The role of perceptions of parental behavior, cultural values conflict and ethnic identity on Mexican American identity development

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Request accessible transcript

Transcript (if available)

Content THE ROLE OF PERCEPTIONS OF PARENTAL BEHAVIOR
CULTURAL VALUES CONFLICT AND ETHNIC IDENTITY
ON MEXICAN AMERICAN IDENTITY DEVELOPMENT
by
Joseph Armando Nunez
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(Psychology)
August 1990
Copyright 1990 Joseph Armando Nunez
UMI Number: DP30722
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
ûissertaiiDn M L ib lisN n g
UMI DP30722
Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY PARK
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90089-4015
PK.D
Ps
' 9 O
N 972
This dissertation, written by
...........................Joseph^Arma^do Nunez......................
under the direction of hJ.?... Dissertation
Committee, and approved by all its members,
has been presented to and accepted by The
Graduate School, in partial fulfillm ent of re
quirements for the degree of
D O C T O R O F P H IL O S O P H Y
Dean of Graduate Studies
Date
DISSERTATION COMMITTEE
July 23, 1990
Chairperson
11
Acknow1edgment s
Many people have provided support and guidance
during my years as a graduate student, and the writing of
this dissertation. With much gratitude, I mention them
at this time. I give a special word of thanks to Jay
Martin, Ph.D., who has provided me with support since the
beginning of my graduate studies in psychology. I am
grateful to the dissertation committee (Steven Lopez,
Ph.D., Milton Wolpin, Ph.D., Frank Manis, Ph.D., Mauricio
Mazon, Ph.D., Margaret Gatz, Ph.D.) for their helpful
comments and suggestions as I attempted to transform a
personal interest into an academic research project. I
am indebted to Mr. Court land Holdgrafer, Mr. Gregory
Pezzetti, Mr. Jose Espinosa, and Rosemary Price, Ph.D.,
faculty members of the Rancho Santiago Community
College. Their enthusiastic support made the recruitment
of subjects for the study possible. I am grateful to my
friends, Rafael Luevano, Ph.D., and Mr. Javier Vidrio,
who provided me with much needed times of reflection and
relaxation. Finally, I am indebted to my parents, Jose
and Dolores Nunez, for their love and encouragement
during my many years of study.
Ill
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments ............. ii
List of Tables ....................................... v
Abstract ........................................... vii
Page
INTRODUCTION .............................. 1
EGO IDENTITY: THEORY AND OPERATIONALIZATION............. 4
IDENTITY FORMATION: MINORITY AND MAJORITY
ADOLESCENTS ...................................... 17
MEXICAN AMERICAN IDENTITY FORMATION: POSSIBLE
CONTRIBUTORY FACTORS .... 28
A. Parental Behavior ........................... 31
B. Cultural Values Conflict .................... 38
C. Ethnic Identity ................. 44
STUDY OVERVIEW ...................................... 50
Hypotheses ..................................... 52
Method ......................................... 55
Results ........................................ 69
Discussion ..................................... 87
REFERENCES ......................................... 105
Appendix
A. Objective Measure of Ego Identity ................ 117
B. Parental Behavior Inventory ..................... 120
C. Cultural Values Conflict Scale ................... 126
IV
D. Cultural Values Pilot Study: Questionnaire
(Spanish Version) ............................ 129
E. Cultural Values Pilot Study: Questionnaire
(English Version) ............................ 131
F. Cultural Values Pilot Study: Subjects’
Characteristics .............................. 133
G. Table G-1: Cultural Values Pilot Study:
Value ratings ................................ 134
H. Phinney Ethnic Identity Measure ................. 136
I. Demographic Questionnaire ....................... 139
V
List of Tables
Page
Table 1. Frequency of Subjects’ Background
Information by Ethnicity ................. 57
Table 2. The Number and Percentages of Mexican
American and Anglo American Subjects
in Identity Status Categories ........... 71
Table 3. Mean Values, Standard Deviations and
F_ Values of Subjects’ Identity Status
Subscale Scores by Ethnicity ............ 72
Table 4. Chi-square: Ego Identity Group (High/Low)
(EIG) as related to Ethnicity, Gender,
SES, and Age ............................ 72
Table 5. Mean Values, Standard Deviations and
F Values of Subjects’ Perceptions of
Parental Behaviors for Ethnicity and
Identity Group (with SES as Covariate) 74
Table 6. Mean Values, Standard Deviations and
F Values of Subjects’ Perceptions of
Parental Behaviors by Socioeconomic
Status ............................. 76
Table 7. Mean Values, Standard Deviations and
F Values of Subjects’ Perceptions of
Parents’ Values by Ethnicity (with SES
as Covariate)............................ 80
Table 8. Mean Values, Standard Deviations and
F Values of Subjects’ Perceptions of
Own Values by Ethnicity (with SES
as Covariate)............................ 82
Table 9. Mean Values, Standard Deviations and
F Values of Subjects’ Perceptions of
Values Conflict by Ethnicity (with SES
as Covariate)....................... 83
Table 10. Mean Values, Standard Deviations and
F. Values of Subjects’ Perceptions of
Values Conflict by Ethnicity and
Identity Group (with SES as Covariate) . . 84
vi
Mean Values, Standard Deviations and
F Values of Subjects’ Perceptions of
Values Conflict by Gender .........
Tab
84
Mean Values, Standard Deviations and
F Values of Subjects’ Perceptions of
Values Conflict by SES ............
Tab
84
Mean Values, Standard Deviations and
F Values of Subjects’ Ethnic
Identification and Achievement for
Ethnicity and Identity Group (with
SES as Covariate) ...............
Tab
86
vii
Abstract
Mexican American adolescents, compared to their
Anglo American (i.e., white Americans of European
descent) peers, may have a more difficult time
establishing a sense of identity because they are in a
predominant society and culture that is not their native
one. The purpose of the present study was to examine
identity development among Mexican Americans and the
possible contributory role of three factors, namely
perceptions of parental behaviors, a cultural values
conflict, and ethnic identity. The subjects were 160
Mexican American and Anglo American males and females,
between the ages of 18 and 21, attending a community
college in Southern California. They were assessed on
the Objective Measure of Ego Identity (Adams, Shea, &
Fitch, 1978), the Parental Behavior Inventory (an
adaptation of a measure used in Openshaw, Thomas, &
Rollins, 1984), the Cultural Values Conflict Scale (a
measure developed for the study), and the Phinney Ethnic
Identity Measure (Phinney, 1989). A demographic
questionnaire was also included to gather background
information.
The hypotheses tested included the following; (1)
Mexican Americans, compared to Anglo Americans, would
more likely to be categorized in a low-identity group
rather than a high-identity group; (2) Mexican Americans
vi i i
would perceive their parents as less supportive, using
more coercive and less inductive controlling techniques
than Anglo Americans; (3) Mexican Americans would report
more values conflict than their Anglo American peers; (4)
Mexican Americans, compared to Anglo Americans, would
report higher levels of ethnic identity.
An Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA)(with SES as a
covariate) on the measure of ethnic identity showed
Mexican Americans, compared with Anglo Americans, with
significantly higher levels of ethnic identity at the
p<.01 level. Furthermore, the ANCOVA showed a
significant interaction (p<.05) between ethnicity and
identity group: high-identity Mexican Americans reported
higher levels of ethnic identification than their
low-identity peers. A Chi-square on the ego identity
measure, and ANCOVAs (with SES as a covariate) on the
measures assessing perceptions of parental behaviors and
a cultural values conflict, showed no differences among
the Mexican American and Anglo American samples. The
hypothesis of ethnic differences on a measure of ethnic
identity was supported, while hypotheses regarding ethnic
differences on measures of ego identity, perceptions of
parental behavior, and cultural values conflict were
not. The results of the present study suggest that
ethnic identity plays a contributory role in the identity
development of Mexican Americans.
Throughout adolescence, I felt myself
mysteriously marked. Nothing else about my
appearance would concern me so much as the
fact that my complexion was dark. My
mother would say how sorry she was that
there was not money enough to get braces to
straighten my teeth. But I never bothered
about my teeth. In three-way mirrors at
department stores. I’d see my profile
dramatically defined by a long nose, but it
was really the color of my skin that caught
my attention... Thirteen years old.
Fourteen... With disappointment I located
myself in class photographs-my dark face
undefined by the camera which had clearly
described the white faces of classmates.
(Rodriguez, 1982, p. 125)
When I was in high school I thought I
was a real radical. I guess I thought of
myself as Chicana and I used to cause a lot
of fights at home. I used to call myself a
Mexican and my dad would say ’you’re
Mexican American,’ and I’d say, ’no I’m
not. I’m not white!’ (Anna Fuentes, in
Keefe & Padilla, 1987, p. 93)
Between the school years at the
seminary and the summers at the store, I
gradually became more and more aware of the
many things that I was not: I was not and
never would be, even if I wanted to, a
regular U.S.-American. Yet neither would I
be a ’puro mexicano.’ There were identities
that I knew that I was and was not at the
same time: U.S.-American, Mexican, Spanish,
Indian. Yet I was! My very being was a
combination. I was a rich mixture but I
was not mixed-up! I was more and more
clear that my own inner identity was new
and exciting. I started to enjoy the
feeling of who I was: I was not just
U.S.-American and not just Mexican but
fully and exclusively neither ... I lived
in two worlds, and the two worlds lived in
me. That was wealth. (Elizondo, 1988, p.
26)
2
According to Erikson’s (1968, 1980) theory of
personality development, at the time of their
adolescence, Richard Rodriguez, Anna Fuentes, and
Virgilio Elizondo, like any other adolescent, had the
developmental task of establishing a sense of identity.
But was, and is, the task more difficult, or different in
some way, for them as Mexican American adolescents
compared to their Anglo American (i.e., white Americans
of European descent) counterparts? Richard Rodriguez’
difficulty with his skin color may be the variation of an
adolescent theme: the importance of physical appearances
among adolescents. However, it may also reflect the
additional struggle for the ethnic minority youngster
attempting to achieve a sense of identity in the
predominantly Anglo American society and culture of the
United States. Anna Fuentes’ self-proclamation as a
"Chicana" illustrates a common adolescent experience of
"being a radical" but may also reflect her coming to
terms with being "not white." Virgilio Elizondo states
that he "celebrates" (personal communication, August 13,
1989) being a "combination", "a rich mixture" but might
this entail some extra psychological work, a longer
period of searching and trying out various social
ident i t ies?
Erikson’s (1968, 1980) conceptualization of identity
as the major task of adolescence has stimulated a great
3
deal of research (e.g., Adams, Bennion, Huh, 1987;
Bourne, 1978a; Dusek, 1986; Marcia, 1980). There have
been numerous attempts to operationalize his concept of
"ego identity" (e.g., Bourne, 1978a; Ciaccio, 1965,
Constantinople, 1969, Hauser, 1972; Marcia, 1966). The
early identity research was conducted primarily with
adolescent Anglo American males (Bourne, 1978a, Marcia
1980). More recently, the number of studies addressing
identity formation among female adolescents has increased
(e.g., Abraham, 1983; Adams, 1985; Adams & Fitch, 1982;
Adams & Jones, 1983; Marcia & Friedman, 1970; Orlofsky,
1977). A very notable absence in the published
literature is the lack of studies exploring identity
formation among racial and ethnic minorities among
American researchers.
As illustrated by the autobiographical pieces above
the present research investigates identity formation
among Mexican American adolescents. There are two major
goals. One goal is to compare identity formation among
Mexican American minority adolescents with their Anglo
American counterparts. The other goal is to identify
some of the factors that might contribute to differences
in identity development between the two groups. Although
there are only two published studies (Abraham, 1983;
1986) that examine the identity development of Mexican
American adolescents there are relevant research areas
4
that can provide the theoretical framework for the
present investigation. This literature includes 1)
Erikson’s theory of ego identity, and the most widely
accepted operationalization of the concept, Marcia’s
(1966) identity statuses, 2) studies comparing identity
formation between ethnic minority and ethnic majority
adolescents, and 3) the research examining factors that
may play a role in the identity formation of Mexican
American adolescents, specifically perceptions of
parental behavior, cultural values and ethnic identity.
Ego Identity: Theory and Operationalization
Erikson (1968; 1980) describes personality
development as eight "epigenetic” stages that encompass
the entire life span. At each stage, an encounter
between the individual and the environment must be
successfully worked through for personality growth to
continue. During adolescence, the fifth stage, the
developmental task is to establish a sense of identity.
Erikson (1968) speaks of the adolescent's "identity
crisis" because it is for him or her "a turning point, a
crucial period of increased vulnerability and heightened
potential, and therefore, the ontogenetic source of
generational strength and maladjustment" (p. 96).
Erikson defines a sense of identity as "the accrued
confidence that one’s ability to maintain inner sameness
and continuity is matched by the sameness and continuity
5
of one’s meaning for others" (1980, p. 94). Thus,
identity is both personal and social. The personal
experience of identity entails a sense of connectedness
between what one has been in the past with what he or she
is in the present, as well as an "inner cohesiveness"
among the various roles that the individual has assumed
(Bourne, 1978a).
Identity is also a social phenomenon because it
requires recognition by the group. Bourne (1978a)
describes it as "not mere self-definition, but social
self-definition" (p. 227). Society’s recognition stem
from its hope that the adolescent’s "enormous spurt of
new needs, new energies, and new faculties" (Erikson,
1980, p. 116) will be used for the good of the group.
Thus, societies provide their adolescent members the time
and space to explore the various elements required for
their new identities. Erikson (1980) states, "Societies
offer, as individuals require, more or less sanctioned
intermediary periods between childhood and adulthood,
institutionalized psychosocial moratoria, during which a
lasting pattern of inner identity is scheduled for
relative completion" (p. 119).
The adolescent’s successful resolution of the
identity crisis results in an established sense of
identity. Erikson (1968) says these adolescents have a
"sense of psychosocial well-being" and an "inner
6
assuredness" about themselves and their future. They
have a reciprocal relationship with society: they feel
they have something to give to the group and it will be
acknowledged and accepted. Moreover, their solid sense
of identity permits further personality development.
They can now turn to the developmental task of young
adulthood— intimacy. Erikson (1980) writes, "it is only
after a reasonable sense of identity has been established
that real intimacy with the other sex (or, for that
matter, with any other person or even with oneself) is
possible... The youth who is not sure of his identity
shies away from interpersonal intimacy; but the surer he
becomes of himself, the more he seeks it in the form of
friendship, combat, leadership, love and anticipation"
(p. 101).
According to Erikson, the danger for the adolescent
is to remain in a state of "identity diffusion." Such
adolescents appear unable to establish a sense of who
they are and cannot make reasonable plans for their
future. Erikson (1987) describes three major symptoms of
the identity diffused. First, these adolescents have a
distorted and confused sense of time. On the one hand,
they sometimes feel that everything needs to be done at
once— their education, career plans, choosing a mate. On
the other hand, they experience the feeling that nothing
i8 really important enough to actually do. Second,
7
identity diffused adolescents display an exaggerated
preoccupation with the self: the type of person they are,
their physical appearances and sexual characteristics.
This self preoccupation leaves them unable to concentrate
on, or complete, the everyday tasks of home or school. A
third symptom of the diffused adolescent is a hostility
towards the constructive roles offered by society and the
experimentation with a "negative" identity, such as the
role of patient or delinquent.
These symptoms are applicable, to some extent, to
most adolescents at some point. The problem, however,
occurs when the adolescent's identity remains diffused.
Erikson presents identity formation as a progressive
process from identity diffusion to ego identity. The
major period of identity formation occurs during
adolescence but it continues as a lifelong task (Erikson,
1963, 1968). Subsequent research findings support this
progressive understanding of identity formation (Adams et
al., 1987; Constantinople, 1969, Fregeau & Barker, 1986;
Meilman, 1979) and specific studies will be discussed
1ater.
The role of society in identity formation is
particularly relevant when discussing the Mexican
American adolescent who is in contact with a predominant
society and culture which is not his or her native one.
According to Erikson (1963, 1968), society facilitates
8
identity development in two major ways. First, by
recognizing an "adolescent period", thus bestowing a
certain degree of status and value, a society gives the
adolescent the security and courage required to try out
alternative ideas and roles. Second, a society offers
its adolescents ideas and roles that have the potential
to be lived out; it provides a range of realistic
possibilities. In American society, for example, the
adolescent can try out the role of believer or
nonbeliever, liberal or conservative, physician or
carpenter. Thus, the adolescent’s conviction of
self-determination is confirmed by society’s providing
him or her with a certain degree of choice and individual
opportunity.
A question, however, is whether the general society
"recognizes" adolescents from minority ethnic and
cultural backgrounds. Does the predominant Anglo
American society and culture value minority adolescents,
providing them with livable ideals and roles, and giving
them a sense of self-determination? Erikson himself did
not think that American society recognized some of its
adolescent members. He writes, "The Negro is only the
most flagrant case of an American minority which by the
pressure of tradition and the limitation of opportunity
is forced to identify with its own evil fragments, thus
jeopardizing whatever participation in an American
9
identity it may have earned" (1968, p. 244). Given a
lack of social recognition and limited opportunities
identity development may be more difficult for minority
adolescents.
Erikson (1963, 1968, 1980) also speaks of the
importance of a cultural identity for ego identity. He
says, "cultural identity ... is that part of the ego
which at the end of adolescence integrates the infantile
ego stages" (1980, p. 112). A particular cultural milieu
allows younger children to identify with older persons
and establishes a "hierarchy of expectations" as to what
the child is going to be when he or she grows older. A
"cultural change," according to Erikson, can be traumatic
to identity formation if it leads to a break up in the
inner consistency of a child’s hierarchy of
expectations. At another point, he writes "minority
groups of a lesser degree of Americanization (Negroes,
Indians, Mexicans, and certain European groups) often are
privileged in the enjoyment of a more sensual childhood.
Their crises comes when their parents and teachers,
losing trust in themselves and using sudden corrections
in order to approach the vague but pervasive Anglo-Saxon
ideal, create violent discontinuities" (1980, p. 96).
Erikson thus posits that a change occurs during the
adolescence of minority children whereby previous ideals
and roles are no longer valid, and in their place, there
10
is the sudden imposition of an Anglo ideal. Identity
formation, in so far as it involves a sense of sameness
and continuity, is disrupted in the minority adolescent.
In brief, Erikson suggests that the predominant
Anglo society may hinder identity development among
minority adolescents in two ways. First, the social
community withholds its recognition and gives limited
encouragement and opportunities to minority adolescents
to explore alternative ideals and roles. Second, the
imposition of Anglo ideals disrupts the continuity of
previous culturally specific roles and ideals. As a
result, minority adolescents have a more difficult time
establishing a sense of identity compared to Anglo
American adolescents who do not encounter such social
real it ies.
Researchers have empirically tested some of
Erikson’s theoretical formulations by operationalizing
his concept of "ego identity" (For reviews see Adams et
al., 1987; Bourne, 1978a, 1978b; Marcia, 1980). Marcia’s
(1966) identity status paradigm is the most widely
utilized approach and dominates the adolescent identity
research (for reviews see Adams et al., 1987 ; Bourne,
1978a; Marcia, 1980). His interpretation of Erikson is
that the adolescent’s degree of ego identity can be
determined on the basis of two psychosocial criteria: (1)
a "crisis" period during which the adolescent experiments
11
with meaningful alternative roles and ideals, and (2) a
subsequent commitment to the chosen alternatives giving
the adolescent a more complete se 1f-definition and a
place in society. He looked for the presence or absence
of crisis and commitment in the occupational and
ideological (religion and political ideology) realms of
the adolescent’s life.
Marcia categorized individuals into one of four
identity statuses: identity achievement, moratorium,
foreclosure, and identity diffusion. "Identity
achievers" have experienced a crisis period and have made
relatively enduring commitments regarding occupation and
ideology. They have seriously considered several
occupational choices and have chosen the type of job that
feels best to them. With respect to politics and
religion, these persons have reevaluated past beliefs and
attitudes and have decided upon their own set of beliefs
to live by. Individuals in the "moratorium" status are
currently in crisis with commitments lacking or vague.
These adolescents are in an active struggle exploring
what occupations might be best for them ; they are
searching for their place in the job world. They are
also reconsidering the religious and political beliefs
that they have grown up with ; an exposure to other
people’s religion and politics has led them to reexamine
their own. "Foreclosure" individuals have not
12
experienced a crisis, yet they express commitments. But
these commitments are not their own. They have accepted
(at least for the moment) those occupations that others,
most likely their parents, believe are best suited for
them. Their religious beliefs and political attitudes
are simply the unquestioned ideologies they have heard
since childhood. The "identity diffused" individuals are
those who have no apparent commitments and, unlike the
moratorium people, are not struggling to make
commitments. They are undecided about occupations and
are not concerned about them. They are uninterested in
religious and political issues.
