Is support for multiculturalism threatened by … threat itself?

International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 22–30

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Intercultural Relations journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijintrel

Is support for multiculturalism threatened by . . . threat itself?夽,夽夽 Linda K. Tip a,∗ , Hanna Zagefka b , Roberto González c , Rupert Brown a , Marco Cinnirella b , Xue Na b a b c

University of Sussex, School of Psychology, Pevensey 1, Falmer, Brighton, BN1 9QH, United Kingdom Royal Holloway, University of London, Department of Psychology, Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX, United Kingdom Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Escuela de Psicología, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Campus San Joaquin, Santiago, Chile

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Accepted 20 September 2010 Keywords: Multiculturalism Acculturation Integration Identity threat

a b s t r a c t Three studies investigated the effects of British majority members’ perceptions of minority members’ acculturation preferences and perceived identity threat on their support for multiculturalism. The following hypotheses were tested: (1) a perception that minority members want to maintain their original culture will negatively affect support for multiculturalism; (2) a perception that minority members want to adopt the British culture will positively affect support for multiculturalism; and (3) a perception that minority members desire contact with British people will positively affect support for multiculturalism. All three effects were predicted to be mediated by identity threat. Studies 1 and 2 focussed on Pakistanis as a target group, and study 3 focussed on ethnic minority members more generally. All studies yielded evidence in support of the hypotheses. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Great Britain is becoming more and more multicultural. Every year, many thousands of people immigrate to the UK (Office for National Statistics, www.statistics.gov.uk). However, the opinions of its inhabitants about immigration are divided. A survey conducted in November 2007 by Opinion Research Business (ORB) (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/ shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/TABLESv3.pdf) revealed that 44% of people think that immigration does more help than it does harm to the UK. However, 41% of people think the opposite. When asked whether immigration poses a threat to employment 52% agreed, whereas 45% disagreed. Furthermore, 46% of people agreed that a lack of immigration might damage the economy. From this, it can be concluded that British people vary in the extent to which they welcome the newcomers and in the ideas they have about how ethnic minorities should live in their new country of residence. The present research investigates which factors influence attitudes toward multiculturalism in white British majority members. Specifically, we will test how perceived acculturation preferences of minority members and perceived threat are related to support for multiculturalism. Multiculturalism describes a policy which values and fosters a culturally plural society. Supporting multiculturalism means to value and actively support mutual cultural differences and equal chances and opportunities (Arends-Tóth & Van de Vijver, 2003). For example, people who support multiculturalism will agree with a statement such as “Ethnic minorities should be helped to preserve their cultural heritage in the UK”.

夽 This research was supported by an ESRC grant to the second, fourth, and fifth author, RES-000-22-2113, and by a grant from the Chilean National Funding for Scientific and Technological Research Program (FONDECYT, grant no. 1070833) to the third author. 夽夽 The paper was reviewed and accepted by the prior Editor-in-Chief, Dan Landis. ∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 7519 719622; fax: +44 1273 678058. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (L.K. Tip), [email protected] (H. Zagefka), [email protected] (R. González), [email protected] (R. Brown), [email protected] (M. Cinnirella), [email protected] (X. Na). 0147-1767/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2010.09.011

