Beyond Universalism in
Culture and Socialization
•The cross-cultural perspective has challenged
the notion that the process of Culture and
Socialization is completely universal.
•Despite some similarities across cultures,
research has shown important cultural variations
that require theoretical clarifications and further
empirical research.
•Many questions reamin…
The Multi-Cultural Challenge
•As a starting point, the notion that a
society (nation) is represented by a
single culture which, in turn,
influences socialization, personality
and behavior is no longer viable.
•Reality is that most people in most
societies are exposed to influences
from more than one culture.
The Multi-Cultural Challenge
(Cont.)
This is the primary reason that the “crosscultural psychology” field rubric is
increasingly being replaced by “multicultural psychology” or simply “cultural
psychology.”
But. the psychological consequences of
acculturation and assimilation have been
studied by social scientist for nearly 100
years.
The Multi-Cultural Challenge
(Cont.)
Theories abound:
• the melting pot
– Inclusive
– Selective
• Segregation
– Separate and unequal
– Separate but equal
– Separate but not yet equal
The Multi-Cultural Challenge
(Cont.)
• Embracing cultural diversity
– The mosaic analogy
– Celebrating all diversity
•
•
•
•
•
Gender
Language
Height
Sexual orientation
Etc.
Acculturation in a Nutshell
The following two slides provide a
succinct summary of the complex
relationship between Acculturation and
Environmental Stress
The role of the actual acculturation
experience is emphasized to
demonstrate different hypothetical
outcomes.
Environmental Influences and
Personal Choice
A Humanistic Perspective on
Acculturation
Raymond T. Garza, Ph.D.
Placida I. Gallegos, Ph.D.
Past Research
• Stonequist (1935)-Marginal Person Theory
– An individual lives in two margins of culture.
– If the individual experiences poor adjustment,
the individual must choose one or the other
culture to isolate him or herself.
• Ramirez et al.-multiculturalism doesn’t
always produce negative outcomes.
– Instead high levels of adjustment and positive
capabilities.
Past Research on Acculturation
• Personality Types (Padilla et al.)
– Individuals choose to move toward, against, or away
• Berry and Annis (1974)
– “The personal factor in Acculturation”-individuals defy
classification by refusing to conform.
• Szapocznik and Kurtines (1980)
– Personal choice factors in relinquishing or retaining
one’s culture.
Problems with Past Research
• Previous theoretical frameworks have not
allowed for the simultaneous contributions
of cultural, ecological, and personality
variables.
• And subgroup and individual variations
were largely ignored.
Proposed Model
• Addresses Critical Question
– Why some people adjust positively while others do
not.
• Incorporates both personal and situational
factors.
• Involves Free Will
– The individual can choose to act in a manner
incongruent with cultural demands.
• Not a Linear Model
– Cross-cultural studies of Maori (Fitzgerald, 1971)
• Stressed the importance of acculturation and assimilation.
• View acculturation as a complex dynamic process where the
direction of change can be reversed by situational factors.
Humanistic Alternative to
Studying Acculturation
• Two Basic Meta-theoretical Assumptions
– Free Will
– Environmental Contingencies (limitations)
• Lens Model-Brunswick (1952)
– In any given situation an individual is faced
with a large number of stimuli and possible
behaviors with varying probabilities of
occurrence and enactment.
– The cultural environment affects the range of
stimuli and potential social behaviors and
respective probabilities.
Environmental Factors
• Do not impact the individual uniformly.
• Should not be oversimplified, (i.e., Acculturation is
more complex than generation status)
• Free will can moderate or even negate cultural
influences.
– If cultural construct very powerful, the behavior is highly
determined.
– The individual can bear responsibility for his or her
cultural characteristics.
– The Hispanic/Latino can choose whether or not to adopt
mainstream American cultural perspectives.
Cultural Constructs
• Based on Kelly’s (1955) Theory on Personal
Constructs
– Working hypotheses used by the individual to
structure and anticipate life events.
• Do not exist in absolute sense
– Cultural construct nothing more than how the
individual construes it.
– Different individuals may interpret differently.
• Probability of Influencing Individual based on
Significance and Convenience
• Back to Kelly
– Individual can choose to modify or reject a cultural
construct regardless of environmental strength or
saliency.
Biculturals or Multiculturals
• Range of cultural constructs is much greater.
– Highly Americanized Hispanic/Latino-higher
probability of exposure to mainstream American
constructs
• Isolated individuals will be restricted in
exposure.
– Undocumented Individuals who stay within a
particular neighborhood
• For example, Hispanics as a multicultural group
– Difficult to assess specific cultural aspects.
Important Terms to
Theoretical Framework
• Convenience and Significance
– Individuals usually select the most convenient
alternative.
– But if decision is personally significant then
overrides convenience.
• Strength and Saliency
– Saliency-the probability of the individual to be
influenced by a construct.
– Strength-the potency of a construct on an
individual.
Positive and Negative
Outcomes of Multiculturalism
• Positive:
– More flexible individual can adapt to complex
environments.
• Negative
– Individual overwhelmed with simultaneous living will
reject one culture.
– Resulting in long term damage to psychological
health and inability to adapt to complex environments.
• Open Cultural System
– Allows for individual to tolerate both cultures.
Environmental Limitations
• Whether an individual’s range is large or
small has profound impact on individual’s
behavior (Lewin, 1935).
• Actions stem from both positive and
negative forces.
– The individual can either retreat and shelter
himself or herself, or
– Become well-equipped to master his or her
environment
Proposed Model Constructs
• Socio-ecological influences-incorporate
socioeconomic and other non-cultural
environmental factors, which can have a direct
impact on the individual.
• Family Influences-socialization practices and
parental attitudes
• Individual-includes personality (includes innate
factors such temperament), affective, and
cognitive components
• Social Behavior-overt behavioral expressions of
individuals
Humanistic
Interaction Model
Socio-ecological
Influences
Family Influences
Individual
Multicultural
Influences
Social Behavior
Benefits for Future Research
with Humanistic Model
• Allows within-culture individual variability
• Researchers can use only one portion of
the model, but must not ignore the rest.
• Future Research
– “Universal multiculturalism”