2. IDENTITY, ACCULTURATION AND ADAPTATION IN MIGRANT YOUTH Colleen Ward Centre for Applied Cross-cultural Research Victoria University of Wellington Research funded by Royal Society of New Zealand, James Cook Fellowship

3. INTERNATIONAL COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ETHNOCULTURAL YOUTH 13 nations Over 30 ethnic groups 7000 migrant youth 20 researchers

4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS How do immigrant youth live within and between two cultures? How well do immigrant youth deal with their intercultural situation? What is the relationship between HOW youth engage in intercultural relations and HOW WELL they adapt?

5. RESEARCH INSTRUMENT Demographic factors- e.g., gender, ethnicity, birthplace, citizenship Intercultural factors- e.g., language use and proficiency, national and ethnic identity, peer contacts, acculturation preferences Adaptation indicators- e.g., school adjustment, behavioural problems, psychological symptoms, life satisfaction

6. RESEARCH SAMPLE  935 migrant youth 53% female 12-19 years (M = 15.5) 70% overseas born 145 Chinese, 188 Korean, 147 Samoan, 102 Indian, 111 British, 101 South African, 141 others  510 national youth 50% female 12-19 years (M = 14.9) 98% New Zealand born 396 NZE and 114 Maori

7. KEY FINDINGS

8. HOW DO MIGRANT YOUTH LIVE WITHIN AND BETWEEN TWO CULTURES?

9. ACCULTURATION DIMENSIONS Integration Assimilation Separation Marginalisation CULTURAL MAINTENANCE YES NO PARTICIPATION YES NO

10. ACCULTURATION PREFERENCES Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high )

11. ACCULTURATION PROFILES Integrated (28.7%) National (28.8%) Ethnic (23.6%) Diffuse (18.8%)

12. INTEGRATED Strong ethnic and national identity Good English proficiency and frequent use of English Strong ethnic peer contacts Strong endorsement of integration

13. INTEGRATED PROFILE

14. NATIONAL Moderately strong national identity and weak ethnic identity High proficiency in and frequent use of English Strong national peer contacts and weak ethnic peer contacts Strong rejection of separation

15. NATIONAL PROFILE

16. ETHNIC Moderately strong ethnic identity and weak national identity Poor proficiency in and infrequent use of English Good proficiency in ethnic language Few national peer contacts and strong ethnic peer contacts Strong endorsement of separation

17. ETHNIC PROFILE

18. DIFFUSE Very weak ethnic identity Poor English proficiency Endorsement of assimilation, separation and marginalization

19. DIFFUSE PROFILE

20. HOW WELL DO MIGRANT YOUTH DEAL WITH THEIR INTERCULTURAL SITUATION?

21. LIFE SATISFACTION Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high )

22. PSYCHOLOGICAL SYMPTOMS Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

23. SCHOOL ADJUSTMENT Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

24. BEHAVIOURAL PROBLEMS Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

25. DISCRIMINATION Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

26. WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HOW MIGRANT YOUTH ENGAGE IN INTERCULTURAL RELATIONS AND HOW WELL THEY ADAPT?

27. LIFE SATISFACTION Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

28. PSYCHOLOGICAL SYMPTOMS Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

29. SCHOOL ADJUSTMENT Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

30. BEHAVIOURAL PROBLEMS Scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high)

31. SUMMARY Both national and migrant youth prefer integration as an acculturation strategy Integration is not achieved to the extent it is desired Overall, migrant youth adapt well Both cultural maintenance and participation (social inclusion) are important –Integration associated with better adaptive outcomes –Diffusion linked to poorest outcomes

32. POLICY IMPLICATIONS: QUESTIONS FOR THE FUTURE What can be done to facilitate integration? How can we promote greater participation and social inclusion? How do we address the issue of cultural maintenance? Who are our policies for?

33. For further information contact: Colleen.Ward@vuw.ac.nz