L.K. Tip et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 22–30

23

Why is it important to investigate predictors of support for multiculturalism? Multiculturalism can be expected to lead to more positive intergroup relations. For example, Verkuyten (2005) found that the more majority group members endorsed multiculturalism, the less likely they were to show negative outgroup evaluations. Pfafferott and Brown (2006) produced similar findings. Furthermore, according to Berry (2001), we can regard a multicultural ideology as the societal counterpart of an acculturation preference of ‘integration’ (i.e., maintenance of the cultural characteristics of one’s own ethnic group and of positive relations with other groups in society). There is a substantial body of evidence demonstrating that integration is the strategy that leads to the best psycho-social and health outcomes for minority members (e.g., Berry, 1997; Berry, Kim, Minde, & Mok, 1987; Liebkind, 2001; Liebkind & Jasinskaja-Lahti, 2000; Phinney, Chavira, & Williamson, 1992). Further, the pursuit of integration is facilitated by a policy of multiculturalism (Breugelmans & Van de Vijver, 2004). To further investigate the issue of multiculturalism, we draw on probably the most influential paradigm in the psychological study of acculturation: Berry’s acculturation model (Berry, 1997). It describes various preferences ethnic minority members might have about how they want to live in the destination country after immigration. Two dimensions underlie these preferences: The desire of a minority member to maintain his or her original culture (‘culture maintenance preference’), and the desire to have contact with members of the majority society (‘contact preference’). The two dimensions of ‘culture maintenance’ and ‘contact’, when crossed, result in four acculturation preferences: integration, assimilation, separation and marginalisation. Because various theoretical and methodological concerns have been noted about the measurement of these four preferences (Rudmin, 2003), the present research will not investigate the four preferences separately, but will study the underlying dimensions instead. Findings by Zagefka, Brown, and González (2009) suggest that researchers should move away from the fourfold categorical model, and start thinking of culture maintenance and contact as two continuous constructs which should be studied independently of each other. Recently, some researchers have suggested that it might be better to replace the ‘contact’ dimension with another dimension, i.e., one measuring how much minority members desire to adopt the culture of their new country of residence (e.g., Bourhis, Moise, Perreault, & Senecal, 1997), because this would conceptually be a better match with the culture maintenance dimension. Barely any research has yet looked at both the desire to have contact with majority members and the desire to adopt the culture of the host country (‘culture adoption preference’) (for an exception see Snauwaert, Soenens, Vanbeselaere, & Boen, 2003). The present research will measure the two original dimensions (maintenance of the original culture and contact with majority members), but will also follow the suggestion to measure culture adoption. This way, by measuring three dimensions, it will be possible to check for potential differences between the original ‘contact’ dimension and the suggested ‘adoption’ dimension. Although Berry’s original acculturation model is focussed on minority members, it has been pointed out by Berry and others (e.g., Berry, 1997, 1999; Berry, Poortinga, Segall, & Dasen, 1992; Bourhis et al., 1997) that majority members too have preferences about whether they want minority members to keep their original culture and/or have contact with or adopt part of the host culture. It has recently been pointed out that what the respective outgroup is perceived to want in terms of acculturation preferences might also be important (Horenczyk, 1997; Piontkowski, Rohmann, & Florack, 2002; Roccas, Horenzyk, & Schwartz, 2000; Zagefka & Brown, 2002). That is, do majority members perceive ethnic minority members to wish to maintain their original culture, to have contact with British people, and/or to adopt the British culture? It has been suggested that such perceived acculturation preferences impact on own acculturation preferences (Berry, 1997; Bourhis et al., 1997). Zagefka, Brown, Broquard, and Leventoglu Martin’s (2007) research among majority members in Belgium and Turkey showed evidence that perceived acculturation preferences impact on own preference for integration. However, perceived acculturation preferences have not yet been studied in relation to support for multiculturalism. Because a policy of multiculturalism facilitates integration (Breugelmans & Van de Vijver, 2004), the present research will investigate perceived acculturation preferences as predictors of support for multiculturalism. The present research will also investigate whether perceived threat (Stephan & Stephan, 2000) might be an important mediator in this context. Threat was not considered in this previous work, and the present contribution therefore aims to theoretically extend the effects found by Zagefka and colleagues (2007) for Belgian and Turkish majority members. We draw on Stephan and Stephan’s (2000) definition of identity threat: a perceived intergroup difference combined with perceived threats to the worldview of the ingroup from the outgroup. How are perceived acculturation preferences presumed to be linked to support for multiculturalism? In several countries, evidence has been found showing that in general, majority members dislike it when minority members maintain their original culture. Instead, they prefer minority members to adapt to the culture of the host society (e.g., Arends-Tóth & Van de Vijver, 2003; Breugelmans & Van de Vijver, 2004; Van Oudenhoven, Prins, & Buunk, 1998; Zick, Wagner, Van Dick, & Petzel, 2001; see Schalk-Soekar, Van de Vijver, & Hoogsteder, 2004; although see Zagefka & Brown, 2002). Some theorists suggest that majority members view the desire of minority members to maintain their original culture as a threat to the majority culture and to the unity of society as a whole (Schalk-Soekar & Van de Vijver, 2008; Van Oudenhoven et al., 1998). In order to clarify the relationship between perceived acculturation and perceived threat, Piontkowski et al. (2002) developed the concordance model of acculturation (CMA). This model compares whether the acculturation preferences of the minority group match those of the majority group, and states that the greater the mismatch in acculturation preferences is, the more threatening the intergroup situation will be perceived to be. This process was confirmed by various other studies (e.g., Rohmann, Florack, & Piontkowski, 2006; Rohmann, Piontkowski, & Van Randenborgh, 2008). Hence, because majority members have been found to generally prefer culture adoption or contact by minorities, and dislike culture maintenance

