Socialization Values and Practices of IndianImmigrant Parents: Coirelates of Modernityand Acculturation

Nisha Patel and Thomas G. PowerUniversity of Houston

Navaz Peshotan BhavnagriWayne State University

PATEL, NISHA; POWER, THOMAS G.; and BHAVNAGBI, NAVAZ PESHOTAN. Socialimtion Values andPractices of Indian Immigrant Parents: Correlates of Modernity and Acculturation. CHILD DE-VELOPMENT, 1996, 67, 302-313. Mothers and fathers from 100 Brst-generation, Gujarati, Indianimmigrant families were interviewed about their socialization values and practices. Adolescentsprovided data about their parents' behavior as well. 3 predictors of parental attitudes and behav-ior were examined: modemity, acculturation, and time in the United States. The effects of thepredictors varied as a function of parent and child gender. Whereas modernity and acculturationpredicted socialization values for fathers of girls, only time in the United States predicted thesocialization values of mothers. Parental modemity, acculturation, and time in the United Statespredicted the use of induction and psychological control, but differently as a function of parentand child gender. Implications for understanding the selective nature of acculturation are con-sidered.

Developmental psychologists are in- host culture without prejudice or discrimina-creasingly recognizing the impact of culture tion regarding institutional and group mem-on socialization practices and children's de- bership, social relations, and positions oi'velopment (e.g., Rogoff, Mistry, Goncu, & power (Gordon, 1964).Mosier, 1993). This is the result of the recog- j-. , _ j i f_,^_*- u J

I. ^ . r 1. i "1 " u i. Early models ot immigration, basednition that most of vi'hat we know about , l u • c • •,. J I ^1 . I. J Jargely on the experiences oi lmmigjantnormative developmental processes IS based „_ i,- r e 4. ^u TT - J.1 • J j i 1 TT groups migrating irom Europe to the Unitedprimarily on middle-class, European- ci. i J ^u • r i-u- *^ . - . J ,.1. • V i j //-• States around the turn ol this centuryAmerican parents and thexr chiidren (Ora- /„ u u £ D • l inon^ J -UI, innrt e ir.oc\ r^ _..• 1 1 (Rueschenberg & Bunel, 1989), describe as-ham, 1992; Sears, 1986). One particularly \ . . . . .„ ., ' . . . .. ,

/ 1 \ X J 11. • i r 1 similation primarily as a unidirectional pro-useful way to study the impact of culture on ^.^^ assimilation occurring once immi-child-reanng practices and development is ^^^^ ^ ^^^^^ ^.^ ^^^ ^ j . ^ ^o study immigrant families By examining ^ ^ j ^ ^

the process of exposure to and adaptation to ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^^^^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ j ^ ^95^^a n e w cu l tu re , it is p o s s i b l e to d e s c r i b e h o w r7 ' l • r- A • / I Q C , ^ \ j« i

.. 1 ,* . . J 1 For example, in Gordon s (19D4) model, ac-competing cultural expectations and values ^^^uration was seen as the first of seven se-are resolved by the immigrant family (Taft, ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^^^^^ .^ ^^ ^^^^^^^^ assimilation

'• of immigrant groups. The basic assumptionModels of immigration have historically of this and similar models is that once assim-

focused on two processes; acculturation— ilation occurs, it is difficult to distinguish im-the immi^^nt's adoption of behavior pat- migrant from native members of the cultureterns from the host culture in attempting to in their attitudes, behaviors, and other char-adapt to new cultural demands (Lonner & acteristics. As stated by Gordon, "The priceBerry, 1989), and assimilation—the degree of assimilation . . . is the disappearance ofto which the immigrant is accepted into the the ethnic group as a separate entity and the

The authors wish to thank Dipal Vaidya for her assistance in data collection and coding.We also thank the Gujarati Samaj of Houston for providing access to subjects. We are gratefulto the editor and the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions. Sendreprint requests to Thomas G, Power, Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Hous-ton, TX 77204-5341.

[ChildDevelopment, 1996,67,302-313. © 1996 by the Society for Research in Child Development, Inc.All rights reserved. 0009-3920/96/6702-0018801,00]

evaporation of its distinctive values" (1964,p. 81).

Although such models may have workedfor the European immigration of the early1900s (after all, this was a case of recent Eu-ropean immigrants and their descendantsbeing assimilated into a culture made up ofthe ancestors of less recent European immi-grants—Rueschenberg & Buriel, 1989), theyare inadequate for describing the most re-cent waves of immigration from Asia, LatinAmerica, and the Middle East (Jackson,1980; Kitano & Daniel, 1988). Because mem-bers of these groups come from cultures con-siderably different from those of the earlierEuropeans (e.g., in religion, political andeconomic structures, family and marital rela-tionships, language, customs, and physicalappearance), acculturation not only requiredgreater behavioral and attitudinal change,but was viewed by many as an inappropriatemethod of adaptation. Members of manygroups, for example, have worked hard tomaintain their cultural customs and identi-ties in the face of considerable pressure tochange. For these immigrants, acculturationis selective, and is often limited to behaviorsinvolving direct interaction with members ofthe host culture such as language, education,and behavior in the workplace (Bond &Yang, 1982; Rueschenberg & Buriel, 1989;Triandis, Kashima, Shimada, & Villareal,1986). Research on these groups has led tomore complex models of immigration thatmaintain that acculturation is selective, vol-untary, multidimensional, and bidirectional(Garza & Gallegos, 1985; Hareven, 1982;Rueschenberg & Buriel, 1989). According tothese researchers, immigrant families do notsimply shed old values for new ones, butselectively shift, modify, retain, or alter theirvalues and practices to adapt to their newhomeland. Many recent models also refer tobi- and multiculturalism, the tendency to ac-quire and/or maintain characteristics of twoor more cultures, and the flexibility to oper-ate effectively within each (Ramirez & Cas-taneda, 1974; Szapocznik & Kurtines, 1980).Adaptation, therefore, is not simply a matterof acculturation, but instead a creative work-ing out of solutions for integrating compet-ing cultural demands.