In keeping with Erikson’s developmental
understanding of identity, Marcia (1966) proposes the
identity statuses as deve1opmenta11y progressive stages:
identity diffusion, foreclosure, moratorium, identity
achievement. For the most part, developmental research
studies confirm a movement from lower to higher identity
statuses among adolescents and young adults. In a
cross-sectional study Meilman (1978) investigated the
formation of identity in five age groups of males: 12,
15, 18, 21, and 24. A majority of the younger males were
identified as identity diffused or foreclosures while
their older counterparts were predominantly moratoriums
and identity achievers. Constantinople (1969), Stark and
Traxler (1974), and Abraham (1986) also report similar
13
age trends in their cross-sectional studies. More
recently, Adams and Montemayor (as reported in Adams,
Bennion, & Hugh, 1987), in a three year longitudinal
study, found that 50% of their college sample showed
progressive (lower to higher identity statuses) growth,
14% stability, 11% regressive development and 25%
unstable patterns.
Marcia (1980) points out the major advantages of the
identity statuses approach to research on ego identity.
In comparison with Erikson’s theoretical writings, the
identity statuses are relatively objective. Marcia
developed the semi-structured Identity Status Interview
that determines individuals identity status with a fair
degree of interobserver reliability, usually around 80%
agreement among raters. The statuses have also
demonstrated construct validity in their ability to
differentiate individuals on a number of personality
characteristics, such as anxiety and locus of control
(e.g., Abraham, 1983 ; Marcia, 1967; Oshman & Manossevitz,
1974 ; Waterman & Waterman, 1970). In addition, the four
identity statuses provide a greater variety of styles in
dealing with the identity issue than does Erikson’s
simple dichotomy of ego identity versus identity
diffusion. Finally, except for identity achievement,
there are both healthy and pathological aspects to each
of the statuses. "Foreclosures may be seen either as
14
steadfast or rigid, committed or dogmatic, cooperative or
conforming; Moratoriums may be viewed as sensitive or
anxiety-ridden, highly ethical or self-righteous,
flexible or vacillating; Identity Diffusions may be
considered either carefree or careless, charming or
psychopathic, independent or schizoid. Identity
Achievements, for the most part, are seen as strong,
self-directed, and highly adaptive" (p. 161),
The criticisms against the identity statuses have
largely been directed towards Marcia’s measure of the
identity statuses, the Identity Status Interview, and not
the paradigm itself. One problem is that the interview
only covers two areas of commitment, occupation and
ideology (Bourne, 1978b). However, Erikson’s (1980)
discussion of identity formation suggests that other
areas may be involved in identity formation, including
sex-role identity and interpersonal relationships. This
issue has been particularly stressed in the literature
regarding identity in women (Douvan & Adel son, 1966;
Grotevant, Thorbecke & Meyer, 1982; Hodgson & Fischer,
1979; St. Clair & Day, 1979 ; Schenkel & Marcia, 1972 ;
Waterman & Nevid, 1977). Marcia (1980) admits "the
predominant concerns of most adolescent girls are not
with occupation and ideology. Rather, they are concerned
with the establishment and maintenance of interpersonal
relationships" (p. 179). Some researchers have addressed
15
this problem by adding questions regarding sexuality,
friendships and dating to identity measures (e.g.,
Grotevant, Thorbecke & Meyer, 1982; Schenkel & Marcia,
11972). Another problem with the semi-structured
I interview is that it requires a lot of time to
I individually administer resulting in small samples in
jresearch studies (Adams et al., 1979). Adams and his
associates (Adams et al., 1979 ; Adams et al., 1987;
Bennion & Adams, 1986) advocate a self-report scale that
places respondents in one of the four identity statuses
as an alternative to the interview technique.
On a more conceptual level, a major limitation of
the identity status paradigm is that its external
validity has not been well established (Bourne, 1978b).
For the most part, Marcia’s identity paradigm has been
confined to white high school and college students,
resulting in a possible cultural boundedness of the
identity status paradigm. Thus, the generalizabi1ity to
other populations of the results of empirical studies
differentiating among identity statuses has not been
established. There is a need to broaden the subject
I sample base to include other ethnic groups. However,
j some caution is warranted. The danger is that given the
, lack of minority adolescents used in Marcia’s formulation
of his identity paradigm a simple application afterwards
I
I to minority adolescents may be the imposition of the
16
majority group’s view of (ideal) adolescent children on
minority youth.
Given the likelihood of the cultural boundedness of
Marcia’s conceptualization of identity one alternative is
to begin totally anew. This would not only involve the
exploration of identity within a particular ethnic or
cultural group without any preconceived framework, but
more fundamentally, assessing whether "identity" is a
relevant concept to the social group. Yet, even in this
way, one cannot completely avoid a cultural imposition
because the idea of "identity" has not originated within
the social group, but has been borrowed from without.
Another alternative, operative in the present study, is
to utilize Marcia’s identity paradigm, as do most
researchers of adolescent identity, as a workable, but
not the definitive, theoretical framework of identity
development. The identity statuses are viewed as
descriptive rather than evaluative: one identity status
is not viewed as the ideal or better than the others.
Moreover, a lower identity status would be taken as an
expression of adaptation rather than maladjustment. For
example, if Mexican Americans are more frequently
categorized as foreclosure individuals than their Anglo
American counterparts, then one explores how this
identity status might reflect an adaptation to the family
or the broader social environment rather than as an
17
indication that the Mexican American adolescents are less
than achieved. Thus, with these interpretive guidelines
Marcia’s conceptualization and operationalization of
identity will guide the present investigation of Mexican
American adolescent identity.
Identity Formation: Minority and Majority Adolescents
My interest in Mexican American adolescents in the
predominant Anglo American culture reflects the more
general issue of identity development of minority
adolescents in a predominant culture and society that is
not their native one. A review of the research comparing
identity formation among minority and majority
adolescents will provide previous investigators’
reasoning for ethnic differences as well as illustrate
their research methods and findings. I will first
examine published studies involving non-American
adolescents, followed by studies investigating identity
formation among American adolescents.
Three studies involving non-American adolescents
have examined identity formation among ethnic minority
and ethnic majority adolescents. In New Zealand, Chapman
and Nicholls (1976) compared 14 to 17 year old male
minority Maori (Polynesian) adolescents to their majority
Pakeha (white) counterparts. Using Marcia’s (1966)
semi-structured interview, the researchers assessed the
adolescents’ occupational identity. They found more
18
Maori adolescents were categorized identity diffused
while more Pakehas adolescents were identity achieved.
The investigators suggest that the greater frequency of
identity diffused among Maori may indicate that it is an
adaptive role-appropriate status for the Maori, and
occupation may be less important for Maoris than for
Pakehas. They noted that had their interview covered
topics other than occupation the results would have
probably differed. I assume they meant (since they did
not say) that fewer Maori youth would have been
categorized identity diffused. Chapman and Nicholls’
make an important point here: occupational identity may
not play the same crucial role across cultural contexts
for an overall sense of identity as proposed by Erikson
(1968; 1980) and Marcia (1966; 1980).
In another study, Tzuriel and Klein (1977) examined
identity among Western and Oriental Israeli male
adolescents between the ages of 13 and 18. Ego identity
was assessed with a modified form of the Adolescent Ego
Identity Scale (Wessman & Ricks, 1966; Rasmussen, 1964).
The items of this measure reflect the successful or
unsuccessful resolution to the adolescent’s identity
crisis (e.g., I know who I am and what I want from life;
I really don’t have any definite goals or plans for the
future). Because Western culture is dominant in Israel,
the researchers hypothesized that the minority Oriental
19
adolescents would be susceptible to a cultural clash
(between the ideals of their country of origin and the
new country), and therefore, have more identity problems
than their Western counterparts. Contrary to their
predictions, the investigators found no differences in
ego identity between the two ethnic groups. This may
mean that the proposed cultural clash among Oriental
adolescents was unimportant for their identity
development, or that it was previously resolved in some
fashion and no longer affected identity development, or
that a cultural clash does not really exist for the
Oriental adolescents. A limitation of the study is that
the cultural clash was assumed rather than empirically
demonstrated. A follow-up study could first attempt to
show that minority adolescents do experience a cultural
clash or conflict, and then assess its effect on identity
development. I shall discuss cultural conflict further
when I examine cultural values as a contributory factor
to identity formation among Mexican American
ado 1escents.
In the third study, Rosenthal, Moore, and Taylor
(1983) examined identity formation among 13 to 16
year-old, male and female, working class Anglo-, Greek-,
and Italian-Australian adolescents. The researchers used
the Erikson Psychosocial Stage Inventory (Rosenthal,
Gurney, & Moore, 1981) which examines crisis and
20
resolution in the first six stages of Erikson’s
developmental stages (the fifth stage being identity
versus identity confusion). Examples of the items on
this measure are; "I’ve got a clear idea of what I want
to be." "I like myself and am proud of what I stand for,"
As in the Tzuriel and Klein (1977) study, these
researchers were interested in culture conflict as an
influential factor in the identity of minority
adolescents. Contrary to their predictions, they found
no differences in identity among the three groups. The
authors concluded that the Anglo-Australian adolescents,
although members of the dominant social group, showed no
better resolution of the identity crisis than the group
of adolescents who were themselves or whose parents were
born in Greece or Italy. Once again, however, the
cultural conflict that was believed to affect identity
development was assumed rather than demonstrated.
There are three studies comparing American ethnic
minority adolescents (Black, Mexican American) with their
Anglo American counterparts. In an early study, Hauser
(1972) examined identity development among Black and
White male high school students, ages 14-16 at the start
of the study, of similar social economic backgrounds, for
three years. He operationalized Erikson*s ego-ident ity
into two processes involving an individual’s self-images,
specifically structural integration (i.e., a bringing
21
together of self-images) and temporal stability (i.e.,
the constancy of self-images). Hauser used a Q-sort
method to gather the adolescents* self-images. He
proposed that the simultaneous increase over a period of
time in both structural integration and temporal
stability processes indicated a progression in identity
formation, while failure to achieve integration and
continuity of self-images demonstrated identity
diffusion. Identity foreclosure, Hauser reasoned, was
indicated when structural integration remained unchanged
although temporal stability increased. In this case, the
individual is prematurely fixed on a set of self-images
without exploring other role-image alternatives.
Finally, according to Hauser, a fluctuation in both
directions of structural integration and temporal
stability represented moratorium, the experimentation
with new roles and images. Hauser found that for eight
separate self-images (e.g., now, ideal, ten years from
now, etc.) Blacks, compared to Whites, showed minimal
change in structural integration while having
consistently higher levels of temporal stability. In
other words, the content of the Blacks* self-images
showed a more static quality compared with Whites.
Hauser concluded that White adolescents "fit the pattern
of progressive identity formation" while Black
22
adolescents "exemplify a pattern of identity foreclosure"
(pp. 123-124).
In interpreting his results, Hauser proposed three
explanations for the foreclosure status of his Black
adolescent subjects. First, he posits that
sociohistorical determinants, including "racial
restrictions" placed on part-time jobs and housing,
limited work opportunities, and the lack of role models,
hinders identity development among Blacks. Second, from
a developmental perspective, Hauser points to late
childhood and latency as critical phases. During the
former, conflicts over guilt and aggression arise, while
the latter involves questions of competence and
inadequacy. A failure to resolve these crucial sets of
issues may lead to identity foreclosure. Third,
referring to a functional perspective, Hauser stresses
the need to take into account other ego functions, such
as those that involve cognition, underlying identity
processes (e.g., self-images). Hauser admits that all
three of these explanations require further research for
empirical validation. Unfortunately, Hauser’s findings
have not been replicated nor has his suggested research
been conducted. Although there are numerous studies on
Blacks’ racial identity (e.g., Carter & Helms, 1987;
Houston, 1964; Krate, Levanthal & Silverstein, 1974;
Staiano, 1980), I found no other published studies
23
addressing ego identity or comparing identity development
among White and Black adolescents.
Abraham (1983) examined identity formation among
Anglo American and Mexican American male and female
students attending a rural high school. The investigator
used the Objective Measure of Ego Identity Status (Adams,
Shea & Fitch, 1979) which classifies individuals into one
of Marcia’s (1966) four identity statuses. The
comparison of identity formation between the two ethnic
groups was not the primary purpose of the study but
became an additional objective for the study when it
became apparent that the high school sample consisted of
the two ethnic groups. Thus, the researcher proposed no
hypothesis. The findings showed the Anglo Americans,
compared to their Mexican American peers, were more
likely to be categorized as identity diffused
individuals. There were no ethnic differences for the
other three identity status categories.
Abraham considers two factors that might account for
the ethnic differences in the identity diffused
category. She first considers socioeconomic status
(SES), given that the Mexican American subjects were more
often of a lower SES than their Anglo American peers.
However, Abraham reasons that socioeconomic deprivation
would be related to high levels of diffusion, rather than
to low levels, as was the case in her study. Thus, she
24
concludes that SES fails to account for the ethnic
differences. She then suggests that parental
socialization styles may be the responsible factor. She
cites Adams and Jones (1983) who found that a maternal
style characterized by control, regulation, and extreme
encouragement, and a paternal style consisting of praise,
approval and less fairness were associated with
adolescents in the identity diffused status. Assuming
the generalizabi1ity of the Adams and Jones’ study to her
own subjects, Abraham speculates that Anglo American
parents may have been more inclined to utilize these
parenting styles than the Mexican American parents. She
admits that given the absence of data her interpretation
requires further research evidence.
In a follow-up study, Abraham (1986) further
investigated identity formation among Anglo American and
Mexican American, male and female, high school
adolescents. In this case, the researcher used the
Extended Objective Measure of Ego Identity Status
(EOM-EIS)(Grotevant & Adams, 1984), a self-report measure
that reflects Marcia’s original Ideological/Occupâtional
identity as well as questions relating to Interpersonal
identity. Moreover, unlike her previous study in which
each person was classified into a single identity status
category, in this study each subject’s diffusion,
foreclosure, moratorium, and identity achievement scores
25
were incorporated into the analysis of the data.
Statistically controlling for SES, Abraham found that
only the foreclosure status was correlated with ethnic
group; the Mexican American youth were more likely to be
in the foreclosed status than their Anglo American
counterparts in Ideological/Occupâtional identity. With
respect to Interpersonal identity, there were no
differences between the two adolescent groups. These
findings indicate that Abraham failed to replicate the
results of the first study showing Anglo American
adolescents more frequently categorized as identity
diffused. She interprets her new results as suggesting
that Mexican American youth may be more inclined,
compared to Anglo American youth, to adopt their parents’
commitments to religious and political beliefs,
occupational preferences, and philosophical lifestyles.
Abraham proposes two explanations for the likelihood
of the foreclosure status among Mexican American
adolescents. First, the minority group status of Mexican
American youth results in their being exposed to a more
limited range of available models, roles, and commitments
than are Anglo American adolescents. Society, reflecting
the majority White culture, does not provide minority
adolescents with the same opportunities for the
exploration of social roles as given their White
adolescent peers. Second, Mexican American and Anglo
26
American youth do not develop identity in the same way as
a result of cultural differences. Specifically, again
citing Adams and Jones (1983), she speculates that
parental socialization styles account for differences in
identity development in the two groups. Unfortunately,
measures assessing either explanation were not included
in the study.
In summary, studies comparing identity development
among minority and majority adolescents provide an
interesting variety of results. In New Zealand, Chapman
and Nicholls (1976) found minority Maori adolescents to
be more diffused in occupational identity than Pakeha
majority adolescents. Tzuriel and Klein (1977) found no
differences in identity development between their Western
and Oriental Israeli adolescents. Similarly, in
Australia, Rosenthal et al. (1983) found no identity
differences among their minority Greek- and
Italian-Australian adolescents when compared to their
majority Anglo-Australian counterparts. In the United
States Hauser reported that Black adolescents were more
likely to be categorized foreclosure individuals than
White adolescents. Abraham (1983) reported that Anglo
American adolescents, compared to Mexican Americans, were
more likely to be identity diffused. In a second study,
Abraham (1986) found that Mexican American youth were
27
more likely to be identified as foreclosures than their
Anglo American counterparts.
In addition to inconsistent findings, other features
of this research make even tentative conclusions
regarding identity development between minority and
majority adolescents highly suspect. First, the studies
have been few in number. Second, the studies utilized a
variety of instruments to measure identity formation, and
thus it is not clear that they were assessing the same
construct. Third, the subjects involved in the studies
were from different countries and ethnic groups. The
groups vary widely in history and treatment in their
respective countries such that their "minority status"
cannot be assumed to be the same phenomenon.
This research also has two further major
limitations. First, with the exception of Chapman and
Nicholls (1976), the researchers failed to acknowledge
the possible cultural boundedness of their
conceptualizations and measures of identity development.
They assumed that a standard measure of identity had been
found and that it could be universally applied to all
adolescents. As previously noted, the external validity
of identity formation as proposed by Erikson (1963; 1968)
and Marcia (1966; 1980) has not been adequately
established (Bourne, 1978a). Second, the researchers
looked for differences in identity formation among ethnic
28
groups without examining factors that might account for
these differences. When differences were found, the
researchers, quite appropriately, offered explanations to
account for them. However, given that the investigators
did not include such explanatory factors in their studies
(nor could they refer to previous research data), their
explanations were speculative. Clearly, more research is
needed regarding identity development among adolescents
of varying ethnic groups. Most important is the
inclusion of potential contributory factors that may
account for ethnic differences in identity development.
Mexican American Identity Formation:
Possible Contributory Factors
I now turn to the research that can provide some
understanding of identity formation among Mexican
American adolescents. However, before I discuss specific
factors that might be involved in identity development, a
discussion of two major hypotheses, or sets of
contributory factors, is in order. The "minority status
hypothesis" proposes that sociohistorical factors
associated with being a member of a minority group are
responsible for the minority adolescents* identity
problems (Abraham, 1986; Erikson, 1968; Hauser, 1972).
The dominant cultural group fails to recognize and value
ethnic minority adolescents, and does not provide
minority youth with the necessary components for identity
29
development. In the United States, for example, minority
Black and Hispanic adolescents, compared to Anglo
American adolescents, have fewer opportunities (e.g.,
part-time jobs, recreational activities) and resources
(e.g., role models, a variety of social roles) by which
to establish their sense of identity. The minority
status hypothesis has been used to account for the "low"
identity level of some minority adolescents (e.g.,
Abraham, 1986; Hauser, 1972).
The "cultural difference hypothesis" posits that
majority and minority adolescents do not develop identity
in the same way as a result of cultural differences. For
example. Chapman and Nicholls (1977) suggest that work is
not of equal importance for identity development for the
two ethnic groups they examined. Abraham (1983; 1986)
speculates that culturally influenced parenting styles
account for differences in the identity formation of
Mexican American and Anglo American adolescents. Tzuriel
and Klein (1977) and Rosenthal et al. (1983) propose that
cultural differences results in a cultural clash, which
in turn, affects identity development. The cultural
difference hypothesis is also sometimes used to explain
"deficits" in identity formation among adolescents but it
can also be used as simply a descriptive explanation (one
group develops identity differently than the other),
rather than an evaluative explanation (i.e., one group is
30
higher in identity development than the other). These
two hypotheses are not mutually exclusive and both may
play a role in the identity development of minority
adolescents. However, as previously noted, neither
hypothesis (or factors associated with it) has been
adequately evaluated.
The testing of the minority status hypothesis
requires the operationalization of such social processes
as the predominant cultural group’s view of minorities
and the minority adolescents’ exposure to alternative
roles and ideals. These social processes have been
studied somewhat via census and survey data (e.g.,
educational level and employment of minority
populations), as well as studies examining school success
and the vocational aspirations of minority youth (e.g.,
Gandara, 1986; Matute-Bianchi, 1986). However, an
examination of these social processes and the minority
status hypothesis would require a number of
investigations leading beyond the focus of the present
study.
Previous researchers have examined some of the
components of a cultural difference hypothesis. Three
factors of particular relevance to Mexican American
identity development are parental behaviors, cultural
values and ethnic identity. Abraham (1983, 1986)
suggests parental behaviors and cultural values may
31
account for differences in identity formation between
Mexican American and Anglo American adolescents. In this
case, parental behaviors refers to the parents’ methods
(e.g., supportive, controlling) of interacting with their
adolescent children. Cultural values are the ideals,
customs, and institutions that a particular cultural
group esteems and, one assumes, influence the members*
perceptions and behaviors. Rosenthal (1987) as well as
Tzuriel and Klein (1977) argue that the third factor,
ethnic identity, facilitate an overall sense of identity
among minority youth. These investigators define ethnic
identity as a person’s subjective identification,
expressed in a variety of ways, with his or her ethnic
group. I now turn to a more thorough discussion of each
of these factors, including a review of the previous
research.