24

L.K. Tip et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 22–30

(Arends-Tóth & Van de Vijver, 2003), we can assume that a perception that minority members prefer to adopt the mainstream culture and to have contact with majority members will be negatively related to perceived threat, while a perception of minority members preferring to maintain their original culture will be positively related to threat. In turn, there is evidence that an increased perception of threat is associated with stronger negative attitudes toward ethnic minorities and immigration (e.g., Esses, Jackson, Nolan, & Armstrong, 1999; González, Sirlopú, & Kessler, 2010; Stephan, Diaz-Loving, & Duran, 2000; Stephan, Renfro, Esses, Stephan, & Martin, 2005). More specifically, both Schalk-Soekar and Van de Vijver (2008) and Ward and Masgoret (2006) have suggested a negative relationship between perceived threat and support for multiculturalism. All together, this leads to the hypothesis that perceived threat will mediate the relationship between perceptions of minority members’ acculturation preferences and support for multiculturalism among majority members. This hypothesis was tested in three independent studies. Our first two studies focus on attitudes towards people of Pakistani origin in Britain. We chose this group as an exemplar group because it is sizable and therefore important in the British context, and because members of this group can be seen as having become more vulnerable due to recent Islamophobic trends following attacks such as the London bombings (Post & Sheffer, 2007; Report by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia, November 2005). The third study focuses on ethnic minorities in general, to test whether the observed patterns would generalise to a more global, abstract level. To recap, we hypothesise a negative association between perceived maintenance of the original culture and support for multiculturalism, mediated by threat. That is, the more British majority members perceive that minority members want to maintain their original culture, the more threatened they will feel. In turn, perceived threat will reduce support for multiculturalism (H1). Furthermore, we expect that a perception that minority members desire contact with British people and a perception that they want to adopt the British culture will be positively related to support for multiculturalism, and these relationships will be mediated by threat: the more British majority members perceive that minorities want to be in contact with British people, the less threatened they will feel. In turn, low perceived threat will be associated with more support for multiculturalism (H2). Finally, the more British majority members perceive that minority members want to take on the British culture, the less threatened they will feel. In turn, low perceived threat will be associated with more support for multiculturalism (H3). 2. Study 1 2.1. Method 2.1.1. Participants A total of 100 undergraduate students of a London university participated in the study. Participation was voluntary and rewarded with course credits. Although the cultural backgrounds of the students on this campus are highly diverse, we selected only those participants who were white and British according to their self-classification regarding ethnicity and nationality. Eighty-six were female and 14 were male. The age of the participants varied from 18 to 49, with a mean of 19.7 years. 2.1.2. Procedure and measures Participants filled out a questionnaire measuring the independent variables, the mediator, and the dependent variable. The questionnaires included the following items: Perceived acculturation preferences. The perceptions that participants had of Pakistani minority members regarding their desired culture maintenance, culture adoption, and contact with British people were measured with scales based on Zagefka and Brown (2002). The questions allow an examination of the effects of the three underlying dimensions separately, and they avoid double-barrelled items (Rudmin, 2003). All items were measured on 5-point Likert scales (1 = totally disagree to 5 = totally agree). The participant’s perception of the outgroup’s desire for cultural maintenance was measured with the following items: ‘I believe that Pakistani immigrants want to maintain their own culture’, ‘I believe that Pakistani immigrants want to maintain their own religion, language, and clothing’, and ‘I believe that Pakistani immigrants want to maintain their own way of living’. For this three-item scale, Cronbach’s alpha (˛) was .83. The participants’ perception of adoption of the British culture by the outgroup was measured as follows: ‘I believe that Pakistani immigrants want to take on the British culture’, ‘I believe that Pakistani immigrants want to take on the British religion, language, and clothing’, and ‘I believe that Pakistani immigrants want to take on the British way of living’. These three items had an alpha (˛) of .69. Finally, the perception of the outgroup’s attitude towards contact was measured with two items: ‘I believe that Pakistani immigrants find it important to have British friends’, and ‘I believe that Pakistani immigrants find it important to also spend time with Brits after school or work’ (˛ = .90). Multiculturalism. To measure multiculturalism, we used a 7-item scale, which was part of the Canadian Multicultural Ideology Scale (Berry & Kalin, 1995), adapted to the British context. Example items are: ‘Brits should recognize that British society consists of groups with different cultural backgrounds’, ‘Ethnic minorities should be helped to preserve their cultural

