-—--—-—- “ NNNNN NNNN NNNN NNNNNNNN NNNNNNNN NNNN NNNNNNNNNNNN NNNIQ NNNN!‘ 4.54-8.4-bbbbbbfifi58554-555-5‘888-54-3-bd—bbbbbbbb‘d—bhd—«l—J—‘J-J-54-4-4- 90 Please indicate W with the following staernnernts. Circle the nunberdna best appliestoyou. Inn-d: M ' M.“ I. Ifeeldiatl'mapersonofwortlnatleastonanyequalbasiswitlnotlners. l 2 3 4 2. lfeel that l have a number of good qualities. l 2 3 4 3. All in all. larnninclined to thihktha’tlamafailue. I 2 3 4 4. Iarnabletodothingsaswellasother people. I 2 3 4 s. lreelldonoiliovfinieniobeproudor l 2 3 4 6. Irakeapositive utitude towards myself. I 2 3 4 7. Ontlnewholelamsatisfiedwithmyself. l 2 3 4 8. Iwishlcouldhavemorerespectformyself. l 2 3 4 9. [certainly feel useleasattimes. l 2 3 4 IO. Attinnesltlninklamnogoodatall. l 2 3 4 II. monomeomy'ioliyeinmmeuiuiedsaiee l 2 3 4 l2. Not matter how much educationl get. peoplewill stilldiscriminateagainstme. I 2 3 4 Foril3-15. oleasemswerhowtrueeachst‘emeutisforvouundyoufinily. Vary M NstVaq nutri- Tr. True Tr. AtAI FlMypa-entsdonotlikemeverymuch. | 2 3 4 I “4. My parents haveputrrnedownn foralong time. I 2 3 4 I D5.MyErerntsareusuallynotveryinterestedinwhnlsay. I 2 3 4 I For#l6-ZI. pleasemswerWMwitheachm has larval land A"! I6. rrnernbers one arnotlner. | 2 3 I7. Wesharesimilarvaluesand asa . I I work out well us as a l9. We dotrnnstandconfideineach I Were ou Zl. Wecun ou withou For#22-28. please answerWeachstnementistrueaboutyouoryou funily. mash lama ' Never awfl baa ca- 22. Familymembersliketospandfi'eetimswitlneaclnodner. I 2 3 4 23. Farrnilynnernbersfeelveryclosetoeachother. I 2 3 4 24. Furnilytogethemeasisveryimport-nt. I 2 3 4 25. HowofiandopeopledislikeyoubecurseyouleVietn-nese? I 2 3 4 26. HowoflenareyoutreatedunfairlybeeauseyouaeViotnurneae? I 2 3 4 27. How ofiern have youseern frierndstreaed I 2 3 4 unfairlybeeausetheyrseViehnanneae? 28. l-Iaveyoueverfeltdiscrirnirnaedagu'nsuortreuedunfairly)? l.Yes 2. No— ' 29. Whatdoyouthinkwastlnemainreasonfordiscriminflingagdnstyou? (Pleasewritecleuly) MUM MUM: 91 Pleue indicate Wham with the following statements. Use the scale listed below. I- DisagreeAIot 2-Sortofdhagree 3-Sortongree 4-AgreeAlot _I. Itisokaytosrneakintoamovieorballganewitholrtpaying. _2. Itisokay tostealabieycleifonecandoitwithougettingcauglnt. __3. ltisimportanttopayforalltlningstakenfromastore. ____4. Itisimportanttotrytofollowrulesandobeytlnelaw. For #5-7. please irndicate m you think each staternernt is. I-Nottrueatall 2-Notverytrnne 3-Prettytrue 4-Verytrnre 5. ‘l‘lnekidstlnatmessaoundwidndnelawseemtobebetterofl‘thanthosednatalwaysfollowthelaw. 6. ldon'tcareaboutotherpeople'sfeelings. 7. Iwouldliketoquitschoolassoonaspoaa‘ble. thdly,mefollowmgquesdomaskabouhowyouhavefdtubehavedindnepaaweek Pleasecheckthebox forwhmwhichbeaducfibahmnflnwadtubdnavdmisway-duhgmemwek. m “of Haste! lately Sanche- he take . lwasbotlnered that don'tbotlnerme. . |did not feel like was I thatlcouldnotshake tbebluesevernwitln fi'om or fiiernds. . I felt tlnat I was as as other . Ihadtrouble mirndonwhalwas . I felt . lfelt that |did wasarnefi‘ort. . I felt about the future. . I life had been a failure. . I felt fearful. was restless. . l was . I talked less than usual. . I