A. Parental Behavior
In examining the role of the adolescents’
perceptions of parental behavior on identity development
I will discuss: 1) Erikson’s views on parental behavior
and its role in identity formation, 2) the research on
the relationship between child-rearing and identity, and
3) the social science literature describing parenting
among Mexican Americans.
Erikson’8 writings (1968; 1980; 1987) suggests that
identity development is influenced by child-rearing
32
practices. Parental behavior can affect the different
stages of personality growth and their respective
developmental tasks (e.g., trust, autonomy, initiative,
etc.), which in turn, contribute to identity formation.
The infancy stage serves as an example. Erikson (1968)
writes, "Mothers create a sense of trust in their
children by that kind of administration which in its
quality combines sensitive care of the baby’s individual
needs and a firm sense of personal worthiness ... This
forms the very basis in the child for a component of the
sense of identity which will later combine a sense of
"being all right," of being oneself, and becoming what
others people trust one will become" (p. 103).
Similarly, parental behavior can influence the
achievement, or non-achievement, of the subsequent
developmental tasks that provide the basis for a
successful resolution of the identity crisis during
adolescence.
Granted, during adolescence, in addition to parental
behavior, the influences of peers and the general
society, contribute to identity formation. To discuss
all that influences the adolescent is beyond the scope of
the present investigation. At this time the focus is on
the relationship between parental behavior, or more
precisely, the adolescent’s perceptions of parental
behavior and identity development. Parental Haehavior, of
33
course, encompasses a broad spectrum of behavior: it can
include a mother’s breast feeding her infant and a
father’s support of his young adult child through
college, and a whole lot in between. I will examine
those behaviors that have been discussed in the research
literature as relevant to the adolescent’s development.
Researchers have proposed a number of conceptual
models to describe major dimensions of parental behavior
or child-rearing practices (Becker, 1964; Coopersmith,
1967; Martin, 1975; Rollins & Thomas, 1979; Schaefer,
1965 ; Siegelman, 1965). The two major dimensions of
parental behavior most frequently investigated for their
relationship to adolescents’ attitudes and behaviors are
parental support and control. Parental support
communicates acceptance and approval to the adolescent.
It is expressed by behaviors such as praising,
encouraging, helping and physical affection (Ellis,
Thomas & Rollins, 1976; Rollins & Thomas, 1979 ; Thomas,
Gecas, Weigart & Rooney, 1974). Parental control has as
its goal directing the adolescent’s behavior in a manner
desirable to the parent (Rollins & Thomas, 1979). One
method of control, induction, utilizes convincing
arguments or explanations. This method transmits to the
child that he or she has the ability to evaluate the
consequences of actions and make appropriate decisions.
Another control method, coercion, uses guilt, physical
34
force, and punishment to direct behavior. It suggests to
a child that the parent sees him or her incapable of
evaluating situations and making sound judgements.
Keeping in mind Marcia’s (1966) emphasis on crisis
(exploration) and commitment, parental support and
inductive control would seem to provide the adolescent
with the most conducive environment to explore the
alternative ways of being (roles) and thinking (beliefs)
necessary for identity development. The available
research confirms the need for this type of family
atmosphere for the adolescent’s identity formation. In
an early study of 15 to 18 year old adolescents, LaVoie
(1976) found that high-identity boys reported less
regulation and control by their mothers, and more
frequent praise from their fathers, than 1ow-identity
boys. High-ident ity girls perceived less maternal
restrict iveness than their low-ident ity counterparts.
With a similar age group, Enright, Laps 1ey, Drivas and
Fehr (1980) found that male identity was highest under
perceptions of democratic fathering and lowest under
autocratic fathering. Adams and Jones (1983) found that
female high school students who were identity achieved or
in a state of moratorium were least likely to report
maternal behaviors that control or regulate. Fathers
were viewed as being fair in their punishment but
offering minimal approval and praise to their daughters.
35
In the most recent study with an older group, 18 to 21
years of age, Kamptner (1988) found that the subjects’
perceptions of parental warmth were positively associated
with their level of identity. Although not a simple
formula, differences in adolescents* perceived parental
child-rearing practices are associated with varying
levels of identity formation.
Shifting the focus to the role of parental behavior
on identity formation among Mexican Americans the
previous research provides limited information, given
that none of the studies included ethnic minorities among
their adolescent subjects. There is, however, some
social science literature describing Mexican American
parenting.
Early researchers (Diaz-Guerrero, 1955; Hayden,
1966; Heller, 1967; Madsen, 1964a; Penalosa, 1968)
depicted an authoritarian father who expected strict
obedience from his children and a manipulative mother who
overly controlled their behavior. Such family dynamics
were viewed as leading to problematic relationships
between parents and their children, particularly at the
time of the children’s adolescence. Initially warm and
affectionate, the relationship between father and son
becomes distant as the father perceives his adolescent
son as a rival to his (the father’s) social position
(Madsen, 1964a; Penal osa, 1968). Mother and daughter’s
36
close relationship becomes strained during the girl's
adolescence because of the family's concern over her
ability to live up to the society's moral standards
(Pehalosa, 1968).
This description of the Mexican American family has
been criticized by Mexican American social scientists as
a pejorative generalization based on limited observations
(Romano, 1973; Tempie-Truji11o, 1974; Zapata & Jaramillo,
1981). In contrast, their own depictions of the Mexican
American family are more positive. While admitting that
the father is the authority in the family, Murillo (1976)
points out that the father's authority is to be used in a
just and fair manner. The Mexican American mother is
presented as the emotional center of a warm and nurturing
family environment (Alvirez & Bean, 1976 ; Murillo,
1976). But even these investigators have been criticized
for their reliance on limited research methods, such as
case studies or clinical experience (Staples & Mirande,
1980).
Some authors have discussed the possible role of
Mexican American parenting on the personality development
of their adolescent children. Falicov (1982) states
that, compared to Anglo American parents, Mexican
American parents allow their adolescent children limited
autonomy and thus make this time particularly difficult.
DeVos (1982) says that there is distrust among Mexican
37
American parents and this leads to "debilitated"
personality development among their youth. Neither of
these authors conducted an empirically based research
study but rather relied on the more subjective methods of
clinical experience and anthropological observation.
Although there may be ethnic differences in parental
behavior, this may not be the result of deficient
parenting skills. I propose that differences, if they
exist, are due to "cultural stressers" that affect
parental behavior. Mexican American parents, familiar
with parenting in another cultural context, are not as
prepared to raise children in a different cultural
environment. Their children, who are more in contact
with the predominant culture than they themselves, live
in a different cultural world that they (the parents)
sometimes find difficult to understand and support. For
example, Mexican parents from rural areas in Mexico have
often received only an elementary education. Mexican
American adolescents and young adults in American high
schools and colleges experience challenges and
opportunities that are unfamiliar to their immigrant
parents. The students’ need for time and a quiet place
to study, as well as the desire to socialize with fellow
students, may not be comprehended by their immigrant
parents. These children of immigrants may perceive less
support than they would had they all remained in the
38
original cultural setting. Moreover, faced with their
adolescent children’s experimentation with a different
set of cultural values that are not their own, Mexican
American parents may be controlling in an attempt to keep
the family "culturally" together. In contrast, Anglo
American parents do not experience these types of
cultural stressers.
In summary, adolescents’ perceptions of parental
behavior appears to be a plausible contributory factor to
their identity development. Specifically, the research
suggests that perceptions of parental support and limited
control are most conducive to identity formation.
However, the studies have only involved Anglo American
families. The research on Mexican American parental
child-rearing practices is limited in number and research
methods. In response to this paucity of research, the
present study includes an examination of the relationship
between the adolescents’ perceptions of parental behavior
and identity.
B. Cultural Values Conflict
A number of researchers (Coles, 1977; Derbyshire,
1968; Madsen, 1964b; Rosenthal, 1987; Rosenthal, Moore &
Taylor, 1983; Tzuriel & Klein, 1977) investigating the
ethnic minority adolescent in a pluralist society have
proposed that this adolescent experiences a cultural
values conflict. Tzuriel & Klein (1977), in their study
39
of the Oriental Israeli male adolescent write; "formation
of ego identity is complicated by the clash between the
different expectations held by the dominant and subgroup
culture. The adolescent may find it difficult to
integrate the two value-laden expectations, those imposed
by the family or subgroup and those by society, and
develop a diffused sense of identity." (p. 1100).
Speaking of large cities with culturally heterogeneous
populations, Rosenthal et al. (1983), state, "For first-
and second-generation immigrant adolescents, the problem
of coping simultaneously with new and old cultures
undoubtedly has effects ... on adjustment" (p. 118).
Social scientists (e.g., Coles, 1977; Derbyshire,
1968; Griffith, 1983; Madsen, 1964b), writers (e.g.,
Rodriguez, 1982; Villarreal, 1970; 1980) and artists
(e.g., Roberto Juarez, Gilbert Lujan; Museum of Fine
Arts, Houston, 1987) speak of a cultural values conflict
of the Mexican American. Mexican American adolescents
are in the midst of two competing cultural systems and
they are in conflict over which cultural system to adopt
as their own. On the one hand, the adolescent has been
brought up within the Mexican cultural value system.
Social scientists describe the culture as having a
present orientation and an emphasis on being (Derbyshire,
1968; Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, 1961 ; Madsen, 1964a;
Murillo; 1976), a strong sense of family (Farris & Glenn,
40
1976; Madsen, 1964a; Murillo, 1976; Ramirez, 1988), a
spirit of cooperation (Diaz-Guerrero, 1975), a
patriarchic authority structure (Falicov, 1982; Madsen,
1964a; Murillo, 1976), and rigid masculine and feminine
roles (Penal osa, 1968). On the other hand, the Mexican
American adolescent comes into contact with a foreign
Anglo culture through school and other social
institutions. Researchers depict the Anglo American
culture as being future oriented with an emphasis on
achievement (Derbyshire, 1968; Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck,
1961 ; Heller, 1967), having an individualistic
orientation (Heller, 1967 ; Murillo, 1976), a competitive
spirit (Diaz-Guerrero, 1975), and an egalitarian family
structure (Tharp, Meadow, Lennhoff & Straterfield,
1968).
This clear cut division between the cultural values
of Mexicans and Anglo Americans is not as sharp as
originally conceived. Some of the more negative values
associated with the Mexican culture, such as a
patriarchic family structure and rigid gender roles have
been called into question by a number of investigators
(Bean, Curtis, & Marcum, 1977 ; Cromwell & Ruiz, 1979 ;
Hawkes & Taylor, 1975 ; Vasquez & Gonzalez, 1981).
Researchers have also recognized the heterogeneity among
Mexican Americans with respect to their adherence to
cultural values (Falicov, 1982 ; Grebler, Moore & Guzman,
41
1970; Murillo, 1976), Nevertheless, there still appears
to be a consensus that the Mexican culture differs from
the Anglo culture. For example, the Mexican culturels
emphasis on the family and its spirit of cooperation.
A cultural values conflict among Mexican American
adolescents has been assumed, rather than empirically
demonstrated. I found no published study that directly
examined a cultural values conflict. There are studies
assessing Mexican American adolescents’ preference for
Mexican or Anglo values and its relationship to
psychosocial adjustment. Mexican American adolescents
who identified with traditional Mexican American values
were found to have better family relationships (Ramirez,
1969; Vigil, 1979), performed better academically
(Buriel, Calzada, & Vasquez, 1982; Derbyshire, 1968;
Vigil, 1979), engaged in less delinquency behavior
(Vigil, 1979), and experienced less stress and health
problems (Buriel et al., 1982; Vigil, 1979) than the
Mexican American adolescents who rejected these values or
identified with Anglo values.
Yet, is the preference for one cultural value system
over another the same as a conflict? If one defines
cultural conflict as simply the need to make a decision
for or against certain cultural values over others, then
Mexican American adolescents may experience conflict.
They undoubtedly make some decisions about the values
42
they will live by. However, one might argue that this
occurs among most adolescents. Adolescents across ethnic
groups need to make decisions regarding which values
(liberal, conservative, family, peers, religious,
secular) to adopt as their own. Although this is true,
Mexican American adolescents are described as struggling
with more than this. Social scientists (e.g.,
Derbyshire, 1968; Madsen, 1964b) discuss a values
conflict unique to the Mexican American adolescent.
Mexican American authors and artists speak of a conflict
that arises out of living in the midst of two cultures.
The problem, however, is that the "conflict" in the
proposed cultural values conflict has not been clearly
defined. The conflict, for example, may be a conscious
pondering of one cultural value over another: the Mexican
American adolescent needs to decide if he or she is to
pursue individual goals, such as go to college, or do
what might be beneficial to the family group, such as
obtain a job and contribute to the family income.
Another possibility is that this conflict is a more
general feeling of not being part of a particular
cultural group: Mexican Americans do not see themselves
as fitting in with the Mexicans as their parents do, but
neither do they feel comfortable in the predominant Anglo
culture. A third possibility might be to view the
conflict as an unconscious process; Mexican Americans
43
experience unconscious conflicts resulting in self
perceptions of inferiority or inadequacy. Thus, many
definitions of conflict are possible.
An important task at this point is to define a
cultural values conflict in such a way that it can be
examined. In the present study, a cultural values
conflict is defined as the difference between the
adolescents’ and their parents’ cultural values.
Granted, this is not the only possible definition, and
subsequent research will need to explore other ways of
defining a cultural values conflict. The definition
proposed here provides a much needed starting point. The
cultural values conflict will be operationalized by means
of the following three step process. First, items will
be selected that reflect values identified with the
Mexican and/or Mexican American culture (e.g., Ramirez,
1967; 1969). Second, Mexican American adolescents will
indicate the degree to which they think their parents
agree or disagree with the items, thereby assessing the
adolescents’ perceptions of their parents’ values (which
may or may not reflect Mexican values). Third, the
extent to which the adolescents agree or disagree with
the items, thereby assessing their own values (which may
or may reflect Mexican values). A cultural values
conflict is then assessed in terms of the adolescents’
perception of disagreement between their own values and
44
that of their parents. One suspects that there may be
disagreement and conflict in areas such as individual
versus family priorities, gender roles, and dating
pract ices.
The proposed measure has two very positive
characteristics. First, it is conceptually sound in that
it takes into account cultural values and a potentially
disagreement (conflict) between the values of Mexican
American parents and their adolescent children. Second,
the approach is simple and feasible. Having this measure
of a cultural values conflict, one can then examine its
relationship to the adolescent’s level of identity.
In summary, a cultural values conflict among Mexican
American adolescents has been proposed and discussed by
social scientists. However, a major problem has been a
lack of clarity in the conceptualization and definition
of the proposed conflict. In this study a cultural
values conflict is defined as the adolescents* perceived
difference between their values and that of their
parents. Given this definition, the role of a cultural
values conflict as a contributory factor in the identity
development of the Mexican American can be examined.
C. Ethnic Identity
The impact of ethnic identity on the individual in
multiethnic societies is beginning to be addressed (for
review, see Phinney, in press), including the many
45
conceptual issues, such as its nature, structure and
relationship to other constructs. The present Interest
is the possible contributory role of ethnic identity in
the adolescents overall sense of identity. Erikson’s
(1963; 1968) "cultural identity" suggests that one aspect
of an individual’s identity involves his or her ethnic
background. Rosenthal (1987) proposes that the impact of
ethnic identity is especially relevant to minority group
members who exist alongside a dominant social group. She
refers to ethnic identity, one of many possible social
identities (others include female, sibling, parent,
student, professional, etc.), as one based on a
subjective identification with an ethnic group. Ethnic
identity is objectively demonstrated in terms of
"ascribed characteristics, such as national or geographic
birthplaces of individuals or their ancestors, language,
religion, race or physical characteristics, history or
customs" (Rosenthal, 1987, p. 159).
Admittedly, for some adolescents, ethnic identity
may not play a major role in their sense of identity.
Adolescent members of the dominant social group may not
consider ethnic identity a personal concern, and thus, it
would be unrelated to their identity formation.
Moreover, unlike the ethnic minority adolescent, the
predominant society may not make an issue of the majority
members’ ethnicity. In contrast, minority adolescents.
46
such as Blacks and Hispanics in the United States, may be
"forced" to come to terms with their race or ethnicity
given that this characteristic may influence the roles
and opportunities offered to them by the dominant
society.
There are many studies that have examined ethnic
identity alone or in association with a variety of
constructs, such as self-esteem, affective states and
school success. These studies have involved a rather
broad range of ethnic groups, including white ethnic
groups (Greek Americans, French Canadians, American
Jews)(e.g., Alba & Chamlin, 1983; Constantinou & Harvey,
1985; Elias & Blanton, 1987), Blacks (e.g., Parham &
Helms, 1981; Parham & Helms, 1985), Hispanics (e.g.,
Arce, 1981; Garcia, 1982; Garcia & Lega, 1979), and
Asians (e.g., Matute-Blanchi, 1986; Masuda, Hasegawa, &
Matsumoto, 1973). However, I found only one published
study that directly examined the role of ethnic identity
in identity formation. The Tzuriel and Klein (1977)
study discussed earlier investigated the relationship of
ego identity to ethnic identification (measured by items
assessing involvement with, and acceptance of, the
subject's ethnic group) among 13 to 18 year old Western
and Oriental male Israeli adolescents. The researchers
found that ego identity was higher among persons with
high ethnic identification than those with low ethnic
47
identification. The authors propose that ethnic
identification provides members of ethnic minority groups
"a sense of belonging, cohesion, pride, and security
which enables them to cope with the culture clash and
form an integrated ego identity" (p. 1107).
There has been some research on Mexican Americans*
sense of ethnic identity. The problem, however, is that
researchers have failed to develop a consistent
conceptualization (Arce, 1981), Several investigators
(see Buriel, 1987, for a review of this literature)
emphasize self-labeling (e.g., Chicano, Hispanic, Mexican
American) as reflecting varying degrees of ethnic group
identification. Other researchers (e.g., Buriel, 1982;
Derbyshire, 1968; Ramirez, 1969) stress "identification
with Mexican American values" as indicative of ethnic
identity. Still, another group use behaviors (e.g.,
Clark, Kaufman & Pierce, 1976; Keefe & Padilla, 1987),
such as self-reported use of language and patterns of
association with one’s ethnic group, as the criteria for
ethnic identity.
Ethnic identity as an identification with Mexican
American values has been most prevalent in the research
involving Mexican American adolescents. These studies
have already been reviewed in our discussion of an
identification with Mexican American values and
psychosocial adjustment. Noteworthy at this point is
48
that two researchers have interpreted their findings as
suggesting that ethnic identity is important for a sense
of identity among Mexican American adolescents.
Derbyshire (1968), comparing Mexican American adolescents
who identified with the Mexican way of life with those
who did not, concluded that Mexican heritage and culture
are important for the maintenance of a stable sense of
identity for Mexican American adolescents while growing
up in the United States. In Vigil’s (1979) investigation
of the adaptation strategies and cultural lifestyles of
three groups of Mexican American adolescents he found the
Anglo-oriented adolescents, but not the Mexican or
Chicano oriented, to be ambivalent about their identity
and experienced stress because of their inability to
fully acculturate.
In neither the Derbyshire (1968) nor the Vigil
(1979) study was the relationship between ethnic identity
and identity formation the major focus, and thus, the
relationship was not examined in depth. A definition
that is more consistent with the theoretical discussions
of ethnic identity by Erikson (1968) and Rosenthal (1987)
would stress the individual’s identification with his or
her ethnic group rather than an identification with
cultural values. Keefe and Padilla (1987) note that in
the study of ethnic identification the "particular
assemblage of cultural traits becomes less important than
49
the attitudes of members towards the people and culture
of in-group versus out-group as well as members’
self-definition" (p. 41). Thus, what is required is a
measure that assesses this sense of ethnic
ident if icat ion.
Moreover, the studies by Derbyshire (1968) and Vigil
(1979) did not directly assess identity among Mexican
Americans. Derbyshire gave Mexican American subjects a
series of Osgood differential scales assessing self
perceptions (e.g., brave, strong, beautiful) and
perceptions of parents and defined identity conflict as
"identification incongruence" between the way the
adolescents view self and parent of the same sex. Vigil
examined adolescent "adjustment" in terms of family
stability and support as well as academic success.