L.K. Tip et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 22–30

25

heritage in the UK’, and ‘The unity of this country is weakened by people of different cultural backgrounds sticking to their old ways’ (reversed item). All items were measured on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = totally disagree to 5 = totally agree; ˛ = .78). Threat. Threat was measured with an 11-item scale drawing on Stephan and Stephan’s (2000) conceptualisation. Stephan and Stephan (1996) make a distinction between symbolic and realistic identity threat. However, these two types of threat are tied together by an underlying theme (i.e., threats to the ingroup; Stephan, Ybarra, & Bachman, 1999), they are highly correlated, and are generally assumed to operate on the same level (Riek, Mania, & Gaertner, 2006). Furthermore, both symbolic and realistic threat have been found to influence attitudes towards minority groups (Stephan et al., 2005), and they have been analysed together as a single score before (e.g., Verkuyten, 2009). We are following this work and will measure symbolic and realistic threat together in a general measure of threat. Example items are: ‘I think that essential aspects of the British culture will be weakened because of the high number of Pakistani immigrants’, and ‘Thinking of the current economic situation, I think it is not desirable to allow more Pakistani immigrants into the UK’. Again, participants answered on a scale from 1 (= totally disagree) to 5 (= totally agree). The 11-item scale had excellent internal reliability (˛ = .89). Demographic data. We asked for age, gender, country of birth, ethnicity, and nationality to check for potential influences of this background information (unless indicated, these variables did not have any effects). Upon completion of the questionnaire, participants were thanked and thoroughly debriefed. All aspects of the research were in line with APA ethical guidelines. 2.2. Results H1 predicted that perceived maintenance of the original culture would be negatively associated with support for multiculturalism, and that this relationship would be mediated by feelings of threat. H2 predicted a positive relationship between perceived desire for contact and support for multiculturalism, mediated by threat. H3 predicted a positive relationship between perceived desire for taking on the British culture and support for multiculturalism, mediated by threat. To test these hypotheses, we employed the Sobel test (Sobel, 1982) and followed the method outlined by Baron and Kenny (1986). Means, standard deviations, and bi-variate correlations between variables are shown in Table 1. First, we tested whether threat mediated the negative relationship between perceived maintenance of the original culture and support for multiculturalism (H1). The independent variable (IV) ‘perceived culture maintenance’ had indeed a significant negative relationship with the dependent variable (DV) ‘support for multiculturalism’ (r = −.40, p < .001) and a significant positive relationship with the mediator ‘threat’ (r = .34, p < .001). When regressing the DV simultaneously from the IV and the mediator (R2 = .44, p < .001), the results showed that the mediator had a significant effect on the DV (ˇ = −.56, p < .001), and the effect of the IV became less strong upon addition of the mediator in the model (ˇ = −.20, p < .02). The Sobel test indicated that the decrease in effect of perceived maintenance on support for multiculturalism was indeed significant (z = −3.20, p < .002). Second, we tested whether threat mediated the positive relationship between perceived adoption of the British culture and support for multiculturalism (H2). The IV ‘perceived adoption’ had a significant positive relationship with the DV ‘support for multiculturalism’ (r = .30, p < .003) and a significant negative relationship with the mediator ‘threat’ (r = −.24, p < .02). When regressing the DV simultaneously from the IV and the mediator (R2 = .42, p < .001), the results showed that the mediator had a significant effect on the DV (ˇ = −.59, p < .001), and the effect of the IV became less strong upon addition of the mediator in the model (ˇ = .16, p < .05). In line with the hypothesis, the Sobel test indicated that threat mediated the relationship between perceived adoption on support for multiculturalism (z = 2.35, p < .02). Finally, we tested whether threat mediated the positive relationship between perceived contact and support for multiculturalism (H3). The IV ‘perceived contact’ had also a significant positive relationship with the DV ‘support for multiculturalism’ (r = .34, p < .001), and a significant negative relationship with the mediator ‘threat’ (r = −.36, p < .001). When regressing the DV simultaneously from the IV and the mediator (R2 = .41, p < .001), the results showed that the mediator had a significant effect on the DV (ˇ = −.59, p < .001), and the effect of the IV became non-significant upon addition of the mediator in the model (ˇ = .12, ns). The Sobel test indicated that, as predicted, threat mediated the relationship between perceived contact and support for multiculturalism (z = 3.37, p < .001).

Table 1 Correlations between the variables in study 1 (N = 101).

Perceived maintenance Perceived contact Perceived adoption Threat Support for multiculturalism * **

Mean

SD

Perceived maintenance

Perceived contact

Perceived adoption

Threat

Support for multiculturalism

3.85 2.77 2.46 2.18 3.51

.68 .98 .65 .81 .73

–

−.30** –

−.34** .55** –

.34** −.36** −.24* –

−.40** .34** .30** −.63** –

Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed). Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed).

26

L.K. Tip et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 22–30

2.3. Discussion Study 1 showed evidence in support of all three hypotheses: perceived cultural maintenance, perceived contact, and perceived adoption were all systematically associated with support for multiculturalism. Feelings of threat mediated all three relationships. A second study was conducted to replicate these findings. 3. Study 2 A second survey among an independent sample of British majority members was conducted to test whether the findings of study 1 could be replicated. Studies 1 and 2 were conducted at different universities. Whereas study 1 was conducted at a London university, where the population is ethnically highly diverse, study 2 was carried out at a university on the south coast of England, where the population is significantly less diverse. Hence, we sought to replicate the findings in a different setting. 3.1. Method 3.1.1. Participants One hundred and eight British undergraduate psychology students participated in this study. Participation was voluntary and was rewarded with course credits. All participants self-reported to be both white in terms of ethnicity and British in terms of nationality; 90 were female and 18 were male. The age of the participants varied from 18 to 55, with a mean of 19.5 years. Data from participants who reported to be non-white or non-British were excluded from the analyses, yielding the remaining sample of 108. 3.1.2. Procedure and measures Questionnaires which contained the same measures as in study 1 were filled out. The three items which measured perceived maintenance of the original culture had a Cronbach’s alpha (˛) of .86, the three items measuring perceived adoption of the British culture had an alpha (˛) of .79, and the Cronbach’s alpha (˛) for the two items measuring perceived contact with British people was .83. The 11-item threat-scale had an internal reliability (˛) of .89, while the Cronbach’s alpha (˛) for the multiculturalism scale was .80. Upon completion of the questionnaire, participants were thanked and thoroughly debriefed. All aspects of the research were in line with APA ethical guidelines. 3.2. Results The hypotheses and analyses for study 2 mirrored the ones for study 1. Means, standard deviations, and bi-variate correlations between variables are shown in Table 2. First, we tested whether threat mediated the negative relationship between perceived maintenance of the original culture and support for multiculturalism (H1). The independent variable (IV) ‘perceived maintenance’ had a significant negative relationship with the dependent variable (DV) ‘support for multiculturalism’ (r = −.26, p < .006) and a significant positive relationship with the mediator ‘threat’ (r = .24, p < .02). When regressing the DV simultaneously from the IV and the mediator (R2 = .36, p < .001), the mediator had a significant effect on the DV (ˇ = −.56, p < .001), and the effect of the IV became nonsignificant upon addition of the mediator in the model (ˇ = −.13, ns). The Sobel test indicated that, as predicted, threat mediated the relationship between perceived maintenance and support for multiculturalism (z = −2.37, p < .02). Second, we tested whether threat mediated the positive relationship between perceived adoption of the British culture and support for multiculturalism (H2). The IV ‘perceived adoption’ had a significant positive relationship with the DV ‘support for multiculturalism’ (r = .31, p < .001) and a significant negative relationship with the mediator ‘threat’ (r = −.32, p < .001). When regressing the DV simultaneously from the IV and the mediator (R2 = .37, p < .001), the mediator had a significant effect on the DV (ˇ = −.55, p < .001), and the effect of the IV became non-significant upon addition of the mediator in the model (ˇ = .14, ns). In line with the hypothesis, the Sobel test indicated that threat mediated the relationship between perceived adoption and support for multiculturalism (z = 3.05, p < .003). Table 2 Correlations between the variables in study 2 (N = 108).

