Sociocultural adjustment of immigrants: Universal and group-specific predictors

ARTICLE IN PRESS

International Journal of Intercultural Relations

30 (2006) 195–211

0147-1767/$ -

doi:10.1016/j

�Correspodel Paıs Va

+34 943 3110��Corresp

Vasco, Paseo

E-mail a

pspparod@ss

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijintrel

Sociocultural adjustment of immigrants:Universal and group-specific predictors

Anna Zlobinaa,�, Nekane Basabea,��, Dario Paeza,Adrian Furnhamb

aSocial Psychology Department, University of the Basque Country, Avenida de Tolosa, 70, 20018,

San Sebastian, SpainbDepartment of Psychology, University College of London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK

Received 1 February 2004; received in revised form 18 June 2005; accepted 20 July 2005

Abstract

The study examined the sociocultural dimension of acculturation of 518 first-generation

immigrants in the Basque Country, Spain. Members of five ethnocultural groups (88

Brazilians, 98 Colombians, 139 Ecuadorians, 105 North and 85 Sub-Saharan Africans)

answered a self-report questionnaire. The study aimed first to replicate the findings of previous

investigations regarding the predictors of sociocultural adaptation at the whole sample level.

The results showed that length of residence in the new culture, immigration status (having

resident permits or being ‘‘illegal’’), and perceived discrimination were the most powerful

predictors of sociocultural adjustment of immigrants. Education, relationships with host

nationals and perceived cultural distance were other factors significantly associated with social

difficulty in the receiving society. The second purpose of the study was to test the universality

of these predictors taking into account the possibility of culture-context interaction. Length of

residence, immigration status and perceived discrimination were found to be independent or

semi-independent of the context and culture. On the other hand, other variables contributed

see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

.ijintrel.2005.07.005

nding author. Departamento de Psicologıa Social, Facultad Psicologıa Social, Universidad

sco, Avda. de Tolosa 70, San Sebastian 20009 Spain, Tel.: +34 943 015738; fax:

55.

onding author. Departamento de Psicologıa Social, Facultad Farmacia, Universidad del Paıs

de la Universidad 7, 01006 Vitoria, Spain. Tel.: +34945 013051.

ddresses: [email protected] (A. Zlobina), [email protected] (N. Basabe),

.ehu.es (D. Paez), [email protected] (A. Furnham).

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijintrel

ARTICLE IN PRESS

A. Zlobina et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 30 (2006) 195–211196

the explanation of outcomes of adjustment of the ethnocultural groups in their specific

context. As predicted, the groups varied in their degree of social difficulty: the Colombians and

the immigrants from Sub-Saharan Africa had the highest degree of self-reported difficulty, the

Ecuadorians had a medium degree, and the Brazilians and the North Africans had the lowest.

r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Sociocultural adjustment; Immigration; Cultural distance; Social difficulty

1. Introduction

Sociocultural adaptation along with psychological adaptation has been con-ceptualized as a major dimension of intercultural adjustment (Searle & Ward, 1990;Ward, Bochner, & Furnham, 2001; Ward & Kennedy, 1992). While psychologicaladaptation refers mainly to affective well-being and mental health in general,sociocultural adaptation consists predominantly of behavioural and cognitivecomponents of cultural learning for performing effectively in a new milieu (Wardet al., 2001). The results of empirical studies conducted primarily by Colleen Wardand her associates, have shown that sociocultural adjustment is conceptually distinctfrom psychological well-being during cross-cultural transition, as it is predicted bydifferent set of variables.

An examination of the literature shows that certain variables emerge as robustpredictors of sociocultural adjustment, despite the type of the group of sojourners, itsorigin or its destination (Ward, 1996; Ward et al., 2001; Ward & Kennedy, 1993).Thus, length of residence in a new culture is one of the most important factors ofsuccessful sociocultural adjustment: adaptation is especially low at the beginningthen improves in the earliest stages until it reaches a plateau (Ward & Kennedy,1996; Ward, Okura, Kennedy, & Kojima, 1998). Other important variables areresources such as higher education and income (Ataca, 1996 cited in Ataca & Berry,2002). Gender was also found to be associated with the greater social difficulty. Forinstance, Turkish females living in Canada and especially those with lowersocioeconomic status were found to have poorer sociocultural adjustment thanmales (Ataca & Berry, 2002). The explanation of these findings was that women havefewer opportunities to learn a new culture, being more isolated from it, and due tothe traditional role distribution in which they are expected to stay at home more andto be responsible for maintaining the home culture.

Other factors are quantity and quality of relations with hosts (Ward & Kennedy,1993; Ward & Rana-Deuba, 2000). Host national contact provides opportunities forcultural learning and culture-specific skills acquisition (Ataca & Berry, 2002; Searle& Ward, 1990; Ward & Kennedy, 1992, 1993). The quality of contact was alsoshown to be important. Thus, it was found that satisfaction with host nationalrelationships predicted better adjustment of New Zealand students living abroad(Ward & Kennedy, 1993).