Although perceptions of self and psychosocial adjustment
are relevant to a sense of identity (Erikson, 1968;
Josselson, 1973; Rasmussen, 1964) they are not
equivalent. A more direct assessment of identity would
entail the use of measure of identity formation, such as
Marcia’s identity statuses or some other
operationalization of Erikson’s ego identity.
In summary, researchers have suggested that ethnic
identity is an important contributory factor in the
minority adolescent’s identity development. However, with
the exception of Tzuriel and Klein (1977), there are no
50
studies that have rigorousiy examined the relationship.
Consistent with a focus on identity development among
Mexican American adolescents, the present study will
include an examination of ethnic identity and its role in
identity development among this ethnic group.
Study Overview
This study examines identity formation among Mexican
American and Anglo American male and female adolescents.
The major advancement of this study over past research is
its focus on Mexican American adolescents. The
ever-increasing number of ethnic minorities in the United
States makes their inclusion in social science research
essential if the research is to reflect the cultural and
ethnic diversity in this country. As noted by Powers,
Hauser, and Kilner (1989) in a recent issue of the
American Psvchologist. "future research programs must
include more variety in the adolescents and families
studied ... not enough is known about the varieties of
adaptive functioning in Black, Hispanic, Native American,
and other groups of adolescents in our culture" (p.
206). Mexican Americans comprise 65% of the Hispanic
population, the fastest growing ethnic minority in the
United States. Hispanic Americans presently comprise
6.4% of the U.S. population and are projected to make up
11.1% of the population by the year 2000 (U.S. Bureau of
the Census, 1985).
51
In addition, this study examines the adolescents’
perceptions of parental behavior, a cultural values
conflict, and ethnic identity and their potential
contributory roles in identity formation. A limitation
of previous studies comparing identity formation among
ethnic/cultural minority and majority adolescents has
been a tendency to look for differences without examining
the factors that might account for these differences
(Abraham, 1983; 1986; Chapman & Nicholls, 1976; Hauser,
1972; Rosenthal et al., 1983; Tzuriel & Klein, 1977).
The present study also incorporates important
subject characteristics that have been lacking in
previous research. First, the study includes male and
female subjects. As noted previously, much of the early
identity research involved only male subjects. Although
recent studies have focused on identity in women (Marcia,
1980), their inclusion in the present study is
significant because it allows for examining identity in
Mexican American women. Second, the subjects are 18 to
21 year-old late adolescents and young adults (hereupon
referred to as simply adolescents). This appears to be
the most crucial time for identity formation (Bourne,
1978a; Marcia, 1980). Yet, most of the previous research
has focused on high school age adolescents. Third, the
subjects consist of both Mexican American and Anglo
American adolescents. Previous researchers have
52
sometimes concluded that Mexican American adolescents
have more adjustment and identity problems than their
Anglo American counterparts when the latter group has not
been included (e.g., Derbyshire, 1968; Heller, 1968 ;
Ramirez, 1969). It is inappropriate to draw conclusions
about one group against another if both are not included
in the research study.
Hypotheses
In this study several hypotheses regarding the
variables of ethnicity, ego identity, and the three
proposed contributory factors of identity (perceptions of
parental behaviors, a cultural values conflict, and
ethnic identity) will be tested.
Ego Identitv. A number of researchers (Derbyshire,
1968; DeVos, 1982; Abraham, 1986) have proposed that
Mexican American adolescents, as a result of their
minority status and cultural differences, have a more
difficult time establishing a sense of identity compared
to Anglo American adolescents. Consistent with this, and
expressed in terms of Marcia’s identity paradigm, I
hypothesize that the Mexican American adolescents will
more likely be in the lower identity statuses (i.e.,
diffusion, foreclosure), and less likely to be in the
higher identity statuses (i.e., moratorium, identity
achieved) than their Anglo American counterparts.
53
Perceptions of Parental behavior. Previous research
regarding adolescents* perceptions of parental behavior
suggests that there may be ethnic differences.
Similarly, I predict ethnic differences, not as a result
of deficient parenting skills (e.g., DeVos, 1982; f
Falicov, 1982 ; Pena 1 osa, 1968), but as discussed
previously, due to "cultural stressers" that affect
adolescents’ perceptions of their parents’ behavior. In
terms of the specific behaviors examined here, I
hypothesize that the Mexican American adolescents will
perceive their parents as less supportive, using less
inductive control, and more coercive control than Anglo
American adolescents. In short, I predict a main effect
for ethnicity for the three domains of parental behavior
examined in the present study.
Past research also suggests a significant
relationship between adolescents’ perceptions of parental
behavior and their identity development. Supportive
parental behaviors and democratic parenting styles have
been associated with high-identity adolescents (Enright
et al., 1980; Kamptner, 1980; LaVoie, 1976). I
hypothesize a main effect for identity group: adolescents
in the high-identity group (i.e., moratorium, identity
achieved) will perceive their parents as more supportive,
utilizing more inductive control and less coercive
control than adolescents in the 1ow-identity group (i.e..
54
identity diffusion, foreclosure). The possible
interaction between ethnicity and identity status for the
adolescents* perceptions of parental behavior is not
expected.
Cultural values conf1ict. Some social scientists
propose that minority adolescents, such as the Mexican
American in the United States, experience a cultural
values conflict (Derbyshire, 1968; Madsen, 1964b;
Rosenthal, 1987). However, this values conflict has not
been clearly defined or empirically demonstrated. In the
present study, a cultural values conflict is
operationalized as the adolescents’ perception of
disagreement between their own cultural values and their
parents’ values. I predict a main effect for ethnicity:
Mexican American adolescents will report more values
conflict than their Anglo American counterparts. I
predict no main effect for identity status on cultural
values conflict. However, I hypothesize an interaction
between ethnicity and identity group : 1ow-ident ity
Mexican Americans will report more values conflict than
high-identity Mexican Americans, while no differences in
values conflict will be reported among Anglo American
ado 1escents.
Ethnic Identity. Rosenthal (1987) proposes that the
impact of ethnic identity is especially relevant to the
minority adolescents in the midst of a predominant
55
culture that is not their own. Ethnic identification
among minority adolescents is positively related to a
sense of belonging, cohesion, and a security that enables
them to establish their identities. In contrast, among
Anglo American ethnic identity is not a salient factor in
identity development. In the present study, I
hypothesize a main effect for ethnicity: the Mexican
American adolescents will report higher levels of ethnic
identity than their Anglo American peers. Regarding the
relationship between ethnic identity and ego identity, no
main effect is predicted. However, an interaction
between ethnicity and identity group is expected. The
high-identity Mexican Americans will report higher levels
of ethnic identity than their low-identity counterparts,
whereas there will be no differences in ethnic identity
among Anglo American adolescents.
Method
Sub iects
The subjects were 160 Mexican American and Anglo
American community college students, between the ages of
18 and 21. They were recruited from Introduction to
Psychology and Mexican American History classes at a
community college in Southern California. The students
enrolled in the psychology classes received "out of
class" hours credit for their participation in the
study. In addition to being of the appropriate ethnic
56
group the criteria for the selection of Mexican American
subjects were that they (a) had lived in the United
States for eight years or more, meaning that they had
spent their adolescent years in the United States, and
(b) had at least one parent who was born in Mexico. The
Anglo American subjects, other than being of the
designated ethnic group, needed to be (a) born in the
United States, and (b) have had both parents born in the
United States.
A breakdown of the subjects* characteristics by
ethnicity, gender, age, place of birth, time in the
United States, primary language, home language, parents’
place of birth, and socioeconomic status is shown in
Table 1. Among the Mexican American subjects 52% were
born in the U.S. and 48% were born in Mexico. In this
group, 88% of the fathers and 92% of the mothers were
born in Mexico. A majority of the Mexican American
subjects, 63%, had lived in the U.S. all their lives and
37% had lived in the U.S. more than eight years. Spanish
was the primary language for 50% of these subjects,
English was the primary language for 32%, and 18%
indicated both languages as primary. With respect to
language spoken at home, 50% of the Mexican American
subjects indicated Spanish, 10% English, 40% both
languages. In terms of SES, the Mexican American group
consisted of 8% who had at least one parent who had some
Tab
Frequency of Subjects
le 1
* Background Informat ion
57
by Ethnicity
Mexican American Anglo American
TOTAL (N=160) 84 76
g,e.x
Mai e 31 31
Female 53 45
18 24 31
19 31 22
20 14 14
21 15 9
SES (Parents)
Professional/Adv. Degree 7 34
Skilled/Some College 17 35
Unskilled/No College 58 7
Unemployed 2 0
Place of Birth (Subiect)
United States 44 76
Mexico 40 0
Time in U.S.
All my life 53 76
More than 8 years 31 0
Primary Language
Eng 1i sh 27 76
Both 15 0
Spanish 42 0
58
Home Language
English 9 76
Both 29 0
Spanish 46 0
Place of Birth (Father)
United States 9 76
Mexico 74 0
Other 1 0
Place of Birth (Mother)
United Sates 8 76
Mexico 76 0
59
advanced degree or worked as a professional, 20% had at
least one parent with some college education or worked in
a skilled job, 69% had parents with no college education
or worked as unskilled laborers, and 3% had unemployed
parents. All Anglo American subjects and their parents
were born in the U.S. They all reported that English was
their primary language and it was the language spoken at
home. The SES of the Anglo American group consisted of
45% who had at least one parent who had some advance
degree or worked as a professional, 45% had at least one
parent with some college education or worked in a skilled
job, and 10% had parents with no college education or
worked as unskilled laborers.
Measures
Ego-Ident itv. Ego-ident ity was assessed by means of
the Objective Measure of Ego-ident ity Status
(OM-EIS)(Adams et al., 1987) (see Appendix A). The
OM-EIS is comprised of 24 randomly arranged items (six
questions for each of Marcia’s four identity statuses).
For each item, subjects responded on a 6-point scale
ranging from "strongly agree" (6) to "strongly disagree"
(1). The subjects obtained four raw subscale scores, one
for each identity status category. The range for each
subscale score was from a possible low of 6 to a possible
high of 36. Using the strategy that raw scores are
appropriate for interpretation if they exceed a certain
60
threshold or magnitude above the norm (mean), the
developers of the OM-EIS conducted a series of validation
studies to generate means and standard deviations for
each identity status category and thereby derived a
cut-off point for each scale. The subjects * raw subscale
scores were compared against these cut-off points, and
utilizing rules formulated by the developers, the
subjects were each classified into a single identity
status category (for a more detailed description of the
scoring procedure see Adams et al., 1987). The measure
is designed to assess the presence or absence of
commitment and crisis with respect to occupational,
political and religious attitudes.
Due to an uneven distribution among the identity
statuses resulting in very few individuals categorized in
a particular category, the identity categories were
sometimes collapsed into a "low-ident ity" group
(diffusion, foreclosure) and a "high-identity" group
(moratorium, identity achieved)(LaVoie, 1976). Such a
procedure is conceptually justifiable because the
1ow-identity statuses of identity diffusion and
foreclosure have in common the absence of a crisis or
exploration period while the high-identity statuses of
moratorium and identity achievement share the experience
of being in, or having gone through, this crisis or
exploration period (Adams et al., 1987)
61
Although an extended version of the OM-EIS (i.e.,
EOMEIS)(Adams et al., 1987) exists that includes items
assessing Interpersonal Identity, I chose the OM-EIS in
the present study because there are more validation
studies with this version of the measure. Moreover,
Abraham (1986) found no differences in Interpersonal
Identity between Mexican American and Anglo American
adolescents, but differences were reported in
Occupâtional/Ideological Identity between the two
groups. This may mean that Interpersonal Identity is not
so important in an investigation of ethnic differences or
that perhaps the EOMEIS is unable to detect the
interpersonal identity issues of Mexican American
adolescents. In any case, at this point, the OM-EIS
appears to be a more useful and valid measure to
investigate ethnic differences in identity development.
Validation studies of the OM-EIS report internal
consistency ranging from .67 to .76 (Adams & Jones, 1983;
Adams, Shea & Fitch, 1979 ; Bennion & Adams, 1986) and
test-retest reliability ranging from .71 to .93 (Adams et
al., 1979 ; Adams et al., 1987). Predictive validity for
the identity statuses measured with the OM-EIS has been
confirmed for such constructs as locus of control
(Abraham, 1983), authoritarianism (Bennion & Adams, 1986)
and commitment (Adams et al., 1979). Several different
methods of comparing Marcia's (1966) Identity Status
62
Interview and the OM-EIS found moderate to high agreement
in status classification (Adams et al., 1987; Craig-Bray
& Adams, 1986).
Percent ion of Parental Behavior. The adolescents*
perceptions of parental behaviors were assessed by the
Parental Behavior Inventory, a 30-item adaptation of the
measure used by Openshaw et al. (1984) (see Appendix B).
The instrument measures perceptions of parental (father
and mother) support, induction, and coercion. The
subjects responded to the first eight items on a 5-point
scale, ranging from "very often" (5) to "never" (1),
indicating their perceptions of the frequency of their
parents’ supportive behaviors. An additional three items
assessed adolescents’ perceptions of parental physical
affection (considered an aspect of parental support) on a
3-point scale, ranging from "very much like him/her" to
"not like him/her." The subjects responded to the
remaining 19 items, also on a 3 point-scale, noting their
perceptions of parental inductive control and coercive
control. The measure yielded four scores, two reflecting
parental behaviors of support (general support ive
behaviors and physical affection) and one each for
parental induction and coercion. Moreover, each parent
received their own set of scores, resulting in paternal
and maternal parental behavior scores. D. K. Openshaw
(personal communication, September, 28, 1988) reported
63
reliability coefficients ranging from .68 to .86 for the
parental behaviors assessed by the version of the
instrument used in this study.
Cultural Va lues Conf1ict. The Cultural Values
Conflict Scale (CVCS) is a 28-item instrument (see
Appendix C) with items selected to reflect five areas of
values associated with Mexican (Mexican American)
culture: parental authority (general), parental
authority over dating, loyalty to family, a preference
for cooperation over competition, and a present (rather
than future) time orientation. The items were adapted
from studies by Ramirez (1969), Derbyshire (1968),
Diaz-Guerrero (1975) and Ramirez * (1989) Family Attitude
Scale. The subjects responded to the first set of 14
items on a 6-point scale ranging from "strongly agree"
(6) to "strongly disagree" (1), indicating the degree to
which they thought their parents agreed or disagreed with
each statement. In a second set, with the same 14 items,
the subjects indicated the degree to which they agreed or
disagreed with each statement. The degree of conflict
was assessed in terms of the disagreement between the
adolescents’ own values and their perceptions of their
parents’ values. The range of disagreement for each item
was a possible low of 0 (i.e., a subject’s ratings of
his/her parents’ values and his/her own are the same) to
a possible high of 5 (i.e., a subject’s rating of
64
parents’ value is '6" and his/her own is "I"). Subscale
scores for the five values areas as well as a total score
were obtained for subjects’ perceptions of their parents’
values, their own values, and perceived differences
between the subjects’ values and their parents’ values.
Given that the CVCS was a newly developed instrument
for this study, pilot studies were conducted to assess
its reliability and validity. A pilot study was first
conducted to evaluate the validity of the items. A
questionnaire (see Appendices D and E) with the 14 items
believed to reflect Mexican cultural values was given to
a group of Spanish-speaking, immigrant, Mexican adults,
and a group of Anglo American adults (see Appendix F for
subjects’ characteristics), to assess whether the items
reflected values associated with the Mexican culture.
The Mexican subjects agreed significantly more with
ten of the fourteen statements than the Anglo American
subjects (see Appendix G). An interesting outcome was
that the two items assessing a preference for either
cooperation or competition were significantly different
between the two ethnic groups, but not in the expected
direction. The Mexican subjects were more strongly in
agreement with competition than their Anglo American
counterparts. There were also ethnic differences on
items reflecting respect for adults, parental authority
(general), and loyalty to family. Four items reflecting
65
a present time orientation and parental authority over
dating were not significant. The four non-significant
items were still included as part of the CVCS to respect
the integrity of the measure and to assess its validity
with other Hispanic groups.
The test-retest reliability of the 14-item
questionnaire among the Mexican subjects (the Anglo
American subjects were not available) was .73, indicating
a fair degree of reliability. Further examination of the
questionnaire’s reliability was conducted in conjunction
with the major study. The CVCS was sent as a follow-up
study to those subjects willing to participate. Those
results are reported in the results section.
Ethnic Identity. Ethnic Identity was assessed by
the Phinney Ethnic Identity Measure, Version 2,
(PEIM-2)(Phinney, 1989)(see Appendix H). Although it was
originally a 32-item instrument, 8 demographic items were
omitted because this information was requested in the
demographic questionnaire to be described shortly. The
remaining 26 items measured three aspects of ethnic
identity: (1) the strength of identification with one’s
own group (ethnic identification); (2) the degree of
search and commitment towards one’s ethnicity (ethnic
achievement); and (3) one’s orientation toward other
ethnic groups. For each item, subjects responded on a
6-point scale ranging from "strongly agree" (6) to
66
"strongly disagree" (1). The measure yielded three
subscale scores, one for each aspect of ethïilc identity.
The sense of ethnic identity as presented in the
literature review is reflected in aspects (1) and (2) of
the PEIM, and it is these subscale scores that were of
primary interest, and were used in the testing of
hypotheses. However, the subjects responded to all items
of the PEIM respecting the integrity of the measure.
An important advantage of the PEIM is that it is not
a measure for one particular ethnic group (e.g., Clark et
al., 1976; Keefe & Padilla, 1987) and thus it can be used
with a variety of ethnic groups, including Anglo
Americans. J. P. Phinney (1989) reports adequate
reliability for the measure with Cronbach’s alpha ranging
from .396 to .862.
Demographic Questionnaire. The subjects demographic
characteristics were ascertained with 13 items (see
Appendix I), including questions regarding sex, age,
ethnicity, place of birth, primary language, and their
parents’ educationa1/professional level. This enabled
the investigator to ensure that the subjects met the
predetermined criteria of age, ethnicity, time in the
U.S., and parents’ place of birth.
Procedure
The subject sample was to be comprised of high
school and community college students. The community
67
college sample was obtained while, even with much effort,
a high school group was not. With permission of the Dean
of the Social Studies Department of a Southern California
community college, I contacted instructors of the
Introduction to Psychology courses and described the
study to them. They were receptive to the project and
granted permission to recruit subjects from their classes
for an initial pilot study, followed by the major study.
The pilot study involving 20 students indicated that
the questionnaire could be completed in approximately 30
minutes and the research measures and their instructions
were clear. Furthermore, during the pilot study three
different data-collecting approaches were used. The
approach resulting in the greatest participation was used
in the major study and will be described shortly.
Finally, through the pilot study it became clear that it
would be difficult to obtain the desired number of
subjects, particularly Mexican American male subjects.
In order to obtain more subjects among this group, an
instructor teaching a Mexican American history course was
contacted, told of the study, and he granted permission
to recruit subjects from his classes.
In the major study, the students were informed that
the study examines people’s impress ions of themselves,
their parents, and their ethnic group. They were told
that their participation in the study would entail
68
completing a 30-minute questionnaire and was voluntary.
Moreover, they were informed that they could discontinue
their participation at any time without question, and
that their responses would be confidential and
anonymous. So as not to bias participation, the students
were not told that the study focused on Mexican
Americans, and all those desiring to participate could do
so. Those interested in participating in the study were
given, at the end of class, a research questionnaire. A
final detachable page was included so that subjects could
write their name and address if they were willing to
participate in a 10 minute follow-up study (to assess the
reliability of the CVCS) or to receive a brief summary of
the study's findings. The students were informed that
this page was optional and could be left blank.
The subjects were instructed to fill out the
questionnaires at their convenience but to refrain from
discussing the study with classmates. The investigator
returned at the end of subsequent class sessions to
collect the completed questionnaires. Those enrolled in
the psychology classes were given a form to receive their
"to be arranged" hour credit. All participants were duly
thanked.
A total of 446 questionnaires were distributed to
interested subjects in 14 classes and 257 were returned,
indicating a 57% return rate. Of the returned
69
questionnaires, 97 were excluded from the study for the
following reasons: 9 were not completed, 43 participants
were older than 21 years of age, 36 involved non-Mexican
American minority students, 3 were of Mexicans who had
lived in the U.S. less than eight years, 3 Mexican
American students had both parents born in U.S., and 3
Anglo American participants did not have both parents
born in U.S. This left a total of 160 questionnaires
that could be used in the study.