Perceived maintenance Perceived contact Perceived adoption Threat Support for multiculturalism * **

Mean

SD

Perceived maintenance

Perceived contact

Perceived adoption

Threat

Support for multiculturalism

3.82 2.87 2.69 1.88 3.63

.70 .83 .74 .69 .70

–

−.25** –

−.40** .38** –

.24* −.20* −.32** –

−.26** .22* .31** −.59** –

Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed). Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed).

L.K. Tip et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 22–30

27

Finally, we tested whether threat mediated the positive relationship between perceived contact and support for multiculturalism (H3). The IV ‘perceived contact’ had a significant positive relationship with the DV ‘support for multiculturalism’ (r = .22, p < .03) and a significant negative relationship with the mediator ‘threat’ (r = −.20, p < .05). When regressing the DV simultaneously from the IV and the mediator (R2 = .36, p < .001), the mediator had a significant effect on the DV (ˇ = −.57, p < .001), and the effect of the IV became non-significant upon addition of the mediator in the model (ˇ = .11, ns). The Sobel test indicated that threat indeed mediated the relationship between perceived contact and support for multiculturalism (z = 2.0, p < .05). 3.3. Discussion Study 2 replicated the results of study 1 in a different setting, and showed further evidence in support of the hypotheses. However, both studies 1 and 2 focussed on Pakistanis. Although there are no theoretical reasons why the hypothesised mechanisms should differ between different minority groups, generalisability should ideally be tested rather than assumed. This was the aim of study 3. 4. Study 3 Study 3 tested whether the findings of studies 1 and 2 generalise to other groups which might have different mean levels of perceived threat. It has been shown that functions of attitudes differ depending on the level of abstraction at which different outgroups are represented (Watt, Maio, Rees, & Hewstone, 2007). Therefore, this study focussed on ‘ethnic minority members’ in general, rather than naming a specific minority group. It has been acknowledged that, of course, majority members’ attitudes might differ towards different minority groups (Bourhis et al., 1997). Although mean level differences between groups do not necessary mean that the processes which drive attitudes must be different, this possibility should at least be tested, which was the aim of study 3. 4.1. Method 4.1.1. Participants An independent sample of 115 undergraduate students of a London university participated in the study. They participated voluntarily and were rewarded with course credits. All participants were white and British according to their self-classification regarding ethnicity and nationality. Of these, 73 were female and 42 were male. The age of the participants ranged from 18 to 50 years (M = 22.3). 4.1.2. Procedure and measures The measures in the questionnaires were identical to the measures in studies 1 and 2, with a few exceptions. First and most importantly, for all items measuring perceived acculturation preferences the words ‘Pakistani immigrants’ were replaced with ‘ethnic minority members’. Furthermore, time pressures forced us to shorten the questionnaire by several questions. That is, perceived maintenance of the original culture was measured with two instead of three items, these being ‘I believe that ethnic minority members in Britain want to maintain their own culture’ and ‘I believe that ethnic minorities want to maintain their own religion, language, and clothing’. Also, the scale measuring support for multiculturalism was shortened by three items, leaving a 4-item scale. The two items measuring perceived cultural maintenance had a Cronbach’s alpha (˛) of .71, the three items measuring perceived adoption of the British culture had an alpha (˛) of .77, and the Cronbach’s alpha (˛) for the two items measuring perceived contact with British people was .87. The internal reliability of the 11-item threat-scale (˛ = .92) and the 4-item multiculturalism scale (˛ = .92) were both excellent. Upon completion of the questionnaire, participants were thanked and thoroughly debriefed. All aspects of the research were in line with APA ethical guidelines. 4.2. Results The hypotheses and analyses for study 3 were identical to the ones for studies 1 and 2. Means, standard deviations, and bi-variate correlations between all variables are shown in Table 3. First, we tested whether threat mediated the negative relationship between perceived maintenance of the original culture and support for multiculturalism (H1). The independent variable (IV) ‘perceived maintenance’ had a significant negative relationship with the dependent variable (DV) ‘support for multiculturalism’ (r = −.21, p < .03) and a significant positive relationship with the mediator ‘threat’ (r = .34, p < .001). When regressing the DV simultaneously from the IV and the mediator (R2 = .46, p < .001), the mediator had a significant effect on the DV (ˇ = −.69, p < .001), and the effect of the IV became nonsignificant upon addition of the mediator in the model (ˇ = −.03, ns). The Sobel test indicated that, as predicted, threat mediated the relationship between perceived maintenance and support for multiculturalism (z = −3.58, p < .001). Second, we tested whether threat mediated the positive relationship between perceived adoption of the British culture and support for multiculturalism (H2). The IV ‘perceived adoption’ had a significant positive relationship with the DV ‘support for multiculturalism’ (r = .38, p < .001) and a significant negative relationship with the mediator ‘threat’ (r = −.35, p < .001).

