Factors affecting the degree of acculturation

Nauck (2008) declared vast individual differences in psychological acculturation exist; not every group or individual enters into, participates in, or changes in the same pattern during their acculturation. Even individuals who have the same cultural origin and who live in the same acculturation ground would adapt in a different way. Studies have found multiple factors including motivation for migrating, individual factors, cultural factors and factors related to the migrant experience influence the degree of individual experience of

acculturation (Arends-Tóth, & Van de Vijver, 2006; Berry, 1997, 2001; Ozgur, & Van de Vijver, 2011). In comparison with motivation between voluntary and involuntary migrants, Keller (1975) found involuntary migrants can be substantial weaker than voluntary migrants, because the trauma of involuntary leaving the country of origin had a crucial impact on the refugee’s psychological state. This crucial impact would influence forced immigrants’

residual behavior for years in a new resettlement.

Berry (1997) suggested a number of personal characteristics of both a demographic and social nature influence the acculturation process of individuals. The individual factors consist of age, gender, education and socioeconomic status, cultural distance, as well as personal factors. These individual factors existed prior to acculturation, and give the ability to lower the amount of uncertainty experienced and increase familiarity with the new

environment.

Age

Age is negatively associated with acculturation success (Berry, 2001). It is generally smooth when acculturation starts early. Nevertheless, there appears to be increased risk in resettlement if acculturation begins at retirement or if older parents migrate to join their resettled adult offspring due to family reunification (Beiser, Barwick, Berry, da Costa, Fantino, Ganesan, Lee, Milne, Naidoo, Prince, Tousignant, & Vela, 1988). Studies found

individuals who relocated to the United Sates at an early age and who had been in the United States for an extended period of time were more acculturated (Faragallah, Schumm, & Webb, 1997; Tran, 1989). Yet immigrants in adolescence may experience conflicts between their parents’ cultural values and those of the host culture, although they tend to acculturate faster (Sam, 1995; Tran, 1993). Berry (1997) suggested that life transition between childhood and adulthood is compounded by cultural transitions. People who immigrate in later life are predisposed to pressure in adaptability and an increased risk of mental health problems. The demands for adjusting to different customs and social norms, learning a new language, and getting familiar with new rules can create stress and strain on older migrants (Beiser et al., 1988; Organista, Organista, & Kurasaki, 2003).

Gender

Gender has also been found to influence the process of acculturation (Berry, 1997). It is reported that different gender role expectations are factors contributing to stress and tension in immigrant families (Dion & Dion, 1996). Berry (2001) claimed social structural factors and values pertaining to the process of immigration and adaptation may lead to very different experiences from men and women. Dions’ finding (2001) demonstrated the

expectations and responsibilities related to family roles may be renegotiated between the host culture and the culture of origin. For example, Korean women attempt to adopt new roles in the United States in asking for husbands’ involvement in household work, although the majority of the wives and husbands regarded family work as primarily the wife’s duty (Lim, 1997).

Level of Education and Socioeconomic Status

It has been suggested that an individual’s acculturation is positively associated with their level of education and socioeconomic status (Beiser et al., 1988; Berry, 1997). Berry

(1997) proposed three reasons for this relationship: 1) education is a personal resource in itself; problem solving and problem analysis is generally embedded in formal education and possibly contribute to better adaptation, 2) education is interrelated with other resources, such as income, occupational status, support networks, etc., and 3) education may accustom

migrants to features of the society into which they settle; it is like pre-acculturation to the language, history, values and norms of the new culture. Studies conducted with Albanian immigrants (Dow, & Woolley, 2011) and Bosnian refugees (Colic-Peisker & Walker, 2003) evidently found that members were less educated or those who originated from rural areas were more likely to use separation as an acculturation strategy. Yet members who were educated or coming from more urban areas in these groups were likely to use integrative acculturation strategies to adjust to life in the United States.

Cultural distance

Cultural distance lies in the dissimilarity between the two cultures in contact such as language, religion, and so forth. Greater cultural distance indicates the needs for great cultural learning and shedding. However, large differences probably cause negative intergroup

attitudes and bring greater culture conflict leading to poorer adaptation (Berry, 1997). Studies conducted among Chinese shopkeepers in Montreal, Canada (Croucher, 2008) and Muslims in France (Croucher, 2009a, 2009b) echo the cultural conflict in great cultural distance. The results show that ethnic minorities would respond by closing themselves off from the dominant culture and be less motivated to acculturate when they are oppressed to

linguistically, religiously, politically, culturally and economically adapt to a dominant mode (Croucher, 2006).

Personal factors

Personal factors have also been shown to affect acculturation, but consistent findings

have been rare. It is possibly because it does not matter about trait itself, but on the subject of its fit with new cultural setting (Berry, 1997). One finding (Ramdhonee & Bhowon, 2012), among a group of immigrants to Mauritius after transnational marriages, is that personal traits are related to a person’s preferred acculturation strategy and acculturative stress. By using the five-factor model (also called the “big five”: extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism and openness to experience), neuroticism, openness to experience and

agreeableness factors emerged as noteworthy predictors of integration and marginalization (except agreeableness) strategies and acculturative stress. Neuroticism, openness to

experience, and marginalization were significant predictors of acculturative stress.