Research carried out mostly on international students and sojourner adaptationhas demonstrated that social difficulty is related to cultural distance between the

ARTICLE IN PRESS

A. Zlobina et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 30 (2006) 195–211 197

home and the host culture and is also associated with perceived cultural differences.Thus, the acquisition of new skills and cultural knowledge depends on the similaritybetween the home culture and the new culture: the greater the cultural distance, themore cultural learning is required to ‘‘fit in’’ (Furnham & Bochner, 1982; Ward &Kennedy, 1993; Ward & Searle, 1991). Similarly, it was demonstrated that those whoperceive greater cultural distance between two cultures are likely to experience moresocial difficulty during the transition process (Searle & Ward, 1990; Ward &Kennedy, 1992, 1993).

The role of discrimination as antecedent of social difficulty was less investigated.Nevertheless, this factor is probably one of the most serious handicaps forimmigrants. Furthermore, the damaging influence of perceived negative attitudes onthe success of the immigrant’s and sojourners’ efforts to adjust to a new culture wasfound (Ward, 1996). For instance, among Turkish male immigrants in Canada thedegree of perceived discrimination was a significant predictor of problems ofsociocultural adaptation (Ataca & Berry, 2002).

However, it is worth mentioning that, as Ataca and Berry (2002) have pointed out,the empirical findings on predictors of sociocultural adaptation have somelimitations. Thus, most of them have been based on sojourners, so theconclusions can not be extended automatically to the immigrants’ group.For instance, sojourners are short-term visitors while most immigrantsintend to establish themselves in the receiving country. Another considerationmay be that sojourners, probably, have better status in eyes of the hostnationals and experience less discrimination. Hence the relative importanceof the predictor variables in immigrants’ adaptation may differ from that ofsojourners.

2. Overview of the study

The aim of this study was, first, to replicate the findings of previous investigationsregarding the predictors of sociocultural adaptation among different groups ofsojourners and to examine which factors best predict successful acculturation ofimmigrants.

To measure sociocultural adaptation, a scale was developed composed of thoseaspects that represented the most significant difficulties for immigrants in Spain.Following other researchers, we conceptualized immigrants’ sociocultural adjust-ment as a broader phenomenon which includes not only problems of interculturalcommunication such as cultural knowledge or coping with the language, but also thesuccessful resolving of practical problems that imply interaction with hosts (Brislin,Cushner, Cherrie, & Yong, 1986; Hawes & Kealey, 1981). We assumed that renting ahouse, arranging an appointment in a surgery, and other similar everyday tasksrequire culture-specific information and skills. For example, we supposed that theknowledge of how public institutions and social services (e.g., job agencies, hospitals,the police, etc.) work and how to get assistance from them was a substantial part ofcultural learning.

ARTICLE IN PRESS


Variables more frequently mentioned as predictors of sociocultural adjustmentwere selected to test their importance in our study (Ward, 1996; Ward et al., 2001).First, personal and demographic information was gathered including age, gender,education, length of residence in Spain, and also immigration status (havingresidence permits). We considered this last variable to be one of the key-aspects ofadjustment that makes a sharp distinction between immigrants. Thus, the likelihoodof obtaining residence permits depends strongly on the contextual factors such aslength of residence or group of belonging. For instance, recent immigrants in Spainnow find it much harder to obtain permits because of a recent toughening up oflegislation. Moreover, there are more flexible agreements between Spain and someLatin American countries regarding admission of immigrants compared to thosefrom the rest of the world.

Second, individual variables were introduced. The role of expectations and howthey matched with the actual situation were analysed. The overly optimisticexpectations of ‘‘streets paved with gold’’ in the country of arrival are quite commonamong immigrants (Moghaddam, Taylor & Wright, 1993). The negative contrastbetween the previous view of immigration and the reality was expected to frustratesuccessful culture learning (Furnham & Bochner, 1986; Taft, 1977; Weissman &Furnham, 1987). We also investigated the plan of immigration variable, that is, theintention to reside permanently in Spain. Bochner (1982) considered time span asone of the basic dimensions of intercultural relations and introduced short term–longterm classification to predict outcomes and nature of the interaction with hosts.

Interpersonal variables were also introduced as potential predictors of adaptation.As was pointed out above, the importance of relationships with host nationals hasbeen consistently demonstrated in previous studies. Nevertheless, we considered therole of conationals as a source of practical and cultural information. We assumedthat immigrants who had been living for a longer time in the new country can act asexperienced anthropologists of the receiving culture, providing advice andinformation about norms, conditions and available resources. Perception of thedegree of cultural distance between home and host cultures was another variable.

Finally, perceived discrimination was introduced as a possible predictor ofsociocultural adaptation of immigrants, one that takes into account the intergroupnature of cross-cultural transition.

The other goal of the present research was to test the universality of the predictorsof sociocultural adaptation among different ethnocultural groups. We put forward aset of hypotheses regarding the cross-cultural stability of the predictor variables.

First, we hypothesized that greater length of residence, higher education level,legal immigration status, lower perceived cultural distance, and lower self-reporteddiscrimination would be universal predictors of successful sociocultural adjustment,as was found in the previous extensive research and as is consistent with sociallearning perspective (H1).