felt were . l ' life. . I had . I felt sad. . I felt that disliked me. I could not " ' H 92 Apgendix 3: Informed Consent Latter (English Version) Informed Consent Project Title: “Culture and Adjustment" Dear Parent/Guardian and Student: Hello. My name is Huong Nguyen. and I am a graduate researcher at Michigan State University (MSU). With the help of Dr. Gary Stollak. we are interested in Ieaming about how Vietnamese teenagers are doing at this stage in their lives. Having grown up as a Vietrnamese person in the United States myself. I krnow that there are many common and not-so-common factors that affect the development of a minority person. Common factors can involve the normal changes of all adolescents (e.g., physical changes. puberty, etc.). wlnile ”not-so-common" changes involve issues unique to minority adolescents (e.g., cultural differences). Althougln adolescence is an interesting time in general. it is an especially interesting time for minority teenagers. It is a time where minority adolescent begin dealing with cultural differences. What are these differences? How do tlne differences affect one's adjustnnnent in school? Arnd at home? Most importantly. how can we better facilitate the adjustment and education of Vietnamese teenagers? 11nesearetlnetypeofquestionsthatourstudy isdesignedtoassess. Answerstosuchquestionscanlnve peatimportance forVietrnamese studentsthemselvesandforallthosewhocomeintocorntactwithtlnese students (teachers. parents. administrators, etc.) Essentially, this study can help us to better untknrstand and better help Vietrnamese teenagers It can help u facilitate their education. It can improve their general well- being Grand as these implications are. we need you help in getting the answers We are asking parents for your permission to allow your student to participate in this study. And we are asking students to be hvolved in the study. we are also asking for you permission to attain copy of the student's grade point averages via school records. The exact details of the involvement are outlined below: W Studentswhopartieipatewill spendatotalofabout I honreo-pktiagso-e questionnaires. The questionnaires will ask about difl'erernt parts of tlne student's life (eg, friends, family, school. activities, etc.). The questionnaires will be completed sometime during the school day. Additionally. mastudentwhoparticipatesinthestudywillberewardedam Andasanaddedbonusnlu'ee nflleprizesoowillbegiventosumelwkysuklems (Chancestowinthernflleprinsare about three students in a group of I00.) Wu. The student's participation in this study is completely voluntary. There will benopenaltyifthestudentdoesnotwishtobe inthisstudy.arndsllnemaywitlndrnwatanytimednrringthe study. S/lnemayalsorefirsetoansweranyofthequestions. Thisptojectlnasbeetnnpprovedbytlneresearch committee at MSU and by the Lansing and East Lansing schools. WWI. All information will be held confidential. Ornly the researchers will see the questionnaires. Once the questionnaires have been collected, the teenagers name will be removed and replaced with a number so that she can no longer be connected to any specific answers. W Please return the portion on page 2, stating