28

L.K. Tip et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 22–30

Table 3 Correlations between the variables in study 3 (N = 115).

Perceived maintenance Perceived contact Perceived adoption Threat Support for multiculturalism * **

Mean

SD

Perceived maintenance

Perceived contact

Perceived adoption

Threat

Support for multiculturalism

3.87 2.90 2.92 2.22 3.96

.59 .91 .72 .86 .86

–

−.24** –

−.35** .44** –

.34** −.24* −.35** –

−.21* .29** .38** −.68** –

Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed). Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed).

When regressing the DV simultaneously from the IV and the mediator (R2 = .48, p < .001), the mediator had a significant effect on the DV (ˇ = −.62, p < .001), and the effect of the IV became less strong upon addition of the mediator in the model (ˇ = .17, p < .03). In line with the hypothesis, the Sobel test indicated that threat mediated the relationship between perceived adoption and support for multiculturalism (z = 3.59, p < .001). Finally, we tested whether threat mediated the positive relationship between perceived contact and support for multiculturalism (H3). The IV ‘perceived contact’ had a significant positive relationship with the DV ‘support for multiculturalism’ (r = .29, p < .002) and a significant negative relationship with the mediator ‘threat’ (r = −.24, p < .02). When regressing the DV simultaneously from the IV and the mediator (R2 = .48, p < .001), the mediator had a significant effect on the DV (ˇ = −.64, p < .001), and the effect of the IV became less strong upon addition of the mediator in the model (ˇ = .14, p < .05). The Sobel test indicated that threat indeed mediated the relationship between perceived contact and support for multiculturalism (z = 2.50, p < .02). 4.3. Discussion Study 3 replicated the results of studies 1 and 2 with a different, more general target group. As opposed to studies 1 and 2, in which the majority members’ perceptions of Pakistani immigrant’s acculturation preferences were measured, study 3 focussed on perceptions of ethnic minority members in general. This showed further evidence in support of the three hypotheses. 5. General discussion Three independent studies generated support for the hypotheses. In line with our predictions, threat mediated the relationships between perceived acculturation preferences and support for multiculturalism among majority members. With regard to perceived cultural maintenance, we found that the more majority members perceived that minority members wanted to maintain their original culture, the more threatened they felt. In turn, the more threatened, the less they supported multiculturalism. Opposite patterns emerged with regard to perceived contact and adoption: the more majority members perceived that ethnic minorities wanted to be in contact with British people or wanted to adopt the British culture, the less threatened they felt. In turn, low perceived threat was associated with more support for multiculturalism. These results were found not only with Pakistani minority members as a target group (studies 1 and 2), but also when a more general target group was used: ethnic minority members (study 3). The pattern found in the three studies might be described as paradoxical, since support for multiculturalism refers to a policy which values and fosters mutual cultural differences and equal chances and opportunities (Arends-Tóth & Van de Vijver, 2003). According to our results, majority members report supporting multiculturalism as long as they believe that minority members do not wish to maintain their original culture. It is possible that this effect is due to participants giving socially desirable answers regarding their support for multiculturalism. That is, people might agree with multiculturalism as a lip service (i.e., they express a support for multiculturalism only if they think minority members do not wish to maintain their original culture to begin with). Another possibility is that majority members might agree with certain ideas of multiculturalism (those related to culture adoption/contact), but not with all (those related to cultural maintenance). This is in line with research by Ginges and Cairns (2000), who found that Australian majority members agreed the view that multiculturalism is seen as having various advantages, such as cultural and social enrichment, but they also showed support for statements about the disadvantages of multiculturalism, for example, threat to the status quo, unity, and stability of the country. More research is needed to find out when self-reported support for multiculturalism is actually ‘honest’ and likely to translate in action. Also, it will be important to find out whether perhaps new, multi-faceted measures of multiculturalism are needed. Our findings are compatible with the concordance model of acculturation (CMA) (Piontkowski et al., 2002; Rohmann et al., 2006; Rohmann et al., 2008). According to this model, a greater mismatch in acculturation preferences between minority and majority members will lead to a perception of the intergroup situation as more threatening. Since majority members have been found to generally prefer culture adoption or contact by ethnic minorities over culture maintenance (Arends-Tóth & Van de Vijver, 2003), it is likely that a perception of culture maintenance created a greater mismatch than a perception of