Given the increasing diversity of recentimmigrant groups to the United States, it iscrucial to understand the nature of adaptiveresponses and family patterns for immigrantfamilies of specific ethnic origins. Immi-grants from India are an excellent group forstudy, given the fairly recent occurrence of

Patel, Power, and Bhavnagri 303

their immigration, as well as their tendencytoward bicultural functioning. Current de-mographics provide further justification—itis projected that by the year 2000, the num-ber of Indian-Americans will be over 1 mil-lion, a thirteen-fold increase from 1970 (Ki-tano & Daniel, 1988).

Ethnographic studies show that Indianimmigrants work hard to develop and main-tain characteristics of both cultures (Das-gupta, 1989; Helwig & Helwig, 1980; Kurian& Ghosh, 1983; Wakil, Siddique, & Wakil,1981). On the one hand, they have been de-scribed as an achievement-oriented, ambi-tious, materialistic, and upwardly mobilegroup that places a strong emphasis on for-mal education and individual success. Onthe other, largely due to their Eastern, col-lectivist roots, Indian immigrants attempt tomaintain traditional family values, such as amajor emphasis on the extended family andthe obedience of elders, traditional sex roles,arranged marriages, and the discouragementof autonomy in the young. This unique com-bination of individualistic and coUectivisttraits is the result of years of British influ-ence In India (Leonard-Spark & Saran,1980), the mixing of eastern and western tra-ditions, and the considerable variation insubcultures that existed in India before Brit-ish rule.

Bicultural functioning, however, is noteasy. Ethnographic studies and studies frommental health and social work perspectives(Balgopal, 1988; Mohan, 1989; Segal, 1991)show that Indian immigrants invest consid-erable effort and confront challenges inmaintaining Indian cultural values and prac-tices in the United States, especially in theiradolescent children (Kurian & Ghosh, 1983;Saran, 1985; Wakil et al., 1981). Becausetheir adolescents usually have considerablecontact with peers from the larger U.S. cul-ture, practices such as restrictions on sociallife and dating, arranged marriages, and thesubjugation of adolescent wishes to parentalauthority often become sources of parent-adolescent tension (Helwig & Helwig, 1980;Segal, 1991). Though many families have re-sponded to these challenges by selectivelymodifying their traditional sex role attitudesand encouraging achievement and occupa-tional success in their girls as well as theirboys, many others continue to maintain tra-ditional family values in the home, espe-cially regarding the role of the extendedfamily, the division of household responsi-bilities, obedience and respect for elders, aswell as religious practices and holidays

304 Chad Developmeni

(Dasgupta, 1989; Kurian & Ghosh, 1983;Wakil et al., 1981). Moreover, North Ameri-can immigrant Indian parents are less likelyto be authoritarian than their Indian counter-parts and allow for greater informality in re-lationships between children and adults{Dasgupta, 1989; Kurian & Ghosh, 1983).

Although these ethnographic studiesprovide a wealth of information on the rangeof adaptations that immigrant Indian fami-lies make to life in the United States, theyare limited in that they provide little infor-mation on individual differences in adapta-tion, and particularly about the correlates ofthese differences. Moreover, it is difBcult tostudy the processes involved in adaptationbecause the factors that covary with differentpatterns of adaptation cannot be systemati-cally identified (Whiting & Child, 1953). Todate, to our knowledge, there are no empiri-cal, quantitative data on parental values andsocialization practices among immigrant In-dian families.

The purpose of the present study was toprovide such data on the immigration pro-cess—particularly on some of the factors as-sociated with parental socialization practiceswithin the Indian immigrant population.Two aspects of socialization practices wereexamined; the characteristics that parents at-tempt to encourage in their children, and themethods that they use in encouraging thesecharacteristics or traits. These are referred toa.s parental socialization values and parentalsocialization practices, respectively.

Three predictors of parental socializa-tion values and practices were included: mo-dernity, acculturation, and length of resi-dence in the United States. Modernity is thedegree to which an individual's attitudes aresimilar to those found in western industrial-ized nations (Abraham, 1976) and reflects at-titudes in such areas as sex roles, prefer-ences for urban versus rural life-styles,religious beliefs, and attitudes toward au-thority (Inkles, 1969). Acculturation is thedegree to which an individual has adoptedthe behavioral patterns of a new culture towhich he or she has come into continuousfirst-hand contact (Lonner & Berry, 1989).Length of residence is a gross measure ofthe extent of that contact. We therefore hadthree types of predictors: one assessing atti-tudes (modernity), one assessing behavior(acculturation), and one assessing the rela-tive amount of exposure to the host culture(length of residence).

