Self, identity, and biculturalism Flashcards
The self
Cognitive representation of one’s own self, idea, or images one has about oneself and how and why one behaves
–> a conscious idea about who you are. What your reputation is in the eyes of others, but also what you think about yourself and why you do certain things
Origin of the self
Practices and worldviews
–> cultural change and transmission, parenting in ecocultural context
Development of the self
Cutlural change and transmission, parenting in ecocultural context
- we are not the same person in each domain (personal, family, moral) or in each context (with family, with friends or with strangers)
Independence and interdependence of the self
“In Japan, the word for self, ‘jibun’, refers to “one’s share of the shared life space” (Hamaguchi, 1985). The self, Kimura (cited in Hamaguchi, 1985) claimed, is “neither a substance nor an attribute having a constant oneness” (p. 302).
According to Hamaguchi (1985), for the Japanese, “a sense of identification with others (sometimes including conflict) pre-exists and selfness is confirmed only through interpersonal relationships . . . .
Selfness is not a constant like the ego but denotes a fluid concept which changes through time and situations according to interpersonal relationships” (p. 302).” (Markus & Kitayama, 1991, p. 228).
IOS: inclusion of others in self-scale
Scale with cirkels of self and other who overlap on different levels, you have cirkel the cirkel that represents you the most
The twenty statements test: 20x I am…
Make 20 statements about yourself starting I am…
- research shows that American students describe themselves a lot more dispostional than Japanese students and Japanese students describe themselves a lot more dispositional in a contextual format
Self-esteem
Cognitive and affective evaluations one makes about himself/herself
–> higher in individualistic cultures than collectivistic cultures
Self-enhancement
Collection of psychological processes by which one bolsters his/her self-esteem
Self-effacement
Tendency to downplay one’s virtues
–> tendency of collectivistic individuals along with critizing themselves
Better than average effect
Tendency of individuals to underestimate the commonality of desirable traits and to overestimate their consequences
Mutual self-enhancement
Achieved through the giving and receiving of compliments between partners in close relationships
Different aspects of identity
- personal
- collective
- relational
- cultural
- ethnic
- racial
Social identity
that part of an individual’s self-concept which derives from his knowledge of his membership in a social group together with the value or emotional significance attached to that membership
Ethnicity
Indicates cultural heritage, the experience shared by people who have a belief in a common ancestral origin, language, traditions, and often religion and geographic territory
Ethnic identity
Combination of ethnicity and social identity
Ethnic identity formation
- ascribed/self-ascribed identity: ethnic category= by others / ethnic group= self-categorization
- terms are not neutral (ethnic minorities and struggles about names)
- identity formation always concerns power
Partial identities
- everyone belongs to multiple categories
- depending on a specific context, one of these partial identities may come to the foreground
- number of identities/ roles depends on the stage of life and the social network
- cultural differences is the nuber of partial identities: higher in non-traditional, lower in traditional cultural contexts
Indentity is fluid
- identity changes in different contexts and cultures
- depends on whom one is talking to and where the person is located
- identity denial/ misrecognition effect
Identity denial/ misrecognition effect
One is not recognized as a member of the group to which he or she identifies
Biculturalism: early positions
- PARK: living in two cultures in undesirable: managing the complexity of dual reference points generates ambiguity, identity confusion,a nd normlessness
- GOLDBERG, GREEN: only if conflict is internalized having norms of the subculture is a buffer
–> it may depend on how much conflict there is and how much of this conflict is internalized
Biculturalism/alteration
Models of 2nd culture acquisitions –> alteration
- individuals may exhibit higher cognitive functioning, and self-esteem
- similar to evidence from studies on bilingualism
Alteration
Wide range of differences: problem solving skills, relational patterns etc.
Key to wellbeing
- knowledge of cultural beliefs and values
- positive attitudes towards both groups
- bicultural efficacy
- communication ability
- role repertoire
- groundedness
How can you define someone that is bicultural?
- in a deographic sense
- uni-/bidimensional
- if we can’t just look at the demographic features, we need to look at the dynamic feature: domain specificity and dynamic constructivistic approach
Multiple cultural references
Static –> demographic and uni-/bidimensional
Dynamic –> domain specificity, dynamic constructivist approach (CFS, cultural frameswitching) and culture as situated cognition (CSC)
Dynamic constructivism
- internalized culture as a network of discrete, specific constructs that guide cognition only when the come to the fore in an individual’s mind
- culture = doamin-specific knowledge
- an individual’s knowledge varies in accessibility
- priming - spreading activation
Parts of the dynamic constructivistic approach
- cultural frame switching
- interpretation of behavior - individual vs group actors
- cultural priming
- culture as situated cognition
Cultural frame switching
- cognitive perspective
- when we are looking at cultural differences, are we looking at individual differences?
- we should look at culture as a structure, as a knowledge network
- they think of culture as a network of discrete, specific constructs that guide cognition only when they get triggered
- culture = domain specific knowledge
- an individual’s knowledge varies in accessibility
- they looked at things that would trigger their networks or one of their cultures/contexts
CSC: culture as situated cognition
Cultural orientations and behaviors interact with situational factors
Cultural/country differences:
- american > chinese in recall of abstract and central
- japanes > americans with proportions between elements
Differences cultural frame switching and culture as situated cognition
CFS: top-down, where a central part of the mindset is to be activated
CSC: bottom-up, tou can slo assess monocultural people
- what is common to both approaches is that you don’t have a culture. What we’re looking at is a culture as something that is accessible in certain contexts
- many people look at ‘between individual differences or between national differenves, while the variability between individuals is often neglected’
Implications for our understanding of culture
- not having a culture - accessibility
- variance across groups = variance in accessibility
- importance of language as a cultural marker
- focus on the cognitive process - not one single outcome
Mediators an moderators
Compatible vs. oppositional cultural
- perceptions of distance and
- perceptions of conflict
Predictors of BII
- acculturation orientations
- acculturation stressors
- personality
Predictors of bicultural identity integration (BII)
- accultuarion orientations: how do you want to resolve the conflict
- acculturation stressors (discrimination for example) -> how much are you discriminated being a member of these two groups?
- personality: neuroticism for example