Four weeks after the questionnaires had been
completed, those providing their name and addresses were
sent another copy of the CVCS with the same ID number as
the questionnaire. Included with the CVCS was a written
statement reminding participants of their willingness to
cooperate in a follow-up study and a stamped addressed
envelope to mail back the completed CVCS to the
investigator. A total of 108 follow-up CVCS were sent
out, and 50 were returned, indicating a 46% response
rate.
Results
The tests of the major hypotheses concerning
ethnicity, ego identity, perceptions of parental
behavior, cultural values conflict, and ethnic identity
are presented. For some of the dependent variables, the
results of examining potential relationships between
subjects’ characteristics, other than ethnicity, and the
70
variable are also presented. Given that it was not
possible to match ethnic groups for socioeconomic status
(SES), the variable was statistically accounted for by
including SES as a covariate when appropriate. In cases
involving more than two groups, Scheffe’s procedure
(Wilcox, 1987) was used to determine which means were
significantly different.
Ego Identity
The number and percentage of Mexican American and
Anglo American subjects classified into the four-way
classification of identity statuses are presented in
Table 2. Fifteen subjects were omitted from the analysis
because, in accordance with the classification rules
(Adams et al., 1987), their responses indicated that they
were not discriminating between items and the subjects
were dropped from further consideration. Chi-square
analysis of the identity statuses revealed no significant
difference (^<.05) between ethnic groups. Moreover, an
ANOVA with subjects’ identity status subscale scores as a
within subjects dependent variable also yielded no
significant main effect (£<.05) for ethnicity. As shown
in Table 3, an examination of the means of subjects’
identity status subscale scores were not significantly
different between the two ethnic groups. Given the small
number in some of the identity status categories the four
categories were collapsed into two groups: diffusion
Table 2
The Number and Percentages of Mexican American
and Anglo American subjects in
Identity Status Categories
71
Ident i ty Status
Mexican American Anglo American
Diffusion 35 (47%) 36 (51%)
Foreclosure 10 (14%) 4 (6%)
Morator ium 26 (35%) 23 (32%)
Identity Achieved 3 (4%) 8 (11%)
TOTAL 74 (100%) 71 (100%)
72
Mean Values
Subjects
Table 3
Standard Deviations and Z Value of
Identity Status Subscale Scores
by Ethnicity
Ethnicity
Mexican
Amer ican
Anglo
Amer ican
Identity Status
Subscale Score
M
Sfî M SD
z
Di ffusion 18.15 5.05 18.45 6.07
Forec1osure 15.80 5.43 14.35 5.28
Morator ium 17.82 4.96 17.56 5.49
Achievement 24.09 4.16 24.40 4.96
87
Note: All items were on a 6-point scale ranging from
(6) "Strongly Agree" to (1) "Strongly Disagree." Given
that there were 6 items for each identity status
subscale, the range of subscale scores were a possible
low of 6 to a possible high of 36.
Table 4
Chi-square :
as related
Ego Identity Group (High/Low)(EIG)
to Ethnicity, Gender, SES, and Age
Source
M .
P
EIG X Ethnicity 1 . 15 NS
EIG X Gender 1 .01 NS
EIG X SES 2 1 .53 NS
EIG X Age 3 .90 NS
73
and foreclosure comprising a low-identity group,
moratorium and identity achieved a high-identity group.
As shown in Table 4, a series of chi-square analyses on
the two identity groups revealed no significant
difference (p<.05) for ethnicity, gender, SES, or age.
These findings indicate that the distribution of identity
group is not significantly affected by subjects'
ethnicity, gender, SES, or age.
Percent ions of Parental behavior
Paternal Behavior. Ethnicity. and Ego Identity. A 2
(ethnicity) X 2 (identity group: high and low) Analysis
of Covariance (ANCOVA) on subjects’ perceptions of
paternal induction, with SES as a covariate, yielded a
main effect for ethnicity, F.( 1 , 132) = 5.53, £.<.02.
There was no significant main effect Cp<.05) for identity
group and no significant interaction (£<.05), between
ethnicity and identity group. As shown in Table 5,
examination of means reveals that the Mexican American
subjects perceived their fathers as using more inductive
behaviors than their Anglo American counterparts. A
series of 2 (ethnicity) X 2 (identity group: high and
low) ANCOVAs on subjects’ perceptions of paternal support
(general), paternal support (physical affection), and
paternal coercion, with SES as a covariate, yielded no
significant main effects (£<.05) for ethnicity or
identity group, nor was there a significant interaction
74
Table 5
Mean Values, Standard Deviations and £ Values of
Subjects’ Perceptions of Parental Behaviors for
Ethnicity and Identity Group, (with SES as Covariate)
Ethnicity
Mexican
American
Anglo
Amer ican
Parental Behavior
SD M
âZ £
Paternal Support:
General 3.65 1 . 13 3.67 1.00 3.75
Physical Affection 1 .70 .64 1 .84 .60 .03
Paternal Induction 1 .97 .57 1.79 .47 5.53*
Paternal Coercion 1 .75 .55 1.71 .58 .83
Maternal Support:
General 4.63 .97 4.79 .88 .77
Physical Affection 1.99 .66 2.33 .65 .25
Maternal Induction 2.11 .50 2.00 .50 2.38
Maternal Coercion 1 .74 .47
Ident i ty
1 .70
Group
.53 1 . 15
High Low
Parental Behavior
M m
M
ED £
Paternal Support:
Genera 1 3.66 1.11 3.65 1 .03 .00
Physical Affection 1 .82 . 63 1 .74 .61 .46
Paternal Induction 1,81 . 53 1 .92 .52 1 .30
Paternal Coercion 1 .70 . 55 1.75 .58 .24
Maternal Support:
General 4.72 1 .06 4.70 .83 .00
Physical Affection 2.25 .70 2.10 . 65 1 .56
Maternal Induction 2. 10 .53 2.02 .48 1 .00
Maternal Coercion 1.77 .51 1 .68 .49 1.27
Note : Parental Support (General) ratings are on a
5-point scale, ranging from (1) "Never" to (5) "Very
Often," referring to frequency of behavior. Ail other
parental behavior ratings are on a 3-point scale, ranging
from (1) "Not Like Him/Her" to (3) "Very Much Like
Him/Her," referring to descriptions of parental
behaviors.
*£<.02
75
(£<.05). As shown on table 5, the mean ratings of
subjects’ perceptions of these paternal behaviors were
not significantly different.
Maternal Behavior. Ethnicity. and Ego Identitv. A
series of 2 (ethnicity) X 2 (identity group: high and
low) ANCOVAs on subjects’ perceptions of maternal support
(general), support (physical affection), induction and
coercion, with SES as a covariate, yielded no significant
main effects (£<.05) or interaction (£<.05) for ethnicity
or identity group. As shown on Table 5, the mean ratings
of subjects’ perceptions of maternal behaviors were not
significantly different.
Parental Behavior and SES. No predictions were made
regarding the relationship between adolescents’
perceptions of parental behavior and SES. However, given
its importance as a subject characteristic exploratory
analyses were conducted.
Paternal Behavior and SES. The one-way ANOVA
yielded significant differences in subjects’ perceptions
of paternal support (general) for SES, £(2, 146) = 3.88,
£<.01. Scheffe’s procedure revealed a significant
difference between the means of the low SES group and the
high SES group, p<.05. As shown in Table 6, the subjects
from the low SES group rated their fathers as less
supportive than did their high SES peers. The one-way
ANOVAs on subjects’ perceptions of paternal support
Table 6
Mean Values, Standard Deviations and F Values of
Subjects* Perceptions of Parental Behaviors by
Socioeconomic Status
High Middle LOW
76
Parental Behavior
M Ml M &D
M
SD F
Paternal Support:
General 3.99* .87 3.68 1.03 3.33» 1.13 3.88*
Physical Affection 1.93 .64 1.72 .57 1.64 .60 2.40
Paternal Induction 1.86 .54 1.94 .52 1.86 .58 .31
Paternal Coercion 1.63 .49 1.70 .65 1.84 .53 1.71
Maternal Support:
General 4.93* .90 4.90* .56 4.38» 1.00 4.76**
Physical Affection 2.46* .56 2.21 .69 1.93b
.66 6.05***
Maternal Induction 2.07 .54 2.05 .46 2.05 .54 .02
Maternal Coercion 1.66 .57 1.63 .47 1.86 .49 3.35*
Note: Parental Support (General) ratings are on a 5-point scale,
ranging from (1) "Never" to (5) "Very Often," referring to frequency
of behavior. All other parental behavior ratings are on a 3-point
scale, ranging from (1) "Not Like Him/Her" to (3) "Very Much Like
Him/Her," referring to descriptions of parental behaviors.
Note: Means having different superscripts are significantly
different at p<.05.
*£<.05 **£<.01 ***£<.001
77
(physical affection), induction, and coercion yielded no
significant main effects (£<.05) for SES. As shown in
Table 6, the mean ratings of subjects' perceptions of
paternal induction and coercion were not significantly
different.
Maternal Behavior and SES. The one-way ANOVA
yielded significant differences in subjects' perceptions
of maternal support (general) for SES, F(2, 153) = 4.76,
£<.01. Scheffe's procedure revealed a significant
difference among the means of the low SES group and the
middle and high SES groups, £<.05. As shown in Table 6,
the low SES subjects rated their mothers as less
supportive than did their middle and high SES peers. The
one-way ANOVA yielded significant differences in
subjects' perceptions of maternal support (physical
affection) for SES, £(2, 152) = 6.05, £<.001. Scheffe’s
procedure revealed a significant difference between the
means of the low SES group and the high SES group,
£<.001. As shown in Table 6, the low SES group rated
their mothers as showing less physical affection than did
their high SES peers. The one-way ANOVA yielded
significant differences in subjects' perceptions of
maternal coercion for SES, £(2, 148) = 3.35, £<,05.
Scheffe's procedure revealed a near significant
difference (£<.06) between the means of the low and
middle SES groups. As shown in Table 6, the low SES
78
subjects rated their mothers as more coercive than their
middle SES counterparts. The one-way ANOVAs on subjects'
perceptions of maternal induction yielded no significant
main effect (p<.05) for SES. As shown in Table 6, the
mean ratings of subjects' perceptions of maternal
induction were not significantly different.
Cu1tural Values Conflict.
Re 1iabi1itv Check. An analysis of the test-retest
reliability of the Cultural Values Conflict Scale (CVCS)
was conducted because the scale was newly developed for
use in the present study. Thirty-one percent (n=50) of
the total subjects participated in the follow-up study.
The test-retest reliability for the subjects’
self-ratings on the CVCS was .67 while the reliability
for ratings of parents cultural values was .61,
indicating that subjects demonstrated more consistency in
the perceptions of their own cultural values as compared
to their parents. These ratings indicate a fair degree
of reliability but the measure requires modifications to
increase its reliability to a more acceptable level.
Cultural Values and Ethnicity. Although the
principal area of interest in the present study was the
subjects’ cultural values conflict (i.e., perceptions of
differences between their own values and their parents
values), subjects’ perceptions of parental values and
their own values were first analyzed for ethnic
79
differences in cultural values. An ANCOVA on subjects’
perceptions of parental values, with SES as a covariate,
yielded a significant main effect for ethnicity, F.( 1 ,
153) = 4.11, £<.05. An examination of values areas
showed a significant main effect for ethnicity in two of
the five values areas, namely parental authority
(general), £.( 1 , 156) = 5.06, £<.05, and loyalty to
family, £(1, 154) = 4.05, £<.05. There were no
significant main effects in the values areas of parental
authority over dating, cooperation versus competition, or
a present time orientation. As shown in Table 7, an
examination of means revealed that the Mexican American
adolescents, compared to their Anglo American
counterparts, rated their parents higher on items
reflecting parental authority (general) and loyalty to
family.
An ANCOVA on subjects’ own values, with SES as a
covariate, yielded a significant main effect for
ethnicity, F(1, 148) = 6.32, £<.05. An examination of
values areas showed a significant main effect for
ethnic ity in three of the five values areas, namely
parental authority (general), £(1, 151) = 6.62, £<.01,
loyalty to family, £(1, 150) = 6.62, £<.05, and
cooperation versus competition, £(1, 151) = 4.16, £<.05.
There were no significant main effects in the values
areas of parental authority over dating, or a
80
Table 7
Mean Values, Standard Deviations and £
Subjects’ Perceptions of Parents’ Values
(with SES as Covariate)
Values of
by Ethnicity
Ethnicity
Mexican
Amer ican
Anglo
Amer i can
Values Subscale M SD M
gD
£
Parental Authority
(General)
4.45 .86 3.75 .97 5.05*
Parental Authority
Over Dating
2.98 1.05 3. 10 .52 1 . 16
Loyalty to Family 4.29 .88 3.82 .77 4.05*
Preference for
Competition over
Coopérât ion
3.49 1.10 3.08 1 . 18 .71
Present Time
Orientat ion
3.38 1.33 3.37 1 .28 .00
A1 1 Items 3.91 .56 3.54 .52 4.11*
Note: Subjects’ resoonded to values items
scale ranging from (6) "Strongly Agree" to
Disagree."
on a 6-point
(1) "Strongly
Note: CVCS items for each values subscale: Parental
Authority (General), Items 1,2,7,9; Parental Authority
Over Dating, Items 5,11; Loyalty to Family, Items
4,8,10,12; Preference for Competition Over Cooperation,
Items, 6,14; Present Time Orientation, Items 3,13.
*£< .05
81
present time orientation. As shown in Table 8, an
examination of means revealed that the Mexican American
adolescents, compared to their Anglo American
counterparts, were more in agreement with items
reflecting parental authority (general), loyalty to
family, and competition over cooperation.
An ANCOVA on subjects' cultural values conflict
(i.e., perceptions of differences between their own
values and those of their parents), with SES as a
covariate, yielded no significant main effect for
ethnicity for the total item score or particular values
areas. As shown in Table 9, the mean scores for
subjects’ values conflict were not significant different
for the two ethnic groups.
Cultural Values Conflict. Ethnic itv. and Ego
Identity. A 2 (ethnicity) X 2 (identity group: high and
low) ANCOVA on subjects’ cultural values conflict
(perceptions of differences between their own values and
those of their parents), with SES as a covariate, yielded
no significant main effects or significant interaction
(£<.05) for ethnicity or identity group. As shown on
Table 10, the means for cultural values conflict were not
significantly different.
Cultural Values Conflict. Gender. and SES. Although
no prior predictions were made, exploratory analyses were
conducted to examine possible relationships between
82
Table 8
Mean Values, Standard Deviations and F
Subjects* Perceptions of Own Values by
(with SES as Covariate)
Values of
Ethnicity
Ethnicity
Mexican
Amer ican
Ang 1 o
Amer ican
Values Subscale M
jsn
M M £
Parental Authority 3.85
(General)
.90 3.31 1.02 6.62*
Parental Authority 3.29
Over Dating
1.11 3. 19 .91 .09
Loyalty to Family 4.00 .70 3.62 1.02 6.97**
Preference for
Competition over 3.86
Cooperation
1.00 3.23 1.26 4.16*
Present Time 3.61
Orientât ion
1 .30 3.98 1.21 1.70
A1 1 Items 3.78 .55 3.48 .57 6.32*
Note: Subjects* responded to values items
scale ranging from (6) "Strongly Agree" to
Disagree."
on a 6-point
(1) "Strongly
Note: CVCS items for each values subscale: Parental
Authority (General), Items 1,2,7,9; Parental Authority
Over Dating, Items 5,11; Loyalty to Family, Items
4,8,10,12; Preference for Competition Over Cooperation,
Items, 6,14; Present Time Orientation, Items 3,13.
*£<.05 **£<.01
83
Table 9
Mean Values, Standard Deviations, and F Values of
Subjects* Perceptions of Values Conflict by Ethnicity
(with SES as Covariate)
Values Subscale
Parental Authority
(General)
Parental Authority
Over Dating
Loyalty to Family
Preference for
Competition over
Coopérât ion
Present Time
Or ientat ion
A11 Items
Ethnicity
Mexican
Amer ican
M
.96
1 .41
.81
.84
1 . 14
.98
SD
.78
1.34
.63
.80
1.06
.67
Anglo
Amer ican
M
.82
1 .20
.72
. 96
SD
.70
1.22
.65
.93
93 1.00
. 86 . 62
£
. 12
. 14
.78
.35
. 18
.40
Note : CVCS items for each values subscale: Parental
Authority (General), Items 1,2,7,9; Parental Authority
Over Dating, Items 5,11; Loyalty to Family, Items
4,8,10,12; Preference for Competition Over Cooperation,
Items, 6,14; Present Time Orientation, Items 3,13.
Note : Values conflict scores can range from 0 (subjects
perceive no disagreement between their values and their
parents* values) to 5 (subjects perceive complete
disagreement between their values and their parents*
values).
84
Table 10
Mean Values, Standard Deviations, and F Values of
Subjects' Perceptions of Values Conflict by
Ethnicity and Identity Group (with SES as Covariate)
Ethnicity
Mexican Anglo
American American
Values Conflict
Values Conflict
M
91
gD
.85
M
.88
High
M SD
89 .60
Table 11
Identity Group
Low
M
89
Ml
61
67
F
1.09
£
01
Mean Values, Standard Deviations and £ Value of
Subjects’ Perceptions of Values Conflict by Gender
Gender
Values Conflict
Mai e
M SD
.79 .63
Table 12
Female
M SD
1.00 .65
£
3. 94*
Mean Values, Standard Deviations and £ Value of
Subjects' perceptions of Values Conflict by SES
High
M SD
.80 .62
S£S
Middle
M
.75
SD
.53
Low
M SD
1.13 .70
£
5.75** Values Conflict
Note : Values conflict scores can range from 0 (subjects
perceive no disagreement between their values and their
parents’ values) to 5 (subjects perceive complete
disagreement between their values and their parents’
values).
*£<.05 **£<.01
85
subjects' gender, SES and cultural values conflict. A
One-way ANOVA revealed a significant difference in
cultural values conflict by gender, £.(1, 149) = 3.94,
£<.05. As shown in Table 11, female subjects reported a
significantly higher degree of cultural values conflict
than their male counterparts, A One-way ANOVA revealed a
significant difference in cultural values conflict for
SES, F(2, 147) = 5.75, p<.01. Scheffe's procedure
revealed a significant difference between the means of
the low SES group and the middle and high SES group,
£<.05. As shown in Table 12, the subjects of the low SES
group reported a significantly higher level of cultural
values conflict than the middle and high SES groups.
Ethnic Identity.
Ethnic identification, ethnicity. and identity
group. A 2 (ethnicity) X 2 (identity group: high and
low) ANCOVA on ethnic identification, with SES as a
covariate, yielded a significant main effect for
ethnicity, £.(1, 140) = 6.84, £<.01, no significant main
effect for identity group, but a significant interaction,
F(j_, 140) = 4.14, £<.05. As shown in Table 13, an
examination of the means reveals that the Mexican
American subjects reported a higher level of ethnic
identification than their Anglo American counterparts.
Moreover, the high identity Mexican Americans reported
higher levels of ethnic identity than their low identity
86
Table 13
Mean Values, Standard Deviations, and £ Values
of Subjects* Ethnic Identification and Achievement
for Ethnicity and Identity group
(with SES as Covariate)
Ethnicity
Mexican Anglo
American American
M SD
M SD
F
Ethnic
Ident ificat ion 2.95 .84 2 . 55 .76 6.84**
Identity Group
High Low
M SD M
SD £
Ethnic
Ident if icat ion 2.77 .71 2.73 . 90 . 19
Ethnicity
Mexican Anglo
American American
M SD M SD
£
Ethnic
Achievement 4.25 .87 3.65 .70 21.21***
Identity Group
High Low
M SD M SD £
Ethnic
Achievement 4.18 .77 3.78 .86 10.67**
Note: Subjects* responses to the PEIM items ranged from
(6) "Strongly Agree" to (1) "Strongly Disagree
** £<.01 *** £< 001
87
peers, while identity group was not associated with
levels of ethnic identification for the Anglo American
subjects.
Ethnic achievement. ethnicity. and identity group.
A 2 (ethnicity) X 2 (identity group: high and low) ANCOVA
on ethnic achievement, with SES as a covariate, yielded a
significant main effect for ethnicity, £(1, 143) = 21.20,
£<.001, and a significant main effect for identity group,
£( 1, 143) = 10.66, £<.01. There was no significant
interaction, £<.05. As shown in Table 13, an examination
of the means reveals that the Mexican American subjects
reported a higher level of ethnic achievement than their
Anglo American counterparts, and the high identity group
(moratorium, identity achieved) reported a higher level
of ethnic achievement than their low identity (diffusion,
foreclosure) peers.