wlnetlner or not you family would like to [anticipate If you are tlne teenager. please sigrn the fornn to indicate whether or not you agree to participate. (There is one section for parents and one for the teenager.) Please sign and return this forrrn even if you decide mt to be involved. Eitlner way, it will help us to know that this information Ins reached you. You may keep this page oftlne letter foryourecords. I really dohopeyoudecidetobe involved. It takesso little timeandyet ithassuchpeatimportance. Ifyou haveanyquestions, please feel freetocall me, IlnongNgnyen (333-3826) or Dr. Gary Stollak (353-8877). Graduate Student Professor Dept of Psychology—MSU Dept. of Psychology-MSU OVER --—> 93 Informed Consent F onns Project Title: ”Culture and Adj ustment" Student's Name (please printx PhoneNtnnber. School: Informed Consent—Eaten: sign here PlancheckdnapprowhtlhundamdhfifhnnbackwachodMymnaonum __ l. YES! lhavereadandlrntderstandthepermissionletter. Igivecoruentformyteenagertopartieipate inthisworthwhilestudy. _ 2. NO. Idonotwantmychildtopartieipateinthisstudy. __ 3. lwoufllikemaemfumdmbefaegivingcomemfumychildmpardcimindussmdy. Please callme. Parent's SigrntualDate. Informed Consent-Students Sign Here PhasecheckdtsapptopriUelinesandrennndrisformbacktodieteacher: r. YES! ruwwmrmmmcmmw. tmmmumm. 2. NO. ldonotwishparticipateinthisstudy. 3. lmuldlikemorehu'ormadonbeforeagreeingtoparticipateindussnrdy. Pleasecallrne. Student‘s SignatuelDate: - 94 Qpendix 3: Informed Consent Letter (Vietnamese Version) rudnd'stmr 'tou'to 'vi' 'VKIII nos v?! . sages tron?!" our vi tum hmh, era'- ha}, ya :5: .- hoeginh this all. . . , de h‘t tdi rtin tr! 9.1th thiQu tdi 19 tgguydn, “63¢, nqhian edu sinh eua tru'oftq dai hoe ttiehigan. Vdi pti' group dd eua 'ridn ai Gary gtoilalt, dang tib'n hinh viQe khao ,etlivh‘ 16p tubi vi .thinh nidn thube dan toe thiau ad: a sinh sb’ng trln yit ttoa lt'y. Viée lthao etiu aide ehu trongodin dd‘i sang ena ga'e thanh this: nigh Viat an. {at t n '61 Viatnan 1 n 1§n trdn 'dat,ttoa ty. nan t3i biat in 5:6 r t nhiau y 'u t ehung va ridnq eo a'nh htidng tSi ad phbt tridh 6p tr; n3 .., lthtiri'g v‘d'u ta'ehung iiin quan din nh 9.34 3133 831., than thu‘ong ej'ra eie thanh this}: ni‘n n‘y thu‘dfig 1‘34 khde biatva va'n hoa. ‘ the diit tubi, tra , ii~n§t_thdi‘ It? néi ghung r t in thigh thti. 90' ia' pat thdi k9 hg'nq phin. -Do curry is thdi ian na ea'e; thanh thiiu nié‘n nay lthdi at; dddng din ybi a ,va chqn vi via n a. s khae star. va"n ho'a 1: 9i? sit turd: bite na'y nah hd n9 nhu' ths nd'o ng ,v fig hoe ha'nh. v1 trionq gia. ‘dihh ‘I {Digit quart trgng trgng vide kh o euu nay livti'n ra nhtlng, ydugto ed th‘ giup eho ted n, hoe 3: dar'ig hdn trong vide hddnq dfi't vi giang day eho eie thanh thiau nian Cm“. \ . ~96 1a” nhdn'§,10ai gin 'hdi trong 8‘ air Itha’o edr} nan ldn. 8d tgfa idi e‘e, eau n51 nly_rat 9'6 ieh he ehi’nh e e thanh enters ni‘n viaem va eho nhtfnq nerid'i thrion tidp rnie i eae an phrfiqia'o ,vii‘n‘ eha‘po. v; nhan nun quart tri. Vide idu nghiin Oniy ed thi giup ehung toi‘ hi_u bidt hdn vp idp tnhi tra’ Vietnam hlh gidp eae an dride nhihu hbn., 9 hrs nay eBn e.o thg qiup zhnhg t3; dz‘ daijg trpngflvihe gia'n diy va