The purpose of this study is to explore ethnic and gender differences in the sociocultural adaptation and adjustment of college students (n=1053) in the United States and Spain from a cultural-historical framework. The study further validates a new measure, the Cultural Adaptation and Development Inventory (CADI), to allow for a better understanding of how diverse cultural groups adapt in a predominantly majority campus. We examine the role of ethnic identity among Dominant (D) and Non-Dominant (ND) groups using The Cultural Adaptation and Development Inventory (CADI), The Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale (RSES) and the Center for Epidemiological Studies, Short Form (CES-D). This study adds an international lens to increase the generalizability and external validity of the constructs measured by the CADI and focuses on 3 questions:

1) How do the CADI factors relate to majority and specific ND groups (i.e. African American, Hispanics, and Asian Americans)?

2) Is depression and self-esteem related to the four CADI factors?

3) How does gender relate to self-esteem and depression and the CADI factors?

Theoretical Framework

Research on socio-psychological and inter-cultural adaptation is increasingly important for multicultural societies in terms of different groups’ relations and experiences that mediate identity and adaptation. Cultural adaptation encompasses a semiotic process regarding any ethnicity, in which two or more groups may have to change certain aspects of their native culture in order to adapt to another. We define cultural adaptation broadly here, first as a psycho-social developmental process through which any individual comes to feel part of one or more communities.

A salient feature in cultural adaptation literature is the overwhelming one-sided lens regarding how sojourners, ethnic minorities and/or immigrants (as out groups) attempt to fit into the dominant host society. Many scales and models are based on only ND groups’ responses framed along the D group’s assumptions regarding personality, intelligence, inter-cultural competencies, inter-cultural knowledge and performance, efficacy of training and related measures (e.g. Ward, Wilson & Fischer, 2011; van der Zee & van Oudenhoven, 2001). However, by privileging dominant groups in the study of cultural adaptation, both developmental aspects and the generalizability of the adaptation-related measures reported remain unknown and theoretically limited. Some scales measure acculturation based on particular groups (e.g. Asians or Cuban Americans, see Garcia & Lega, 1979) and lack the psychometric standards for research. Others favor a dominant group perspective and include methods that leave out important context and cultural factors (Cross, 1995; Phinney, 2003).

From a cultural historical perspective, the lived experiences of individuals shape social and ethnic identities that underlie acculturation and adaptation. How culture affects socio-psychological development matters in grasping how attitudinal, affective and cognitive aspects of development are socially constructed (Cole, 1996). These differences in cultural history serve to explain differences in adaptation measures when groups are included in designing and validating measures.

We propose a reciprocal D/ND framework as a heuristic that can be assessed and extended across groups and a methodology to begin exploring empirically predictions based on a cultural historical dialogic framework (Celeste, Brown, Tip, & Matera, 2014; Cole, 1996; Vygotsky, 1978). The question of whether within group differences in cultural developmental trajectories can be as significant as between group remains to be addressed (Portes, Salas, & Baquedano-López, 2014). The main conceptual issue is that both measures and their theoretical framework miss cultural context and history simply because such may adversely affect reliability (Ward, Wilson, & Fischer, 2011). We addressed this problem by uncovering dimensions that may differ using our theory in predicting significant differences among groups.

Celeste, L., Brown, R., Tip, L. K., & Matera, C. (2014). Acculturation is a two-way street: Majority–minority perspectives of outgroup acculturation preferences and the mediating role of multiculturalism and threat. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 43, 304-320. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Cross, W.E., (1995). Oppositional identity and African American youth: Issues and prospects. In, W.D. Hawley, & A.W. Jackson, (Eds.), Toward a Common Destiny: Improving Race and Ethnic Relations in America (pp 185-204). Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, US. Dukes, R. L., & Martinez, R. (1994). The impact of ethgender on self-esteem among adolescents. Adolescence, 29(113), 105. Garcia, M., & Lega, L.I. (1979). Development of a Cuban ethnic identity questionnaire. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 1, 247-261. Ogbu, J. (1992). Understanding cultural diversity and learning. Educational Researcher, 21(8), 5-14. Phinney, J.S., (2003). Ethnic Identity and acculturation. In K.M. Chun, & P. Balls Organista, et al., (Eds.), Acculturation: Advances in theory, Measurement, and Applied Research (pp. 63-81). American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, US. Portes (1996). Culture and ethnicity in educational psychology. In R. Calfee & D. Berliner (Eds.), The handbook of educational psychology. New York: Macmillan. Portes, & Nixon, C.B. (2008, February). Development of a cultural adaptation and adjustment scale - revised: The persisting issue of cultural validity. Paper presented at the Society for Cross Cultural Research 2008 Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA. Portes, Salas, S., & Baquedano-López, P. (2014). U.S. Latinos and education policy: research-based directions for change. New York, NY: Routledge. Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurements, 1, 385-401. Rosenberg, M. (1965/1989). Society and adolescent self image (Rev. ed.). Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press. Van der Zee, K., & Van Oudenhoven, J. P. (2001). The multicultural personality questionnaire: Reliability and validity of self and other ratings of multicultural effectiveness. Journal of Research in Personality, 35, 278-288 Verkuyten, M. (2005). Ethnic group identification and group evaluation among minority and majority groups: Testing the multiculturalism hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(1), 121-138. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner & E. Souberman, Trans.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Ward, C., Wilson, J., & Fischer, R. (2011). Assessing the predictive validity of cultural intelligence over time. Personality And Individual Differences, 51, 138-142.