Discuss ion
The overal1 purpose of the present research was to
examine identity formation among Mexican American
adolescents and three factors that might contribute to
it. The first step was to examine the effect of
ethnicity on the identity statuses of Mexican American
and Anglo American community college students, ages 18
through 21. The hypothesis that the Mexican American
adolescents would be more highly represented in the lower
identity statuses (identity diffused, foreclosure).
88
whereas the Anglo American would be more frequent among
the higher identity statuses (moratorium, identity
{achieved), was not supported. In fact, the distribution
I of identity statuses did not differ among the Mexican
I American and Anglo American samples. Furthermore, an
jexamination of the identity status subscale scores also
* showed no ethnic differences. The finding of no ethnic
differences on a measure of ego identity is consistent
with previous studies comparing non-American minority and
majority adolescent groups (Rosenthal et al., 1983;
Tzuriel & Klein, 1977), but it contradicts studies with
American ethnic groups, including Abraham * s studies
involving Mexican American and Anglo American high school
students (Abraham, 1983, 1986; Hauser, 1972).
There are several plausible explanations for finding
no ethnic differences in ego identity. One explanation
is that ethnic background does not play a significant
role in the identity formation of Mexican American and
Anglo American adolescents. Thus, the process postulated
by Rosenthal (1987) that identity formation is more
difficult for minority versus majority adolescents is not
I supported by these findings. Another possibility is that
' ethnicity does play a significant role in identity
i
I formation but it was not reflected in the present study
; because of the subject sample and/or the measures used to
I examine identity.
89
Considering the subject sample, Mexican American
community college students are not representative of the
general group. For every 10 Mexican American
18-year-olds, only two will complete high school and
pursue any postsecondary education (Gandara, 1986). In
terms of educational achievement, the present sample is
uncommonly successful. If one considers Abraham’s (1986)
suggestion that exposure to occupational and ideological
roles account for ethnic differences one might reasonably
suspect that Mexican American college students have been
exposed to occupational and ideological roles more than
their non-college Mexican American peers. Certainly,
they have been exposed to the role of college student
and, one suspects, some of the occupational roles
associated with going to college. When compared to Anglo
American community college students, differences in
exposure to occupational and ideological roles may be
minimal, resulting in no differences in identity
development as assessed by the ego identity measure used
in the study. Thus, no ethnic differences in the present
study would be due to the nonrepresentative sample.
Another possibility is that ethnic differences in
identity formation exist, but the measure utilized in the
present study was not able to detect it. The OMEIS,
following Marcia's operationalization of ego identity,
focuses on ideology (politics, religion) and occupation.
90
However, Erikson’s (1968, 1980) concept of ego identity,
is much more than the search and commitment in these
areas. He speaks of 'inner assuredness," "psychological
well-being," "an accrued confidence in maintaining
sameness and continuity." Therefore, as a measure of ego
identity, the OMEIS may only be tapping the tip of the
iceberg. Mexican American writers (Rodriguez, 1982 ;
Villareal, 1970, 1984) and artists (e.g., Roberto Juarez,
Gilbert Lujan ; Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, 1987) who
have expressed an identity struggle have not done so in
terms of religion, politics, or their vocational
interests. Rather, they appear to struggle at a deeper
level, with questions of belonging, selfhood, and
meaning. Thus, researchers exploring this more profound
level of identity may find ethnic differences and begin
to unravel the role of ethnicity in identity
development. Perhaps giving Mexican Americans
opportunities to tell their own story, or^the use of
projective techniques, such as the Rorschach or the
Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), may allow this more
profound level of identity to be examined. One example,
although examining self-concept rather than identity, is
Urrabazo’s (1985) study exploring self-concept among
Mexican American male teenagers through Kinetic Family
Drawings and TAT stories.
91
The second step in the exploration of ego identity
among Mexican Americans was to examine some of the
factors that might influence its development. Several
researchers (DeVos, 1982; Falicov, 1982) have suggested
that parental behaviors are influenced by culture and
these, in turn, affect the personality development of the
adolescent child. Abraham (1983, 1986) proposed that
parenting styles accounted for the ethnic differences in
ego identity among Mexican American and Anglo American
high school adolescents in her studies. In the present
research the adolescents’ perceptions of parental
support, induction, and coercion were examined. It was
predicted that Mexican American adolescents, because of
their parents’ "cultural" stressers, would perceive their
fathers and mothers as less supportive, less inductive,
and more coercive than their Anglo American
counterparts. However, none of the six predictions were
confirmed by the results of the study. In only one case,
involving paternal induction, was there a significant
difference between the two ethnic groups. Contrary to
the predicted hypothesis, Mexican American adolescents
perceived their fathers as using more induction than
their Anglo American peers. That is to say, Mexican
American fathers were viewed as using explanations to
direct their children’s behavior more so than Anglo
American fathers.
92
The unexpected results of no differences in Mexican
American and Anglo American adolescents’ perceptions of
parental support and coercion is particularly interesting
in light of some of the early social science literature
(Hayden, 1966; Madsen, 1964a; Penal osa, 1968) depicting
the Mexican American father as authoritarian and the
Mexican American mother as manipulative, and neither one
being very supportive to their adolescent children. More
recent writings (DeVos, 1982; Falicov, 1982) suggesting
distrust among Mexican American parents and their giving
"limited autonomy" to their adolescent children are also
not consistent with the Mexican American adolescents
perceptions of their parents’ behavior in the present
study. Admittedly, as previously noted, Mexican American
adolescents who attend college are atypical of the
group. Their having parents who are supportive and
opting to use inductive rather than coercive controlling
techniques may or may not be reflective of the broader
ethnic group. In any case, the results do contradict
certain stereotypes and descriptions of Mexican American
parents.
It may be that the perceived deficits in parenting
among Mexican Americans observed by early researchers
were due to socioeconomic status (SES) rather than
ethnicity. In the present study, a post-hoc examination
of adolescents’ (both groups) perceptions of parental
93
behavior revealed significant differences for SES: low
SES adolescents generally viewed their fathers and
mothers as less supportive and more coercive than did
their middle and high SES peers. Early researchers,
observing low SES Mexican American families, may have
tended to generalize their findings as reflective of the
ethnic group rather than the SES group. The importance
of taking into account SES or examining it directly as
was done in this study is necessary to avoid confounding
var iab1 es.
The hypotheses that the high-identity group, when
compared to the 1ow-ident ity group, would perceive their
fathers and mothers as more supportive, and more
inductive and less coercive in their use of control
techniques, were not confirmed. The positive role of a
supportive and democratic home environment for identity
development suggested by previous researchers (Adams,
1985; Adams & Jones, 1983 Enright et al., 1980; Kamptner,
1988; LaVoie, 1976) was not found in the present study.
It is difficult to account for these findings given that
the importance of supportive, noncoercive, parents for
identity development seems so reasonable and has been
supported by previous research. It may be that the
parents of college students generally have constructive
child-rearing techniques, and so a more sensitive measure
is required to reveal significant differences in
94
parenting styles. Past studies involving high school
subjects may have included a broader range of parents and
parenting styles, and thus differences were more easily
detected.
Another reason for the lack of differences among the
adolescents* perceptions of parental behavior may have
been social desirability. Of the four research measures,
the parental behavior questionnaire required the most
sensitive information, asking adolescents to rate their
parents on behaviors with obvious social desirable
characteristics: the "good" parent is supportive,
physically affectionate, and refrains from physical
punishment. Thus, it may have been too difficult for
some adolescents to respond honestly. In fact, one
subject did not fill-out the this section of the
questionnaire stating it was "too personal." Thus,
subjects may have tended to respond in a social desirable
manner resulting in no significant differences for
ethnicity or identity group.
A cultural values conflict was another factor that
researchers proposed as influential in the identity
formation of the ethnic minority adolescents (Rosenthal
et al., 1983). In the case of Mexican American
adolescents, the need to choose between two opposing sets
of cultural values, makes it more difficult for them to
resolve their identity crises. In previous studies, a
95
conflict had been assumed rather than empirically
demonstrated (e.g., Derbyshire, 1968, Madsen, 1964b),
In the present study the conflict was
operationalized as the difference between adolescents’
perceptions of their own values and their parents’
values. As a first step, the present study did find
ethnic differences in subjects’ perceptions of their
parents’ values and their own values, suggesting that the
two ethnic groups do hold different cultural values in
some areas, such as parental authority and loyalty to
family. However, the hypothesis that Mexican American
adolescents, compared to their Anglo American peers,
would perceive greater differences (conflict) between
their own values and that of their parents was not
confirmed. This suggests that the Mexican American
adolescents in the present study hold different values
than their Anglo American peers, but perceived no
significant difference between their own values and their
parents.
The hypothesized interaction between ethnicity and
identity group was also not supported. An examination of
the means and standard deviations for the various groups
indicated quite a range: some adolescents perceived
major differences between their own, and their parents’
values, while other saw very little. However, these
96
differences were not related to ethnic background or
identity group.
Post-hoc analyses revealed that the level of values
conflict was significantly related to subjects’ gender
and SES. Female adolescents reported more values
conflict than their male counterparts, and low SES
adolescents reported more values conflict than their
middle and high SES peers. Regarding gender differences,
there are many possible explanations. One possibility is
that the greater conflict among females, compared to
their male peers, may be reflecting society’s tendency to
allow less independent thinking and behavior among
women. The social norm appears to be that women,
compared to men, should be more compliant with parental
and social rules. Thus, women expressing their own
values to the same degree as men experience greater
disagreement with their parents. Clearly, further
research is needed to move beyond this speculative
1 eve 1.
The most significant factor associated with values
conflict was SES. One can propose some explanations: low
SES parents are more traditional than middle and high SES
parents, thus resulting in more differences in values
between them and their adolescent children; low SES
families have economic stressers and frustrations that
are played out in parent-ado 1escent relationships
97
resulting in values conflict. Clearly, further research
is required with low SES families to better understand
the relationship between values conflict and SES. In any
case, researchers and clinicians, viewing values conflict
among Mexican Americans, may have assumed it was due to
culture when other factors, such as SES, were involved.
The third proposed contributory factor for identity
development was ethnic identity. Rosenthal (1987) argues
that a strong sense of ethnic identity in minority
adolescents facilitates identity development by giving
him or her a sense of belonging, cohesion, and a security
that enables them to establish their identities. In the
present study, ethnic identity was assessed in terms of
the strength of identification with one’s own ethnic
group (ethnic identification) and the degree of personal
search and commitment regarding one’s ethnic background
(ethnic achievement).
The proposed hypothesis of ethnic differences for
ethnic identity was confirmed. The Mexican American
adolescents, compared to their Anglo American
counterparts, reported significantly higher levels of
ethnic identification and achievement, suggesting a
stronger sense of ethnic identity among Mexican American
adolescents. Furthermore, the hypothesized interaction
between ethnicity and identity for ethnic identification
was also confirmed. The high-ident i ty Mexican Americans
98
reported higher levels of ethnic identification, while
identity group was not associated with levels of ethnic
identification for the Anglo American adolescents. Thus,
ethnic identification among Mexican Americans, but not
Anglo Americans, is associated with an overall sense of
identity. An unexpected result was that the
high-ident ity group, regardless of ethnicity, reported
higher levels of ethnic achievement than their
1ow-identity peers. Thus, even for the Anglo American
group, a personal search and commitment to one’s ethnic
group was associated with high-identity. In general, the
findings support Rosenthal’s hypothesis that ethnic
identity among minority adolescents facilitates identity
deve1opment.
These findings suggest that ethnic identity
reflects the cultural identity that Erikson recognized
as important for identity development. Mexican
American adolescents, by exploring their ethnic
heritage, discover a group and culture that they are a
part of. On a personal level, this results in a
certain cultural pride that fosters psychological
well-being, and the "accrued confidence" that Erikson
(1980) speaks of. On a social level, the adolescents
find a social recognition that gives them the
confidence and security required for identity
deve1opment. Thus, the social recognition that does
99
not come from the predominant Anglo American society
must come (if at all) from the minority ethnic
community. In practical terms this has many
ramifications. Certainly, this includes the need for
the Mexican American community to foster ethnic
identity among its members. Some concrete examples
include encouraging families to celebrate their ethnic
heritage, facilitating ethnic student groups, not to
form secluded cliques, but to explore their common
ethnic roots.
In summary, the present study confirmed a few of
the proposed hypotheses as well as provide a much
needed basis for further research. There were no
ethnic differences on measures of ego identity,
perceptions of parental behavior, and a cultural values
conflict. However, as predicted, ethnicity was
significantly related to ethnic identity. Thus, in
terms of the first major goal of the study, comparing
Mexican American and Anglo American identity
development, no overall differences in identity
formation were found. Because no ethnic differences in
identity were found, the second major goal changed from
examining factors that might contribute to differences
to whether there were factors that contributed
differentially to identity development for the two
ethnic groups. In this case, ethnic identity, but not
100
perceptions of parental behavior or cultural values
conflict, was significant for the identity development
of Mexican American adolescents but less so for their
Anglo American counterparts.
There is certainly more research to be done in
examining the identity development of Mexican American
adolescents. The limitations of the present study give
some guidelines to important areas of further
research. First, a broader age range and a more
representative sample than a Mexican American community
college sample is required to test more thoroughly the
hypotheses presented in this study. Mexican American
college students, an important group to be sure because
of their academic success, may not reflect the
experiences of the majority non-college Mexican
American adolescents. Clearly, an important area of
research is to examine the identity issue among a
variety of Mexican American adolescents: those who stay
in school and those who do not, recent immigrant versus
second and third generations, those in problematic
family relationships and those in supportive family
environments. Granted, as discovered by the present
investigator, Mexican American subject samples are not
easy to come by. School districts and other agencies
may be resistant to allowing outside researchers to
come in and conduct research with their adolescents.
101
In any case, researchers examining ethnic minorities
need to make an effort to establish a working
relationship with schools and other agencies such that
research can be conducted for the mutual benefit of
both.
Another limitation of the present study was that,
in retrospect, two of the measures used in the study
did not adequately assess the interested variables. In
examining identity, the OMEIS focused on ideology
(politics, religion) and occupational roles. These
issues may not be as salient for adolescents today as
they were when Marcia (1966) first formulated his
identity statuses, 24 years ago in the mid-sixties.
Moreover, as indicated previously, identity as
conceptualized and described by Erikson is much more
than ideology and the occupational roles. Clearly, a
more encompassing measure of identity is needed. A
step in this direction are the more recent versions of
the OMEIS, the Extended (EOMEIS-l) and the Final
(EOMEIS-2) developed by Adams and associates (Adams et
al., 1987). These versions include Interpersonal
Identity and assess the areas of friendship, dating,
and sex roles. With respect to the Mexican American
adolescent, the OMEIS was probably not detecting the
central identity issues. Mexican Americans do appear
to struggle with their identity, but it is rarely, if
102
at all, expressed in terms of ideology or occupation.
Thus, a very important research area is the development
of a more appropriate identity measure to examine
identity among this group. Admittedly, ego identity is
difficult to operationalize and, as suggested
previously, more subjective measures, such as
project ive techniques, may be better suited to explore
i t.
The measure used to examine a cultural values
conflict in this study did not seem to adequately
reflect a social cultural phenomenon that likely
exists. More research is required to "tap" this
experience among ethnic minorities. First of all, more
clearly defined conceptualizations of "values conflict"
and "cultural clash" need to formulated. A better
theoretical understanding of the phenomenon is likely
to lead to more accurate and appropriate assessment
procedures. Second, even with a good theoretical
formulation of a "cultural conflict," a variety of
assessment approaches need to be attempted, and with
these multiple efforts, more adequate measures can be
developed. For example, the present study utilized an
indirect way to assess a cultural values conflict
(i.e., asking adolescents of their own values, their
parents, and taking the differences as reflective of a
conf1ict). Another, more direct approach, would
103
involve asking Mexican Americans if they have
experienced any conflict between their own values and
their families. Another possibility would be to list a
series of statements reflecting socio-cultural values
and ask Mexican American and Anglo American adolescents
if they think these values are more reflective of
Mexican or Anglo values, and whether they see them as
conflicting. There are certainly other possibilities.
The main point is that evidence from anecdotal accounts
and literary works suggest that Mexican Americans do
experience a cultural clash and given an appropriate
measure the phenomenon could be assessed and better
understood.
In addition to studies examining identity
formation among Mexican Americans there is a need for a
more theoretical understanding of identity development
among ethnic minorities in general. There are many
issues to be explored. For example, ethnic minority
adolescents may have similar identity struggles, such
as being ’ ’nonwhite," or given their various cultural
backgrounds, they may each have a rather unique
identity development. Also, the concept of identity
may not be understood and utilized among all cultural
groups. It seems that some cultural groups emphasize
the identity of the individual, while others appear to
va lue an identity within the broader social cultural
104
group (Urrabazo, 1985). Obviously, much still needs to
be examined and learned. The existing theoretical
concepts for understanding identity and the methods
used to measure it will undoubtedly be utilized.
However, the present study clearly illustrates the need
for developing new ways of understanding and examining
ident ity.
105
References
Abraham, K. G. (1983). The relation between identity
status and locus of control among high school
students. Journal of Ear 1v Adolescence. 3, 257-264.
Abraham, K. G. (1986). Ego-identity differences among
Anglo-American and Mexican-American adolescents.
Journa1 of Ado 1escence. 9, 151-166.
Adams, G. R. (1985). Family correlates of female
adolescents’ ego-identity development. Journal of
Adolescence. S, 69-82.
Adams, G. R. , Bennion, B.S., & Huh, K. (1987). Ob iect ive
measure of ego-identitv status : A Reference Manual.
Available from G. R. Adams, Department of Family and
Human Development, Utah State University, Logan,
Utah, 84322-2920.
Adams, G. R., & Fitch, S. A. (1982). Ego stage and
identity status development: A cross-sequential
analysis. Journal of Personalitv and Social
Psycho logy. 43. 574-583.
Adams, G. R., & Jones, R. M. (1983) Female adolescents’
identity development: Age comparisons and perceived
child-rearing experiences. Developmental Psychology.
19. 249-256.
Adams, G. R., & Montemayor, R. (1983). Identity
formation during early adolescence. Journal of Early
Ado 1escence. 3, 193-202.
Adams, G. R., Shea, J., & Fitch, S. A. (1979). Toward
the development of an objective assessment of
ego-identity status. Journal of Youth and
Ado 1escence. 8, 273-237.
Alba, R., & Chamlin, M. B. (1983). A preliminary
examination of ethnic identification among whites.
Amer ican Sociological Review. 48. 240-242.
Alvirez, D., & Bean, F. D. (1976). The Mexican American
family. In C. H. Mindel & R. W. Habenstein (Eds.),
Ethnic fami 1ies is America. (pp. 269-292). New York:
El sevier.
106
Arce, C. H. (1981). A reconsideration of Chicano
culture and identity. Daedalus. 110. 177-191.
Archer, S. L., & Waterman, A. S. (1983). Identity in
early adolescence: A developmental perspective.
Journal of Early Adolescence. â, 203-214.
Bean, F., Curtis, R. L., & Marcum, J. P. (1977).
Fami 1ism and marital satisfaction among Mexican
Americans: The effects of family size, wife’s labor
force participation, and conjugal power. Journal of
Marriage and the Family. 39. 759-767.
Becker, W. C. (1964). Consequences of different kinds
of parental discipline. In M. L. Hoffman & Hoffman
(Eds.), Review of chi Id deve1opment research. Vo 1. j,,
(pp. 169-208). Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Bennion, L. D., & Adams, G. R. (1986). A revision of
the Extended Version of the Objective Measure of Ego
Identity Status: An identity instrument for use with
adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research. X*
183-198.
Bourne, E. (1978a). The state of research on ego
identity. A review and appraisal. Part I. Journal of
Youth and Adolescence. 7, 223-251.
Bourne, E. (1978b). The state of research on ego
identity. A review and appraisal. Part II. Journal
of Youth and Adolescence. %, 371-392.
Buriel, R. (1987). In J. S. Phinney & M. J. Rotham
(Ed8.), ChiIdren’^ ethnic socializat ion. Plural ism
and development. Newbury Park : Sage Publications.
Buriel, R., Calzada, S., & Vasquez, R. (1982). The
relationship of traditional Mexican American culture
to adjustment and delinquency among three generations
of Mexican American male adolescents. Hispanic
Journal of Behavioral Sciences, X, 41-55.