On the other hand, as Ward and her collegues pointed out, the process andoutcomes of cross-cultural transition are influenced by both culture-general andculture-specific phenomena (Ward & Kennedy, 1993; Ward & Rana-Deuba, 2000).In this regard, we hypothesized that somewhat different patterns of acculturative

ARTICLE IN PRESS


experience would be found for different groups (H2). For instance, weexpected gender to be a significant variable only for some ethnocultural groupsdue to the fact that different cultures do not mark gender role differentiation to thesame degree. We hypothesized that North-African women would experience moredifficulties in adjustment than men (H2.1), as was found in the previous researchwith Muslim immigrants (Ataca & Berry, 2002). Moreover, we expected the contactwith host nationals be important only for groups with low self-reporteddiscrimination (H2.2). We assumed that positive or at least neutral character ofthe intercultural interaction is a necessary condition of culture learning (Ward &Kennedy, 1993).

Our third hypothesis (H3) was regarding the degree of social difficulty amongdifferent groups. We hypothesized that groups which are more culturally andhistorically similar to Spain (Colombians and Ecuadorians) would experience fewerproblems of sociocultural adaptation compared to more culturally distant(Brazilians) or ‘‘visible’’ groups (North and Sub-Saharan Africans).

2.1. Context of the study

The study was conducted in the Basque Country, Spain. Immigration on a largescale is a relatively recent phenomenon in Spain. A decade ago, in the early 1990s,about 400,000 foreigners resided in Spain, 1% of the total population (Blanco, 2002).Now the total official number of foreign people is 3,034,326, that is, 7% of the totalpopulation (INE, 2005). This percentage could still increase if we also consider thepeople who have obtained Spanish citizenship and those who do not have anyresidence permit. Regarding the countries of origin most represented in Spain, thelargest groups are those from Morocco, Ecuador, Romania, Colombia, and GreatBritain.

3. Method

3.1. Participants

Five hundred and eighteen (518) adult first-generation immigrants participated inthe study. The sample consisted of 284 male (55%) and 234 female immigrants, agedbetween 16 and 57 (M ¼ 32:8, SD ¼ 8.8), who had been living in Spain from 3months to 32 years (M ¼ 4:6 years, SD ¼ 5.5) and who came from Latin America,North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa.

The Latin-American group was the biggest one (63% of the total sample) and,therefore, was divided into three subsamples according to the country of origin: 88Brazilians (17% of the total sample), 98 Colombians (19%) and 139 Ecuadorians(27%). The North-African subsample consisted of 105 immigrants (20% of the totalsample), mostly from Morocco (77.2%). Other countries of origin were Algeria(4.4%), Syria (8%), Egypt (2.6%), Palestine (3%) and Jordan (2.6%). The Sub-Saharan-African subsample was rather heterogeneous and consisted of 85 subjects

ARTICLE IN PRESS


(16% of the total sample). Most of them came from Senegal (44%) and another largepart was from Cameroon (15%). Other countries of origin were Angola (5.4%),Burkina Faso (6.5%), Rwanda (3.2%), and Nigeria (6.5%).

In terms of education, 31% reported having achieved a university degree,47.5% had completed secondary education, 17.8% had completed primaryschool and 3.6% had no formal education. Regarding their immigrationstatus in Spain, 20.9% reported not having any type of residence permit and78.1% had some legal documentation or had obtained Spanish nationality, and1.1% did not answer.

One-way ANOVAs and w2-tests revealed that ethnocultural groups differed inrelation to gender distribution, length of residence in Spain, educational level andimmigration status. Thus, there were more men among North and Sub-Saharanimmigrants (66% and 68%, respectively), and more women among the Braziliansand the Colombians (62% and 57%, respectively) (w2 ¼ 28:65, po:001). TheEcuadorians were the group with nearly equal distribution of genders (52% weremen). Between-group analyses (Scheffe-tests) indicated that Ecuadorian immigrantshad been living in Spain for a shorter period of time than the other groups, while theNorth-Africans were the most long-standing group in Spain (F(4; 511) ¼ 46.17,po:001). The North Africans had the lowest educational level, while the othergroups did not differ significantly from each other (F(4; 510) ¼ 12.62, po:001). Thepercentage of people without any type of permit was the highest among theColombians (47.7%), lower among immigrants from Brazil, Ecuador and Sub-Saharan Africa (13.4%, 20.7% and 18.5%, respectively), and the lowest among theNorth Africans (4.4%) (w2 ¼ 59:34, po:001).

3.2. Procedure

This study forms part of a wider research project on the acculturation inimmigrants from different countries living in Spain.

Previous qualitative interviews were conducted with approximately 30 immigrantsfrom different ethnocultural groups before selecting and developing measures forthis study. Some scales were adopted from the earlier research conducted by Paez,Gonzalez and Aguilera (2000) with Chilean refugees living in the north of Spain.Studies by Ward and associates on the topic were consulted, and reference was madeto the Social Situations Questionnaire developed by Furnham and Bochner (1982)and to its modified version proposed by Searle and Ward (1990).

The resulting questionnaire was administered during a personal interview.Participants were recruited through social and cultural associations and in publicplaces frequented by immigrants (telephone centres, social services offices, churches,bars, etc.).

Linguistic adaptation: The back-translation procedure was used to translate allscales into Portuguese and Arabic. In addition, in the questionnaire administratedamong Spanish-speaking Latin Americans, several experts from these countries wereconsulted to revise the survey in order to avoid unfamiliar or unpleasant forms ofspeaking.

ARTICLE IN PRESS


3.3. Measures

Sociocultural adjustment: Sociocultural adjustment was assessed by 18 itemsasking about the degree of difficulty in dealing with practical, social andinterpersonal communication problems during the previous year. For example,‘‘Have you had problems getting medical or social assistance?/understanding thelocal people (their way of life, their intentions)?’’. Response options ranged from 1(not at all) to 5 (very much). The whole scale was highly consistent and its reabilitymeasured by Cronbach’s alpha, was .90.

Expectations: Participants were asked to evaluate their actual situation comparedto their previous expectations as 1 (worse), 2 (same) or 3 (better).

Plan of residence: Participants were asked about their expected period of residencein Spain, answering 1 (uncertain), 2 (temporal) or 3 (permanent).

Contact: The quantity of contact was assessed with two items. One asked aboutcontact with conationals living in Spain and the other about contact with hostculture members. Answers ranged from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much). The quality ofinteractions was measured by the following two items: ‘‘Do you feel supported (inyour problems, troubles) by your fellow compatriots who live here?’’, and ‘‘Do youfeel supported (in your problems, troubles) by the local people?’’ with the sameresponse options. Factor analysis (principal component analysis, varimax rotationwith Kaiser normalization) of these four items demonstrated the existence of twoindependent factors that accounted for 69.39% of the variance. The first factorreferred to the relationships (amount and quality of contact) with host nationals,accounting for 34.16% of the variance. The second factor referred to therelationships with conationals (33.23% of the variance). The reliability of thesetwo factors was .62 and .58, respectively. Resulting factor scores were assigned toeach participant and used in all subsequent analysis as indicators of relationshipswith conationals and hosts.

Perceived cultural distance: The differences perceived between the culture of originand the host’s culture in different areas (such as family life, gender relationships,work habits, punctuality, competitiveness, etc.) were ascertained by the 36-item scaledeveloped for the study. The total mean score of the perceived cultural distance wascalculated for each participant: responses indicating the perception of differencebetween two cultures were codified as 1, while the absence of difference was codifiedas 0. Thus, the resulting score ranged from 0 to 1 estimated the magnitude, but notthe direction, of the perceived cultural differences.

Perceived discrimination: The scale consisted of 6 items assessing the frequency ofbeing treated negatively due to ethnic background (e.g., ‘‘Have you beenvictim of the hostile actions that Spaniards would never use with other Spanishpeople?’’), and ranged from 1 (never) to 4 (almost always). Its reliabilitycorresponded to .87.

Demographics: Participants reported their age in years, their gender, andtheir length of residence in Spain in years and months. They were also askedabout their immigration status in Spain and their educational level as describedabove.

ARTICLE IN PRESS


4. Results

4.1. Predictors of sociocultural adjustment on the whole sample level

We first carried out bivariate correlations among sociocultural difficulty and thepredictor variables, and consequently, a multiple regression (stepwise method) wasperformed (see Table 1).

Better sociocultural adjustment correlated significantly with having longer lengthof residence, being female, having residence permits, evaluating the actual situationas better than expected, planning to live permanently in Spain, having more contactwith hosts, having fewer relationships with conationals, and perceiving smallercultural distance and less discrimination.

In the regression model, length of residence, education, immigration status,relationships with conationals and with hosts, perceived cultural distance anddiscrimination (displayed in bold) each made a unique contribution to the predictionof sociocultural adaptation. Gender, expectations and plan of residence were nolonger significant. As in the correlations, age showed no significant relationship tosociocultural adjustment, and was therefore dropped from the subsequent analysis.

4.2. Predictors of adjustment on the ethnocultural groups’ level

In order to test our hypothesis regarding the universality of the predictors ofsociocultural adjustment among different ethnocultural groups, the multiple

Table 1

Results of multiple regression analysis of predictor variables on sociocultural difficulty at the whole sample

level

Predictor variables Sociocultural difficulty

r b

Length of residence �.27** �.19**

Age �.10* �.02

Gender �.08 �.05

Education �.02 �.10**

Immigration status �.30** �.23**

Expectations �.12** �.04

Plan of residence �.11** .01

Relationships with hosts �.27** �.10**

Relationships with conationals .09* �.06*

Perceived cultural distance .25** .09**

Perceived discrimination .58** .53**

F (DF) 41.16** (11,508)

R2 (AR2) .50 (.49)

Note: Pearson product-moment coefficients and standardized beta coefficients; Method ¼ enter. F test,

and R (AR2) ¼ Squared R (Adjusted Squared R).

*pp:05, **pp:01 (two-tailed).

ARTICLE IN PRESS


regressions were conducted separately for each subsample (see Table 2). Beta weightsand zero-order correlations provide some indication of the relative magnitude andsignificance of contribution of each variable.