We use the term modernity as it is typi-cally used in the literature—to refer to theattitudes characteristic of individuals fromurbanized, industrialized societies. Duringthe Industrial Revolution, the transforma-tion from agrarian to mechanized economiesin the West was accompanied by an adaptiveevolutionary shift from authoritarian to egal-itarian child-rearing practices (Goode, 1963).The patriarchal control that was once neces-sary to run the family farm and the economydiminished once children left home for ur-ban industrial jobs. This shift in child-rearing attitudes and practices becamekniown as "modem child rearing," one mani-festation of the "modern" attitudes accompa-nying this societal transformation. Thus,modern childrearing approaches have beenassociated with the behavior of parents inwestern industrialized nations (although theshift to modemity is now prevalent all overthe world where agrarian societies are un-dergoing transformation).

Modernity is particularly relevant forstudy in the present sample because it as-sesses the degree to which Individuals froman eastern culture hold selected western at-titudes. As should be evident in the preced-ing discussion, we do not subscribe to theview that individual differences in moder-nity and acculturation are direct conse-quences of immigration. Nor do we believethat being "modern" or "western" is in anyway better or worse than being "traditional"or "eastern." Substantial individual differ-ences in western attitudes and behaviors arefound among individuals still living in India,and it is possible that Indians who choose toimmigrate are more western than the gen-eral Indian population.

A major focus of the present researchwas on gender differences in the correlatesof socialization values and practices. Whenfamilies immigrate from a traditional to a rel-atively more modern society, parents are of-ten faced with reorienting traditional gen-der-role expectations to "fit" the newsociety. Consequently, the adaptation pro*cess usually differs for males versus females.Gender-role socialization also varies greatlyacross different traditional and developingsocieties and within the same developing so-ciety (Edwards & Whiting, 1980; Saraswathi& Dutta, 1988). For example, in some sub-cultures within developing nations, sons aretaught to do well in school, as they will be-come future breadwinners of the families;dau^ters, on the other hand, are taught tt)do the household chores, along with taking

Patel, Power, and Bhavnagri 305

care of younger siblings, as they will haveto carry on these activities once they marry(Ramu, 1977). Hence, in these subcultures,competence in occupational tasks is the so-cialization goal for boys and competence inhousehold tasks is the socialization goal forgirls. If these are the values and socializationgoals of a family, then that family maychoose to reorganize these value patternswhen immigrating, so as to adjust to and toaccept the new host society. If this occurs,the effects are likely to be greater for femalesthan for males, given the greater differencein their roles across traditional and modemsettings. These gender-related changes invalue patterns and socialization processesfor immigrant families from developing na-tions such as India have not been fully ex-amined.

Based on the literature reviewed above,specific hypotheses were developed for pa-rental socialization values and practices. Ineach case, parental modemity was expectedto have a greater impact on socialization val-ues and practices than were acculturationand length of residence in the United States.This was because modernity refiects atti-tudes that should influence behavior acrossa wide range of contexts, whereas accultura-tion often reflects adjustments in behaviortoward members of the host culture only andnot toward family members or other mem-bers of the immigrant group (see Bond &Yang, 1982; Rueschenberg & Buriel, 1989;Triandis et al., 1986). Length of residenceshould be the poorest predictor because it isonly a gross measure of cultural exposureand not a measure of individual adaptationor change.

Three socialization value domains wereassessed: competence and effectiveness (inacademic and work domains), manners andpoliteness (including deference to author-ity), and positive orientation toward others(including prosocial behavior, tolerance, andhonesty). It was hypothesized that, first,modem parents would place greater valuethan traditional parents on the developmentof competence and effectiveness in theirgirls. In the case of boys, it was predictedthat there would be no difference betweentraditional and modern parents in their em-phasis on competence and effectiveness.Second, traditional parents were expected toplace a greater emphasis than modern par-ents on the development of manners and po-liteness for both girls and boys. Third, nodifferences were predicted between tradi-tional and modem parents of boys and girls

regarding the value placed on a positive ori-entation toward others.

Given the differences between tradi-tional and modern parents in their emphasison deference to authority and the encourage-ment of independence and autonomy, so-cialization practices were also expected tovary with parental modernity. Specifically,the fourth hypothesis was that modern par-ents were expected to use more techniquesinvolving verbal reasoning and persuasion,such as explanations, instruction, and justi-fications, whereas, fifth, more traditional par-ents were expected to use more forcefultechniques such as punishment, scolding,and unelaborated commands. No effects forchild gender were predicted for the social-ization practices.

Sixth, for both socialization values andpractices, acculturation and length of resi-dence in the United States were expected toshow the same relations as modernity, al-though the relations were expected to beweaker.

MethodSubjects

One hundred Indian families of 12-19-year-old children living in the Houston are;aparticipated. To control for variations in reli-gion, language, and culture of origin, HinduGujarati, one of the largest Indian immigrantsubcultural groups, were studied. Subjectswere recruited through the Gujarati Samaj,a social organization to which most Gujaratifamilies in the Houston area belong.

Only families in which the adolescentlived at home were included. For familieswith more than one child in the study agerange, a child was selected at random forparticipation. Ninety percent of the familiescontacted agreed to participate. Forty-ninefamilies of girls and 51 families of boys par-ticipated.

As expected, the sample was profes-sional and highly educated. This is typicalof Gujarati immigrants to the United States.Approximately 85% of the fathers were inprofessional or managerial occupations, andthe majority (71%) had university degrees.Sixty-one percent of the mothers were em-ployed, of which half were in professionalor managerial occupations. The majority ofmothers (60%) had 2-year or university de-grees. All of the parents were born in India;43 of the targeted adolescents were. Mothershad lived in the United States an average of

306 Child Development

14.3 years (SD = 4.7), fathers a mean of 16.2years (SD - 5.4).