Carter, R., & Helms, J. (1987). The relationship of
Black value-orientations to racial identity
attitudes. Measurement and Evaluation In Counseling
and Deve1opment. 19. 185-195.
107
Chapman, J. V., & Nicholls, J. G. (1976). Occupational
identity status, occupational preference, and field
dependence in Maori and Pakeha boys. Journal of
Cross-cultural Psychology, 7, 61-72.
Ciaccio, N. B. (1971). A test of Erikson’s theory of
ego epigenesis. Developmental Psychology, X,
306-311.
Clark, M., Kaufman, S., & Pierce, R. (1976).
Exploration of acculturation: Towards a model of
ethnic identity. Human Organization. 35, 231-238.
Coles, R. (1977). Eskimos. Chicanos and Indians.
Vol. IV of ChiIdren of Crises. Boston: Little, Brown
& Company
Constantinople, (1969). An Eriksonian measure of
personality development in college students.
Developmental Psychology. X, 357-37.
Constantinou, S., & Harvey, M. (1985). Dimensional
structure and intergenerational differences in
ethnicity; The Greek Americans. Sociology and SocXaL
Research. 69. 234-254.
Coopersmith, S. (1967). The antecedents jaX
se 1f-esteem. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
Craig-Bray, L., & Adams, G. R. (1986). Different
methodologies in the assessment of identity:
Congruence between self-report and interview
techniques? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, X5,
191-204.
Cromwell, R., & Ruiz, R. A. (1979). The myth of macho
dominance in decision making within Mexican and
Chicano families. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral
Sciences. X» 355-373.
Derbyshire, R. L, (1968). Adolescent identity crises in
urban Mexican-Amerleans in East Los Angeles. In E.
B. Brody (Ed.), Minority group adolescents In the
United States. Baltimore: Wilkins & Wilkins.
DeVos, G. (1982). Ethnic pluralism: Conflict and
accommodation. In G. DeVos & L. Romanucci-Ross
(Eds.), Ethnic identity. Cultural continuities and
change. (pp. 5-41).
108
Diaz-Guerrero, R. (1955). Neurosis and tl%. Mexican
family structure. Amer ican Journal of Psychiatry.
112. 411-417.
Diaz-Guerrero, R. (1975). Psychology of the Mexican.
Austin: University of Texas Press.
Douvan, E. & Adel son, J. (1966). The Adolescent
Experience. New York: Wiley
Dusek, J. B. (1987). Adolescent deve1opment and
behavior. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hal1.
Elias, N., & Blanton, J. (1987). Dimensions of ethnic
identity in Israeli Jewish families in the United
States. Psycho logical Reports. 60. 367-375.
Elizondo, V. (1988). The future is mestizo: Life
where cultures meet. Bloomington, IN: Meyer Stone
Books.
Ellis, J. E., Thomas, D. L., & Rollins, B. C. (1976).
Measuring parental support: The interrelationship of
three measures. Journal of Marriage and the Family.
38. 713-722.
Enright, R. D. , Laps ley, D. K. , Drivas, A. E. ,
& Fehr, A. Parental influences on the development of
adolescent autonomy and identity. Journal of Youth
and Adolescence. £, 529-545.
Erikson, E. (1963). ChiIdhood and society. New York ;
W. W. Norton & Company.
Erikson, E. (1968). Ident itv: Youth and crisis. New
York : W. W. Norton & Company
Erikson, E. (1980). Ident itv and the 1 ife cycle. New
York : W. W. Norton & Company.
Erikson, E. (1987). A wav fif. looking aX things :
Selected papers from 1930 to 1980. (Edited by S.
Schlein). New York; W. W. Norton & Company.
Falicov, C. J. (1982). Mexican Families. In M.
Goldrick, J. K. Pearce, & J. Grinder (Eds.),
Ethnicity and famiIy therapy. (pp. 134-163), New
York : Guilford Press.
109
Farris, B., & Glenn, N. (1976). Fatalism and fami1ism
among Anglos and Mexican Americans in San Antonio.
Sociology and Social Research. 60. 393-402.
Fregeau, D. L., & Barker, M. (1986). A measurement of
the process of adolescence: Standardization and
interpretation. Adolescence. 21. 913-919.
Gandara, P. (1986). Chicanos in higher education: The
politics of self-interest. American Journal of
Educat ion. 95, 256-272.
Garcia, J. A. (1982). Ethnicity and Chicanos:
Measurement of ethnic identification, identity, and
consciousness. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral
Sciences. 4, 295-314.
Garcia, M., & Lega, L. (1979). Development of a Cuban
ethnic identity questionnaire. Hispanic Journal of
Behavioral Sciences. X, 247-261.
Gecas, V. (1971). Parental behavior and dimensions of
adolescent self-evaluation. Sociometry. 34.
466-482.
Gecas, V., & Schwalbe, K. (1986). Parental behavior and
adolescent self-esteem. Journal of Marriage and the
Fami ly. 48., 37-46).
Grebler, L., Moore, J., & Guzman, R. (1970). The
Mexican American oeople. New York: Free Press.
Griffith, J. (1983). Relationship between acculturation
and psychological impairment in adult Mexican
Americans. Hisoanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences.
5, 431-459.
Grotevant, H. D. (1983). The contribution of the family
to the facilitation of ego formation in early
adolescence. Journal of Ear ly Adol escence .
225-237.
Grotevant, H. D., & Adams, G. R. (1984). Development
of an objective measure to assess ego identity in
adolescence : Validation and replication. Journal of
Youth and Ado 1escence. 13. 419-438.
110
Grotevant, H. D., & Cooper, C. R. (1985), Patterns of
interaction in family relationships and the
development of identity exploration in adolescence.
Chi 1d Deve1opment. 56. 415-428.
Grotevant, H. D., Thorebecke, W., & Meyer, M. L.
(1982). An extension of Marcia’s Identity Status
Interview into the interpersonal domain. Journal of
Youth and Adolescence. 11. 33-48.
Gruen, W. (1964). Adult personality; An empirical study
of Erikson*s theory of ego development. In B.
Neugarten (Ed.) Personalitv in middle and later
1 ife. New York : Atherton Press.
Hauser, S. T. (1972). Black and white identity
development: Aspects and Perspectives. Journal of
Youth and Adolescence. X, 113-130.
Hawks, G. R., & Taylor, M. (1975). Power structure in
Mexican and Mexican American farm labor families.
Journal of Marriage and the Family. 37. 807-811.
Hayden, R. G. (1966). Spanish-Americans of the
Southwest : Life style and patterns and the
implications. We 1 fare in Review. 4, 14-25.
Heller, C. S. (1967). Mexican American youth aX the
crossroads. New York : Random House.
Hodgson, J. W., & Fischer, J. L. (1979). Sex
differences in identity and intimacy development in
college youth. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 8.,
37-50.
Houston, L. (1984). Black consciousness and
self-esteem. Journal of Black Psychology. XX, 1-7.
Josselson, R. L. (1973). Psychodynamic aspects of
identity formation in college women. Journal of
Youth and Adol escence. 2., 3-52 .
Kamptner, N. L. (1988). Identity development in late
adolescence: Causal modeling of social and familial
influence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 17.
493-514.
Ill
Keefe, S. E. & Padilla, A. M. (1987). Cbi . oa&o
Ethnicity. Albuquerque: The University of New Mexico
Press.
Kluckhohn, F. R., Strodtbeck, F. (1961). VariatLQim in
value orientations. New York; Row & Peterson.
Krate, R., Levanthal, G., & Silverstein, B. (1974).
Self-perceived transformation of negro-to-black
identity. Psychological Reports. 3^, 1071-1075.
LaVoie, J. C. (1976). Ego identity formation In middle
adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 5,
371-385.
Madsen, W. (1964a). The Mexican American of South
Texas. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston.
Madsen, W. (1964b). Value conflicts in cultural
transfer. In P. Worschel & D. Byrne (Eds.),
Personality change, (pp. 470-489). New York; Wiley.
Marcia, J. E. (1966). Development and validation of
ego-identity status. Journal o£ Personality and
Social Psycho logy. 3 551-558.
Marcia, J. (1967). Ego identity status: Relationship to
change in self-esteem, general maladjustment, and
authoritarianism. Journal q1 Personality. 3&,
118-133.
Marcia, J. E. (1980). Identity in adolescence. In J.
Adel son (ed.), Handbook of adolescent psychology,
(pp. 159-187). New York: John Wiley & Sons
Marcia, J. £., & Friedman, M. L. (1980). Ego identity
in college women. Journal o£ Personality.
149-163.
Martin, B. (1975). Child-parent relations. In F.
Horowitz (Ed.) Review of child development research.
Vol. 4, Chicago; University of Chicago Press.
Masuda, M., Hasegawa, R., & Matsumoto, G. (1973). The
ethnic identity questionnaire: A comparison of three
Japanese age groups in Tachikawa Japan, Honolulu, and
Seattle. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology. X,
229-244.
112
Matute-Blanchi, M. (1986). Ethnic identities and
pattern of school success and failure among
Mexican-descent and Japanese-American students in a
California high school: An ethnographic analysis.
Amer ican Journal of Educat ion. 95, 233-255.
Mielman, P. W. (1979). Cross-sectional age changes in
ego identity status during adolescence.
Developmental Psvchologv. 15. 230-231.
Mi than, J. S. (1983). The role of the family in
acculturation assimilation in America: A
psychocuItura1 dimension. In W. C. McCready (Ed.),
Culture. ethnicity. and identity; Current issues in
research.
Montiel, M. (1970). The social science myth of the
Mexican American family. Ei Gr ito : 4 Journal of
Contemporary Mexican American Thought. 3, 56-63.
Montiel, M. (1973). The Chicano family: A review of
research. Social Work. 18. 22-31.
Munro, G., & Adams, G. R. (1977). Ego-identity
formation in college students and working youth.
Developmental Psychology. 13. 523-524.
Murillo, N. (1976). The Mexican American family. In
C. A. Hernandez, N. J. Haug., & N. Wagner (Eds.),
Chicanos: Social and psychological perspect ives (2nd.
Ed.) (pp. 71-82). St. Louis: C. M. Mosby.
Museum of Fine Arts, Houston (1987). Hispanic Art in
the United States : Thirty contemporary painters &
sculptors. Houston: Museum of Fine Arts.
Openshaw, D. K., Thomas, D. L., & Rollins, B. C.
(1984). Parental influences of adolescent
self-esteem. Journal of Early Adolescence. 4,
259-274.
Orlofsky, J. L. (1978). Identity formation, achievement
and fear of success in college men and women.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence. %, 49-62.
113
Oshman, H. P., & Manosevitz, M. (1974). The Impact of
the identity crisis on the adjustment of
1ate-ado 1escent males. Journal of Youth and
Adol escence. 3.» 207-216.
Parham, T., & Helms, J. (1981). The influence of black
student’s racial identity attitudes on preference of
counselor’s race. Journal QÎ. Counse1ing Psychology.
28. 250-257.
Parham, T., & Helms, J. (1985). Relation of racial
identity attitudes to self-actualization and
affective states of Black students. Journal of
Counse1ing Psychology. 22. 431-440.
Peffalosa, F. (1968). Mexican family roles. Journal of
Marriage and the fami1v. 30, 680-689.
Phinney, J. S. (1989). The Phinney Ethnic Identity
Measure. Unpublished assessment measure.
Phinney, J. S. (in press). Ethnic identity in
adolescents and adults; A review of research.
Psycho logical Bulletin.
Powers, S. I., Hauser, S. T., & Kilner, L. A. (1989).
Adolescent mental health. American Psychologist. 44,
200-208
Ramirez, M. (1967). Identification with Mexican family
values and authoritarianism in Mexican Americans.
Journal of Social Psychology. 73. 3-11.
Ramirez, M. (1969). Identification with Mexican
American values and psychological adjustment in
Mexican American adolescents. Internationa1 Journal
of Social Psychiatry. 15. 151-156.
Ramirez, M. (1989). FamiIv Attitude Seale. Unpublished
assessment instrument.
Rasmussen, R. E. (1964). Relationship of ego identity
to psychosocial effectiveness. Psychological Reports.
12, 815-825.
Rodriguez, R. (1982). Hunger o£ memories ; The educatIon
of Richard Rodriguez. Boston: David R. Grodine.
114
Rollins, B. C., & Thomas, D. L. (1970). Parental
support, power, and control techniques in the
socialization of children. In W. R. Burr, R. H. H.,
I. Nye, & I. L. Reiss (Eds.), Contemporary theories
about the fami ly. Vol . I . . New York; Free Press.
Romano, O. I. (1971). The anthropology and sociology
of the Mexican-Americans : The distortion of Mexican
American history. In O. Romano (Ed.), Voices :
Readings from El Grito. A Journal of Contemporary
Mexican American Thought. Berkeley, CA: Quinto Sol
Publicat ions.
Rosenthal, D. A. (1987). Ethnic identity development
in adolescents. In J. S. Phinney & M. J. Rotheram
(Eds.), ChiIdren’s ethnic socializat ion. Plural ism
and deve1opment. Newbury Park, N. J.: Sage
Publicat ions.
Rosenthal, D. A., & Gurney, R. M., & Moore, S. M.
(1981). From trust to intimacy: A new inventory for
examining Erikson’s stages of psychosocial
development. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 10.
525-537.
Rosenthal, D. A., & Hrynevich, C. (1985). Ethnicity
and ethnic identification. A comparative study of
Greek-, Italian, and Anglo-Australian adolescents.
Internat ional Journal of Psycho logy. 20. 723-742.
Rosenthal, D. A., Moore, S. M., & Taylor, M. J.
(1983). Ethnicity and adjustment : A study of the
self-image of Anglo-, Greek-, and Italian-Australian
working class adolescents. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence. 12. 117-135.
St. Clair, S., & Day, H. D. (1979). Ego identity
status and values among high school females. Journal
of Youth and Adolescence. 2, 317-326.
Schaefer, E. S. (1965). Children’s reports of parental
behavior: An inventory. Chi Id Deve1opment. 36.
413-424.
Schenkel, S., & Marcia, J. E. (1972). Attitudes toward
premarital intercourse in determining identity status
in college women. Journal of Personalitv. 40.
472-482.
115
Siege 1man, M. (1965). Evaluation of Brenfenbrenner’s
questionnaire for children concerning parental
behavior. Child Deve1opment. 36. 163-173.
Staiano, K. (1980). Ethnicity as process: The creation
of an Afro-American identity. Ethnici tv. %, 27-33.
Staples, R., & Mirande, A. (1980). Racial and cultural
variations among Mexican families: A decennial review
of the literature on minority families. Journal of
Marr iage and the FamiIv. 42 887-903.
Stark, P. A., & Traxler, A. J. (1974). Empirical
validation of Erikson’s theory of identity crises in
late adolescence. Journal of Psychology. 86. 25-33.
Temp1e-Truji11o, R. E. (1974). Conceptions of the
Chicano family. Smith Col lege Studies in Social Work.
45, 1-20.
Tharp, R. G., Meadow, A., Lennhoff, S., & Satterfield,
D. (1968). Changes in marriage roles accompanying the
acculturation of the Mexican American wife. Journal
of Marr iage and the Family. 32, 404-412.
Thomas, D. L., Gecas, V., Weigart, A., & Rooney, E.
(1974). FamiIv socialization and the adolescent:
Determinants of self-concept. conformity. religiosity.
and counter-cultural values. Lexington, MA: Lexington
Books.
Tzuriel, D., & Klein, M. M. (1977). Ego identity:
Effects of ethnocentrism, ethnic identification, and
cognitive complexity in Israeli, Oriental, and Western
ethnic groups. Psychologica1 Reports. 40,. 1099-1110.
U. S. Bureau of the Census (1985). Persons of
Spanish origin in the United States. Series P-20, No.
403.
Urrabazo, R. (1985). Machismo : Mexican American
male se 1f-concent. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley, CA.
Vazquez, M. J. T., & Gonzalez, A. M. (1981). Sex roles
among Chicanos: Stereotypes, challenges, and changes.
In A. Baron (Ed.), Explorations in Chicano psycho 1ogy.
(pp. 50-70). New York: Praeger
116
Vigil, D. (1979). Adaptation strategies and cultural
life styles of Mexican American adolescents. Hispanic
Journal of Behavioral Sciences. 375-392.
Vi 1larreal, J. A.
Anchor Books.
(1970). Pocho. Garden City, N. Y.
Villarreal, J. A. (1984). Clemente Chacon; A nove1
Binghampton, N. Y.:Bi1ingual Press/Editorial Bilingue
Waterman, C. K., & Nevid, J. S. (1977). Sex
differences in the resolution of the identity crisis.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 6, 342.
Waterman, C. K., & Waterman, A. S. (1974). Ego
identity status and decision styles. Journal of Youth
and Adolescence. 1-6.
Wessman, A. E.,
personalitv.
t Ricks, D. F. (1966). Mood and
New York: Holt, Reinhart & Winston.
Wilcox, R. R. (1987). New statistical procedures for
the social sciences : Modern solut ion to basic
problems. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Zapata, J. T., & Jaramillo, P. T. (1981). Research on
the Mexican American. Journa1 of Individual
Psychology, 37. 72-85.
117
Appendix A
Objective Measure of Ego Identity
Instruct ions : Read each item and circle the number using the
scale below to indicate to what degree it reflects your thoughts
and feelings. If a statement has more than one part, please
indicate your reaction to the statement as a whole.
Strongly
Agree
(6)
Moderately
Agree
(5)
Agree Disagree
(4) (3)
Moderately
Disagree
(2)
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
1. I haven’t really considered politics.
They just don’t excite me much. 6 5
2. I might have thought about a lot of
different things but there’s never
really been a decision since my
parents said what they wanted. 6 5
3. When it comes to religion I just
haven’t found any that I’m really
into myself. 6 5
3 2
3 2
3 2
4. My parents had it decided a long time
ago what I should go into and I’m
following their plans. 6 5
5. There are so many different political
parties and ideals. I can’t decide
which to follow until I figure it out. 6 5
3 2
3 2
6. I don’t give religion much thought
and it doesn’t bother me one way or
the other. 6 5 3 2
7. I guess I’m pretty much like my folks
when it comes to politics. I follow
what they do in terms of voting
and such.
8. I haven’t chosen the occupation I really
want to get into, but I’m working toward
becoming a ________ (fill in and rate)
until something better comes along.
118
Strongly Moderately Agree Disagree Moderately Strongly
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree
(6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
9. A person’s faith is unique to each
individual. I’ve considered and
reconsidered it myself and know what
I can be 1i eve. 6
10. It took me a long time to decide but
now I know for sure what direction to
move in for a career. 6
11. I really never was involved in
politics enough to have to make a
firm stand one way or the other. 6
12. I’m not sure what religion means to
me. I’d like to make up my mind but
I’m not done looking yet. 6
13. I’ve thought my political beliefs
through and realize I may or may not
agree with many of my parents’ beliefs. 6
14. It took me awhile to figure it out,
but now I really know what I want for
a career. 8
15. Religion is confusing to me right now.
I keep changing my views on what is
right and wrong to me. 6
16. I’m sure it will be pretty easy for me
to change my occupational goals when
something better comes along. 6
17. My folks have always had their own
political and moral beliefs about
issues like abortion and mercy killing
and I’ve always gone along accepting
what they have. 6
18. I’ve gone through a period of serious
questioning about faith and can now say
I understand what I believe in as an
individual. 6
119
Strongly Moderately Agree Disagree Moderately Strongly
Agree Agree Disagree Disagree
(6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
19. I’m not sure about my political
beliefs, but I’m trying to figure
out what I can truly believe in. 6
20. I just can’t decide how capable I
am as a person and what jobs I’ll
be right for. 6
21. I attend the same church as my family
has always attended. I’ve never
really questioned why. 6
22. I just can’t decide what to do for an
occupation. There are so many that
have possibilities. 6
23. I’ve never really questioned my
religion. If it’s right for my
parents it must be right for me. 6
24. Politics are something that I can
never be too sure about because things
change so fast. But I do think it’s
important to know what I believe in. 6
120
Appendix B
Parental Behavior Inventory
Instructions: Read each statement. Circle the number on the left
side of the page which best describes how your father treats you,
and then circle the number on the right side of the page best
describing how your mother threats you.
1. Father Over the past several years this parent seemed Mother
to trust me in my role as a family member.
1 .................. Never ..................... 1
2 .................. Hardly Ever ................ 2
3 .................. Sometimes .................. 3
4 ................ .. Fairly Often ............... 4
5 .................. Very Often ................. 5
2. Father Over the past several years whenever I had any Mother
kind of problem, I could count on this parent
to help me out.
