Acculturation

By Nnenna Ndika. 2013

432 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The primary purpose of the study was to identify acculturation group memberships of first-generation Nigerian immigrants in the United States of America, based on socio-demographics data. The study also determined the relative power of the predictor variables in the classification. The accuracy with which the sample participants were classified into acculturation groups was also explored. One hundred four first-generation Nigerian immigrants (N = 104) were recruited for the study. These participants lived in different states across the United States. Discriminant function analysis (DFA) was conducted to determine acculturation group memberships, the relative power of the predictors, as well as the accuracy of classification of the sample. Findings suggested that the Nigerian immigrants were classified into five acculturation groups, which were integration, assimilation, separation, assimilation and separation, as well as integration and assimilation. The assimilation and separation acculturation strategy was most frequently endorsed by the Nigerian sample, whereas the integration option was the least reported. The most powerful discriminant functions were immigration support and self-efficacy. Reclassification accuracy was 64.8%. Nigerians in the United States, and perhaps Africans in general, may be using two parallel acculturation strategies to navigate the mainstream culture in plural societies. This preference is likely linked to their multicultural backgrounds. Therefore, integration as an acculturation strategy may not be the favored option among Nigerians living in the United States. Furthermore, immigration support and self-efficacy were revealed as important markers for the classification of the Nigerian sample into acculturation groups. These are areas that require further exploration.

Subfields: Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/85f1c0e77cc05abf3588a82f940a4d565a51bc0d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Sociology and Political Science

1. J. Wilson
2. C. Ward
3. James T. Neill
4. Ronald Fischer
5. Anita S Mak
6. Kun Yan
7. David C. Berliner
8. Irem Uz

Citations in the corpus

• Beyond Culture Learning Theory (2013, background): “…emotional stability in contributing to successful sojourner outcomes has most commonly been interpreted within a stress and coping framework and associated with the capacity to cope with the stresses of cross-cultural transition and the challenges of intercultural interactions (Ward, 1996, 2001).”
• Chinese International Students' Personal and Sociocultural Stressors in the United States (2013, background): “Cultural distance can be defined as the similarities and differences between the culture of origin and the culture of contact (Ward, 1996).”
• Does cross-cultural training in tertiary education enhance cross-cultural adjustment? A systematic review (2017, background): “Notably, Ward and colleagues (e.g. Ward, 1996; Ward et al., 2001; Ward & Kennedy, 1993) developed the ABC (Affective, Behavioural, and Cognitive) framework of intercultural contact that highlights the active process of cross-cultural adjustment.”