The results of the multiple regression for the Brazilian subsample showed that fourvariables from the general model—higher level of education, legal immigrationstatus, greater degree of relationships with the members of the host society, andlower perceived discrimination—were significant predictors of successful adjustment.For the Colombians, three variables were significant and were the same as in thegeneral model: legal immigration status, greater contact with conationals and lowerperceived discrimination. The regression made for the Ecuadorian group showedthat there were five significant variables predicting their adjustment to the newculture. Of them, three were the same as in the whole sample model, namely, longerlength of residence, attainment of legal immigration status, and low perceiveddiscrimination. Additionally, satisfied expectations and the perception of theirresidence as temporal were important for predicting successful adjustment of thisgroup. In the regression model for North African immigrants four variables from thewhole sample regression model were significant showing that greater length ofresidence, greater contact with hosts, perception of smaller cultural distance andlower discrimination predicted better adjustment for this group. Additionally, twomore variables showed themselves to be significant. Thus, gender (being female) andexpectations (evaluating the situation as worse than expected) were related to fewersociocultural difficulties among North Africans. For Sub-Saharan Africans, fourvariables from the general model—greater length of residence and higher educationlevel, legal immigration status, and lower perceived discrimination, and also twomore variables, fulfilled expectations and the intention to reside permanently inSpain, were significantly associated with better sociocultural adjustment.

4.3. Degree of sociocultural adaptation among ethnocultural groups

Finally, we carried out an analysis of variance (ANOVA) assessing the meanscores of the five subsamples on their degree of sociocultural difficulty as well as onthe predictor variables. The results are shown in Table 3.

The groups differed significantly in their degree of sociocultural adjustment toSpanish society, and also on most of the predictors. Between-group post-hocanalyses (Scheffe-test) showed that the Colombians and immigrants from Sub-Saharan Africa had more self-reported difficulties in adjusting to the new culture, theBrazilians and the North Africans had the lowest degree of problems, and theEcuadorians were in between.

Regarding expectations, the immigrants from Brazil, Colombia and Sub-SaharanAfrica reported significantly more ‘‘fit’’ between their expectation and the realitycompared to the immigrants from Ecuador and North Africa. Comparing groupswith respect to their plan of residence, it was shown that the North Africans hadsignificantly more intention to live in Spain for ever than the rest. The Colombiansand the immigrants from Sub-Saharan Africa had significantly less contact with hostnationals than other groups. On the in-group contact variable the Colombians

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table

2

Resultsofmultiple

regressionanalysisofpredictorvariablesonsocioculturaldifficultyoftheethnoculturalgroups

Predictorvariables

Brazil

Colombia

Ecuador

NorthAfrica

Sub-SaharanAfrica

br

br

br

br

br

Length

ofresidence

.06

.01

�.02

.17

�.23**

�.27

�.33**

�.45

�.23**

�.52

Gender

.02

.03

.05

.05

.03

.04

�.19*

�.35

�.11

�.20

Education

�.24*

�.31

�.04

�.17

.01

.03

�.09

.11

�.15*

�.17

Immigrationstatus

�.29**

�.25

�.27**

�.15

�.32**

�.38

�.03

�.18

�.18*

�.38

Expectations

.08

.03

�.11

.01

�.19**

�.31

.19**

�.06

�.25**

�.31

Planofresidence

.02

�.03

.02

�.11

.17

.07

�.09

.02

�.31**

�.55

Relationshipshosts

�.20*

�.22

�.01

�.12

�.01

�.10

�.19**

�.49

.07

�.32

Relationshipsconationals

�.19

.05

�.14*

�.13

.03

.11

�.06

�.06

�.01

.27

Perceived

culturaldistance

.06

.02

.04

.33

�.08

�.01

.33**

.56

�.07

�.03

Perceived

discrim

ination

.38**

.34

.77**

.70

.49**

.50

.36**

.56

.44**

.51

F3.42**

13.56*

13.02**

19.82**

15.83**

DF

10/78

10/88

10/129

10/95

10/75

R(A

R2)

.31(.22)

.60(.55)

.50(.46)

.70(.67)

.65(.61)

No

te:Pearsonproduct-m

omentcoefficients

andstandardized

betacoefficients;Method¼

enter.

Ftest,andR

2(A

R2)¼

squaredR

(adjusted

squaredR).

*pp:05.**pp:01(two-tailed).


ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table

3

Means(andstandard

deviations)

ofthevariable

measuringdifficultiesofsocioculturaladaptationanditspredictors

fortheethnoculturalgroups

FBrazil

Colombia

Ecuador

NorthAfrica

Sub-SaharanAfrica

Total

Socioculturaldifficulty

15.73**

2.12(.75)a

2.67(.79)c

2.41(.68)b

2.15(.86)a

2.80(.81)c

2.42(.81)

Expectations

4.23**

2.37(.70)a

2.38(.67)a

2.15(.76)b

2.02(.80)b

2.19(.84)a

2.21(.76)

Planofresidence

5.22**

1.34(.48)a

1.37(.49)a

1.34(.48)a

1.57(.50)b

1.30(.47)a

1.39(.49)

Relationshosts

3.10**

�.01(.99)a

�.12(1.12)b

�.02(.94)a

.28(.99)a

�.14(.92)b

.03(1.01)

Relationsconationals

8.70**

�.01(1.03)a

.42(1.05)b

�.30(1.01)a

�.04(.72)a

.05(1.03)a

.04(.99)

Perceived

culturaldistance

14.39**

.63(.17)a

.62(.17)b

.62(.18)a

.66(.19)a

.77(.13)b

.65(.19)

Perceived

discrim

ination

16.87**

1.76(.55)a

2.22(.91)b

1.97(.58)a

1.77(.61)a

2.39(.65)b

2.01(.99)

No

te:Meanswithdifferentsuperscripts

differsignificantlyato

.05usingScheffe

test.

