Bicultural Identity Integration

Given the growing numbers of bicultural individuals in the United States and around the world, bicultural identity integration (BII) is an important construct that helps researchers to better capture the diversity within this group. In this chapter, we organize and summarize the limited literature on individual differences in bicultural identity, with a special focus on BII. First, we discuss and define biculturalism and cultural identity in general. Second, we introduce individual differences in bicultural identity and the ways in which these differences have been studied. Third, we define BII, summarize research on this construct, and introduce the latest applications of BII theory to other areas of identity research. In unpacking the construct of BII, we first define it along with its components (harmony and blendedness) and nomological network. We also discuss what we believe to be the process involved in integrating one’s dual cultural identities. We then present correlates of BII, including self-group personality perceptions, culturally related behaviors and values, and sociocultural and psychological adjustment. Finally, we discuss how BII relates to other important social-cognitive constructs, such as cultural frame switching or code switching. We end with a brief overview of the latest applications of BII theory (e.g., to gay identity) and suggestions for future research on bicultural identity. In summary, our goal for this chapter is to introduce BII and to help readers understand the importance of culture in identity. Since 1970, international migration has doubled worldwide. According to a recent report by the United Nations, about 175 million people are Q.-L. Huynh (!) Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA, USA e-mail: [email protected] living in a country other than where they were born, and about 1 in 10 persons in “more developed” regions is an international migrant (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2002). In addition to these changes in international migration, advances in technology have drastically increased cross-cultural contact and cultural diversity across the globe (Arnett, 2002), and changes in attitudes and laws about 827 S.J. Schwartz et al. (eds.), Handbook of Identity Theory and Research, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4419-7988-9_35, © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011 828 Q.-L. Huynh et al. inter-ethnic marriage in some parts of the world have led to more inter-ethnic families whose children have mixed cultural backgrounds. Overall, people have more opportunities now than ever before to interact with those who are culturally different from them due to international migration, globalization, travel, and the Internet (cf. Arnett Jensen et al., Chapter 13, this volume). As a result of this cross-cultural exposure, there has been a large increase in the number of bicultural individuals – people who have internalized at least two cultures. It is essential for those interested in issues of identity to understand how dual-cultural identities operate within bicultural persons. Broadly speaking, bicultural individuals may be immigrants, refugees, sojourners, indigenous people, ethnic minorities, or mixed-ethnic individuals (Berry, 2003; Padilla, 2006). However, bicultural individuals are not necessarily cultural minorities or those in non-dominant ethnocultural groups. For example, individuals from the dominant group (e.g., non-Hispanic White Americans) who have lived abroad or in ethnic enclaves, and those in inter-ethnic relationships, may also be bicultural. More strictly defined, bicultural individuals are those who have been exposed to and have internalized two cultures (BenetMartínez, in press; Benet-Martínez & Haritatos, 2005; Nguyen & Benet-Martínez, 2007, 2010), so the cultural domain of identity is especially important for them. The focus of this chapter is on bicultural identity, specifically bicultural identity integration (BII; Benet-Martínez & Haritatos, 2005), as outlined below. We explore the diversity of the bicultural experience, present BII as a way to understand individual differences in biculturalism, and discuss the implications of and suggest future directions for BII. Types of Biculturals From the acculturation literature, biculturalism is conceived as one of four possible acculturation strategies: (a) the integration strategy (i.e., biculturalism) refers to involvement in both dominant and ethnic cultures, (b) the assimilation strategy is involvement in the dominant culture only, (c) the separation strategy is involvement in the ethnic culture only, and (d) marginalization is involvement in neither culture (Berry, 2003). Traditionally, cultural psychologists have focused on differences between bicultural individuals (those using the integration acculturation strategy) and other acculturating groups (those using the assimilation, separation, or marginalization acculturation strategies). However, empirical research, mostly conducted on young adults and adolescents, has shown that the majority of acculturating individuals are bicultural (Berry, 2003; Van Oudenhoven, Ward, & Masgoret, 2006). Therefore, it may be more fruitful to focus on differences among bicultural individuals, rather between bicultural individuals and other acculturating individuals. For example, do all bicultural individuals integrate their two cultures in the same way, in the same contexts, and for the same reasons? Until recently, there has been little research exploring differences within this large group that uses the integration strategy and whether these differences are meaningful. New research, however, suggests that bicultural or integrated individuals do not comprise a homogeneous group and that there are clearly variations among them (Schwartz & Zamboanga, 2008). One of the earliest typologies of bicultural individuals, obtained with a sample of Latinos in the United States, included (a) the synthesized multicultural individual, (b) the functional multicultural individual with a mainstream cultural orientation, and (c) the functional multicultural individual with a Latino cultural orientation (Ramirez, 1984). The synthesized multicultural individual represents the “true” bicultural individual who is competent in and committed to both cultures. The functional multicultural individual is competent in both cultures but is committed to or identified with only one culture – either the mainstream or Latino (or other ethnic) culture. Although this typology was developed for Latinos, it may apply more broadly to other bicultural individuals. See Table 35.1 for a summary and comparison of typologies of bicultural individuals. 35 Bicultural Identity Integration 829 Table 35.1 Types of Biculturals Identified in Previous Research