5 .................. Very Often .......... 5
4 .................. Fairly Often ............... 4
3 .................. Sometimes .................. 3
2 .................. Hardly Ever ................ 2
1 .................. Never ..................... 1
3. Father Over the past several years this parent felt Mother
affection for me and I was certain of it.
1 .................. Never .................... 1
2 .................. Hardly Ever .................2
3 .................. Sometimes ..............*.. . 3
4 .................. Fairly Often ............... 4
5 .................. Very Often ................. 5
121
4j Father Over the past several years this parent taught Mother
me things I wanted to learn.
5 .................. Very Often ................. 5
4 .................. Fairly Often ............... 4
3 .................. Sometimes .................. 3
2 .................. Hardly Ever ................ 2
1 .................. Never .............. 1
5. Father Over the past several years this parent made Mother
me feel he/she was there if I needed him/her.
1 .................. Never ..................... 1
2 .................. Hardly Ever ................ 2
3 .................. Sometimes .................. 3
4 .................. Fairly Often ............... 4
5 .................. Very Often ................. 5
6. Father Over the past several years this parent has Mother
shown positive interest in and support of me
in my daily affairs as part of the family.
5 ................... Very Often ................ 5
4 ................... Fairly Often ........... 4
3 ................... Sometimes ............. 3
2 ................... Hard 1 y Ever ............ 2
1 ................... Never .................... 1
122
7. Father Over the past several years I experienced a
feeling of security in my relationship with
this parent.
Mother
Never .................... 1
Hardly Ever ............... 2
Sometimes ................ 3
Fairly Often .............. 4
Very Often ............ 5
8. Father Over the past several years this parent
seemed to approve of me and things I did.
Mother
Very Often ................ 5
Fairly Often .............. 4
Sometimes .... 3
Hardly Ever ............... 2
Never .................... 1
123
Instruct ions; Read each statement. Using the scale below, circle
one of the three answers on the left side of the page which best
describes how your father treats you. Then circle one of the three
answers on the right side of the page which best describes how your
mother treats you.
Not
Like
Him
(NL)
Some
what
Like
Him
(SL)
Very
Much
Like
Him
(L)
Not
Like
Her
(NL)
Some
what
Like
Her
(SL)
Very
Much
Like
Her
(L)
Father Over the past several years
this parent ..,
Mother
NL SL L 9. ...punished me when I
didn't obey.
NL SL L
NL SL L 10. ... explained to me how
good I should feel when
I do something he/she
1 ikes.
NL SL L
NL SL L 11. ... told me how much
he/she loves me.
NL SL L
NL SL L 12. ... became cross and angry
about little things I did.
NL SL L
NL SL L 13. ... hugged and kissed me
often.
NL SL L
NL SL L 14. ... told me how good
others feel when I do
what is right.
NL SL L
NL SL L 15. ... explained how much it
helps him/her when I obey.
NL SL L
NL SL L 16. ... told me how good I NL SL L
should feel when I do
what is right.
124
Not
Like
Him
(NL)
Some
what
Like
Him
(SL)
Very
Much
Like
Him
(L)
Not
Like
Her
(NL)
Some
what
Like
Her
(SL)
Very
Much
Like
Her
(L)
Father Over the past several years
this parent ...
Mother
NL SL L 17. ... told me how much
it means to him/her
when I obey.
NL SL L
NL SL L 18. ... hugged or kissed me
goodnight.
NL SL L
NL SL L 19. ... told me that when NL SL L
NL SL L
NL SL L
NL SL L
NL SL L
NL SL L
NL SL L
NL SL L
I share with other
family members I should
feel happy.
20. ... believed in showing
his/her love for me.
fault with me.
21. ... believed that ail my
bad behavior should be
punished in some way.
22. ... was always finding
23. ... often complained
about what I did.
24. ... was always trying to
change me.
25. ... most always punished
me in some way when I was
bad.
26. ...explained to me the
benefits I receive
when I do something
he/she likes.
NL SL L
NL SL L
NL SL L
NL
NL
NL
NL
SL
SL
SL
SL
125
Not
Like
Him
(NL)
Some
what
Like
Him
(SL)
Very
Much
Like
Him
(L)
Not
Like
Her
(NL)
Some
what
Like
Her
(SL)
Very
Much
Like
Her
(L)
Father Over the past several years
this parent ...
Mother
NL SL L 27. ... was always getting
after me.
NL SL L
NL SL L 28. ... was not very patient
with me.
NL SL L
NL SL L 29. ... explained to me the NL SL L
benefits he/she receives
when I do something
he/she likes.
NL SL L 30. ... explained that when I
share with other family
members, they like me for
sharing.
NL SL L
126
Appendix C
Cultural Values Conflict Scale
Instructions; Read each item and circle the number using the scale
below to indicate how much you think your parents agree or disagree
with each statement.
Strongly Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly
Agree Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree
(6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
1. All adults should be respected. 6 5 4
2. The father should be considered
to have the most authority. 6 5 4
3. It is alright to have a good time
even when there is work to be done. 6 5 4
4. For a child the mother should be
the dearest person in existence. 6 5 4
5. It is alright for a girl to date a boy,
even if her parents disapprove of him. 6 5 4
6. Competition is better than
cooperation to achieve results. 6 5 4
7. It helps a child in the long run
if he or she is made to conform to
his or her parents’ ideas. 6 5 4
8. Uncles, aunts, cousins and other
relatives should always be considered
to be more important than friends. 6 5 4
9. It is more important to respect a
father than to love him. 6 5 4
10. A person should be as concerned
about their family as they are about
themselves. 6 5 4
127
Strongly Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly
Agree Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree
(6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
11. If a boy’s parents do not approve of
his girlfriend he should not go
steady with her. 6 5 4 3 2 1
12. When I do something wrong the whole
family suffers. 6 5 4 3 2 1
13. It is more important to enjoy the
present than to worry about the future. 6 5 4 3 2 1
14. A child should be taught to be
competitive. 6 5 4 3 2 1
Instructions: Read each item and circle the number using the scale
below to indicate how much you agree or disagree with each
statement, (Note; previous items referred to your parents’ views,
these are for your views).
Strongly Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly
Agree Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree
(6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
15. All adults should be respected. 6 5 4 3 2
16. The father should be considered
to have the most authority. 6 5 4 3 2
17. It is alright to have a good time
even when there is work to be done. 6 5 4 3 2
18. For a child the mother should be
the dearest person in existence. 6 5 4 3 2
19. It is alright for a girl to date a boy,
even if her parents disapprove of him. 6 5 4 3 2
20. Competition is better than
cooperation to achieve results. 6 5 4 3 2
128
Strongly Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly
Agree Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree
(6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
21. It helps a child in the long run
if he or she is made to conform to
his or her parents' ideas. 6
22. Uncles, aunts, cousins and other
relatives should always be considered
to be more important than friends. 6
23. It is more important to respect a
father than to love him. 6
24. A person should be as concerned
about their family as they are about
themselves. 6
25. If a boy’s parents do not approve of
his girlfriend he should not go
steady with her. 6
26. When I do something wrong the whole
family suffers. 6
27. It is more important to enjoy the
present than to worry about the future. 6
28. A child should be taught to be
competitive. 6
129
Appendix D
Cultural Values Pilot Study: Questionnaire (Spanish Version)
Instrucctones: Lea oada frase y, utilizando la escala abajo,
circule el numéro que Indica que tanto esta en acuerdo o en
desacuerdo con cada frase.
Muy De
Acuerdo
(6)
Moderaramente Poco De Poco En Moderaramente Muy En
De Acuerdo
(5)
Acuerdo Desacuerdo En Desacuerdo Desacuerdo
(4) (3)
1. Se debe respetar a todos los adultos.
2. Debe considerarse que el padre es el
que tlene la maxima autorldad.
3. Es correcte divertirse un poco aun cuando
se tengan cosas o trabajos que hacer
4. Para un nine la madre debe ser la
persona mas querida que eixste.
5. Es correcte que una muchacha este
saliendo con regularidad con un
ffluchacho, aun cuando sus padres no
aprueben al muchacho.
6. La competicion es mejor que la
cooperacion para lograr resultados.
7. A largo plaza le ayuda al nino si se hace
conformar a las ideas de sus padres
8. Los partentes (tio, tia, primes)
deberan siempre considerarse
mas importante que los amigos.
9. Es mas importante tenerle respeto
al padre (de fami lia) que amarlo.
10. Una persona debe preocuparse acerca
de su familia como se preocupa per si
m i sma.
6
6
( 2)
5 4 3 2
5 4
5 4
5 4
5 4
5 4
5 4
5 4
5 4
(1
3 2
3 2
5 4 3 2
130
Muy De Moderaramente Poco De Poco En Moderaramente Muy En
Acuerdo De Acuerdo Acuerdo Desacuerdo En Desacuerdo Desacuerdo
(6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
11. Si a los padres de un muchacho no les
gusta la novia del muchacho, el no
debera seguir saliendo con el la. 6 5 4 3 2 1
12. Cuando hago algo mal toda la familia
sufre. 6 5 4 3 2 1
13. Es mas importante disfrutar del presente
que preocuparse por el future. 6 5 4 3 2 1
14. Al nino se le debe ensenar a competir. 6 5 4 3 2 1
Escribe el numéro que indica su respuesta y compléta cada frase.
Soy: _____ (1) Sombre (2) Mujer
Mi edad es: _____
Soy de:_____ (1) Mexico (2) El Salvador (3) Otro pais
Tengo: anos en los Estados Unidos
Los anos que fui a la escuela son:______
Mi trabajo es:________________
Los ultimos cuartro numéros de me seguro social son ________ .
Es mi _____ (1) primera (2) segunda vez de responder al cuestionario
131
Appendix E
Cultural Values Pilot Study: Questionnaire (English Version)
Instruct ionsi Read each item and, using the scale below, circle the
number the indicates how much you agree or disagree with each
statement.
Strongly Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly
Agree Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree
(6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
1. All adults should be respected. 6 5 4 3 2
2. The father should be considered
to have the most authority. 6 5 4 3 2
3. It is all right to have a good time
even when there is work to be done. 6 5 4 3 2
4. For a child the mother should be
the dearest person in existence. 6 5 4 3 2
5. It is all right for a girl to date a boy,
even if her parents disapprove of him 6 5 4 3 2
6. Competition is better than
cooperation to achieve results. 6 5 4 3 2
7. It helps a child in the long run
if he or she is made to conform to
his or her parents’ ideas. 6 5 4 3 2
8. Uncles, aunts, cousins and other
relatives should always be considered
to be more important than friends. 6 5 4 3 2
9. It is more important to respect a
father than to love him. 6 5 4 3 2
10. A person should be as concerned
about their family as they are about
themselves. 6 5 4 3 2
132
Strongly Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly
Agree Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree
(6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
11. If a boy’s parents do not approve of
his girlfriend he should not go
steady with her. 6 5 4 3 2
12. When I do something wrong the whole
family suffers. 6 5 4 3 2
13. It is more important to enjoy the
present than to worry about the future. 6 5 4 3 2
14. A child should be taught to be
competitive. 6 5 4 3 2
Write in the number that gives your response to each statement.
1. My sex is _____ (1) Male (2) Female
2. My age is ____
3. My ethnic background is __________ (number and/or name)
(1) Asian-American (you can be specific: Vietnamese
Chinese, etc.)
(2) Mexican/Mexican American/Chicane
(3) Hispanic/Latino (you can be specific: Nicaraguan
Argentinean, etc.)
(4) White/Anglo, not Hispanic (you can be specific:
(Italian, Irish, German, etc.)
(5) Black/Afro-American
(6) Native Indian/Native American
4. I ____
(1) Have some advanced education (after college) or work in
a profession (doctor, lawyer, professor, teacher) or as
manager/executive in a business.
(2) Have at least some college education or work in a skilled
job like technician, nurse, salesperson, secretary, plumber,
or clerk (or use to do this and I am now retired).
(3) Have no college education or work as an unskilled
laborer in agriculture, construction, janitorial work, or
similar (or used to do this and I now retired).
(4) am unemployed.
133
Appendix F
Cultural Values Pilot Study: Subjects’ Characteristics
Mexican Group
N=66
Gender
Male: 50
Female: 16
Age
Mean: 26.3 years
S.D.: 8.0 years
Time in U.S.
Mean: 5.3 years
S.D.: 4.0 years
Years in School
Mean: 8.2 years
S.D.: 3.4 years
Anglo Group
N=67
Gender
Male: 26
Female: 41
ÂÉJÊ.
Mean: 32.6 years
S.D.: 11.7 years
Socioeconomic Status
Adv. Deg./Profes. : 27
Some College/Ski1 led : 30
No College/Unskilled: 7
Unemployed: 3
134
Appendix G
Table G-1: Cultural Values Pilot Study: Value Ratings
Mean Values, Standard Deviations and % Values of
of Cultural Values Items for ethnicity
Ethnicity
Mexican Anglo
M ^ M SD I
1. All adults should be respected. 5.64 .62 4.30 1.53 6.51*
2. The father should be considered
to have the most authority. 5.07 1.37 3.00 1.82 7.44*
3. It is all right to have a good 4.19 1.63 4.34 1.62 .53
time even when there is work
to be done.
4. For a child the mother should be 5.13 1.35 3.60 1.47 6.21*
the dearest person in existence.
5. It is all right for a girl to 2.92 1.59 3.45 1.55 1.69
date a boy, even if her parents
disapprove of him.
6. Competition is better than 3.75 1.89 2.16 1.25 5.65*
cooperation to achieve results.
7. It helps a child in the long run 4.62 1.44 2.61 1.50 7.91*
if he or she is made to conform
to his or her parents’ ideas.
8. Uncles, aunts, cousins and other 4.37 1.67 2.80 1.48 5.74*
relatives should always be
considered to be more important
than friends.
9. It is more important to respect 4.58 1.76 2.38 1.42 7.89*
a father than to love him.
10. A person should be as concerned 5.67 .76 4.77 1.26 4.94*
about their family as they are
about themselves.
135
11. If a boy’s parents do not 2.07 1.29 2.88 1.54 2.80
approve of his girlfriend he
should not go steady with her.
12. When I do something wrong the 4.31 1.88 3.29 1.55 3.40*
whole family suffers.
13. It is more important to enjoy 3.80 1.79 3.61 1.67 .63
the present than to worry
about the future.
14. A child should be taught to be 4.97 1.35 3.88 1.35 4.64*
competitive.
Note: Subjects’ responded on a 6-point scale, ranging from
(6) "Strongly Agree" to (1) "Strongly Disagree."
*£<.001
136
Appendix H
Phinney Ethnic Identity Measure
In this country, people come from a lot of different cultures and
there are many different words to describe the different backgrounds
or ethnic groups that people come from. Some examples of ethnic
groups are Mexican, Hispanic, Black, Asian. Anglo, and White. Every
person is born into an ethnic group, or sometimes two groups, but
people differ on how important their ethnicity is to them, how they
feel about it, and how much their behavior is affected by it. These
questions are about your ethnicity or ethnic group and how you feel
about it.
Instructions : Read each item and circle the number, using the scale
below, to indicate how much you agree or disagree with each
statement.
Strongly Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly
Agree Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree
(6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
1. I have spent time trying to find out
more about my own ethnic group, such
as its history, traditions, and
customs. 6 5 4 3 2 1
2. I am active in organizations or social
groups that include primarily members
of my own ethnic group. 6 5 4 3 2 1
3. I have a clear sense of my ethnic
background and what it means for me in
this society. 6 5 4 3 2 1
4. I like meeting and getting to know people
from ethnic groups other than my own, 6 5 4 3 2 1
5. I think a lot about the effects of my
ethnic group membership on my life
now or in the future. 6 5 4 3 2 1
6. I feel very comfortable about my
ethnicity and am happy that I am a
member of my own group. 6 5 4 3 2 1
7. I often feel it would be better if
different ethnic groups kept to
themselves and didn’t try to mix.
137
Strongly Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly
Agree Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree
(6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
8. I am not very clear about the meaning
of my ethnicity in our multicultural
society.
9. There are things that I sometimes
really don't like about belonging
to my ethnic group.
10. Most of the friends that I spend time
with are from my own ethnic group.
11. I really have not spent much time
trying to learn more the culture and
history of my ethnic group.
12. I often spend time with people from
ethnic groups other than my own.
13. I have a strong sense of belonging
to my own ethnic group.
14. I understand pretty well what my
ethnic group membership means to me,
in terms of how to relate to members
of my own group and other groups.
15. In order to learn more about my
ethnic background, I have often talked
to other people (friends, parents,
other adults) about my ethnic group.
16. I have sometimes wished that I could
"quit" my ethnic group in the same
way that people can quit a job or an
organization that they don't much like.
17. I have a sense of pride in my ethnic
group.
18. I don't particularly try to meet or
become friends with people from other
ethnic groups.
138
Strongly Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly
Agree Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree
(6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
19. If I were to be born all over again,
I would want to be born into a
different ethnic group from the one
I belong to. 6 5 4 3 2
20. I find my ethnicity a pretty
confusing issue. 6 5 3 2
21. I am involve in activities with
people from other ethnic groups. 6 5 4 3 2
22. I sometimes feel that I don't
belong with any ethnic group.
23. I participate in cultural practices
of my own group, such as special
food, music, or customs.
24. I feel a strong attachment towards
my own ethnic group.
25. I enjoy being around people from
other ethnic groups and learning
about their culture.
26. I feel good about my cultural or
ethnic background.
6 5 4 3 2
6 5 4 3 2
6 5 4 3 2
6 5 4 3 2
6 5 4 3 2 1
139
Appendix I
Demographic Questionnaire
Instructions ; Write in the number that completes the statement.
1. My sex is ____ (1) Male (2) Female
2. My age is ____
3. My ethnic background is ___________ (number and/or name)
(1) Asian-American (you can be specific; Vietnamese
Chinese, etc.)
(2) Mexican/Mexican American/Chicano
(3) Hispanic/Latino (you can be specific: Nicaraguan
Argentinean, etc.)
(4) White/Anglo, not Hispanic (you can be specific:
(Italian, Irish, German, etc.)
(5) Black/Afro-American
(6) Native Indian/Native American
(7) Mixed: Parents are from different ethnic groups
4. I was born in _____
(1) the U.S. (2) Mexico (3) Another country:
(name)
5. I have lived in the United States _____
(1) all my life (2) more than 8 years (3) 8 years or less
6. My primary language is _____
(1) English (2) Spanish (3) Another language:_________
(name)
At home, my family speaks _____
(1) English (2) Spanish (3) Another language:________ _
(name)
8. My father’s ethnicity is (use numbers from Ques. #3)
9, He was born in _____
(1) the U.S. (2) Mexico (3) Another country:.
(name)
10. My mother’s ethnicity is ____ (use numbers from Ques. #3)
11. She was born in ____
(1) the U.S. (2) Mexico (3) Another country:_______
(name)
140
12. I am now attending _____ (if not in school, last attended)
(1) High School (2) Community College (3) 4-year College
13. In my family _____
(1) At least one of my parents has some advanced education
(after college) or works in professions (doctor, lawyer,
professor, teacher) or as manager/executive in a
business.
(2) At least one of my parents has at least some college
education or works in skilled jobs like technician,
nurse, salesperson, secretary, plumber, or clerk (or
use to do this and is now retired).
(3) My parents have no college education or work as
unskilled laborers in agriculture, construction,
janitorial work, or similar (or used to do this and is
now retired).
(4) My parents are unemployed
This half page will be detached from the questionnaire to ensure
anonymity of your responses. Also, if you choose you can leave this
portion completely blank.
1. I will be conducting a brief follow-up study involving a 2-page
questionnaire to be sent in the mail requiring 10 minutes to
complete. Would you be willing to participate in this important
follow-up study?
NO ___ YES (provide name and address below)
2. After completion of this study I will write a brief one page
summary of my results. Would you like a copy of my summary to be
sent to you?
NO YES (provide name and address below)
(Note: Your name and address will not be used for any other purposes
other than those indicated in #1 and/or #2. After summary page has
been mailed out list of names and addresses will be destroyed.)
Name
Number Street
City State Zip Code

Asset Metadata

Creator Nunez, Joseph Armando (author)

Core Title The role of perceptions of parental behavior, cultural values conflict and ethnic identity on Mexican American identity development

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,Psychology,Social Sciences

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c36-897892

Unique identifier UC11250520

Identifier DP30722.pdf (filename),usctheses-c36-897892 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier DP30722.pdf

Dmrecord 897892

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Nunez, Joseph Armando

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses