INFORMATION TO USERS The most advanced technology has been used to photo graph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re produced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. These are also available as one exposure on a standard 35mm slide or as a 17" x 23" black and white photographic print for an additional charge. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.
UMI University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600
Order Number 8907291
Asian-American and Black identity: Validation of a self-identity development model of oppressed people
Reynolds, Amy Louise, Ph.D. The Ohio State University, 1988
Copyright ©1988 by Reynolds, Amy Louise. All rights reserved.
UMI 300N.ZeebRd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106
ASIAN-AMERICAN AND BLACK IDENTITY:
VALIDATION OF A SELF-IDENTITY DEVELOPMENT MODEL
OF OPPRESSED PEOPLE
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School
of the Ohio State University
By
Amy Louise Reynolds, B.S., M.A.
*****
The Ohio State University
1988
Dissertation Committee: Approved By:
W.B. Walsh
L.J. Myers
P.S. High!en Advisor
Department of Psychology Copyright by Amy Louise Reynolds 1988 To all people who have been oppressed and continue to struggle ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Completing a dissertation is never a task that can be accomplished alone so there are many people I wish to thank.
I want to thank my adviser Bruce Walsh whose quiet and consistent support helped me to believe in my self throughout my graduate career. Pam Highlen has been there for me since when I was first accepted into the program and she will always hold a special place in my life. Linda James Myers opened up a whole new world for me when I took her class on Afrocentric Psychology. With her as a role model, I have found a new way of viewing the world which continues to bring me much peace and hope.
My friends from the SIDMOP research group, Tricia Hanley, Eve
Adams, Suzette Speight and Chikako Cox have been a source of inspiration for me. Our personal and theoretical work together has been, without a doubt, one of the highlights of my graduate student career. Our work motivates me to continue reseach in this area and to personally fight all forms of oppression.
The last year of my life has been an emotional rollercoaster as I completed my internship and dissertation. I owe special thanks to Jim Ashurst and Steve Yagla who helped me with my statistics. The staff at the UCI Counseling Center offered me endless support and encouragement and I especially want to thank
Valerie Williams, Chris Browning, Janet Loxley and Braddie
Dooley. Having the chance to work with Tom Parham whom I
i i i consider an expert in this research area was a wonderful experience. My fellow interns, D. BlgFoot, Val Gold-Neil* Alvin
Leung* and Charlene Korsgaard made life bearable and taught me alot about myself. I am especially grateful to the BigFoot family for getting me through the weekends and to Val and Camille who gave me the sense of community for which I was longing.
As most people completing their dissertations would testify*
I could not have done this work without the love and support of many friends. Kathy and Zach Feltey have always given me love and acceptance and I treasure our relationship. Tricia, Eve*
Suzette, Terri Rhodes, and Lisa Aubrey are just a few graduate friends who made it all worthwhile and I will treasure our
relationships forever.
My family continues to grow as a source of comfort and support for me. I marvel at how the past several years have allowed us to create open and loving relationships like never before and I treasure our growing closeness.
Without a doubt, my love and gratitude goes out most to Marty
Schmidt, my life partner for the past five years. Without her love and encouragement, surviving graduate school would be an empty achievement. Our time together has bonded us for life and
I will always carry her in my heart.
iv VITA
October 15, 1959 Born - Youngstown, Ohio
1982 B.S., Miami University, Oxford, Ohio
1982-1984 Student Personnel Assistant, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
1984 M.A., Dept. of Education, Student Personnel Work The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
1984-1985 Student Personnel Assi stant, The Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio
1985-1987 Teaching Assistant, Dept. of Psychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
1987-1988 Psychology Intern, Counseling Center, University of California at Irvine
1988-present Staff Psychologist, University Counseling Services, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
v PUBLICATIONS
Carney, C. and Reynolds, A.L. (1984). When Others Challenge Your Career Choice: Strategies for Conflict Resolution. In C.G. Carney and C.F. Wells (Eds.), Career planning; Skills to build your future (2nd Edition). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
FIELDS OF STUDY
Major Field: Counseling Psychology
vi TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION i 1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 111
VITA v
TABLE OF CONTENTS v11
LIST OF TABLES . 1x
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION 1
NEED FOR STUDY 8
RESEARCH QUESTIONS 9
II. LITERATURE REVIEW 13
IDENTITY DEVELOPMENT MODELS 13 RACIAL/ETHNIC IDENTITY 13 BLACK IDENTITY MODELS. 15 WHITE IDENTITY MODELS 19 ASIAN IDENTITY MODELS 21 ACCULTURATION MODELS 25 FEMINIST IDENTITY 27 LESBIAN/GAY IDENTITY 29 "MINORITY" IDENTITY 32 SIDMOP 36 HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT 36 THEORETICAL UNDERPINNINGS AND ASSUMPTIONS 38 MODEL DESCRIPTION 45 III. METHOD 53
PARTICIPANTS 53 INSTRUMENTS 56
vll SUINN-LEW ASIAN SELF-IDENTITY ACCULTURATION SCALE 56 RACIAL IDENTITY ATTITUDES SCALE 58 MARLOWE-CROWNE SOCIAL DESIRABILITY SCALE. 59 SIDMOP MEASURES 60 PROCEDURES 63 ANALYSIS OF DATA 65
IV. RESULTS 68
SIDMOP MEASURES 68 VALIDATION TASK 68 RELIABILITY OF THE SIDMOP SELF-
RACIAL/ETHNIC IDENTITY MEASURES 81 ASIAN-AMERICANS 81 BLACKS 85 CORRELATION ANALYSIS 85 REGRESSION ANALYSIS 92
V. DISCUSSION. 96
VALIDITY OF THE SIDMOP FRAMEWORK 97 LIMITATIONS 106 FUTURE RESEARCH ON SIDMOP Ill
LIST OF REFERENCES 113
APPENDICES 121
A. Comparison Chart 121 B. Suinn-Lew Asian Self-Identity Acculturation Scale 122 C. Racial Identity Attitudes Scale 128 D. Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale 131 E. SIDMOP Phase Sorting 133 F. SIDMOP Item Sorting 135 G. SIDMOP Self-Measure 138 H. Cover Sheet 141 I. Consent Form 142 J. Personal Data Sheet 143
viii LIST OF TABLES
TABLES PAGE
1. Racial/Ethnic Breakdown of Participants 54
2. Generational Level of Asian-American Participants 57
3. Overall Group: Phase Sorting 70
4. Racial/Ethnic Group Breakdown: Phase Sorting 71
5. Racial/Ethnic Group Analysis of Variance:
Phase Sorting 72
6. Overall Group: Item Sorting 73
7. Racial/Ethnic Group Analysis of Variance: Item Sorting 75 8. Racial/Ethnic Group Analysis of Variance: Item Sorting 76 9. Cronbach Alpha Coefficients for the SIDMOP Self- Measure 78
10. SIDMOP Self-Measure Scale Intercorrelatlons 79
11. Asian-American SL-ASIA Scores 82
12. Asian-American Acculturation Level 83
13. Racial/Ethnic Self-Designation: Asian-Americans 84
14. Black Participants' RIAS Profiles 86 15. Pearson Product Correlation Coefficients for Validation Tasks, Social Desirability, and Racial/Ethnic Identity 87
IX LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED)
TABLES PAGE
16. Pearson Product Correlation Coefficients for Racial/Ethnic Identity and SIDMOP Self-Measure 89
17. Regression Analysis Using Blgck Identity to Predict Error Scores 93
18. Regression Analysis Using Asian-American Identity to Predict Error Scores 95
x CHAPTER I
Introduction
Interest in cultural diversity and cross-cultural counseling
has grown tremendously since the mid-1960's and during the last
decade the pace of involvement has quickened (Atkinson, Morten &
Sue, 1983; Dahlquist & Fay, 1983; Heath, Neimeyer, & Pedersen,
1988; Henderson, 1979; Lonner, 1985; Pedersen, 1985; Smith &
Vasquez, 1985). Such heightened interest in cross-cultural
issues is reflected in an increasing number of journal articles
and conference presentations focused on cultural diversity (Heath et a!., 1988). While many psychologists have supported this trend toward cultural pluralism, the quantity, timing and quality of the work has been seriously criticized (Betz, 1987; Hilliard,
1985; Katz, 1985; Sue, 1981).
Some criticisms of the mental health profession's work in cultural diversity include an inability to contribute to the
improvement in the conditions of Third World groups in the U.S.
(Sue, 1981) as well as a failure to create a realistic
understanding of different racial/ethnic groups (Sue, Bernier,
Durran, Feinberg, Pedersen, Smith & Vasquez-Nuttall, 1982).
According to Vasquez (1988), "most difficulties arise...because
practioners fail to fully assess and understand the problems,
1 2 critical issues or worldviews of the individuals or groups with whom they work" (p. 4). According to Sue et al. (1982), the study of culturally different groups tests the limits and generalities of psychological theories.
The current focus on cross-cultural counseling has been seen as a major paradigm shift within the mental health profession
(Smith & Vasquez, 1985). According to Heath et al. (1988),
"cross-cultural counseling is a young field in need of clearer direction and stronger commitment" (p. 27). Although the study of individual differences always has been a basic tenet of psychology, the focus has always centered upon ideographic rather than cultural differences. According to Betz (1987), such concern for oppression stems from both the study of individual differences, as well as the humanistic values imbedded in much of the psychological community. Betz (1987) also states that such emphasis on cultural diversity is "based on one of the major philosophical underpinnings of our field, that is, a deep respect for and desire to nurture differences among people" (p. 2).
Within cross-cultural psychology several trends have occurred. Initially the literature focused on group differences: how various cultural groups, primarily racial/ethnic groups, differed from each other and what role these differences played 3 in psychotherapy (Atkinson et al., 1983; Pederson, 1985; Sue et al., 1982; Vontress, 1971; White, 1984). In addition, many psychologists have expressed concerns about how the Western characteristics of psychotherapy clash with the worldviews and cultural perspectives of various racial/ethnic groups (Katz,
1985; Sue, 1981; Sue et al., 1982; White, 1984). Katz (1985) articulated the Western values and norms that are at the core of psychology. Further work concerning cultural differences led to the development of alternative psychologies such as Afrocentric psychology (Myers, 1981; White, 1984) or Asian psychology (Leung,
1986; Sue, 1977; Sue & Sue, 1971; Sue, Sue, & Sue, 1975) in hopes of improving, knowledge and psychological services to these diverse racial/ethnic groups.
Another trend in cross-cultural psychology has been an emphasis on the differences that exist within racial/ethnic groups (Betz, 1987; Hilliard, 1985; La Framboise, 1983; Parham &
Helms, 1981; Wampold, 1987). As stated by Hilliard (1985), "one must remain sensitive to the potential error of lumping together all members of a group based on race, nationality, language, and so forth, unless one can be certain that they remain close to their cultural core" (p. 22). Without an understanding of how members of diverse racial/ethnic groups differ from each other, 4 cultural knowledge can be misused in detrimental ways (Wampold,
1987).
Out of concern for these within group differences, racial/ethnic identity development has become a major content area of cross-cultural psychology. Historically such work often focused on acculturation which has been defined as the process of accumulating and incorporating the beliefs, values, and customs of an alternative, and usually dominant, culture (Mendoza &
Martinez, 1981). Until recently most acculturation research was primarily anthropological in nature (Olmedo, 1979). However in cross-cultural psychology, research on acculturation, primarily with Asian-Americans and Chicano/Latino people, has been occurring more frequently (Mendoza & Martinez, 1981; Sue & Sue,
1971).
Within racial/ethnic identity research, developmental stage models continue to grow and expand. Most of this work has focused primarily on Blacks (Cross, 1971; Hall, Cross & Freedle,
1972; Jackson & Hardiman, 1984; Parham & Helms, 1981; Thomas,
1971) or Asian-Americans (Awakuni, 1988; Sue & Sue, 1971). Cross
(1971) developed a Black identity development model which was later refined by Parham and Helms; however, since the initial research work of Hall, Cross and Freedle (1972), little research 5 has been done to test the validity of these conceptualizations.
Although these racial identity models have been received positively, according to Highlen, Myers, Hanley, Speight,
Reynolds, Adams and Cox (1986), "the Zeitgeist during which the models of Black identity were developed (1960's and 1970's) may have limited utility for the development of racial attitudes today" (p. 1). Parham and Helms (1985b) have also stated that the Cross model may no longer be an accurate description of Black people.
Research examining identity development of other groups is even more limited; however throughout the development of cross-cultural psychology, connections have been made among various oppressed racial/ethnic groups. Many authors have described an identity development process within Chicano/Latino,
Asian-American, and American Indian populations similar to those previously documented in the Black community. Parallels with
Anglo women, Gay men, Lesbians, elderly people and disabled people as oppressed groups have also been drawn, and some authors believe that the process through which these diverse groups experience their oppression is similar (Atkinson, et al., 1983;
Betz, 1987; Highlen, et al., 1986). According to Atkinson et al. 6
(1983), the common experience of oppression serves as the unifying factor among these diverse groups.
Despite this common ground, every oppressed group has its own terminology and different developmental models (Highlen et al.,
1986). While such growth in the area of psychology of oppression is exciting, few of these identity development, or formation models have been systematically developed and even fewer have been empirically validated (Cass, 1984; Highlen et al., 1986).
Although the connections between oppressed people have been recognized since before the beginning of cross-cultural psychology, rarely have such commonalities been the focus of identity developmental models. Banks (1984) created a typology of ethnic development which extended the concept of Black identity formulation to all racial/ethnic groups. This model, like most other frameworks, has received no empirical validation.
One of the most comprehensive and inclusive models is the
Minority Identity Development Model (MID) which was created by
Atkinson et al. (1983). Unlike Banks' model (1984), the MID model went beyond race and ethnicity and included different types of oppression (e.g., gender, sexual/affectional orientation).
Although the MID framework lacks empirical validation, its 7 comprehensive nature has created a standard by which other
identity models of oppressed people can be measured.
One such model, the Self-Identity Development Model of
Oppressed People (SIDMOP) was created in 1986 by a research team at The Ohio State University and is made up of 13 phases of development. As articulated by Stone (1984), "the term, phase,
is used in place of * stage' because it infers the flui.d process of continuous change" (p. 8). In addition, the term phase is also used within the SIDMOP framework to minimize confusion with more classically defined stage model terminology. While
initially exploring the role of racial identity of clients and therapists in the counseling process, the research team became aware of limited empirical support for available identity development models and instruments. In addition, the research team identified some philosophical differences with these models.
Once there was an awareness of the need for a systematically developed and empirically validated model of oppressed people
(Highlen et a!., 1986), the research focus shifted to developing such a model. As Wampold (1987) stated, "to guide research it is absolutely necessary to have theoretical models that can serve as frameworks" (p. 4). 8
According to Awakuni (1988), the idea of identity is an elusive one which has been "defined in so many different ways* that it is difficult to know with confidence whether we are indeed Investigating a recognizable and measureable dimension"
(p. 73). Parham and Helms (1985a) have suggested that the racial identity development process may be more complex than previously believed or harder to operationalize than expected. There is
"confusion among many theorists as to what identity actually means and how this meaning can be translated into the developmental process" (Cass, 1984, p. 146). In general, the lack of clarity and consistency within the identity literature limits both "the degree to which the validity of a model can be adequately tested and also the extent to which models can be compared" (Cass, 1984, p. 164).
Need for Study
Within the field of cross-cultural psychology, there have been few attempts to systematically design and empirically validate identity development models of oppressed people. In addition, few models designed are inclusive of all people who must deal with oppression on a daily basis. Identity models tend to focus on a specific group (e.g., Lesbians and Gay men,
Blacks). This dissertation study was designed to establish 9 quantitative, empirical support for the SIDMOP framework which is a identity model for all oppressed people.
Empirical studies such as this dissertation will help narrow the theoretical and methodological gaps currently found in identity development models. Expanding understanding of oppressed people within psychology is vitally important both for individuals and society as a whole.
The purposes of this study were: (a) to complete systematic and thorough research to validate the SIDMOP framework, (b ) to test whether the model gains support across a diversity of oppressed groups and (c) to expand research and methodological understanding of the validation process for identity development models. Until there is further exploration of how to create and validate these models, any research done is bound to generate more questions than answers.
Research Questions
In order to gain support for the SIDMOP framework, the following research questions were generated:
(a) Do SIDMOP phases occur in a specific, recognizable
order?;
(b) Are SIDMOP phases clearly identifiable and understandable
as unique and separate phases of development?; 10
(c) Will different racial/ethnic groups respond differently
to validation tasks?;
(d) Does social desirability affect one's responses to
questions about identity development?; and
(e) Does racial/ethnic identity affect one's responses to
questions about identity development?
Considering these research questions, the following hypotheses were developed: (a) SIDMOP phases occur in a specific and recognizable order; (b) SIDMOP phases are clearly identifiable and understandable as unique and separate phases of development; (c) there will be no significant racial/ethnic differences in how participants respond to the SIDMOP measures;
(d) social desirability will have a significant effect on participants'answers and (e) racial/ethnic identity or acculturation level will have a significant effect on participants' responses.
There is support for these research hypotheses within the psychological literature. The first three hypotheses are supported by the SIDMOP theoretical framework which is specified in the literature review (Chapter II). Since SIDMOP is designed as an inclusive model which can address the concerns of all 11
oppressed people, the third hypothesis is necessary in order to
gather evidence about SIDMOP's universality.
In reviewing the literature on social desirability, Crowne
and Marlowe (1964) stated that any participant in a psychological
experiment is likely to be concerned with her or his behavior.
They believed that "the sheer fact of being tested, then, is
likely to arouse the subject's needs and anticipations related to
social evaluation" (p. 30). In other words, researchers must
know what it means for individuals to be tested and what their
needs or goals are within the testing situation. Individuals'
needs may dispose them to present themselves in a particular
light within a testing situation. According to Marlowe and
Crowne (1964), "if it is important for him/her to gain approval
or acceptance, to deny inadequacies, to obtain dependency,
gratifications, or to achieve recognition or status, we can
anticipate test responses will be bent to serve these aims" (p.
32). Therefore, without some understanding of what the testing
situation means to the participants, experimental results cannot
be fully understood.
The fifth hypothesis examines the relationship between
racial/ethnic identity or acculturation level and the
participants' responses to the validation tasks. In reviewing 12 the literature on racial/ethnic identity, there is much discussion of the impact that racial/ethnic identity has on individuals. According to Helms (1984)> the racial consciousness model 1s a cognitive development model which affects how one perceives the world. Cass (1984) states that identity is
Invariably translated into behavior.
Some of the research in this area examines how racial/ethnic identity influences the counseling process through preference of counselor's race or ethnicity. Acculturation level has been related to multiple factors such as dropout from psychological treatment and educational achievement level. The experimental and theoretical evidence seems to imply that racial/ethnic identity may* in fact* affect individuals' perception of the world which would then impact how they approached the validation task for this study. In the sense that "stages" have been shown to be separate and unique aspects of identity* they may cause differential reactions, especially to content area related to oppression or identity. CHAPTER II
Literature Review
Identity Development Models
Although the growth of identity development models has been fairly recent* much parallel work has already been done across a diversity of oppressed groups. The creation of these models appears to have been a reflection of the soda! movements in this country. The first identity models focused on Black identity and seemed to follow and describe the civil rights movement of the
1960's. Feminist identity and Gay and Lesbian identity models grew out of the late 1970's while the women's and gay rights movements were being established. The Minority Identity
Development model by Atkinson et al. (1983) seems to relect a trend in the 1980's toward unification as in the "rainbow coalition". This section will focus on the identity development model literature in the following areas: racial/ethnic identity* feminist identity* Lesbian/Gay identity* and "minority" identity. Racial/Ethnic identity
According to Atkinson et al. (1983)* early work in the area of racial/ethnic identity (Vontress, 1971; Mayovich, 1973) focused on simplistic differences such as people being either conformists or militants based on their degree of racial/ethnic
13 14 identification. Such simplistic explanations did not account for situational influences and the overall dynamic nature of racial/ ethnic identity. These early frameworks, however, were important as they "paved the way for more sophisticated models of identity development" (Atkinson et al., 1983, p. 33). Later models, such as those developed by Cross (1971), Jackson (1975) and Thomas
(1971), were based on a more dynamic understanding of racial/ethnic identity where attitudes and behavior of oppressed people were seen as continually changing as the result of their
"stage" of identity development (Atkinson et al., 1983). Racial/ ethnic identity development models have been continually created since the early 1970's. According to Parham and Helms (1981), racial identity is a "person's beliefs or attitudes about her or his own race" (p. 250). While many theorists conceptualize identity development as a cognitive process, several studies have suggested a relationship between racial identity and emotional states (Butler, 1975; Parham & Helms, 1985a; Parham & Helms,
1985b). In fact, "emotions are not only present but also may be a vital part of the conversion experience" (Parham & Helms,
1985b, p. 438). Parham and Helms (1985b) believe that cognitive and affective aspects of racial identity may evolve at different rates or go through a different process. 15
Black identity Models.
The greatest amount of models and empirical research have focused on Black identity. The leading models of Black identity include the work of Cross (1971), Thomas (1971), and Jackson
(1975). According to Parham and Helms (1985a), these models
"describe Black personality and its corresponding racial transformations (i.e., movement from one level of racial awareness to another)" (p. 143).
Thomas (1971) identified a "five stage developmental process in which Blacks work out and ultimately accept their identity as
Black persons in a White world" (Ponterotto, 1988, p. 147).
Thomas (1971) introduced the concept "negromachy" which means a confusion of self worth and reliance on White society for self- definition. The five stages are: Withdraw!, Testifying,
Information Procession, Activity and Transcendental. This process begins with Black people withdrawing into themselves before renegotiating their connection with other racial and ethnic groups. The final stage of development involves Black people losing any hang-ups or conflicts about race and social class and seeing themselves as members of humanity.
Cross (1971) developed a stage model parallel to the work by
Thomas (1971). Cross (1971) highlighted a developmental process 16
in which Black individuals move from a negative perception of blackness to internalizing their Black identity and are being comfortable with other oppressed groups. The four stages are:
Pre-encounter, Encounter, Immersion, and Internalization. Parham
and Helms (1985b) described the Cross model as a "process of self-actualization under conditions of oppression" (p. 432),
According to Ponterotto (1988), these two models are similar because they are "progressive, characterized by early confusion and a poor sense of identity, and by later ethnic acceptance and
identity integration" (p. 148). Cross (1980b) sees the two models as significantly different with the Thomas model being less comprehensive. The majority of empirical studies of Black
identity have focused on the Cross model.
Another model was developed by Jackson (1975) in which a similar five stage racial identity model was articulated. The
Jackson model is unique in that it proposes stages of racial
identity for both White and Black individuals. The five stages for both Whites and Blacks are called: Naivete, Acceptance,
Resistance, Redefinition, and Internalization. The first stage occurs during childhood in the early formation of one's racial
identity while the last stage involves internalizing and expanding one's new racial identity. 17
The initial research work done on Black identity in a study by Hall et al. (1972) operationalized the Cross model and has been identified as a research prototype for future identity development studies (Atkinson et al.# 1983). In their study, if the statements developed to describe each stage were accurate reflections of beliefs about the identity process for Blacks, then there would be high agreement among participants regarding which items they sorted together as characterizing each stage of the Cross model. In this research participants took on more of an observer role in describing and responding to the identity development process. The purpose of this approach was to test the basic tenets or assumptions of the model. From that initial card sort study, Parham and Helms (1981) developed the Racial
Identity Attitude Scale (RIAS) which has captured the essence of one cognitive aspect (i.e., attitudes) of the Cross model.
Parham and Helms have completed additional research using their instrument on the relationship between racial identity and areas such as self-esteem (1985a), affective states (1985b) and preferences for counselor race (1981).
Some refinement of the Cross model has developed out of these empirical studies. Parham (in review) has expanded the Cross model in his discussion of a general theory of psychological 18
nigresence. He has expanded some of the basic theoretical
assumptions about the Cross model: 1) early Black identity
awareness in childhood may be more a reflection of parental
attitudes and society stereotypes than a crystallized self-image;
therefore, one's home and social environment are crucial to the
identity development process; 2) movement in Black identity is as
influenced by experiences with Whites as it is with experiences
with Blacks; 3) one's racial identity isn't merely in response to
society's oppression and is also a process of self-actualization
rooted in the beliefs and texture of Black culture itself; and 4)
a Black person's world view is also impacted by her or his life
stage and associated developmental tasks. Additional theoretical work has also been done by Cross (1980a, 1981) in an attempt to
differentiate between two types of identity: reference group orientation and personal identity. Cross (1980b) proposes that much of the empirical work done on racial identity, such as those
done by Parham and Helms (1985a, 1985b), assumes these two
identity constructs are interrelated while he believes they are
unique and separate aspects of identity.
According to Parham (in review), there are several
assumptions of the Black identity models that may affect future attempts to apply these frameworks. There has been a reliance on 19 college student samples which has "helped to implicitly
perpetuate the notions that (a) identity development in Blacks is
a phenomenon which occurs during late adolescence/early adulthood
(i.e., college years); and (b) psychological Nigrescence and an
individual's racial identity development are resolved once a
person has completed a single cycle through the stages" (p. 2).
In addition, these models do no attend to any identity development that might occur later in the life cycle. Parham (in
review) expanded three available alternatives to racial identity
resolution: (a) stagnation where one's attitudes remain constant and fixed; (b) stagewise linear progression which involves moving through the stages in the specified order; and (c) recycling where an individual moves through the stages over and over again.
White identity models.
Besides the White identity model by Jackson and Hardiman
(1983) mentioned previously, several other models of White identity have recently been developed by Helms (1984) and
Ponterotto (1988). Hardiman (1979) describes the White identity theory as "developmental sequence of beliefs, values, feelings, and behaviors that White people pass through in developing a non-racist, new White identity" (p. 1). The White identity developmental process begins with acquiring a White racist, 20
racial identity by being socialized in the United States. The
process of transformation to a new, non-oppressive White identity
is a conscious and active process. According to Hardiman (1979),
"very little research exists at the present time on racism as it
affects Whites, or on how racism is manifested in different ways
in White people" (p. 2).
Helms (1984) created an alternative identity stage model for
White people: Contact, Disintegration, Reintegration, Pseudo-
Independence and Autonomy. Each of these stages can result in
either a positive or negative resolution. The initial stage
involves feelings of cun'ousity towards Blacks while the last
stage moves one toward an acceptance of racial differences on a
cognitive and emotional level. Unlike many racial/ethnic oppressed groups, Whites as the dominant race in the United
States, can choose environments where they will not have to
interact with people who are racially or ethnically different.
Helms (1984) has used her conceptualization of Black and White
identity as a means of understanding the multicultural counseling
process across race/ethnicity and racial/ethnic identity.
Ponterotto (1988) recently proposed a four stage theory of
racial consciousness for White counselors: Pre-exposure,
Exposure, Zealot-Defensive, and Integration. The first stage 21 involves a lack of awareness of multicultural issues while the last stage involves heightened awareness and appreciation for cultural differences.
Asian identity models.
Despite the mainstream belief that Asian-Americans are the
"model minority" and are, therefore, less oppressed than other racial/ethnic groups, most psychologists involved in multicultural work believe that Asian-Americans are indeed as oppressed as other racial/ethnic groups (Endo & Della-Piana,
1981; Sue, 1981; Sue, 1977; Sue, Sue, & Sue, 1975). Increasing amounts of theoretical work and some research studies are being focused on Asian-American identity.
In an early study, Masuda, Matsumoto and Meredith (1970) created an Ethnic Identity Questionnaire to explore differences and similarities among three generations of Japanese-Americans, the Issei, the Nisei and the Sansei. According to Masuda et al.
(1970), there was a gradual erosion of ethnicity as acculturation increased" (p. 207). In their study, ethnic identity was seen as either complete integration or cultural pluralism. Although a model of Asian identity was not created, their exploratory research of the impact of acculturation was crucial to early work 22 in this area. They advanced new notions such as a nonlinear change process.
Matsumoto, Meredith, and Masuda (1970) explored the degree of ethnic identification among three generations of Japanese-
Americans in Honolulu and Seattle. Although they hypothesized that the Hawaiian Japanese-Americans would be more ethnically identified, the data indicated otherwise. Some factors hypothesized for this unexpected result were: Immigration and community history, degree of middle-class status conformity, personal differences and varying definitions of ethnic identity.
Based on clinical impressions, personal observations and available research findings, Sue and Sue (1971) created a conceptual framework for understanding the cultural conflict that
Chinese-Americans experience. They identified three distinct ways of resolving culture conflicts: (a) Traditionalist who retains traditional Asian values, (b) Marginal Person who rejects
Asian values and becomes overly identified with western culture and (c) Asian-American who integrates his or her bicultural aspects of self into a new identity. According to Sue (1977), the "main process underlying the identity confict is not whether one tries to be traditionally ethnic or an assimilated
Asian-American but whether a choice is available" (p. 387). 23
Limitations of this schema include no exploration of the following areas: (a) differences and similarities between foreign and American born, (b) the process of identity acquisition, and (c) diversity and individual differences. Leong
(1986) recommended that an empirical measure be created for the
Sue and Sue (1971) model so that further research could be completed.
A study by Yiu (1979) explored the relationship between identity or assimilation level and the preference of counseling style and self-disclosure of Chinese-Americans in Hawaii. Chow
(1982) studied the ethnic identity of women in four of the
Asian-American groups: Chinese, Japanese, Pilipino and Korean.
She developed an Ethnic Identity Scale with two dimensions:
Asian identity and American identity. Her scale measured the extent to which these Asian women agreed with Asian or American values. She found no significant differences among the four groups in terms of degree of ethnic identity. Through her study,
Chow (1982) identified four types of ethnic identity:
Traditionalist (high Asian, low American), Assimllationist (low
Asian, high American), Pluralist (high Asian, high American) and
Ambivalent (low Asian, low American). In her study, Chow also found relationships among ethnic identity, occupational 24
attainment, and some psychological measures. Asian women with a
higher level of occupational attainment (compared to working class women) tended to accept American values, have a high level
of self-esteem and feel satisfied at work.
Suinn, Rickard-Figueroa, Lew and Vigil (1987) created an
acculturation scale for Asian-Americans. Their scale was modeled
after an acculturation scale created for Mexican-Americans by
Cuellar, Harris, and Jasso (1980). The focus of this scale was
language, identity, behaviors, friendship choices, attitudes and generation/geographic history. In their study Suinn et al.
(1987) found Asian identity to be significantly related to generational level, place of upbringing and self-rating. Their framework viewed acculturation level on a single continuum with western identification on one end and Asian identification on the other. Although a strength of this model is its inclusion of bicultural identity, a potential theoretical concern is its assumption that bicultural identity is somewhere between Asian and western identification rather than a separate dimension in and of itself.
In recent studies Awakuni (1988) and Atkinson and Gim (1988) found a relationship between Asian-American identity or acculturation level and help seeking attitudes. In the Atkinson 25 and Gim (1988) study* regardless of ethnicity or gender, Asian-
American students were more likely to recognize a need for professional psychological help; most open to actually talking with a psychologist.
Acculturation models.
Although racial/ethnic identity models and research have primarily focused on Blacks and Asian-Americans, some work has also been done with Chicano/Latino people (Cuellar et al.» 1980;
Olmedo & Padilla, 1978) as well as American Indians (Chance,
1965; Goldensteinahler, 1985). In an extensive collection on acculturation edited by Padilla (198Q), several models and theories of acculturation were explored. According to Berry
(1980), there are different types of acculturation:
Multicultural ism, Pluralism, Melting Pot, Pressure Cooker,
Withdraw!, Segregation, Marginality, and Ethnocide. There are three key factors in discerning among these types: (a) do individuals retain their cultural identity, (b) do they have a positive or negative relationship with dominant society, and (c) do they have a right to choose these options. Berry (1980) views identity (ethnic vs. dominant culture) as one of six psychological responses within the process of acculturation. 26
Additional study of Chicano ethnicity by Keefe and Padilla
(1987) has expanded the understanding of the acculturation and ethnic identity process. According to Keefe and Padilla (1987), there are three models of acculturation: (a) single continuum model where individuals are either unacculturated, bicultural or acculturated; (b) two-culture matrix model where individuals are
identified on continuums for their native culture and the new culture; and (c) multidimensional model in which the acceptance of new cultural traits and loss of traditional cultural traits will vary from trait to trait. Although the empirical support is small, Keefe and Padilla (1987) state that acculturation and ethnic identification are, indeed, separate processes. In their model, ethnic identification is measured by a concept called
Ethnic Loyalty which is an individual's preference for one cultural orientation and ethnic group rather than another. While
it is not clear how this construct relates to other measures of ethnic identity, their research shows it to be a discrete and important variable of ethnic orientation. Their study identified five types of Mexican American ethnic orientation.
According to Keefe and Padilla (1987), a multidimensional and pluralistic model of cultural change is necessary in order to account for individual differences within an oppressed ethnic 27 group. They believe that "only through comprehensive studies combining survey-research and ethnographic methods, quantitative measures and qualitative descriptions, can we hope to provide new insights into the complex way in which ethnicity and culture change affect the individual and the ethnic community. While these studies provide important data and theoretical understanding, they do not focus specifically on the process of racial/ethnic identity formation.
Racial/ethnic identity theories continue to expand and include new possibilities. Brandell (1988) highlighted some of the difficulties in the identity process of biracial children.
The work appears exploratory in nature and very few specifics about the developmental process have been articulated. Brandell
(1988) uses the theory of self-psychology to increase understanding of biracial concerns and proposes treatment considerations.
Feminist Identity
The first model of feminist identity was presented by Avery
(1977). She created a five stage model of the psychosocial development of a woman's liberation (Passive Acceptance,
Revelation, Embeddedness, Emanation, and Synthesis/Active
Commitment). Downing and Roush (1985) developed a more specific 28 framework for feminist identity which paralleled the Cross (1971) theory of Black identity. According to Downing and Roush (1985),
"in contemporary society women share some of the developmental experiences of a minority population" (p. 697). While both of these feminist models have increased understanding of feminist identity, little research has been completed to validate and clarify these models (Downing & Roush, 1985). Downing and Roush
(1985) identified four key areas for future research: (a) creation of assessment methodology to clarify and highlight the stages; (b) longitudinal studies to understand the developmental process; (c) identification of precipitating experiences for the growth process; and (d) impact of counselor and client stage combinations on the therapy process.
Despite their attention to the importance of research, no published work has furthered their ideas. Key points of this model highlighted by Highlen et al. (1986) include: (a) the necessity for a degree of readiness or openness to risk in the change process; (b) recycling is described as a process in which individuals "experience the challenge of that stage more profoundly and using previously learned skills" (Downing & Roush,
1985, p. 702); and (c) focus on Kegan's (1982) model of the 29 development of the self as a broader developmental framework in which to place their model.
Downing and Roush (1985) highlighted several important limitations of their theory: (a) issues of diversity within women
(e.g., class, race/ethnicity, age); (b) increased understanding of the recycling process; and (c) better understanding of similarities and differences between their model and other identity development theories. Because of the lack of attention paid to diversity among women, one might assert that this model of feminist identity might best fit the development of Anglo, middle class women. Hess (1983) broadened the scope by looking at the similarities in the identity development of Lesbians and feminists.
Lesbian/Gav Identity
Most psychological literature examing Lesbian and Gay people and the "coming out" process uses a developmental perspective.
While different frameworks are used, most theorists and researchers describe coming out as a developmental process through which Lesbian and Gay people recognize their sexual/ affectional preferences and integrate this understanding into their personal and social lives (Cass, 1979; deMonteflores &
Schultz, 1978; McDonald, 1982; McLellan, 1977; Minton & McDonald, 30
1984). Among many of these frameworks exists an underlying assumption that identity formation occurs in an orderly sequence
(Cass, 1979; McDonald, 1982). In fact, several of these frameworks use identity stage models similar to those created for
Black identity and feminist identity.
Cass (1979) developed an identity formation model which most closely parallels the Cross (1971) model in its basic assumptions and the type of process described. However, much of her model focuses more in depth on the "coming out" process and less on what happens before and after the process (Highlen et al., 1986).
The six stages of her model are: Identity Confusion, Identity
Comparison, Identity Tolerance, Identity Acceptance, Identity
Pride, and Identity Synthesis. In 1984, Cass tested this theoretical identity development model. Her results show some support for the validity of the stage descriptions along with the order of the stages. The strength of the Cass (1984) effort lies as much in her unique design of an effective validation task as it does in her results.
Cass (1984) developed a questionnaire to validate her model of Lesbian and Gay identity formation. She articulated 16 dimensions relevant to the identity development process and created profiles for the six hypothesized stages. Participants 31 chose which stage best applied to them and then took the Gay/
Lesbian Identity Questionnaire which measured cognitive, affective, and behavioral apsects of the 16 dimensions. By
including those three dimensions, Cass built on other models which tend to be more cognitive or attitudlnal in focus.
Predictions of how participants at each stage might respond were based on her identity model. By comparing the questionnaire responses of participants at each stage to the predicted response, Cass (1984) obtained some support for her model.
Although gender differences were superficially explored in the Cass (1984) study, no generalizations could be made to both
Lesbians and Gay men. In general, little attention was focused on issues of diversity within the Lesbian and Gay community
(e.g., race/ethnicity, age, religion) which creates minimal understanding of the issues affecting people dealing with multiple oppressions (e.g., Chicana Lesbian, Gay Jewish man). In addition, this model focuses more exclusively on Lesbian and Gay identity and makes no connections with other oppressed people and their identity process.
Although connections between oppressed groups can and should be made, there are some unique features in the Lesbian/Gay identity formation process. Since one's status as a Lesbian or 32
Gay person Is often Invisible to society as a whole and because homophobia Is so rampant In our culture/ many Lesbian and Gay people live very different public and private lives. Some
Lesbian or Gay people choose to live segregated or closeted lives
(i.e., their Lesbian/Gay identity is not part of their public or social activities) out of fear or discomfort. Therefore, for many Lesbians or Gay men, integration of their public and private lives may be a unique part of their identity development process.
Another uniqueness in Lesbian identity formation is that some v/omen may choose their lesbian lifestyle and identity for political/ feminist reasons (Faderman, 1984).
I'Minority" Identity
Several models have been developed that encompass a broader scope of identity across race and ethnicity and other oppressed groups. Banks (1984) created a six stage model of ethnic development in order to describe differences between individuals of the same ethnic group. His six stages are: Ethnic
Psychological Captivity, Ethnic Encapsulation, Ethnic Identity
Clarification, Biethnicity, Multiethnicity, and Global ism and
Global Competency. According to Banks (1984), this process
"should be viewed as dynamic and multidimensional rather than as static and unilinear" (p. 56). In fact, he views growth within 33 these stages on a continuum where individuals begin psychologically captive in the sense that they have internalized negative beliefs about their ethnic group. During the last stage, individuals have internalized universal values of humankind and are more balanced in their ethnic and national identifications and commitments.
While Banks (1984) has yet to validate his model, he has proposed some important ideas about the developmental process.
He views the process as gradual and that divisions between stages are blurred. In a sense, a "continuum exists between as well as within stages" (p. 57). Banks (1984) also hypothesizes growth as not always abiding by sequential and unilinear movement although he does believe that once someone experiences a stage, she or he will probably experience the later stages sequentially and developmentally.
Stone (1984) modified Banks' theory into a paradigm of multiethnic phases of development for her work in multicultural career development. Her paradigm is similar to the Cross (1971) model of Black identity although she emphasizes a more dynamic process of ongoing development in which an individual may change from one phase to another. Her final phase, Panethnicity, is similar to the final phase in the SIDMOP framework where 34
individuals transcend to an alternative world view whereby they
see themselves as a "member of the ethnic groups of the world,
sharing a common culture as well as unique culture" (Stone, 1984,
p. 19). There are several limitations to Stone's (1984) model:
1) although it is more inclusive than other models, it only
focuses on ethnicity and 2) no published empirical work has
validated this paradigm.
Sue (1981) proposed another general model of cultural
identity for use with Third World or oppressed clients. His
model while developmental in nature was not an identity
development stage model. The basis of the Sue (1981) model was the belief that "many minority persons hold world views different
from members of the dominant culture" (p. 73). His model was
based on two psychological orientations: locus of control and
locus of responsibility. According to Sue (1981), most
individuals subscribe to one of the four world views identified
in the model. While this conceptual model is helpful in
understanding how oppressed people might view the world, there
has been no research to identify corresponding behavior or to validate its existence.
A comprehensive and inclusive model was created in 1983 by
Atkinson, Morten and Sue. The Minority Identity Development 35
Model (MID) was the first model to extend identity development
across different types of oppression (e.g., gender, age,
religion, affectional/sexual preference). Atkinson et al. (1983)
view their model as a "schema to help counselors understand
minority client attitudes and behaviors within existing
personality theories" (p. 35). Their model is very thorough in
its description of the five stages and describes each stage in terms of the person's view of self, others of the same oppressed
group, others of different oppressed groups as well as persons
from dominant or majority groups (e.g., male, white,
heterosexual). Another strength of their model is its conceptualization of identity development as a continuous process although not all oppressed individuals are believed to experience all five stages in their lifetime (Highlen et al., 1986).
Highlen et al. (1986) identified several potential limitations of the MID model: (a) it is based solely on clinical observations with no empirical validation yet attempted and (b) some of their ideas about the growth process are contrary to what many developmental theories profess (e.g., lower levels of development are prerequisite to functioning at higher levels).
Overall, the MID model has added much to the identity development literature and is a good model from which to learn. Sue and Sue 36
(in press) are proposing a new five stage model, the Racial/
Cultural Identity Development Model, which is an expansion of the
MID model.
Self-Identitv Development Model of Oppressed People
History and Development
In 1985 a group of eight women began meeting to conduct some
multicultural research on racial identity of counselor and client
and its impact on the counseling process. Members of this
research team encompassed much diversity: female, Black, Anglo,
Japanese-American, lesbian, bisexual, heterosexual and combined multiple oppression experiences. Atkinson et al. (1983) have
suggested that the use of diverse research teams with
representatives of studied oppressed groups will help reduce the
unrecognized bias currently in psychological research. After
exploration of the literature, limitations of the published
identity models were highlighted in primarily three areas: (a)
lack of systematic and empirical study; (b) minimal focus on
diversity and the effects of multiple oppression; and (c) basic model assumptions (e.g., growth is a linear process). After
discussion of personal experiences of oppression, the research team began to articulate an identity development process that was
different from what the literature proposed. Although the 37 research team was diverse, there were some important similarities in personal growth and development. After a thorough search of the literature, identity models or developmentally-focused literature across a diversity of oppressions (e.g., gender, race/ethnicity, age, affectional/ sexual preference) were discovered thus supporting the belief about the similar growth process for all oppressed people. A comparison chart of several diverse models and stages can be found in Appendix A.
SIDMOP was created using information from at least four sources: (a) ""personal stories', (b) literature of various oppressed groups, (c) clinical and anecdotal accounts as well as
(d) the little empirical work conducted with oppressed people"
(High!en et al., 1988, p. 1). Third World philosophy and methodology, especially within Afrocentric literature, were a major foundation for SIDMOP assumptions and phase descriptions.
In addition, mainstream developmental psychology served as a source of information in understanding the change process.
The research task was altered and became the systematic development and validation of an identity development model for all oppressed people. The group met for almost two years developing and refining their beliefs as well as the model.