*pp:05.**pp:01(two-tailed).


ARTICLE IN PRESS


showed higher scores than the rest of immigrants. Finally, Colombians and Sub-Saharan Africans perceived significantly greater cultural distance and discriminationcompared to the rest of participants.

5. Discussion

5.1. Replication of the previous results

At the general level, we tested the importance of the variables that in previousresearch were found to be predictors of sociocultural adaptation.

Regarding immigrants’ demographic characteristics, the results for the whole

sample level confirmed that social difficulty decreased over time. This is consistentwith the theory and research on social skill acquisition (Ward et al., 2001; Ward &Kennedy, 1999). Additionally, it was found that gender was not related tosociocultural adaptation but, as will be discussed below, was a significant predictorat the culture-specific level. Age was unrelated to sociocultural adaptation. Probably,the curvilinear pattern of relationship between them is the explanation (Ward et al.,2001). Education was a significant predictor of sociocultural adaptation, controllingfor other sociocultural predictors.

As predicted, having attained legal immigration status was one of the mostimportant predictors of sociocultural adaptation. A few studies considered thisfactor but our results indicate that having official residence permits not onlyfacilitates access to services and assistance but also to the specific cultural knowledgeshared by the members of the host culture. One possible explanation is greatervulnerability and social exclusion of those who do not possess any legal status in thehost country. The participants of the previously conducted focus groups told us thatthe ‘‘illegal’’ immigrants frequently have to avoid going out on the street because ofthe threat of being repatriated, and in general, do not perceive themselves as equalmembers of society but rather as invisible ‘‘shadows’’. This can lead to feelings ofdefencelessness and fear and, therefore withdrawal from the society. For instance,the bivariate correlations demonstrated that ‘‘illegal’’ immigrants had less contactwith hosts (r ¼ :14, po:01).

Regarding interpersonal and intergroup variables considered in the study, contact

with members of the country of origin did not seem to be consistently important tosociocultural competence acquisition at the general level. Meanwhile, our resultsshowed that closer supportive relationships with members of the receiving society

lessened the amount of difficulty in the new culture. Similarly, perceived

discrimination was a powerful predictor of the degree of difficulty of socioculturaladaptation, as in other similar studies (Ataca & Berry, 2002; Ward, 1996). Thus, theoverall results seem to indicate that being accepted at both the juridical and at theinterpersonal level increases the sociocultural adjustment of immigrants to the hostculture.

Another consistent finding was that lower perceived cultural distance was animportant predictor of acquisition of culture-relevant knowledge and skills, similarly

ARTICLE IN PRESS


to that found in previous research (Searle & Ward, 1990; Ward & Kennedy, 1992,1993). One might conjecture that when the experience of culture shock is not overlystrong, the individual feels himself able and motivated to learn more about a newculture. In contrast, when intercultural misunderstandings and faults are frequentlyexperienced, this leads to the perception of impossibility of dealing with the newenvironment. If so, self-esteem and the feeling of self-efficacy could be considered asmoderators in the relationship between perceived cultural distance (culture shock)and sociocultural adaptation.

Most of our results are consistent with the broader literature on socioculturaladaptation replicating successfully findings of other investigations. However, a morerigorous analysis at the ethnocultural group level provided a substantial insight intothe universality of these conclusions.

5.2. Universal versus group-specific predictors of sociocultural adjustment

First, length of residence, immigration status and perceived discriminationdemonstrated their significance for the most part of the sample and therefore, thisvariables can be considered a potential universal (culture- or context-free) predictors

of sociocultural adaptation of immigrants, that confirms our Hypothesis 1.Second, other variables were significant predictors of sociocultural adaptation

only for some ethnocultural groups. Education and perceived cultural distance

indicators, contrary to what was predicted by the Hypothesis 1, were significant onlyin a few cases. Additional data is essential to explain the role of these factors. As aspeculation, we can suppose that education would be more important for thoseimmigrants who seek to make progress in their professional status and not merelyimprovement of their economic situation. Similarly, perceived cultural distancecould be more significant for the sociocultural adjustment of those immigrants whoare motivated to settle down permanently in the receiving society and establish closerelations with hosts. For instance, the data showed that the North Africans had thehighest self-reported degree of relationships with members of the larger society andwere more determined to live in Spain for ever. On the other hand, this group is oneof the most rejected by the Spanish society (Diez Nicolas & Ramirez, 2001).

Third, gender was an important predictor of social difficulty only among NorthAfricans, as was predicted by the Hypothesis 2.1. However, contrary to ourprediction, being male rather than female was related to a greater degree ofadjustment problems. Nevertheless, the gender role distribution can still be used as abase of explanation of this difference. It was shown that men in this ethnoculturalgroup are more responsible for the relationships with the host society, going to workand to public institutions, while women stay more at home (Martinez Garcia, GarciaRamirez, & Maya Jariego, 2002). It is possible then, that the higher degree ofsociocultural difficulty reported by men can be explained by their wider exposure tothe host culture with more culture-specific skills required.