L.K. Tip et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 22–30

29

culture adoption or contact, and therefore lead to an increased perception of threat. Furthermore, our research is in line with that of other researchers finding a negative relationship between perceived threat and multiculturalism (Schalk-Soekar & Van de Vijver, 2008; Ward & Masgoret, 2006). It is important to note that the two dimensions of perceived contact and perceived adoption of the majority culture created the same results. Furthermore, the correlations in Tables 1–3 show that the two concepts were indeed related to each other. That is, despite the fact that some researchers have suggested that it might be better to replace the ‘contact’ dimension with a dimension measuring how much minority members desire to adopt the culture of their new country of residence (e.g., Bourhis et al., 1997), the two dimensions were interchangeable in the present context. Future research will have to show if this is also the case when predicting other outcome variables. One limitation of the present research is that all findings are correlational. All studies were surveys and therefore do not yield any evidence of causality. It would be interesting for future research to investigate whether the results found in these three studies will hold in an experimental setting. Furthermore, only the relationships between perceived acculturation preferences and multiculturalism were tested. Other factors have been shown to be related to support for multiculturalism as well, such as ethnocentrism (Berry, Kalin, & Taylor, 1977), and education (Breugelmans & Van de Vijver, 2004). Future research might usefully establish which of these effects might also be mediated by feelings of threat. Additionally, another limitation of the current studies concerns the generalisability of the results. Although there are no theoretical reasons to assume that the processes will differ between student and other samples, generalisability to other populations would of course have to be tested to be certain. Also, generalisability to other specific minorities cannot be assumed but would have to be tested. This research has several important implications. First, it yields evidence that majority members’ attitudes toward multiculturalism depend on their perceptions of minority members’ acculturation preferences. That is, the perceived desires of the outgroup might influence own attitudes. Such mutual effects have hitherto been largely neglected, and the present findings demonstrate that they would merit more attention in the future. Second, the results confirm that it will be a challenge to encourage support for multiculturalism among majority members when minority groups wish to maintain their original culture. However, there is a substantial body of evidence demonstrating that maintaining certain aspects of the original identity is associated with better psycho-social and health outcomes for minority members (e.g., Berry, 1997; Berry et al., 1987; Liebkind, 2001; Liebkind & Jasinskaja-Lahti, 2000; Phinney et al., 1992). Related research on dual identities has shown that having more than one identity is not only possible, but also desirable (González & Brown, 2006; Hornsey & Hogg, 2000, 2002). Therefore, it is important to make sure that any interventions include the message for majority members that ethnic minorities maintaining their original culture is not necessarily threatening.

References Arends-Tóth, J., & Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2003). Multiculturalism and acculturation: Views of Dutch and Turkish–Dutch. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 249–266. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 46, 5–68. Berry, J. W. (1999). Intercultural relations in plural societies. Canadian Psychology, 40, 12–21. Berry, J. W. (2001). A psychology of immigration. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 615–631. Berry, J. W., & Kalin, R. (1995). Multicultural and ethnic attitudes in Canada: An overview of the 1991 national survey. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 27, 301–320. Berry, J. W., Kalin, R., & Taylor, D. M. (1977). Multiculturalism and ethnic attitudes in Canada. Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and Services. Berry, J. W., Kim, U., Minde, T., & Mok, D. (1987). Comparative studies of acculturative stress. International Migration Review, 21, 491–511. Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Segall, M. H., & Dasen, P. R. (1992). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bourhis, R. Y., Moise, L. C., Perreault, S., & Senecal, S. (1997). Towards an interactive acculturation model: A social psychological approach. International Journal of Psychology, 32, 369–389. Breugelmans, S. M., & Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2004). Antecedents and components of majority attitudes toward multiculturalism in the Netherlands. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53, 400–422. Esses, V. M., Jackson, L. M., Nolan, J. M., & Armstrong, T. L. (1999). Economic threat and attitudes toward immigration. In S. Halli, & L. Drieger (Eds.), Immigrant Canada: Demographic, economic and social challenges (pp. 212–229). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press. European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia. (2005, November). The impact of 7 July 2005 London bomb attacks on Muslim communities in the EU. Ginges, J., & Cairns, D. (2000). Social representations of multiculturalism: A faceted analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 1345–1370. González, R., & Brown, R. J. (2006). Dual identities in intergroup contact: Group status and size moderate the generalization of positive attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 753–767. González, R., Sirlopú, D., & Kessler, T. (2010). Prejudice among Peruvians and Chileans as a function of identity, intergroup contact, acculturation preferences and intergroup emotions. Journal of Social Issues, 66, 802–823. Horenczyk, G. (1997). Immigrants’ perception of host attitudes and their reconstruction of cultural groups. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 46, 34–38. Hornsey, M. J., & Hogg, M. A. (2000). Assimilation and diversity: An integrative model of subgroup relations. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 143–156. Hornsey, M. J., & Hogg, M. A. (2002). The effects of group status on subgroup relations. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 203–218. Liebkind, K. (2001). Acculturation. In R. Brown, & S. Gaertner (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology (pp. 387–405). Oxford: Blackwell. Liebkind, K., & Jasinskaja-Lahti, I. (2000). Acculturation and psychological well-being among immigrant adolescents in Finland: A comparative study of adolescents from different cultural backgrounds. Journal of Adolescent Research, 15, 446–469. Pfafferott, I., & Brown, R. (2006). Acculturation preferences of majority and minority adolescents in Germany in the context of society and family. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30, 703–717.

30

L.K. Tip et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36 (2012) 22–30

Phinney, J. S., Chavira, V., & Williamson, L. (1992). Acculturation attitudes and self-esteem among high school and college students. Youth and Society, 23, 299–312. Piontkowski, U., Rohmann, A., & Florack, A. (2002). Concordance of acculturation attitudes and perceived threat. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 5, 221–232. Post, J. M., & Sheffer, G. (2007). The risk of radicalization and terrorism in U.S. muslim communities. Brown Journal of World Affairs, 13, 101–112. Riek, B. M., Mania, E. W., & Gaertner, S. L. (2006). Intergroup threat and outgroup attitudes: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 336–353. Roccas, S., Horenzyk, G., & Schwartz, S. H. (2000). Acculturation discrepancies and well-being: The moderating role of conformity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 323–334. Rohmann, A., Florack, A., & Piontkowski, U. (2006). The role of discordant acculturation attitudes in perceived threat: An analysis of host and immigrant attitudes in Germany. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30, 683–702. Rohmann, A., Piontkowski, U., & Van Randenborgh, A. (2008). When attitudes do not fit: Discordance of acculturation attitudes as an antecedent of intergroup threat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 337–352. Rudmin, F. W. (2003). Critical history of the acculturation psychology of assimilation, separation, integration, and marginalization. Review of General Psychology, 7, 3–37. Schalk-Soekar, S. R. G., & Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2008). The concept of multiculturalism: A study among Dutch majority members. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38, 2152–2178. Schalk-Soekar, S. R. G., Van de Vijver, F. R. J., & Hoogsteder, M. (2004). Attitudes toward multiculturalism of immigrants and majority members in the Netherlands. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 28, 533–550. Snauwaert, B., Soenens, B., Vanbeselaere, N., & Boen, F. (2003). When integration does not necessarily imply integration: Different conceptualizations of acculturation orientations lead to different classifications. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34, 231–293. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1982 (pp. 290–312). Washington, DC: American Sociological Association. Stephan, W. G., Diaz-Loving, R., & Duran, A. (2000). Integrated threat theory and intercultural attitudes: Mexico and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 240–249. Stephan, W. G., Renfro, C. L., Esses, V. M., Stephan, C. W., & Martin, T. (2005). The effects of feeling threatened on attitudes toward immigrants. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29, 1–19. Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (1996). Predicting prejudice. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20, 409–426. Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (2000). An integrated threat theory of prejudice. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 23–45). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Stephan, W. G., Ybarra, O., & Bachman, G. (1999). Prejudice toward immigrants. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 2221–2237. Van Oudenhoven, J. P., Prins, K. S., & Buunk, B. P. (1998). Attitudes of minority and majority members towards adaptation of immigrants. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 995–1013. Verkuyten, M. (2005). Ethnic group identification and group evaluation among minority and majority groups: Testing the multiculturalism hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 121–138. Verkuyten, M. (2009). Support for multiculturalism and minority rights: The role of national identification and out-group threat. Social Justice Research, 22, 31–52. Ward, C., & Masgoret, A.-M. (2006). An integrative model of attitudes toward immigrants. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30, 671–682. Watt, S. E., Maio, G. R., Rees, K., & Hewstone, M. (2007). Functions of attitudes towards ethnic groups: Effects of level of abstraction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 441–449. Zagefka, H., & Brown, R. (2002). The relationship between acculturation strategies, relative fit and intergroup relations: Immigrant-majority relations in Germany. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 171–188. Zagefka, H., Brown, R., Broquard, M., & Leventoglu Martin, S. L. (2007). Predictors and consequences of negative attitudes toward immigrants in Belgium and Turkey: The role of acculturation preferences and economic competition. British Journal of Social Psychology, 46, 153–169. Zagefka, H., Brown, R., & González, R. (2009). Antecedent and consequences of acculturation preferences of non-indigenous Chileans in relation to an indigenous minority: Longitudinal survey evidence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 558–575. Zick, A., Wagner, U., Van Dick, R., & Petzel, T. (2001). Acculturation and prejudice in Germany: Majority and minority perspectives. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 541–557.