During tnis time a qualitative study of the model was piloted in 38 which a male or female person from the following groups was interviewed: (a) Blacks, (b) Chicano, (c) American Indian, (d)
Asian-American, (e) Jewish American, (f) Physically Disabled and
(g) Gays/Lesbians/Bisexuals.
Unstructured interviews were used which allowed participants to tell their stories in their own words. Although formal data analysis was not completed, the process was very helpful in expanding and refining the model. The qualitative information tested some basic assumptions about the identity formation process and increased understanding of how growth occurred.
While currently this dissertation study is the only research being completed on SIDMOP, refinement and advancement of the model continues.
Theoretical Underpinnings and Assumptions
Similar to other identity development models, SIDMOP focuses on within group differences; in other words, how individuals within the same oppressed groups may differ. However, the SIDMOP framework encompasses many new concepts in both content and process thus making it one of the most comprehensive models currently developed. The following four concepts are what make
SIDMOP unique: (a) multiple oppression, (b) psychology of world view, (c) the nature of reality is the unity of spirit and 39 matter* and (d) transitions. Before articulating the unique aspects of SIDMOP, the definition of oppression used in SIDMOP can be described as "the suppression of any part of self based on
irrelevant factors. This suppression may result from societal values, norms, and mores associated with the devaluing of differences (e.g., an aging person considered worthless)"
(Highlen et a!., 1988, p. 4). In other words, an individual may deny or block parts of him or herself (e.g., a Gay man denying his gayness) as well as have society deny or belittle those parts of one's self.
No other identity development model examines the
ramifications of multiple oppression. According to Highlen et al. (1988), a multiple oppression is when an individual is a member of two or more oppressed groups. As an example, a Chicana woman who is also a Lesbian, is a member of three oppressed groups. Each of her oppressions are unique and must be dealt with separately (being Chicana, a Lesbian and a woman), as well as unique combined oppressions (Chicana Lesbian or Chicana woman) with their own issues.
Although no research has been done to examine the process of dealing with multiple oppressions, several possibilities do exist. An individual may deal with his or her multiple 40 oppressions at the same time (e.g., deal with being Black and being female simultaneously). Or such work may occur separately where one might deal with aspects of being Black first then experience a similar process for being female. The shift in focus may be affected by one's environment or individual needs. » In this situation, a person is most likely to first deal with whichever oppression that is most salient in her or his life.
SIDMOP bases its framework in the psychology of world view.
According to Highlen et el. (1986), "world view is defined broadly as*how an individual construes her or his relationship to the world (e.g., nature, institutions, other people, things, etc.)"; however, for this model, "world view is defined as how a person views his or her oppression in relation to self and others" (p.7). In other words, world view is the filter through which people view and make sense of the world and their oppression. In SIDMOP, assumptions are made about the dominant culture's world view as being based in those values and mores held by the majority of people or the dominant culture of the
United States. In other words, there is a valuing of or preference for what is Anglo, male, heterosexual, young,
Christian, able-bodied, etc. (Highlen et al., 1986). In terms of identity development, SIDMOP proposes a process whereby 41 individuals may examine and change their world view in an attempt to transcend or overcome their oppression.
SIDMOP has consciously been developed from nontraditional psychological frameworks such as Afrocentric psychology. Since scientific research happens within a given time period* geography, and cultural/social context and because "values affect virtually every stage of the investigatory process" (Myers, 1981, p. 6), choosing alternative psychological models which are endorsed by members of oppressed groups is both appropriate and necessary. Despite myths of objectivity, our underlying beliefs, which often go unquestioned or unspoken, deeply affect how we structure our reality and do research.
Myers (1980) states that "the way in which people perceive the world will obviously impact on the way they develop or change" (p. 89). And in fact she sees development as
"artificially contrived concepts used to categorize nations, peoples, and/or cultures based upon the world view, values, and belief systems of the definer: (p. 88). Since oppressed people may be defined as those lacking power in our culture and because power is often viewed as "the ability to define reality or structure belief" (Myers, 1981, p. 18), then using the reference points shared by many oppressed people is crucial. The 42 alternative world view articulated in SIDMOP has its roots among
Afrocentric, American Indian and Eastern people. One key tenet of those alternative world views is the inseparability of the spiritual and material aspects of reality. In another words* our spiritual essence and our physical being are completely interwoven and as one. According to Highlen et al. (1988), with such a world view one cannot describe self identity without talking about spiritual development. The beginning and end phases which are unique to SIDMOP, most clearly encompass this alternative world view from which SIDMOP grew. See Appendix A for a comparison chart that highlights these model differences.
Another tenet of Afrocentric psychology used in the SIDMOP framework is the belief that positive self-worth is inherent and not dependent on external realities (e.g., physical attractiveness, material possessions). In actuality, all people are good just because they exist as part of the spirit and humanity.
Most of the identity development models for various oppressed groups are created using traditional stage model assumptions and descriptions. SIDMOP breaks away from developmental psychology's tradition in its emphasis on transitions and a circular growth process. Within SIDMOP there are 13 developmental processes and six are considered transitions. According to Highlen et al.
(1988), "transitions are characterized by disequilibrium as the person makes a shift in her or his world view. In some way, the person's world view has been challenged by an event or by some more gradual processes of awareness" (p. 5). The phases which follow transitions are used as a time for expanding and strengthening this new perspective. Transitions are crucial to the growth process because that is when much emotional, psychological and spiritual work occurs. Some mainstream developmental theories such as Kegan (1982) do encompass transitions as vital growth process; however, most models deemphasize the importance of transitions.
While SIDMOP views the process of identity development as occurring in a predictable sequence, the amount of time a person may spend in a given phase or transition may greatly vary.
Unlike many classic developmental theories, SIDMOP does not view growth as a linear, step-wise process. As stated by Atkinson et al. (1983), growth is "a continuous process in which one stage blends with another and boundaries between steps are not clear"
(p. 33). In keeping with a circular and continuous view of growth, SIDMOP describes a process through which individuals may reexperience parts of their identity yet always in the present 44 and in new and different ways. As described by Highlen et al.
(1988), "the individual will encounter these experiences with a heightened level of knowledge at the unconscious and/or conscious level" (p. 7). Although recycling is the term most often used in developmental literature, the SIDMOP does not use it because recycling implies "going back to a previous phase in development"
(Highlen et al., 1988, p. 7). For example, a Jewish man who is also Gay may have already experienced dissonance with his Jewish identity and then may later experience dissonance in terms of his
Gay identity in a new and different way.
The remainder of this section will include descriptions of
SIDMOP assumptions and phases taken verbatim from the Highlen et al. (1988) APA Symposium. There are several key assumptions on which SIDMOP is based:
(a) Because early self-identity development as an individual is relatively a universal process (related to cognitive, physiological development), the first three aspects (I. Absense of Conscious Awareness, II. Transition, and III. Individuation) are experienced by all people. It is important to include these three "common" parts of the developmental process in SIDMOP for two reasons: (a) in some way all people are oppressed, according to our definition (e.g., an Anglo male who does not express 45
emotions or does not nurture others is considered oppressed), and
(b) it is possible for oppressed people never to move into
awareness of their oppression (thus not experiencing Parts
IV-XIII, Transition from Individuation and Dissonance through
Transformation).
(b) Consistent with the world view upon which this model is
predicated, the end is also the beginning. Both the first and
final parts of the process are characterized by believing in the
unity of spirit and matter and the acceptance of all life. The
only difference between the two is in Transformation (the final
phase), where there is conscious awareness and knowledge of this
belief.
According to SIDMOP, the first and thirteenth aspects of the
process involve the same collective world view, that is, the
unity of spirit and matter. Aspects II through XII are based on
a collective world view of duality between spirit and matter.
Model Description
I. ABSENCE OF CONSCIOUS AWARENESS: Lack of awareness that
is generally associated with infancy. The individual
developmental!y is unable to formulate a sense of self as
separate and possesses a sense of innocence. All life is
accepted as inherantly good; hence, the unity of spirit and 46 matter Is the world view. EXAMPLE: The spirit of an infant at birth is pure and accepting and is untainted by the dualism of spirit and matter.
II. TRANSITION FROM ABSENCE OF CONSCIOUS AWARENESS TO
INDIVIDUATION: The person begins to recognize differences between self and others. At this time the developmental Issues of mastery and control are salient. Dependency on others is still a basic issue. Those closest to the individual (i.e., the family) are his or her community. Thus differentiation on the physical plane begins. Psychologically, self-identity is tied to the family's world view and its evaluation of the child. Therefore, psychologically the child is still undifferentiated from others.
EXAMPLE: A child knows she or he is physically separate from others but psychologically is very identified with the family community. When the child is treated poorly by a parent, the child assumes he or she is a bad person.
III. INDIVIDUATION: The individual has learned the rules of society through the family and environment (e.g., school). The person is aware that people are different, and judgments made regarding these differences are affected by family/cultural values. The individual rarely experiences dissonance about the oppressed part of him or herself, because self-worth is not seen 47 as being affected by the oppressed part. This oppressed part is out of awareness and has not consciously been examined. EXAMPLE:
A person has integrated family and cultural values* and the values influence self-worth. If some element of the person is devalued, there is no conscious awareness. A female may not be valyed by her parents in the same way that her brother is, but she is unable to see this.
This period is the last portion of development that is universal. If a person feels a part of and identifies with the dominant culture, he or she may never move beyond the world view articulated in this portion of the developmental process.
IV. TRANSITION FROM INDIVIDUATION TO DISSONANCE: The person encounters and is aware of an environmental stimulus
(discrimination of some sort), which disrupts a sense of self.
The event brings the oppressed part of self to the forefront, and as a result, the person questions her or his self-worth. The person feels less a part of society and, therefore, feels, sadness, anxiety, depression, grief, or anger to varying degrees.
EXAMPLE: An elderly man is not considered for a job for which he is qualified to perform. He becomes aware that his age is now more a part of his identity. 48
V. DISSONANCE: A person encounters the part of self that 1s
oppressed more fully. The Individual becomes more aware of his
or her sense of Identity. This experience triggers conflict
between established self-identity and feelings of worth, and
newly experienced feelings of anger or depression and low
self-concept. Depending on the strength of established
self-worth, the person may feel good about self and others like
her or him, or the person may not. A feeling of being inadequate
is more likely to occur if a person has low self worth. If a
person has a strong sense of self, anger toward society is more
likely to be the response to discrimination. A struggle with how much to fit into society occurs during the Dissonance process.
EXAMPLE: A deaf girl is not invited to play with the children in the neighborhood. If she has a strong sense of self, she may be
angry that others aren't more accepting. If she has low
self-worth, she may view herself as defective and withdraw in shame.
VI. TRANSITION FROM DISSONANCE TO IMMERSION: The individual begins to look outside of self and begins to explore oppressed group culture either directly or vicariously. He or she begins to experience more positively the oppressed part of self. The dominant group view is challenged more. The culture of the 49 oppressed group is used to validate the self. Self-identity largely is defined by the oppressed part of self. EXAMPLE: A
Black student who attends a predominantly Anglo university goes to a program on Black leaders at the university. He leaves feeling more positively about his heritage.
VII. IMMERSION: The person embraces all people of the same oppressed group and has little interest in people of the dominant group. Feelings of excitement and joy about his or her connection with the oppressed group are experienced. Some conditional acceptance of people from similar oppressed groups or of people from one's own oppressed group who have not rejected the dominant culture occurs. EXAMPLE: A Jewish man leads a
Jewish student group on campus, belongs to a Jewish fraternity, and will only date Jewish women.
VIII. TRANSITION FROM IMMERSION TO INTERNALIZATION: Positive feelings about self start to come from within (versus being gained from external sources). There is a sifting through of self-identity and group identity. World view becomes more personal, and not based on group's rhetoric. Some discomfort about the limitations and problems within the oppressed group occurs. EXAMPLE: An Asian American woman begins to have deeper friendships with Anglo American women. She starts to form her 50 own opinions about Anglo women and their culture and does not just believe in past stereotypes.
IX. INTERNALIZATION: The individual's community expands to include others outside his or her group, especially people who are experiencing similar oppressions. Because of these positive feelings, the person is able to develop and follow her or his own rules even at the expense of conflict with the oppressed group's expectations. The oppressed part of self is recognized as one of many components of self-identity. The person becomes more accepting of same-group members, regardless of their place in the self-identity development process. Also, members of the dominant group may be more valued for who they are more than they were earlier in the developmental process (i.e., during immersion).
EXAMPLE: A Lesbian who has been active in the Lesbian community in the past is spending her energy being a support person for a
Gay man with AIDS.
X. TRANSITION FROM INTERNALIZATION TO INTEGRATION:
Increasing awareness that all beings struggle with some form of oppression is evident. The view that the world is "we" vs.
"them" no longer seems valid. However, the person still views the oppressor differently than the oppressed. EXAMPLE: A feminist works with a fundamental Christian, who believes women 51 should not work outside the home. While she strongly disagrees with his beliefs about women's roles, she is able to see that he also has some other values with which she agrees.
XI. INTEGRATION: The individual's sense of community continues to expand. As the person feels more connected to all people, she or he sees their struggles as his or her own. The focus is more on similarities between peoples. The person recognizes, understands, and experiences all oppression similarly. "Oppressors" are seen as being created by societal problems or environmental press. EXAMPLE: A woman who was sexually abused as a child views sex offenders as victims. While she sees the offenders as being responsible for their behavior, she is able to see how the environment and their childhood upbringing also was oppressive for them.
XII. TRANSITION FROM INTEGRATION TO TRANSFORMATION: The person begins to realize the limitations of the Western world view that devalues all people, in that everyone questions their worth if they are not achieving—wealth, possessions, partners, attractiveness, etc. The individual is more able to see how the material plane is a manifestation of the spiritual. The spiritual world is the forefront and the most present in the individual. The person recognizes that all people are on the 52 same quest for wholeness; some are just more aware of it than others. The focus of self-Identity is understanding how everything fits together, meaning how all relates to self.
EXAMPLE: A man recognizes that his need to achieve and to always be better is a function of always measuring himself by external standards. He recognizes his culture perpetuates this belief* and he is much more at peace when he is in touch with his uniqueness and inherant self-worth.
XIII. TRANSFORMATION: The individual feels spiritually connected to all people, to all of life, to all of this planet, and to all of the universe. All concerns are her or his concerns. There is no separation between the spiritual and the physical and no separation between people and all life. The person accepts all life (human and nonhuman). All is valued as inherantly good. Pure acceptance of life is the commonality between Transformation and the beginning process (Absence of
Conscious Awareness. EXAMPLE: A woman who was sexually abused as a child views sex offenders as persons who are unable to feel the spirit within. They are people who hate themselves and feel unworthy and are trapped in a world view that keeps them "one down" or "one up". CHAPTER III
Method
In designing the methodology for this study, the strengths
and weaknesses of the Hall et al. (1972) and Cass (1984)
studies were taken into consideration. Since very little
empirical work has been done in validation of the many
identity development frameworks created, there are few models
for research available. In many ways, as the theoretical
models have continued to expand, the methodologies used to
validate such theories lag behind.
Participants
One hundred and twenty-one individuals participated in
this study including 31 Blacks (29 females, 2 males), 30
Chinese-Americans (18 females, 12 males), 18 Japanese-
Americans (11 females, 7 males), 20 Korean-Americans (13
females, 7 males) and 22 Vietnamese-Americans (14 females, 8
males) (See Table 1). Participants ranged in age from 17 to
32. All were enrolled as undergraduates at a major West Coast
university. The sample included 33 freshmores, 37 sophmores,
25 juniors, and 32 seniors. Because of the sampling method
used, gender balance was difficult to achieve and there were
over twice as many female participants (N=85) as male
53 54 Table 1
Racial/Ethnic Breakdown of Participants
Race/ethnicity N % Sample
Black 31 26%
Chinese-American 30 25%
Japanese-American 18 14%
Korean-American 20
Vietnamese-American 22 19%
Total 121 55
participants (N=36). This imbalance was further increased by the
uneven distribution of females and males on the campus,
especially for the Black students where women outnumbered men
eight to one. All participants were either citizens or permanent
residents of the United States.
Participants were contacted in four ways: 1) academic
courses, 2) Social Science subject pool, 3) Black and
Asian-American student organizations, or 4) individual student
contact. Because cross-cultural literature emphasizes the
vast diversity among Asian-American subgroups, (Lim, 1978;
Sue, 1981; Sue, Sue, & Sue, 1975) specific student groups were
contacted (e.g., Chinese Student Association, Pilipino Club,
etc.) to increase the diversity of the Asian-American sample.
A variety of student organizations were contacted including
academic/career focused groups, social clubs and religious organizations. In addition, some student leaders served as contact persons and distributed questionnaires to students they knew or who were members of campus organizations.
In an attempt to minimize confounding factors, traditionally-aged college students were sampled so that
demographic factors such as education level and age were somewhat homogeneous. Second and third generation 56
Asian-Americans individuals were targeted in order to minimize differences among generations as documented in cross-cultural literature (Conner, 1974; Endo & Della-Piana, 1981; Masuda,
Matsumoto, & Meredith, 1970). This sampling procedure was not successful for all Asian-American participants such as the
Chinese-Americans who were 43% first generation as well as the
Vietnamese and Korean students who were 72% and 77% first generation respectively. At this university Vietnamese and
Korean students are primarily first generation immigrants or refugees. For the entire Asian-American sample, 53 or 38% of the participants were first generation which is much higher than was anticipated. Table 2 shows the generational level of the
Asian-American participants.
Instruments
Suinn-Lew Asian Self-Identitv Acculturation Scale (SL-ASIA)
Acculturation level for the Asian-American participants was measured using the SL-ASIA (Suinn, Richard-Figueroa, Lew &
Vigil, 1987). The SL-ASIA is a 21 item, multiple-choice questionnaire that measures language, identity, friendship choice, behaviors, generation/geographic history, and attitudes (See Appendix B). Total scores are obtained by summing across the answers for all 21 items and then dividing the 57
Table 2
Generational Level of Asian-American Participants
Race/ethnicity Mean Generational Level %
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th
Chinese-American 1.77 43% 30% 7% 3% 3%
Japanese-American 3.25 5% 21% 16% 32% 11%
Korean-American 1.11 77% 9%
Vietnamese-American 1.10 72% — 4% — —
Note. Because of missing data, generational level percentages for each group do not add up to 100%. 58 total value by 21. Scores range from 1.00 for low acculturation to 5.00 for high acculturation. Therefore, low scores reflect low levels of acculturation and high scores reflect high levels of acculturation or Western identification.
Reliability data for the SL-ASIA was reported by Suinn et al. (1987) as .88 which indicates a high level of internal consistency among items. Currently there is validity data from three sources: (a) a significantly positive relationship (.0001) between the level of acculturation and generation level, (b) a significantly positive relationship (.00001) between acculturation level and length of residence in the United States, and (c) a significantly positive relationship (.0001) between acculturation level and whether participants rated themselves as very Asian, mostly Asian, bicultural, mostly Anglicized or very
Anglicized. For these three measures of validity, the mean values were in the expected direction thus offering support for the notion that the SL-ASIA does, in fact, measure level of acculturation for Asians and Asian-Americans.
Racial Identity Attitudes Scale (RIAS)
Racial identity for the Black participants was measured using the RIAS (Parham & Helms, 1981). The RIAS (short form) consists of 30 items measuring attitudes related to the four 59 stages of Black Identity articulated by Cross (1971) (See
Appendix C). Item responses were obtained using a 5-polnt Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Scores for each of the four subscales (Preencounter, Encounter,
Immersion-Emersion and Internalization) are obtained by summing the items for each subscale and dividing by the number of items in the subscale. Six items 1n RIAS were found not to discriminate by Parham and Helms and in accordance with their recommendation have been dropped from this analysis.
Scores for each subscale range from 1 to 5 with lower scores indicating lower levels of an identity attitude. According to
Parham and Helms (1981), the internal consistency reliability coefficients found for the four subscales were: Preencounter,
.67; Encounter, .72; Immersion-Emersion, .66; and
Internalization, .71. Construct validity evidence for the
RIAS has been reported by Parham and Helms (1981) where racial identity attitudes were found to predict subjects' preference for their counselors' race.
Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (M-C SPS)
Social desirability for all participants was measured using the M-C SDS (Crowne & Marlowe, 1964). The M-C SDS consists of 33 items measuring individuals' tendency to describe themselves in socially desirable and favorable terms in order to gain others' approval (See Appendix D). Item responses were obtained using true or false questions. Total scores are obtained by scoring one point for each answer in the socially desirable direction. Scores range from 0 (no social desirability) to 33 (highest social desirability). Crowne and
Marlowe (1964) reported an internal consistency reliability coefficient of .88 as well as a test-retest correlation of .88.
Validity of the scale was supported by the confirmation of hypotheses in several experimental settings.
SIDMOP Measures
Three separate measures were created to validate the
SIDMOP framework. The purpose of this validation procedure was to gain empirical support for the idea that distinct phases of beliefs, feelings and behaviors within an oppressed identity transformation process can be identified by Black and
Asian-American undergraduates. These measures were an expansion of some qualitative measures previously created for an initial exploratory study described by Highlen et al.
(1986). The three measures were designed in consultation with two groups of people. The first group included the research team that created SIDMOP. The second group included experts 61 in the area of Black and Asian-American psychology. Feedback from these groups was used in the creation and editing of the
SIDMOP measures. For this study only the five of SIDMOP's phases which typified the identity developmental process unique to oppressed,people were explored: Dissonance,
Immersion, Internalization, Integration, and Transformation.
Since the first two key phases, Absence of Conscious Awareness and Individuation, focus on the part of identity development that occurs before individuals identify themselves as oppressed, they were not included in this study. Although the remaining transitions and phases are key to the SIDMOP framework, excluding them from this study greatly simplified the measurement process.