The role of expectations was shown to be ambiguous. Thus, evaluating the actualsituation as being better than expected was related to having better adjustmentamong Ecuadorian and Sub-Saharan African immigrants, but was associated with

ARTICLE IN PRESS


having more difficulties in the case of the North Africans. However, the impact ofexpectations was stronger (higher beta weights) and in the predicted direction in theregression models for the Ecuadorians and the Sub-Saharans, thus supportingprevious findings. Nevertheless, the results seem to be inconclusive and moreelaborate measurements are necessary to test the role of the expectations in theadjustment process. As Furnham and Bochner (1986) have asserted, migrants have aset of expectations related to different aspects of their life in their new country. Theimportant question here may be which expectations about what aspects of life in thehost culture are more important for adjustment.

The plan of immigration made a particular, group-specific contribution to explainsociocultural adaptation of Ecuadorian and Sub-Saharan immigrants but in theopposite direction. Future research is needed to verify its role for sojourners’ and inparticular, for immigrants’ adaptation.

The varying significance of relationships with host nationals among ethnoculturalgroups showed that the contribution of this variable can be modulated by group-specific context as was predicted by the Hypothesis 2.2. Specifically, contact withhosts had significant positive impact on adjustment only for the Brazilians and theNorth-Africans, groups that had the lowest degree of perceived discrimination.These groups were also shown to be more oriented towards Spanish society than theother groups (Basabe, Zlobina & Paez, 2004).

Regarding the role of the contact with compatriots for sociocultural adjustment,this variable appears group-specific as it was only significant in the case ofColombians. Our previous findings indicated that most of this group preferredseparation as their way of acculturation (Basabe et al., 2004). So, it could be possiblethat when immigrants have an almost exclusive relationship with their own in-group,its members become a unique source of information and support.

Perceived discrimination was demonstrated to be a universal predictor of socialdifficulty and the impact of this variable was the highest among all the groupsstudied. However, the enormous magnitude of its effect for the Colombian sub-sample is noteworthy. This group is one of the closest to Spain in terms of languageand historical bonds. At the same time, the Colombians reported practically thesame degree of discrimination as the immigrants from Sub-Saharan Africa. In thisregards, as Ward et al. (2001) pointed out, a migrant group which is linguisticallyand culturally similar to the members of the host society may feel more sociallydisadvantaged. So far, the experience of discrimination may be especially harmfulfor the adaptation of this group.

5.3. Levels of social difficulty and cultural distance hypothesis

The results of the study showed differences between the groups in their level ofadjustment to the new culture (Hypothesis 3). Specifically, we found thatColombians and Sub-Saharan Africans had the highest degree of self-reporteddifficulties, Ecuadorians had a medium degree, and Brazilians and North Africanshad the lowest. However, the scores of the groups involved in the study did notfollow the pattern which we predicted and which was based on the previous findings

ARTICLE IN PRESS


regarding cultural distance (Furnham & Bochner, 1986; Ward & Searle, 1991; Ward& Kennedy, 1993). This indicates clearly that the mere degree of culturaldissimilarity is not enough to explain a level of social difficulty. Yet, the combinationof contextual and intergroup variables predicts more accurately the outcomes ofacculturation.

5.4. Limitations

The results should be interpreted while keeping the limitations of the study inmind. Firstly, biases of measurement should be considered. Only self-reportedmeasures were used to obtain dependent and independent indicators. Possible causeand effect relationships are suggested, yet it is impossible to make definitivestatements. Secondly, response biases represent another disadvantage. Among manybiases associated with self-reported instruments, social desirability and acquiescenceare the most relevant ones when studying immigrants’ adaptation (Ataca & Berry,2002). As all participants of our study are from collectivistic cultures, the tendenciesto represent themselves in a socially desirable way and to agree with any statementare likely to appear (Triandis, 1989). Another limitation of the study is a potentiallack of stability and validity of single measures. Additionally, our sample was of amedium size and was carried out in a non-random order. Because of thesecharacteristics of the sample, any generalization of the results should be made withcaution.

In summary, the current study has reiterated the contention of Ward and herassociates (Ward & Kennedy, 1993; Ward, 1996; Ward & Rana-Deuba, 2000) thatboth culture-general and culture-specific factors play a role in the adjustmentprocess. It has also identified both cross-cultural similarities and differences invariables that predict successful adaptation of immigrants to their new culturalenvironment. Variables such as length of residence, immigration status and perceiveddiscrimination were found to be independent of the context and culture. Thesefactors can be used to predict the development of sociocultural adjustment at thegeneral level. On the other hand, our study has demonstrated that other variablesshould be considered in order to explain the outcomes of adjustment ofethnocultural groups in their specific context. Finally, only the limited impact ofthe perceived cultural distance on adaptation was demonstrated. It raises doubtsconcerning the idea of ‘‘culturally suited’’ and ‘‘impossible-to-integrate’’ immigrantsshowing that other, ‘‘non-essentialist’’ variables determine this process morestrongly.

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the following Research Grants: MCYT BSO2001-1236-CO-7-01 and 9/UPV00109.231-13645/2001, from the University of the BasqueCountry and by the PhD grant from the Basque Country Government for the firstauthor.