None of the parents were separated ordivorced. Two- and three-child familieswere the most common (84%), and about halfof the participating adolescents were first-boms (55%). The ages of the adolescentswere equally distributed across the 12-19-year age range, with a mean of 15.2 years(SD = 2.1). The ages of boys and girls didnot differ significantly (boys, M = 15.4, SD= L8; girls, M = 15.0, SD - 2.3). The meanage of the fathers was 46.9 years (SD = 4.1);for mothers it was 43.6 years (SD = 4.7).

ProcedureParticipating families were visited in

their homes by one of two bilingual femaleinterviewers. Although participating parentswere bilingual, all preferred to be inter-viewed in English. Occasionally, however,certain concepts were clarified in Gujarati.Fathers, mothers, and adolescents were in-terviewed separately. At the end of the inter-views, parents completed the followingquestionnaires:

Modemity questionnaire.—The Tradi-tionalism-Modernism Inventory developedby Ramirez (1991) was administered to as-sess the modemity of the parents' attitudes.Consistent with definitions of modemity of-fered by others (e.g., Abraham, 1976; Inkles,1969), tiiis questionnaire assesses values andbeliefs in such areas as sex roles, prefer-ences for urban versus rural life-style, au-thority relations, political beliefs, and reli-gion. This 40-item scale was originallydeveloped for clinical work with Mexican-Americans. It assesses modernity across awide range of areas, each of which are rele-vant to Gujarati as well as Mexican-American families. Eighteen Gujarati-specific items were wriften coveringattitudes toward dating, arranged marriage,dowries, the caste system, and relationshipsin the family (e.g., mothers' obedience to-ward sons). Coefficient alphas in this sample{including 16 of the new items) were high:mothers, .93; fathers, .94. Two of the newitems that were unreliable were dropped.

Acculturation questionnaire.—Parentsalso completed a slightly modified versionof the Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexi-can-Americans. This scale (Cueilar, Harris,& Jasso, 1980) has 20 items assessing severaldimensions of acculturation: language famil-iarity and usage, ethnic interaction, ethnicpride and identity, and generational status.Coefficient alphas ranged from .81 to .88,

and test-retest reliability over a 5-week pe-riod was .72. The scale has been validatedby examining its correlation witii other ac-culturation questionnaires and with inde-pendent observer ratings. For the presentstudy, the items were reworded only insoferas they related to Gujarati families insteadof Mexican-American families. Coefficientalphas in the present sample were: mothers,.88; fathers, .84.

Values questionnaire.—A values ques-tionnaire (Power, Schellenger, Moll, & Pa-tel, 1990), modeled after Rokeach's (1973)value system questionnaire, was also com-pleted by each parent. This 98-item ques-tionnaire assesses the degree to which sub-jects value certain characteristics inthemselves or others. These items cover 18categories derived from the free responsesof middle-class, American adolescents de-scribing the kind of person that they want tobe. Eight categories assess competence andeffectiveness in academic and work settings(e.g., independence, intelligence, effective-ness, striving); four assess manners and po-liteness (e.g., politeness, self-control, defer-ence to authority); and six assess a positiveorientation toward others (e.g., helpful, lov-ing, forgiving, broad-minded). These threemajor areas were derived from second-orderfactor analyses of the questionnaire re-sponses in the instrument development sam-ples. Validity for the questionnaire was dem-onstrated in two studies showing significantcorrelations between adolescents' ratings ofwhat is impOTtant to them and ratings com-pleted by their close friends (Power et al.,1990) or by their parents (Schellenger,1989). For the current study, parents com-pleted the questionnaire in terms of thetraits and characteristics that they wantedtheir adolescent to possess. Therefore, foreach of the 98 items (e.g., self-reliant, courte-ous, generous), parents rated on a 7-pointLikert scale (from very opposed to verymuch in favor) the degree to which they de-sired their child to develop that trait. Alphasin the present sample ranged from .76 to .88for mothers and from .60 to .85 for fathers(mean alpha = .79). The correlations be-tween the three values scores in the presentsample ranged from .45 to .79, with a meanof .66. A thorough item-by-item comparisonof the modernity and values questionnairesrevealed that item overlap was minimal, in-volving at most diree out of the 58 modemityitems.

Socialization practices interview.—Theinterview was a modified version of a proce-

dure that has been used in several previouschild-rearing studies (Kobayashi-Winata &Power, 1989; Power, McGrath, Hughes, &Manire, 1987; Power & Shanks, 1989). Thisprocedure differs from many other assess-ments of parenting because it allows parentsto generate the child-rearing issues that aremost salient to them. Parents were asked togenerate, for the focal child, the specific ado-lescent behaviors that they were presentlyencouraging or discouraging in each of thefollowing seven areas: self-care behaviors,household rules, household responsibilities,prosocial behavior, problem behavior, man-ners and politeness, and independence.Then, the parents were asked to generate alist of up to three "typical" techniques thatthey usually used to encourage or discour-age each behavior. Finally, parents wereasked what they would do if tiiey had triedall of the techniques they had mentionedand none had worked. No "secondary" tech-nique was recorded if the parents repliedthat they would do nothing. This entire pro-cedure was conducted separately for each ofthe seven socialization areas. To provide va-lidity data on the parent interviews, the in-terview was also conducted with the adoles-cents separately about their mother's andfather's socialization practices. These datawere viewed as preliminary, because theprocedure had not been used for gatheringchild reports in previous research.

After the interview was completed, thesocialization practices were coded using aset of categories adapted from previous stud-ies. The coding categories that occurredwith sufficient frequency for analysis (i.e.,accounted for at least 2% of all techniques)were provide opportunities, watch/super-vise, tell/ask, repeat, demonstrate/instruct,reason, praise, scold, ignore, and reward. Allinterviews were coded by the interviewerblind to the hypotheses of the study; one-quarter of the interviews were coded byboth interviewers to assess interrater agree-ment. Cohen's kappas for the various codesranged from .75 to 1.00, with an overall valueof .92.

BeBultsPreliminary analyses on the socializa-

tion practices data were conducted to reducethe number of measures derived from theinterviews. A series of principal componentsanalyses (see Patel, 1989, for details) identi-fied common patterns of factor loadingsacross the mother, father, and adolescent in-

Patel, Power, and Bhavnagri 307

terviews. These results indicated that themeasures be combined as follows:

Reasoning/persuasion = Demonstrate/Instruct + Reason + Reward + Praise - Tell/Ask

Psychological Control = Scold + Ignore +Repeat.

Because "watch/supervise" and "pro-vide opportunities" usually loaded by them-selves, they were treated as separate vari-ables in the analyses.

To provide data on the validity of thesocialization practices measures, the correla-tions between the parent and adolescent re-ports were examined. The correlations were:reasoning/persuasion (mothers, .72; fathers,.62); psychological control (mothers, .65; fa-thers, .29); watch/supervise (mothers, .26;fathers, .25); and provides opportunities(mothers, .27; fathers, .48). With the excep-tion of the father value for watch/supervise,all of these correlations were significant atthe p < .05 level.

Predicting Parental Socialization ValuesExamination of the three predictor vari-

ables (acculturation, modernity, and lengthof residence in the United States) showedthat each had sufficient range and varianceto include in the analyses (see Table 1).Also, as expected, acculturation was moder-ately related to modernity and length of resi-dence in the United States (although thelatter was only significant for fathers). Sur-prisingly, length of residence in the UnitedStates was not significantly correlated withmodernity (see Table 1).

To examine the independent contribu-tion of acculturation, modernity, and lengthof residence in the United States in the pre-diction of the socialization values data, twosets of regressions predicting socializationvalues were conducted: one for mothers andone for fathers. Hierarchical multiple regres-sions were run with the predictor variablesentered in the following fixed order: (1)child's age, (2) parental modernity and ac-culturation simultaneously, and (3) length ofresidence in the United States. Child agewas entered first as a control variable be-cause it is possible that parents value differ-ent characteristics for children of differentages. Modernity and acculturation were en-tered second because they were the primarypredictors of interest. Finally, length of resi-dence in the United States was enteredthird, to see if it would contribute to the pre-diction of socialization values over and

308 Child Development

TABLE 1

DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS AND INTEBCOBHELATIONS BETWEEN THEPREDICTOR VARIABLES

Predictor Mean SD ACC MOD YRUS

Mothers:Acculturation 1.99 .46 1.00Modernity 2.47 .48 .41*** 1.00Years in V.S 14.34 4.73 .19 .03 1.00

Fathers:Acculturation 2,13 ,42 1.00Modernity 2.50 .57 .56*** 1.00Years in U.S 16.24 5.35 .36*** .06 1.00

NOTE.—ACC = accultuation; MOD - modernity; YRUS - number of years living in theUnited States.

*"* p < .001.

above the effects of modernity and accultur-ation. This variable was considered last be-cause it was expected that any effects of ex-posure would be largely mediated by theeffects of acculturation and modernity. Anal-yses were run separately for parents' of boysand for parents of girls, as gender differencesin prediction were hypothesized.

Presented in Table 2 are beta weightsfor each of the predictors reported separatelyfor mothers and fathers of boys and girls.The only beta weights presented in the tableare those corresponding to significant (p <.05) or near-significant (p < .10) changes inoverall prediction from one step to the next(as assessed by the incremental F statistic).As shown in the table, in every case exceptcompetence and effectiveness for girls,length of residence in the United States waspositively associated with mothers' valuesresponses, incremental Fs ranged from F(l,47) = 3.83, p < .10, to F(l, 47) - 8.46, p <.01. Child's age and maternal modernity andacculturation were not associated with ma-ternal values responses.

For fathers of girls, there were two sig-nificant findings. First, father modernity pos-itively predicted an emphasis on compe-tence and effectiveness, incremental F(i,47) = 7.51, p < .01; and second, both moder-nity and acculturation predicted mannersand politeness, incremental F(l, 47) = 7.36,p < .01. Note that for manners and polite-ness, the beta for modernity was negativeand the beta for acculturation was positive.This means that the fathers of girls who val-ued manners and politeness the most werethose who were low on modernity (i.e., tradi-tional) and high on acculturation. There wasno significant prediction for fathers of boys.

Comparison of these results with thehypotheses show that the predictions re-garding modernity and socialization valueswere for the most part supported for fathers,but not for mothers. That is, modernity posi-tively predicted fathers' emphasis on com-petence and effectiveness for girls but notfor boys (Hypothesis 1). Traditional fathersplaced more emphasis on manners and po-liteness (Hypothesis 2), although this hy-pothesis only held true for fathers of girls.And, finally, a positive orientation towardothers was not associated with modernity oracculturation for either boys or girls (Hy-pothesis 3). The only unpredicted finding forfather modernity was the lack ofa significantrelation with manners and politeness forboys. The findings involving length of resi-dence for mothers and acculturation for fa-thers were inconsistent with the hypotheses.