After the initial development of the SIDMOP profiles and descriptive statements, a pilot study involving 10
Asian-American undergraduates was completed. This group was diverse in gender, country of origin, age and class standing.
Participants in the pilot study completed all instruments and then were asked to provide feedback about the following areas: (a) directions—were they clear and understandable?,
(b) length—was it too long or repetitive?, (c) instruments—were any tests too confusing or difficult?, (d) were the SIDMOP instruments clear and understandable?, (e) how 62 much introspection or self-analysis was necessary? and (f) identity—what affected what SIDMOP Items were sorted into each phase; any different reactions when sorting for
Asian-Americans in general versus sorting for one's self.
Their feedback was gathered using a qualitative interview focusing on the previously described areas. Using their feedback revisions were made in ordering of instruments, wording and length of directions and in phrasing and content of SIDMOP instruments.
The first measure focused on the five phases of SIDMOP highlighted above. For each of the five SIDMOP phases, profiles or descriptive paragraphs were developed and placed in a random order (See Appendix E). Participants were asked to place the profiles in the order they believed would apply to someone of their own race/ethnicity going through the identity development process. Next, 30 descriptive statements were created for each SIDMOP phase by refining and expanding the individual items generated for the initial qualitative study of
SIDMOP. These 30 statements focused on attitudinal, affective and behavioral aspects of the identity development process (See
Appendix F). Participants were asked to read each statement and choose the SIDMOP phase in which it belonged. These statements 63
were worded in the third person so as to focus on Black or
Asian-American people as a whole. This process attempted to
place participants in more of an observer role enabling them to
respond in a critical way thus testing basic assumptions or
tenets of the model. For the third measure these same 30
statements were written in the first person so that participants would respond according to their own identity development (See
Appendix G). A 5-point Likert scale was created from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree).
Procedures
As observed by Awakuni (1988), although a random sample selection technique is preferable* the "logistic coordination* time and expense required" (p. 31) as well as sampling difficulties associated with gaining participation from underrepresented groups made accomplishing such ideal sampling
impractical for this study. Despite these potential sampling difficulties, a diversity of participants were obtained including representatives from four major Asian-American ethnic groups.
After courses and student organizations appropriate for the study were identified, initial contact was made through a credible staff person or student leader of the same race or ethnicity.
The first available meeting of the class or organization was 64
attended where the study was described and individuals were asked to participate. Sign-up sheets were distributed which asked for each student's name and phone number. Contact was made within the next week* and times were set up to collect data 1n small groups or individually.
In most situations the primary investigator was present during data collection; however, some participants were given surveys to complete at home. This approach was taken because of some participants* difficulty in finding available times on campus due to family or personal responsibilities. In these cases, personal follow-up occurred in order to ensure return of the questionnaires. All but 30 surveys (19%) were returned.
While it is not clear why only 81% of the surveys were collected for analysis, since data was collected near the end of spring term, time availability may have been a big factor.
Over half of the participants were obtained through the
Social Science subject pool. This study was specified for
Black or Asian-American students only. A diversity of Social
Science courses were included, such as psychology, research methodology and communications. All participants were given one hour to complete the questionnaires and were encouraged to ask questions during that time. Key parts of the questionnaire 65 were often reviewed whenever there was any confusion.
For the purpose of this study, instruments were placed in a
specific order. After a cover sheet and consent form, the two measures created to validate SIDMOP were placed first and
second so as to get participants' initial and hopefully
unconfounded reaction. A copy of the cover sheet may be found in
Appendix H and a sample consent form is available in Appendix I.
The racial identity scales (RIAS or SL-ASIA) were next followed by the Social Desirability Scale. The SIDMOP self-ranking was the last scale used in order to create greater distance between the SIDMOP measures in hopes of minimizing confusion and repetition. A demographic sheet was the final part of the questionnaire (See Appendix J). The instruments were combined separately for Asian-American and Black participants because of numbering differences.
Analysis of Data
Data analysis was completed in three separate phases.
Since the purpose of this study was to obtain data about the validity of the SIDMOP framework, the first step involved the examination of how participants responded to the validation tasks as measured by SIDMOP instruments. The degree of support for the SIDMOP phases occurring in a specific and recognizable order was examined by calculating the number of errors between how participants ordered the phases and how the order was proposed by the SIDMOP framework. In addition, the degree of support for SIDMOP phases being clearly defined and descriptors for each phase being Identifiable was examined by calculating the number of errors in how participants sorted the phase descriptors compared to the sorting proposed by the model. Racial/ethnic differences in the support of phase order and recognizability of phase descriptors were investigated using analysis of variance.
In the second phase of analysis reliability data for the
SIDMOP self measure were analyzed by Cronbach's Alpha coefficient. Scale reliabilities, as well as scale intercorrelations were examined for the five SIDMOP phases.
The third phase of data analysis involved examining the relationships between the various instruments as well as to discern which factors had an effect on how participants responded to the SIDMOP measures. Correlation data using the Pearson Product Moment factor were explored to discover if there was a significant relationship between participants1 level of racial/ethnic identity as measured by the RIAS and
SL-ASIA and how they responded to the validation tasks. In 67 addition* correlation data were calculated to examine the relationship between social desirability and how participants responded to the validation tasks.
Finally* a multiple regression analysis was used to determine whether participants' level of error as measured by the SIDMOP instruments could be predicted from their level of racial/ethnic identity. CHAPTER IV
Results
SIDMOP Measures Validation Task
The primary purpose of this study was to gain support for the SIDMOP framework. There were two questions targeted by the chosen validation tasks: (a) is the developmental growth process
(i.e., the order of the phases) clear and recognizable? and (b) is each phase clear and recognizable and seen as a unique and separate aspect of development? For each of these tasks* a measure of mean error was created. The mean error was the distance (or number of spaces) between each participant's placement of the phases or descriptive items and the theorized framework proposed by SIDMOP. This error distance is then averaged across each sorting task.
For the first task of placing the SIDMOP phases in order, the maximum possible error was 16. There were five phases and each phase had a different maximum possible error (e.g., for the first phase, a maximum error of five occurred if a participant thought it was the fifth phase or for the third phase, a maximum error of two occured if a participant thought it was either the first
68 69 participants for the theorized order of the five phases (See
Table 3). Dissonance, the first phase, received the most amount of correct sorting (56%) while the third phase, Internalization,
received the least amount of correct sorting (31%). For the entire sample, the mean error was 5.5 out of a maximum possible error of 16. A breakdown of mean error for phase sorting by
racial/ethnic group is available in Table 4. An analysis of variance was completed to check for significant differences in sorting between the five racial/ethnic groups. As seen in Table
5, there was no significant difference supporting the third hypothesis which predicted no significant differences between the five groups in sorting of the five phases.
The next part of the study asked participants to sort 30 descriptive items by placing each item with one of the five phases that best described it. This process was designed to gain support for the notion that each phase was clearly defined and could be differentiated from the other phases. There was general support across all participants for the theorized sorting of the
30 descriptive items (See Table 6). Only ten items were sorted correctly less than 50% of the time. Of those 10 items, six were mismatched with one other phase more frequently. The 70
Table 3
Overall Group: Phase Sorting
Phase % Correctly Sorted
Dissonance 56%
Immersion 37%
Internalization 31%
Integration 33%
Transformation 48% Table 4
Racial/Ethnic Group Breakdown: Phase Sorting
Racial/Ethnic Group Mean Error
Black 5.19
Chinese-American 5.73
Japanese-American 5.78
Korean-American 4.95
Vietnamese-American 5.82
Overall Group 5.50
Note. The maximum possible error was 16. 72
Table 5
Racial/Ethnic Group Analysis of Variance: Phase Sorting
Source Degrees of Mean F Ratio F Probability Freedom Squares
Between 5 2.88 .626 .6799 Groups
Within 121 4.59 Groups
Total 126 73
Table 6
Overall Group: Item Sorting
Item # Phase % Correctly Sorted
1 Dissonance 68% 2 Internalization 11% 3 Immersion 78% 4 Transformation 49% 5 Dissonance 82% 6 Immersion 74% 7 Internalization 65% 8 Internalization 32% 9 Internalization 10% 10 Transformation 69% 11 Integration 30% 12 Internalization 7% 13 Immersion 82% 14 Integration 52% 15 Integration 55% 16 Transformation 19% 17 Dissonance 42% 18 Transformation 58% 19 Dissonance 60% 20 Immersion 77% 21 Integration 69% 22 Internalization 22% 23 Transformation 68% 24 Immersion 50% 25 Immersion 70% 26 Integration 60% 27 Immersion 47% 28 Transformation 57% 29 Dissonance 71% 30 Immersion 65% 74
five out of Its six Items being correctly placed less than 35% of the time.
In sorting the 30 items the maximum possible number of errors was 96. There were five phases and the maximum error was determined by which phase was chosen for each item. For example*
if the first item was placed with the fifth phase and theorized to belong in the first phase, the error would be four.
Absolute differences were used to determine the error number and for the entire sample, the mean error was 23.46 out of a maximum possible error of 96. A breakdown of item sorting error by
racial/ethnic group 1s available in Table 7. An analysis of variance was completed to check for a significant difference in sorting between the five racial/ethnic groups. As seen in Table
8 there was no significant difference supporting the third hypothesis which predicted no significant differences in sorting of the 30 descriptive items between the five groups.
Reliability of the SIPMOP Self-measure
Cronbach's Alpha coefficient was used to compute internal consistency of the SIDMOP self-measure in order to verify that each item within a given scale measured the same concept as the other items within that category. For example, all items within the Dissonance subscale should be measuring some aspect of that 75
Table 7
Racial/Ethnic G • Breakdown: Item Sorting
Racial/Ethnic Group Mean Error
Black 22.28
Chinese-American 22.54
Japanese-American 21.65
Korean-American 22.86
V i etnamese- Amen" can 28.20
Overall Group Total 23.46
Note. The maximum possil e error is 96. Absolute differences were used to compute the lean error. 76
Table 8
Racial/Ethnic Group Analysis of Variance: Item Sorting
Source Degrees of Mean F Ratio F Probability Freedom Squares
Between 5 145.26 1.26 .288 Groups
Within 121 115.71 Groups
Total 126 77 phase of identity and not one of the other phases. A scale within the SIDMOP self-measure 1s Internally consistent to the extent that a participant's response/attitude towards one item within a scale is related to his or her responses/attitudes towards other items of that category. Internal consistency 1s related to an Instrument's unidimensionality; that each category is attempting to measure only one dimension (e.g., Dissonance).
Within this measure, a scale's reliability score is a measure of its internal consistency (see Table 9). While the Cronbach
Alpha coefficient for the Immersion phase is the highest at
.61, overall all of the coefficients are low (i.e., Dissonance
.428, Internalization .254, Integration .301 and Transformation
.365) indicating that participants may have perceived individual items within a scale as distinct even though they were part of the same category. For all of the phases the Cronbach Alpha coefficient could be raised, sometimes significantly, with the deletion of just one of the scale items.