ARTICLE IN PRESS


We thank Dr B. Martin and Dr T. Chamorro-Oremuzic for their help in thepreparation of this paper.

References

Ataca, B., & Berry, J. W. (2002). Psychological, sociocultural, and marital adaptation of Turkish

immigrant couples in Canada. International Journal of Psychology, 37(1), 13–26.

Basabe, N., Zlobina, A., & Paez, D. (2004). Integracion sociocultural y adaptacion psicologica de los

inmigrantes extranjeros en el Paıs Vasco. [Sociocultural integration and psychological adaptation of

foreign immigrants in the Basque Country]. Cuadernos Sociologicos, 15, 1–141.

Bochner, S. (1982). The social psychology of cross-cultural relations. In S. Bochner (Ed.), Cultures in

contact: Studies in cross-cultural interaction (pp. 5–44). Elmsford, NY: Pergamon.

Blanco, C. (2002). La inmigracion: nuevas realidades, nuevos desafıos. [Immigration: new realities, new

challenges] Servicio Editorial de la Universidad del Paıs Vasco.

Brislin, R. W., Cushner, K., Cherrie, C., & Yong, M. (1986). Intercultural interaction: A practical guide.

Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage.

Diez Nicolas, J., & Ramirez, M. J. (2001). La inmigracion en Espana: Una decada de investigaciones.

[Immigration in Spain: A decade of investigations]. Madrid: IMSERSO.

Furnham, A., & Bochner, S. (1982). Social difficulties in a foreign culture: An empirical analysis of culture

shock. In S. Bochner (Ed.), Cultures in contact: Studies in cross-cultural interaction (pp. 161–198).

Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Furnham, A., & Bochner, S. (1986). Culture shock: Psychological reactions to unfamiliar environments.

London: Methuen.

Hawes, F., & Kealey, D. J. (1981). An empirical study of Canadian technical assistants. International

Journal of Intercultural Relations, 5, 239–258.

Instituto Nacional de Estadıstica (INE) (2005, April 27). Avance del Padron Municipal a 1 de enero de

2005. Datos provisionales. Notas de Prensa. URL http://www.ine.es/prensa/np370.pdf.

Martinez Garcia, M. F., Garcia Ramirez, M., & Maya Jariego, I. (2002). Social support and locus of

control as predictors of psychological well-being in Moroccan and Peruvian immigrant women in

Spain. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 26, 287–310.

Moghaddam, F. M., Taylor, D. M., & Wright, S. C. (1993). Social psychology in cross-cultural perspective.

New York: WH Freeman.

Paez, D., Gonzalez, J. L., & Aguilera, N. (2000). Identidad cultural, aculturacion y adaptacion de los

inmigrantes latinoamericanos en el Paıs Vasco. [Cultural identity, acculturation and adaptation of Latin

American immigrants in the Basque Country]. Getxo: Centro Cultural Chileno Pablo Neruda.

Searle, W., & Ward, C. (1990). The prediction of psychological and sociocultural adjustment during cross-

cultural transitions. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 14, 449–464.

Taft, R. (1977). Coping with unfamiliar cultures. In N. Warren (Ed.), Studies in cross-cultural psychology

(pp. 121–151). San Diego: Academic Press.

Triandis, H. C. (1989). Self and social behaviour in different cultural contexts. Psychological Review, 96,

269–289.

Ward, C. (1996). Acculturation. In D. Landis, & R. Bhagat (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training, (2nd

ed) (pp. 124–147). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1992). Locus of control, mood disturbance, and social difficulty during cross-

cultural transitions. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16, 175–194.

Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1993). Where’s the ‘‘culture’’ in cross-cultural transition? Comparative studies

of sojourner adjustment. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 24(2), 221–249.

Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1996). Crossing cultures: The relationship between psychological and

sociocultural dimensions of cross-cultural adjustment. In J. Pandey, D. Sinha, & D. P. S. Bhawuk

(Eds.), Asian contributions to cross-cultural psychology (pp. 289–306). New Delhi: Sage.

Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1999). The measurement of sociocultural adaptation. International Journal of

Intercultural Relations, 23(4), 659–677.

http://www.ine.es/prensa/np370.pdf

ARTICLE IN PRESS


Ward, C., & Rana-Deuba, A. (2000). Home and host culture influences on sojourner adjustment.

International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24, 291–306.

Ward, C., & Searle, W. (1991). The impact of value discrepancies and cultural identity on psychological

and sociocultural adjustment of sojourners. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 15,

209–225.

Ward, C., Okura, Y., Kennedy, A., & Kojima, T. (1998). The U-curve on trial: A longitudinal study of

psychological and sociocultural adjustment during cross-cultural transition. International Journal of

Intercultural Relations, 22(3), 277–291.

Ward, C., Bochner, S., & Furnham, A. (2001). The psychology of culture shock. East Sussex: Routledge.

Weissman, D., & Furnham, A. (1987). The expectations and experiences of a sojourning temporary

resident abroad: A preliminary study. Human Relations, 40, 313–326.

Sociocultural adjustment of immigrants: Universal and group-specific predictors

Documents

Transcript of Sociocultural adjustment of immigrants: Universal and group-specific predictors