Prediction of Parental SocializationPractices

To examine the prediction of parentalsocialization practices, a set of regressionswas run using the same fixed order of pre-dictor variables as in the values analyses(see Table 3). The dependent variables werethe four socialization practices variablesfrom the parent reports: reasoning/persua-sion, psychological control, watch/super-vise, and provides opportunities. Given thehigh degree of convergence between parentand adolescent reports for most variables,these analyses were run only on the parentalreports of child rearing. This helped reducethe number of analyses conducted on thedata.

There was no significant prediction ofreasoning and psychological control formothers of girls. For mothers of boys, moder-

# *in ort CO I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

u[14

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

0-13Z IJ

310 ChUd Development

TABLE 3

BETA WEIGHTS FOR SIGNIFICANT REGRESSIONS PREDICTING PARENTAL SOCIALIZATION PBACTICES

CHILD

REASONmG/PERSUASION

AGE MOD ACC YRUS

PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTROL

AGE MOD ACC YRUS

Mothers;Boys ...Girls ..

Fathers:Boys ...Girls ..

.53*'

- .35'.34'.32"

NOTE.—Ail nonsignificant regression coefficients are indicated by a dashacculturation; YflUS - number of yean; living in the United States.

' p < .10.* p < .05.**P< .01.

MOD ~ modernity; ACC =

nity positively predicted the use of reason-ing/persuasion, incremental F(l, 47) = 7.24,p < .01, and modernity negatively predictedthe use of psychological control, incrementalF(l, 47) = 3.23, p < .05.

Fathers' modernity positively predictedreasoning/persuasion for both girls andboys: for girls, incremental F(l, 47) = 4.69,p < .05; for boys, incremental F(l, 47) -8.77, p < .001. As for psychological control,fathers' modernity negatively predicted theuse of these practices with girls, whereas ac-culturation positively predicted its use withgirls, incremental F(l, 47) = 4.24, p < .05.Therefore, the fathers of girls most likely touse psychological control were those whowere low on modernity (i.e., traditional) andhigh on acculturation. In contrast, fathers'acculturation was a negative predictor ofpsychological control for fathers of boys, in-cremental F{1, 47) = 7.50, p < .01. Finally,the analysis indicated that the longer the fa-thers had lived in the United States, the lesslikely they were to report using psychologi-cal control with their girls, incremental F(l,47) = 6.40, p < .05, and the more likely theywere to report using these strategies withtheir boys, incremental F(l, 47) = 5.46, p <.05. There was no significant prediction ofthe use of watch/supervise or provides op-portunities-

Comparison of the results with thehypotheses shows that with the exception ofmothers of girls, the hypotheses regardingmodernity and parental socialization prac-tices were for the most part confirmed. Thatis, modernity was positively associated withthe use of reasoning and persuasion (Hy-pothesis 4), whereas modernity was nega-

tively associated with psychological control(Hypothesis 5). Once again, the findings in-volving acculturation and length of resi-dence in the United States were inconsistentwith the hypotheses.

DiscussionThe data from this study illustrate the

complexity of socialization values and prac-tices in an immigrant sample. In predictingsocialization values, the results were mostconsistent with the hypotheses for fathers ofgirls. As hypothesized, the most modern fa-thers of girls placed more emphasis on com-petence and effectiveness and placed lessemphasis on manners and politeness thandid their traditional counterparts. Also, aspredicted, modernity and acculturation werenot related to the emphasis placed on a posi-tive orientation toward others (e.g., prosocialbehavior and broad-mindedness).

Although the fathers of girls placing themost emphasis on manners and politenesswere traditional, unexpectedly, they werealso highly acculturated. Thus, even thoughthese fathers were highly "Americanized" intheir affiliation patterns and language prefer-ences (i.e., few of their friends and work as-sociates were Indian, and they preferred touse English in most settings), they appar-ently held strong to certain traditional valuesand beliefs, and expected their daughters tobe deferent to authority, well-mannered,and polite.

Modernity and acculturation were notassociated with socialization values for fa-thers of boys. This was consistent with thehypotheses which predicted no relation be-

Patel, Power, and Bhavnagri 311

tween modernity/acculturation and eithercompetence and effectiveness or a positiveorientation toward others. As argued earlier,because parents in India and the UnitedStates are not likely to differ on the impor-tance of education and occupational successfor their sons, modernity was not expectedto be associated with an emphasis on compe-tence and effectiveness.

None of the hypotheses regarding accul-turation, modernity, and values were con-firmed for mothers. For mothers of both boysand girls, the length of time in the UnitedStates positively predicted an emphasis onalmost all of the values studied. Thus, inspite of their own values and beliefs, thelonger mothers had been exposed to theNorth American culture, the more they val-ued North American characteristics in theirchildren.

These findings, although open to multi-ple interpretations, can be understood froman adaptational perspective. As argued bynumerous scholars of Hindu Indian familylife (e.g., Kakar, 1981; Srinivas, 1942), thesocialization of females in traditional Indianculture places a greater emphasis on accom-modation to new settings and to the needsof others than does the socialization ofmales. In traditional families, for example,much socialization energy goes into prepar-ing daughters to serve their future husbandsand to help them adapt to life as a memberof the husband's extended family. After mar-riage, women usually move to a village farfrom home, enter an environment that maysometimes be hostile to their presence, andare expected to gradually reduce contactwith their own family. According to Kakar(1981), these women define their identity interms of their relationships with others andoften suppress individual needs to adapt tothe demands of their husband, children, andfamilies.

