| Literature DB >> 30420819 |
Nadya Gharaei1, Karen Phalet1, Fenella Fleischmann2.
Abstract
Prevailing definitions of national identities in Europe equate belonging to the nation with "fitting in" culturally and leave immigrant minorities who are culturally different from the majority group struggling to belong. The present study focuses on an under-researched minority perspective on the intersubjective cultural contents of the national identity. We propose that minorities' national belonging is contingent on their perception that minority peers who deviate from the majority culture are accepted as real nationals. Our study aims to establish (a) minority perceptions of the national fit and acceptance of culturally different peers, and to test (b) the consequences of perceived fit and acceptance for minority adolescents' own national belonging, and (c) its affordances by the local peer context. Drawing on a large random sample of 1,489 Moroccan and Turkish minority youth (aged 12-18) and their peers across 312 classes in 63 Belgian schools, we varied cultural difference from the majority in three vignettes describing imaginary acculturating peers. Minority participants rated to what extent they saw each peer as a real national (perceived fit) and whether other nationals would accept this peer (perceived acceptance). As a measure of their own national belonging, they indicated their national self-identification. Additionally, the multi-level design included classroom contextual measures of majority peer presence and peer acculturation norms (peer norm of heritage culture maintenance). As expected, minority youth who perceived better national fit of culturally different peers, self-identified more strongly as nationals than those who perceived worse fit. This association was not explained by their own acculturation attitudes. In line with the contextual affordance of national fit, only in classes with majority peers, minority youth perceived higher national fit and acceptance of culturally different peers when peer norms supported the maintenance of a distinct heritage culture. We conclude that the national belonging of minority youth is contingent on the peer context through the perceived fit and acceptance of culturally different peers.Entities:
Keywords: cultural difference; fit; minority adolescents; national identification; national identity content; peer context; social belonging
Year: 2018 PMID: 30420819 PMCID: PMC6215841 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01975
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Vignettes, means, and standard deviations of perceived national fit and acceptance of (imagined) cultural different peers.
| Separated | Fatma feels fully Turkish and little Belgian. She only has Turkish friends and wants to marry a Turkish boy later. She prefers Turkish food over Flemish food and likes to watch Turkish movies. She doesn't watch Belgian television. Fatma wears a head scarf and loves to go on holidays to Turkey. | “Do you think that Fatma is a real Belgian?” | 2.00 (1.30)a | “Do you think that most Belgians like Fatma?” | 3.00 (1.22)a |
| Integrated | Ayse feels Belgian. She has lots of Belgian friends and is part of a youth movement. She really likes to eat Belgian food like French fries and chocolate. But Ayse also feels Turkish. She likes to speak Turkish with other Turks and she really likes to drink Turkish tea. She also loves Turkish music and would like to wear a head scarf later. | “Do you think that Ayse is a real Belgian?” | 2.59 (1.27)b | “Do you think that most Belgians like Ayse?” | 3.46 (1.09)b |
| Assimilated | Azize feels fully Belgian and little Turkish. She only has Belgian friends and is in love with a Belgian boy from her class. She likes to watch Flemish television shows and likes to read comic books in Dutch. Azize speaks better Flemish than Turkish and knows little about the Islam. | “Do you think that Azize is a real Belgian?” | 3.40 (1.36)c | “Do you think that most Belgians like Azize?” | 4.01 (1.07)c |
All measures were rated on a 5-point scale (reverse coded: 1 = absolutely not, 5 = very much). The term “Flemish” in the vignettes refers to the Dutch language and customs in the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium (known as Flanders or the Flemish Region) were data collection for this study was conducted. Significant mean differences (at p < 0.001) within columns are indicated by use of different superscripts.
Figure 1Multi-level path model with national self-identification as the final dependent variable while controlling for student nested in school classes. Standardized regression coefficients are reported, and significant indirect paths are shown with arrows in bold. Identical superscripts indicate effects that did not significantly differ. Full model results, including effects of control variables, are reported in Table 2. ***p < 0.001, *p < 0.05, ns = not significant at p = 0.292.
Figure 2(A) Perceived acceptance of the (imagined) separated peer as a function of peer maintenance norm (hign vs. low) and the (lack of) majority peer presence in class **p < 0.01. (B) Perceived acceptance of the (imagined) intergrated peer as a function of peer maintenance norm (hign vs. low) and the (lack of) majority peer presence in class *p < 0.05.
| Perceived national fit (separated) | 0.075 | [0.011; 0.139] |
| Perceived national fit (integrated) | 0.071 | [0.009; 0.133] |
| Perceived national fit (assimilated) | −0.031 | [−0.089; 0.027] |
| Own attitude toward maintenance | −0.088 | [−0.146; −0.029] |
| Own attitude toward adoption | 0.228 | [0.167; 0.288] |
| Girls | 0.104 | [0.046; 0.162] |
| Turkish | 0.092 | [0.033; 0.152] |
| Perceived acceptance (separated) | 0.472 | [0.421; 0.522] | 0.075 | [0.013; 0.137] | −0.056 | [−0.116; 0.004] |
| Perceived acceptance (integrated) | 0.023 | [−0.036; 0.081] | 0.358 | [0.295; 0.421] | −0.009 | [−0.072; 0.054] |
| Perceived acceptance (assimilated) | −0.128 | [−0.182; −0.074] | −0.087 | [−0.141; −0.034] | 0.319 | [0.262; 0.376] |
| Girls | −0.074 | [−0.123; −0.025] | −0.067 | [−0.115; −0.020] | −0.071 | [−0.124; −0.018] |
| Turkish | −0.038 | [−0.085; 0.009] | −0.035 | [−0.085; 0.016] | 0.034 | [−0.016; 0.085] |
| National self-identification | 0.088 | |||||
| Perceived national fit (separated) | 0.253 | |||||
| Perceived national fit (integrated) | 0.156 | |||||
| Perceived national fit (assimilated) | 0.110 | |||||
Standardized regression coefficients (β) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) are reported. Identical superscripts indicate effects that did not significantly differ.
p < 0.001,
p < 0.01,
p < 0.05,
p = 0.292.