Rationale for the Current Research
STUDY 1: Testing the Proposed Theoretical Model of Acculturation - A Quantitative Inquiry
5.4 Results
5.4.4 Basic statistical analysis
Table 5.5
Descriptive Statistics (Valid N=245)
Measures Minimum Maximum M SD Scale Range
Assimilation 7 24 16.82 2.67 7-28
Integration 15 28 23.04 2.59 7-28
Marginalization 7 21 13.74 2.86 7-28
Separation 11 25 18.97 2.45 7-28
Ethnic identity 17 30 24.44 3.16 6-30
National identity 12 30 22.68 3.74 6-30
BI-Weight 10 32 21.99 5.95 8-32
BI-Appearance 15 32 25.54 3.98 8-32
BI-Attribution 4 16 10.11 2.5 4-16
Total body image 32 80 57.65 10.23 20-80
Metacognitive CQ 9 21 15.08 2.28 3-21
Cognitive CQ 16 42 27.76 5.15 6-42
Motivational CQ 15 35 26.27 3.90 5-35
Behavioral CQ 9 35 22.96 4.42 5-35
Total CQ 58 138 97.02 12.10 19-133
Sociocultural adaptation 26 55 42.98 7.09 11-55
Psychological adaptation 5 25 15.95 3.65 5-25
Note. BI-Weight = Body Image Weight aspect; BI-Appearance = Body Image Appearance aspect; BI-Attribution = Body Image Attribution aspect; CQ = Cultural Intelligence.
Bivariate correlation analysis
The correlation analysis (Table 5.6) indicated that most of the independent variables were significantly correlated to the dependent variables of adaptation as proposed in the model. In terms of the acculturation strategies and their adaptive outcomes findings were consistent to literature (Berry et al., 2002; Berry, 2005). Integration acculturation strategy reported positive correlations to sociocultural adaptation (r = .26, p < .01) and assimilation strategy positively related to psychological adaptation (r = .29, p < .01). In contrast, marginalization reported significant negative correlation to both sociocultural
(r = -.28, p < .01) and psychological (r = -.16, p <. 05) adaptation. Negative associations were also reported for separation with sociocultural adaptation (r = -.17, p < .01).
For social identity aspects, identification to the national group was related to both sociocultural (r = .17, p < .01) and psychological adaptation (r = .28, p < .01). While, no significant association of ethnic identity was reported to any aspect of adaptation.
The overall body image positively related to sociocultural (r = .15, p < .05) and psychological (r = .29, p < .01) adaptation. Similarly, the attribution and appearance aspects of body image positively related to both adaptation forms; while the weight aspect significantly related only to psychological adaptation (r = .29, p < .01).
Additionally, CQ was positively correlated to both psychological (r = .21, p < .01) and sociocultural (r = .31, p < .01) adaptation. Metacognitive and motivational CQ were positively related to both adaptation forms; while cognitive and behavioural CQ significantly associated only to sociocultural adaptation.
Association amongst the predictor variables
Amongst the acculturation strategies, marginalization was positively related to assimilation (r = .21, p < .01) and separation (r = .20, p < .01). Integration and marginalization were negatively associated (r = -.28, p < .01). These strategies were also associated to the aspects of social identity. Findings concurred to Berry’s (1980, 2005) conceptualization of the acculturation strategies of migrant groups as defined by their preference to maintain their own cultural identity and the preference for having contact with the new culture. Positive associations were established between assimilation strategy and national identity (r = .20, p < .01); and between separation strategy and ethnic identity (r = .42, p < .01). Berry (2005) considered integration to be most adaptive strategy since it involved simultaneous identification to both original and new cultural groups; and in accord to that, findings revealed significant positive
relations of integration to both ethnic (r = .29, p < .01) and national (r = .29, p <. 01) identity. As opposed to that, marginalization strategy which reflects detachment and lack of identification to both cultural groups did not report significant association to social identity aspects. Therefore, findings were in full support of hypotheses 1A and 1B which assumed positive association of national identity to assimilation and integration acculturation strategies; respectively. Likewise, hypotheses 1C and 1D which proposed positive relations of ethnic identity; respectively, to separation and integration acculturation strategies, are also accepted.
Furthermore, national identity was more strongly correlated to CQ (r = .33, p < .01) as compared to ethnic identity’s association to CQ (r = .16, p < .05). CQ also correlated to assimilation (r = .23, p < .01) and integration (r = .24, p < .01) acculturation strategies.
None of the social identity aspects were significantly associated to body image, thereby;
hypothesis 1E which assumed national identity to be negatively related to body image is not accepted. Similarly, hypothesis 1F which stated the presence of positive association of ethnic identity to body image is also not supported by findings of this study.
Lastly, body image was negatively associated to marginalization strategy (r = -.26, p <
.01) and positively associated to both integration strategy (r = .15, p < .05), as well as, cultural intelligence (r = .14, p < .05). Contradicting hypothesis 1G, assimilation strategy was not correlated to body image.