These early lessons in adaptation mayprovide at least one reason why the immi-grant mothers in this sample who had beenin the United States for a sufficient length oftime encouraged North American character-istics in their children—possibly becausethey viewed such characteristics as impor-tant for their children's adaptation. Theadaptive response of traditional fathers, incontrast, may have been to try to maintainIndian values in their daughters, becausethe fathers themselves were socialized tovalue deference, manners, and politeness asappropriate feminine behaviors. Addition-

ally, in traditional societies, men are social-ized to be responsible for protecting women.This tendency toward protectiveness may beheightened for Indian immigrant fathers,given that they are raising their daughters ina new society with a set of values aboutwhich they may not fully agree.

The fact that this tendency was mosiprevalent among traditional, but highly ac-culturated, fathers illustrates the selectivenature of acculturation—that is, maintainingtraditional values regarding interpersonalrelations at home while at the same timeadopting conventions of the host culture re-garding interactions in other contexts, suchas the workplace (Bond & Yang, 1982; Hare-ven, 1982; Rueschenberg & Buriel, 1989;Triandis et al., 1986). McLaughlin (1971) re-ported that Italian immigrant fathers fol-lowed the values from their old country ofmaintaining and protecting "female honor"by curtailing their daughters' freedom. Theydiscouraged working outside the home to re-duce their daughters' contact with Americanways. In terms of the socialization practices,in all but the case of mothers of girls, themost modern parents were the most likelyto use reasoning and persuasion. This mayrefiect either the increased use of these prac-tices among parents who have adopted amore modern viewpoint (upon exposure toU.S. culture) or the possibility that the mostmodern parents are those who chose to im-migrate in the first place, and therefore arethe parents most likely to employ these prac-tices.

The results for the use of psychologicalcontrol were more complex. In general, ashypothesized, psychological control wasfound to be negatively associated with mo-dernity and acculturation, except in the caseof fathers of girls. For these fathers, the com-bination of traditional attitudes and high ac-culturation predicted the greatest use of thistechnique. Additionally, in the case of fa-thers, time in the United States predictedthe use of psychological control differentlyfor boys than for girls. Given the complexityand apparent inconsistency of these find-ings, replication is necessary before furtherconsideration.

In conclusion, the results of this studyillustrate the limitations of drawing simplis-tic conclusions about the relations betweenparental attitudes and behavior in immigrantpopulations. Depending upon the aspect ofparenting under study, high levels of moder-nity/acculturation/cultural exposure were

312 Child Development

associated with either more North Americanor more Indian socialization practices. Al-though these findings were derived from astudy of one specific immigrant group, thegender differences reported here were forthe most part consistent with the hypothe-ses. It would be worth examining if thesefindings are replicable and generalizable toother similar immigrant groups from South-east Asia, such as Hindu families from Paki-stan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Nepal.

Probably the most consistent findingsconcern the differential role of mothers ver-sus fathers. Whereas mothers appeared to beresponding to their experiences in theUnited States by encouraging North Ameri-can characteristics in their children, thelevel of father acculturation or cultural expo-sure, in many cases, was associated withgreater pressure toward traditional charac-teristics. Thus, fathers appeared to play agreater role than mothers in attempting toprotect their children from North Americaninfiuences and in maintaining continuitywith the Indian culture. Future research in-volving observational and longitudinalmethods should be conducted to assesschanges in immigrants' attitudes, values,and behaviors at various points in the immi-gration process. The best design would in-clude assessments both before and after im-migration. Only then can the complex,multidimensional process of adaptation andchange be understood.

References

Abraham, M. F. (1976). Modernization or socialchange—a redefinition of concepts. IndianJournal of Social Work, 37, 421-433.

Balgopal, P. (1988). Social networks and Asian In-dian families. In C. Jacobs & D. D. Bowles(Eds.), Ethnicity and race: Critical conceptsin social work (pp. 18-33). Silver Spring,MD: National Association of Social Workers.

Bond, M. H., & Yang, K. (1982). Ethnic affirmationversus cross-cultural accommodation: Thevariable impact of questionnaire language onChinese bilinguals in Hong Kong. Journal ofCross-Cultural Psychology, 13, 169-185.

Cuellar, I., Harris, L., & Jasso, R. (1980). An accul-turation scale for Mexican-American normaland clinical populations. Hispanic Journal ofBehavioral Sciences, 2, 199-217.

Dasgupta, S. S. (1989). On the trail of an uncer-tain dream: Indian immigrant experiences inAmerica. New York: AMS.

Edwards, C. P., & Whiting, B. (1980). Differentialsocialization of girls and boys in light of cross-cultural research. In C. M, Super fir S. Hark-

ness (Eds,), Anthropological perspectives onchild development (pp. 45-57). San Fran-cisco: Jossey-Bass.

Garza, B. T., & Gallegos, P. I. (1985), Environ-mental influences and personal choice: A hu-manistic perspective on acculturation. His-panic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 7,365-379.

Goode, W. J. (1963). World revolution and familypattems. New York: Free Press.

Gordon, M. (1964). Assimilation in American life.New York: Oxford University Press.

Graham, S. (1992). "Most of the subjects wereWhite and middle class." Trends in pub-lished research in selected APA journals,1970-1989. Ainerican Psychologist. 47,629-639.

Handlin, O. (1951). The uprooted. Boston: Little,Brown.