edi tidn a phdeoldi eua,tha’h§ tr na ntia. Dian eot an d,day 1 ehuhg tfii ean e . , at! dap ting eua qni vi vi etie an. . i v81. phi; huynh ehung t8i sin qni vi eho'phap eon on. than at! we are. not «it eae an ehu'ng eat ya‘u'etit ester: cite than ad. , Chung t «5'9 133: edit qni' 3.1. vi eae 9n eho hdp ehunq tdi ed‘dtlde nhdr‘r' ban aao li t6 9 kit trung birth itiu trd ndi 6ng hoe. Chi ti t e9 thh‘ tide phde hoa III“! ““3 a s s' o . s o ‘llhtt‘ng aria can s15: v3 bubéihh‘o enu. , eae hog nigh em. art do go .3»: thd} qian 'dd n§t 913 dB' tea _1 pie efiu hoi. lhting eau.hoi ad _nhln vao tu‘n phlh khle nhan tron; ,‘ddi.ad etfa cafe on nht; ban be. gia “inh. hoe ., difdn , heat gang v.v.. sit tra 1 i ededeaunhd’i :0 ddbe ghtle hipn trong buoi hoe tai trddnq. cde hqe ainh than 99‘ so nhan.d’r3 e pat tang phan. thin vd'o do_ can eo' rtit tha"n trun thti’dnmda, ni' 3 giai trung it 100.. so . 25 dollars danh~eho ,ede than du‘ vi n nay (c6 kho'anq 3 hoe ainh trong ad 100 than dd so trun gihi). . - , , , . , nguyzn than dd. _ dd than du’ hoan to'in eo tinh each t}! ngnyqn. .thng eo' bat It? hihlL thdé nae, bit bribe ed. ltgtib‘i than.dt.t’ 6 ti? at its} bit er! 1!: na‘o. vi ennq e6 thh tad ehb‘i tel id'i b§t it? can h i nae. 00 an Ithao grfu naydddesdehapthntmeuattybanmoedntrn’dngmvikhnvdehoeddbng un.£nq.o s A 9 ’ o . v t ’ I A as 9 Q, I fit ea eae eats t‘r‘a idi din drioe girl kin. Chi epe nhan vian lthao euu pdi Uu‘de phap dge ede eau tti 16.1.. Xhi bin vi’n p idi dridg: thin gd'p thi‘ phah dd‘tan sa‘ eat by! va' thay thh vie do’ bdhq n§,a ., ddinqridi than dti hhdng bi lidn iuy dan bit hi eiu tti idi eo tinh ehat ea biet. , Ca'e ego ttdt...~ Xin eoi ndi tranq 2. N‘t'l ia' :hu huynh . rtin tra idi ‘lo‘r‘tg y hay 'lthong dong eho: phap eon on than dd, It o la” ninh sin It? ton “ ddng y hay _khdng angythan dd. gang‘shiau trd 161 d be ehia lion hai pita” ndt phi‘n danh 'eho phu hnynh v! t ph dafih eho eon an. Xin ty./t‘n v. i ted iai ed in qtii 'vi khdnq dbhq f. 00’ 1a edeh ehu‘ng tdi bii't, elLae gins (Iii up. nhdn age: 1, thti any. out vi :6 gut gid'iai end 95y at gun h_o s . Chung toi that as nong déi ail hdat‘e eua'qui'gi.’ rhdt, gié, dung vao vi§e nay, tuy ehang in bao, gong ed the nan din nhting idi ieh rat.to idn. , .ttau qui vi eoIbdt ky edit hoi hf? sin vui 732 gqi diin thoai eho tbi: ttuong amen, so ass-sass hay ‘i'ian :1 Gary se. la): :6 ass-sen. m‘nn ens: ea'n 3n WW MW K 95 Phieu Chap Thuan Tham Du De An Khoo Criu Ve VAN Ho’A VA sU HOI NHAP - 5’ ‘ l. Ho va ten hoc sinh (viet bit'ng chd in): 2. «9563) Thoai: 3. we. tnldhg hoe: A‘ ‘ Ehaumhshnphuhmht \ .s s. s s i. ‘ )Gnvumddnhhumbngduéhwpmgdhhwmmhoca;mmquyfi. ___.l Dongy! ‘lffldadocvahieulathdnay. Torchophepcontotthamdu'vaovreckhaocultnay. :2. Khong! Toikhon muoncontotthamdtlsdkhaoctlunay :3. Tormuonnhantherntrntticvestikhaoctlutnio‘ckhtchapthuan. Xingoitoi. ‘ Clitl ky" can hhu huynh Ngay ‘ g‘ .s ‘ I \ A‘ ‘ a‘ ‘ I Xinvuilongda’nhdsuvaodongthichhdpvanoptrdlaichothaycogiao. _I. Dongy! Toidanvahieulathdnsy. Toidongytlnmdtivaoviecklnoctlunay. _2. Khong!‘ Toik muonthamdtlstikhaocu’uniy. . ___.3 Tormuonnhanthernttnttbvesukhaoctlumrdckhtquyetdtnhthamdti Xingoitoi. Chll ky' cria hoe sinh Ngiy "‘mumr“