1. Multiculturalism and Its Links to Hostility
Martin Nolasco, Sulamunn R.M. Coleman, and Sheila K. Grant, Ph.D.
Department of Psychology, California State University, Northridge
Abstract
As the United States becomes a place filled with an increasing number of different races, ethnicities, and cultures that are meeting, interacting, and mixing, new issues arise with identity and personality regarding multiracial individuals. These individuals often must decide what ethnic group, if any, they feel they belong to and this decision can in turn impact many other characteristics within the individuals. Hostility is a facet of personality that is often tied with a sense of identity and this study examines the relationship between being multiracial and hostility. Data from 600 participants at a four-year university were used for analyses. The relationships between the variables of ethnic identity and hostility were measured using the Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure and the Neuroticism Extroversion Openness Inventory. We hypothesized that hostility rates would not vary between monoracial and multiracial individuals. Results indicated that there was no significant difference in the levels of hostility between monoracial and multiracial individuals, however levels of hostility among multiracial individuals varied depending on acculturation strategy.
Measures Cont’d
NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO) (Buss and Durkee, 1957) - The NEO is a 181-item instrument in the form of a 5 point Likert scale (1=Strongly disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral, 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree). Five factors are examined in this measure: neuroticism (susceptibility to psychological distress), extroversion (orientation toward sociability), openness (willingness to entertain both novel and unconventional values), agreeableness (positive or negative orientation toward others), and conscientiousness (self-discipline). For this study, hostility is the only subtrait of interest and it calculated by summing certain items found within the neuroticism subscale which is compromised of anxiety, depression, hostility, impulsiveness, self-consciousness, and vulnerability. Certain items included questions such as “I’m hard-headed and tough-minded in my attitudes” and “If I don’t like people, I let them know it.”
Participants
Data was collected from students from 1997 to 2008 at a four-year university in Southern California. The participants’ ethnic identity varied greatly and included African-American, European-American, Latino, and Asian-American. Ages ranged between 18 and 60, with 943 females and 328 males
Procedure
Data was collected from participants in a personality psychology course using the NEO and the MEIM.
Introduction
The influx of different races and cultures into the United States has left a need for a better understanding of the mental well being of the individuals within our country.
The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between Racial Identity, Belonging, Acculturation, and Hostility.
Multiracial individuals have been found to not only be comfortable with themselves and their ethnic identity regardless of socioeconomic status (Nolfo, 2008).
Biracial individuals are perceived as colder and less deserving of scholarships than monoracial individuals (Sanchez and Bonam, 2009).
Berry found that different acculturation strategies are related to different levels of hostility (2006).
Hypotheses
It is predicted that an individual’s racial identity will not have a significant effect on their level of hostility.
It is predicted that multiracial individuals who adopt integration as an acculturation strategy will have lower levels of hostility than those who adopt assimilation.
Conclusions
It was found in the test of the first hypothesis that whether an individual identified as monoracial or multiracial did not have a significant effect on their level of hostility.
A test of the second hypothesis revealed that there is a significant difference in the level of hostility of an individual based on whether they chose integration or assimilation as an acculturation strategy.
Implications
This implies that multiracial individuals’ level of hostility closely resembles that of monoracial individuals and does not support neither that they have higher levels of hostility (Sanchez & Bonam, 2009) nor lower levels of hostility (Nolfo, 2008).
This may indicate that adopting certain acculturation strategies can be more effective in reducing the level of hostility in multiracial individuals. This is an important result when considering treatment options because a more comprehensive treatment can be implemented for each acculturation strategy.
Limitations
This study examined ethnic identity and acculturation strategies in an area that is culturally diverse and may not reflect many other areas where measures like the MEIM and the NEO are administered
All of the data were collected by student at a four year university which may not be reflective of the general population.
Future Research
Future research would include a more thorough examination of the relationship between the other variables within the NEO and acculturation strategies.
A deeper look into the differences between acculturation strategies in relation to mental wellbeing for both multiracial and minority monoracial individuals would also be beneficial.
Results
There was no significant difference found in hostility level between monoracial individuals (M= ) and multiracial individuals (M= ) at the α = .05 level for the first independent samples t-test (363) = 1.838, p = .067.
There was a significant difference found in hostility level between individuals who adopted integration (M= ) versus those who adopted assimilation (M= ) as an acculturation strategy at the α = .05 level for the second independent samples t-test (58) = 2.304, p = .025.
Measures
Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM) (Phinney, 1992) - The MEIM is a 15-item instrument in the form of a 4 point Likert scale (1=Strongly disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Agree, 4=Strongly Agree), except for three items that where the respondent can choose from several ethnicities. Three factors are examined in this measure: ethnic identity search, affirmation and belonging, and commitment, and outgroup orientation. The higher a mean score is, the more that particular respondent sought out their ethnic identity, felt feelings of affirmation, belonging, and commitment to a particular ethnic group, and/or valued the ethnic culture and traditions of other cultural groups. Certain items included questions such as “I have a clear sense of my ethnic background and what it means for me” and “I have a lot of pride in my ethnic group.” This item has also been used time and again as it has shown reliability over the course of fifteen years.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by CSUN Psychology Department and Associated Students for travel support. Additional support for the project was provided by the National Institute of Mental Health, Career Opportunities in Research Program (National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Grant T34 MH20023). We thank all the members of the Maximizing Academic and Personal Success (MAPS) Lab.