Hareven, T. (1982). Family time and industrialtime. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Helwig, A. W., & Helwig, U. M. (1980). An immi-grant success story: East Indians in America.Philadelphia: University of PennsylvaniaPress.

Inkles, A. (1969). Making man modern: On causesand consequences of individual change in sixdeveloping countries. American Journal ofSociology, 75, 208-225.

Jackson, K. (1980). The old minorities and the newimmigrants: Understanding a new cultural id-iom in U.S. history. In M. Kritz (Ed.), U.S.immigration and refugee policy. Lexington,MA: Lexington Books.

Kakar, S. (1981). The inner world: A psychoana-lytic study of childhood and society in India.Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kitano, H. L., & Daniel, R. (1988). Asian Ameri-cans: Emerging minorities. EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kobayashi-Winata, H., & Power, T. G. (1989).Child rearing and compliance: Japanese andAmerican families in Houston. Journal ofCross-Cultural Psychology, 20, 333-356.

Kurian, G., & Ghosh, R. (1983). Child rearing intransition in Indian immigrant families inCanada. In G. Kurian & Srivastava (Eds.),Overseas Indians: A study in adaptation (pp.128-140). New Dehli: Vikas.

Leonard-Spark, P. J., & Saran, F. (1980). The In-dian immigrant in America: A demographicprofile. In E. Eames & P. Saran (Eds.), Thenew ethnics: Asian Indians in the UnitedStates (pp. 136-162). New York: Praeger.

Lonner, W., & Berry, J. (1989). Field methods incross-cultural research. Beverly Hills, CA:Sage.

McLau^lin, V. Y. (1971). Patterns of work andfamily organization: Buffalo Italians. In T.

Patel, Power, and Bhavnagri

Rabb & R. Rothberg (Eds.), The family in his-tory: Interdisciplinary essays (pp. 111-126).New York: Harper & Row.

Mohan, B. (1989). Youth alienation, Indo-American ethnicity and mental health. Ititer-national and Comparative Social Welfare, 5,29-41.

Patel, N. (1989). Child rearing in Hindu Indianfamilies in America: Effects of modernityand acculturation. Unpublished Master'sthesis, University of Houston.

Power, T. G., McGrath, M., Hughes, S., & Manire,S. (1987, March). Mothers, fathers, and childrearing: Socialization during the preschoolyears. Paper presented at the Society for Re-search in Child Development, Baltimore.

Power, T. C , Schellenger, J., Moll, B., & Patel, N.(1990, March). The assessment of adolescentvalues: Factor structure, reliability, and va-lidity of a new questionnaire. Paper pre-sented at the Southwestern Society for Re-search in Human Development, Dallas.

Power, T. G., & Shanks, J. A. (1989). Parents assocializers: Maternal and paternal views.Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 18,203-220.

Ramirez, M. (1991). Psychology and counselingwith minorities: A cognitive approach to in-dividual and cultural differences. New York:Pergamon.

Ramirez, M., & Castaneda, A. (1974). Cultural de-mocracy, bicognitve development, and edu-cation. New York: Academic Press.

Ramu, C. (1977). Family and caste in urban India:A case study. New Dehli: Vikas.

Rogoff, B., Mistry, J., Goncu, A., & Mosier, C.(1993). Guided participation in cultural activ-ity by toddlers and caregivers. Monographsof the Society for Research in Child Develop-ment, 58(8, Serial No. 236),

Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human valuesand values systems. New York: Free Press,

Rueschenberg, E., & Buriel, R. (1989). Mexican-American family functioning and accultura-

tion: A family systems perspective. HispanicJournal of Behavioral Sciences, 11, 232-244.

Saran, P. (1985). The Asian Indian experience inthe United States. Gambridge, MA:Schenkman.

Saraswathi, T. S., & Dutta, R. (1988). Currenttrends in developmental psychology: A life-span perspective. In J. Pandey (Ed.), Psychol-ogy in India: The state of the art (pp. 93-152).New Delhi: Sage.

Schellenger, J. (1989). Family membership orien-tation to adolescent value systems. Unpub-lished Master's thesis. University of Houston.

Sears, D. (1986). College sophomores in the labo-ratory: Influence of a narrow data base on so-cial psychology's view of human nature. Jour-no? of Personality and Social Psychology, 51,515-530.

Segal, U. A. (1991). Gultural variables in AsianIndian families. Families in Society: TheJournal of Contemporary Human Services,72, 233-242.

Srinivas, M. N. (1942). Marriage and family inMysore. Bombay: New Book Co.

Szapocznik, J., & Kurtines, W. (1980). Accultura-tion, biculturaiism, and adjustment amongCuban Americans. In A, Padilla (Ed.), Accul-turation: Theories, models, and some newfindings. Boulder, CO; Westview.

Taft, R. (1977). Coping with unfamiliar cultures.In N. Warren (Ed.), Studies in cross-culturalsociety (Vol. 1). London: Academic Press.

Triandis, H. G., Kashima, E., Shimada, E., & Vil-lareal, M. (1986). Acculturation indices as ameans of confirming cultural differences. In-ternational Journal of Psychology, 21, 43-70,

Wakil, S. P., Siddique, C. M., & Wakil, F. A(1981). Between two cultures: A study of so-cialization of children of immigrants./ouriia/of Marriage and the Family, 43, 929-940.

Whiting, J. W. M., & Child, I. L. (1953). Childtraining and personality: A cross-cultural.study. New Haven, CT: Yale UniversityPress.