Table 5.6
Correlation Matrix
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
1 Assimilation .82
2 Integration -.04 .74
3 Marginalization .21** -.28** .78
4 Separation -.01 .11 .20** .71 .
5 Ethnic identity -.11 .29** -.09 .42**
6 National identity .20** .29** -.08 .08 .38**
7 BI-Weight .02 .04 -.16** .03 .06 .04 .78
8 BI-Appearance -.05 .21** -.36** -.06 .09 .11 .55** .76 9 BI-Attribution .13* .12 -.05 -.02 -.01 .08 .31** .34** .74 10 Total Body Image .02 .15* -.26** -.01 .07 .10 .87** .83** .58**
11 Metacognitive CQ .12* .24** .01 .04 .20** .20** .04 .15* .10 .11 .72
12 Cognitive CQ .18** .09 .00 04 .09 .23** .05 .05 .11 .08 .38** .76
13 Motivational CQ .19** .32** -.23** -.04 .11 .33** .10 .23** .21**.21** .37** .43** .72
14 Behavioral CQ .17** .11 .07 -.04 .10 .19** -.01 .05 .05 .03 .54** .37** .29** .80 15 Total CQ .23** .24** -.04 .02 .16* .33** .06 .15* .15* .14* .71** .79** .70** .74**
16 Soc-General .01 .20** -.27** -.19** -.02 .12 .03 .22* .11 .14** .28** .09 .35** .17** .28** .78
17 Soc-Interaction .14* .29** -.22** -.13* -.04 .17** -.03 .15* .11 .07 .21** .14* .36** .08 .26** .59** .84 18 Sociocultural adaptation .08 .26** -.28** -.17** -.03 .17** .01 .22** .16**.15* .27** .15* .41** .15* .31** .9** .83**
19 Psychological adaptation .29** .07 -.16* -.09 .01 .28** .18** .26** .27** .29**
.18**
.11 .30** .09 .22** .41** .41** .48**Note. 1.* p < .05, ** p < .01 (Two-tailed).
2. Numbers shown in boldface denote the square root of the AVE.
3. BI-Weight = Body Image Weight aspect; BI-Appearance = Body Image Appearance aspect; BI-Attribution = Body Image Attribution aspect; CQ = Cultural Intelligence; Soc- General = General aspect of sociocultural adaptation; Soc-Interaction = Interaction aspect of sociocultural adaptation.
Gender difference in the variables
To test for gender differences in the variables a series of t-tests were conducted. Results represented in Table 5.7 indicate that significant gender differences were reported in case of the weight aspect of body image, cognitive CQ and total CQ.
Table 5.7
t-test table for assessing gender differences
Measures Gender t(df)
Male (N = 102) Female (N = 143)
M SD M SD
Assimilation Integration Marginalization Separation Ethnic Identity National Identity BI-Weight BI-Appearance BI-Attribution
Total Body Image Metacognitive CQ Cognitive CQ Motivational CQ Behavioral CQ Total CQ Sociocultural adaptation Psychological adaptation
16.78 2.5 16.85 2.2 .43(243)
23.08 2.7 23.01 2.4 .19(243)
13.61 3.0 13.83 2.7 -.60(243)
19.03 2.5 18.93 2.3 .30(243)
24.82 3.3 24.17 2.9 1.5(243)
23.07 4.1 22.40 3.4 1.3(243)
22.86 5.6 21.37 6.1 1.9*(243)
25.89 4.08 25.3 3.9 7.9 (243)
10.11 2.4 10.11 2.5 .52(243)
58.87 10.05 56.78 10.3 1.5(243)
15.28 2.2 14.95 2.2 1.0 (243)
28.50 4.8 27.23 5.2 1.9* (243)
26.61 3.9 26.02 3.8 1.1(243)
23.52 4.2 22.57 4.5 1.6(243)
98.87 12 95.71 11.9 2.03*(243)
43.22 7.6 42.80 6.7 .44(244)
15.84 4.2 16.02 3.1 -.37(244)
Note. * p <. 05; BI-Weight = Body Image Weight aspect; BI-Appearance = Body Image Appearance aspect; BI-Attribution = Body Image Attribution aspect; CQ = Cultural Intelligence.
Keeping in line with previous findings males reported significantly greater satisfaction with their body weight (M = 22.8, SD = 5.6) compared to females (M = 21.3, SD = 6.1) in the sample. In case of cognitive CQ too, males (M = 28.5, SD = 4.8) reported higher mean than females (M = 27.2, SD = 5.2). A similar trend was seen for total CQ score with males (M = 98.8, SD = 12) reporting a higher mean than females (M = 95.7, SD = 11.9). Therefore, hypothesis 2 is only partially supported as findings did not reveal gender differences in most of the variables including acculturation strategies, the social identity aspects, total body image and adaptation.