Table 10 highlights the SIDMOP self-measure scale intercorrelations. Although the relationships between phases are not consistent, there is some support for the SIDMOP framework offered by the scale intercorrelations. There were significantly 78
Table 9
Cronbach Alpha Coefficients for the SIDMOP self-measure
Scale Number of Items Coefficient
Dissonance 6 .428
Immersion 8 .611
Internalization 5 .254
Integration 5 .301
Transformation 6 .365 79
Table 10
SIDMOP Self-Measure Scale Intercorrelatlons
Scale
Scale
1. Dissonance
2. Immersion .19*
3. Internalization .085 -.110
4. Integation -.076 -.315*** .221**
5. Transformation .098 .175* .419*** .282***
Note. Significance levels: .05*, .01**, .001*** 80 positive correlations between the first phase, Dissonance, and the second phase, Immersion as well as between the third phase,
Internalization and the fourth phase. Integration. In addition, there were significantly positive correlations between the fifth phase, Transformation and the three previous phases. Immersion,
Internalization and Integration. Although all of these phases do
Impact each other 1n terms of the developmental process, they are considerably different so only positive correlations do not seem to fit the SIDMOP theory. For example, when oppressed people are
Immersed 1n their Identity* (Immersion), they should be less likely to transcend the oppressive system and see their world view as the major problem (Transformation); however, In this case, a positive connection Is found. The only significantly negative correlation was found between the Dissonance and
Integration phases which supports the notion that as participants were Increasingly unsure of their Identity as oppressed people, they were less likely to feel Integrated and comfortable connecting with other oppressed groups. In general, because of the low reliability scores, caution must be taken In Interpreting the results of any data from the SIDMOP self-measure. 81
Racial/Ethnic Identity Measures
Asian-Americans
Acculturation level for the Asian-American participants was
measured using the SL-ASIA. According to this scale, a mean
score of one describes a person as being very traditional or
Asian-identified while a score of five describes one as being
very identified with western values and culture. Table 11 shows
the results of the mean SL-ASIA scores for the four
Asian-American groups. In order to get a richer, more complex
understanding of the Asian participants1 racial/ethnic identity,
two questions from the SL-ASIA instrument have been highlighted.
Table 12 specifies their self-identification of acculturation
level ranging from strongly Asian identified to strongly Anglo
identified. A high percentage of each group identify themselves
as bicultural. In general, the Japanese-Americans may be slightly more Anglo identified while the Chinese-Americans and
Vietnamese-Americans may be more Asian identified. Table 13
indicates the racial/ ethnic self-designation for the four groups using the following terms: Oriental, Asian, Asian-American, specific Asian-American group (e.g., Chinese-American) or
American. In general, the groups identify themselves as
Asian-American or with their specific Asian-American group 82
Table 11
Asian-American SL-ASIA Scores
Group Mean SL-ASIA Score
Chinese-American 3.03
Japanese-American 3.59
Korean-American 2.99
Vietnamese-American 2.66
Note. Asian identified =1; Western Identified =5 83
Table 12
Asian-American Acculturation Level
Group Mean Acculturation Level %
Strongly Asian Bicultural Anglo Strongly Asian Anglo
Chinese 3.0 3.3 33.3 33.3 13.3 13.3 American
Japanese 3.26 26.3 31.6 31.6 10.5 American
Korean 3.18 9.1 9.1 63.6 9.1 4.5 American
Vietnamese 2.76 12 24 44 16 American
Note. Because of missing data, acculturation level percentages for each group do not add up to 100% 84
Table 13
Racial/Ethnic Self-Designation: Asian-Americans
Racial/Ethnic Mean Racial/Ethnic Self-Designation % Group
Oriental Asian Asian "Chinese American American American"
Chinese 3.13 10 20 16.7 53.3 American
Japanese 3.68 5.3 21.1 68.4 5.3 American
Korean 3.68 9.1 31.8 50 4.5 American
Vietnamese 2.12 44 16 24 16 American
Note. Because of missing data* racial/ethnic self-designation percentages for each group do not add up to 100%. The "Chinese-American" category is meant to be an example for Asian-American subgroups such as Korean-American* Japanese-American and Vietnamese-American. 85
(e.g.* Chinese-American) although the Vietnamese-American and
Chinese-American groups seem slightly more identified with the labels of Asian or Oriental. In general* these relationships were also impacted by the generational level of the participants.
Blacks
Racial identity for the Black participants was measured using the RIAS. According to this scale* each stage receives a separate score. A score of one means a lower level of identification with the attitudes of that stage while a score of five means a higher level of identification. Table 14 shows the results of the mean RIAS scores for the Black participants with
Encounter and Internalization attitudes being most frequently endorsed.
Correlation Analysis
The Pearson Product Moment factor was used to compute correlations between the various instruments used as well as to discover which factors affected how participants responded to the
SIDMOP measures. Table 15 highlights the correlations between the two validation tasks or error measures and two other factors: racial/ethnic identity and the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability measure. There was a significantly positive correlation between participants' level of social desirability and how they responded 86
Table 14
Black Participants' RIAS Profiles
Stage Mean Score
Pre-encounter 1.79
Encounter 3.93
Immersion 2.67
Internalization 3.74 87 Table 15
Pearson Product Correl itlon Coefficients for Validation Tasks, Soda! Deslrab Hty and Racial/Ethnic Identity
Instruments Validation Tasks
Phase Sorting Item Sorting
Marlowe-Crowne Soda! Desirability .44*** -.026 ,
SL-ASIA .12 -.27**
Preencounter -.003 .16
Encounter -.15 -.18
Immersion -.24 -.06
Internalization -.10 -.18
Note. Significance levels: .05*, .01**, .001*** 88 to the first validation task of placing SIDMOP phases 1n a developmental sequence (r=.44, p < .001). This correlation
Implies that as participants became Increasingly concerned with social desirability, more sorting errors were made. In addition, there was a significantly negative correlation between the Asian-American acculturation score as measured by the SL-ASIA and the second validation task of placing SIDMOP descriptors with the correct SIDMOP phase (r=.27, p < .01). In other words, as the Asian-American participants became more acculturated or
Western identified, they made fewer errors in sorting the descriptor items Into their proper phase.
Correlation analysis was also done between the SIDMOP self-measure and the two racial/ethnic identity scales to identify any significant relationships between the different identity development processes (See Table 16). For
Asian-American participants there was a significantly negative correlation between their level of acculturation and their score on the Immersion phase of SIDMOP (r=,31, p < .01). In other words, the more acculturated or western identified they were, the less likely they were to consider themselves Immersed in their own Asian culture. Although not quite significant, there was also a strong negative correlation between the Western 89
Table 16
Pearson Product Correlation Coefficients for Racial/Ethnic Identity and SIDMOP Self-Measure
Racial/Ethnic Identity
SIDMOP Self-Measure SL-ASIA PreRIAS EncRIAS ImRIAS IntRIAS
Dissonance -.14 -.16 -.27 -.098 -.32
Immersion -.30** -.55*** .06 .58*** .28
Internalization -.09 .54*** _.009 -.31 .46**
Integration -.12 .50** .03 -.36* .36**
Transformation -.17 .06 .24 -.50 .33
Nqte. SL-ASIA= Su1nn-I_ew Asian Self Identity Acculturation Scale; PreRIAS= Preencounter stage of Racial Identity Attitude Scale; EncRIAS= Encounter stage; ImRIAS= Immersion stage; and IntRIAS= Internalization stage. Significance levels: .05*, .01**, .001***. 90
Identification of the Asian-American participants and their
Transformation score for the SIDMOP framework. This relationship
Implies that the more western Identified the Asian-Americans
were, the less likely they were to embrace a non-Eurocentric
world view.
In reviewing the relationship between the Black Identity
scale scores as measured by RIAS and the SIDMOP scale scores,
several connections appear. For the Preencounter attitude of
Black Identity, there was a significantly negative correlation
with the Immersion phase of the SIDMOP framework (r=.55, p <
.001). In other words, the more White identified that the Black
participants were, the less likely they were to consider
themselves immersed in Black culture. However, there were
significantly positive correlations between Preencounter
attitudes and the Internalization and Integration phases of
SIDMOP which does not fit with the SIDMOP theory (r=.54, p <
.001; r=.5, p < .01). This relationship implies the more White
identified the Black participants were, the more able they were to expand their community and connect with other oppressed groups. The Encounter attitude of Black identity showed no
significant correlations with any SIDMOP phases. 91
For the Immersion attitudes of Black identity* there was a significantly positive correlation with the Immersion phase of
SIDMOP (r=.58, p < .001). There was also a significantly negative correlation between Immersion racial attitudes and the
Integration phase of SIDMOP (r=.36, p < .05). Although not quite significant* there was a strong negative correlation between the
Immersion attitude and the Internalization phase of SIDMOP.
These relationships imply that when Blacks were immersed in their own culture, they were less able to expand their community and connect with other oppressed groups.
The final stage of Black identity. Internalization, had several important connections with the SIDMOP framework.
Although not significant, there were stong negative correlations between the Internalization racial attitudes and the Dissonance and Transformation phases of SIDMOP. In other words, as Blacks internalized their Black identity, they were less likely to feel discomfort with their identity as an oppressed person. There was a significantly positive correlation between Internalization racial attitudes and the Integration phase of SIDMOP (r=.36, p <
.01). There was also a significantly positive correlation between the Internalization racial attitudes and the
Internalization phase of SIDMOP (r=.36, p < .01). These 92 relationships Imply that as Blacks internalized their Black identity* they were more able to expand their community and connect with other oppressed groups.
Regression Analysis
Four multiple regression analysis were used to examine whether racial/ethnic Identity attitudes were differentially related to participants' error scores in responding to the two
SIDMOP validation tasks. Predictors or independent variables in the regression equation were participants1 scores on the racial/ ethnic identity instruments. For the Black participants the mean scores for each of the four RIAS attitude scales were computed
(i.e., Preencounter, Encounter, Immersion-Emersion,
Internalization). For the Asian-American participants a total score for the SL-ASIA was computed. Dependent measures were the two error scores computed for the SIDMOP measures on phase order and item sorting.
When the Black participants responded to the validation tasks, there was no significant relationship between their Black identity and their error scores (See Table 17). When both validation tasks were used as the dependent variable, the results of the regression analysis indicated that Black identity as measured by the RIAS was a poor predictor of sorting error. 93 Table 17
Regression Analysis Using Black Identity to Predict Error Scores
Dependent PreRIAS EncRIAS ImRIAS IntRIAS Overall Model Measures
Beta T Beta T Beta T Beta T Beta T
Phase .073 .074 -.13 -.21 -1.1 -.81 -.35 -.43 .049 .31 Sorting Error
Item .55 .073 -1.7 -.50 4.96 .92 -3.56 -.82 .08 .57 Sorting Error
Note. PreRIAS= Preencounter stage of Racial Identity Attitude Scale; EncRIAS= Encounter stage; ImRIAS= Immersion stage; IntRIAS= Internalization stage. When the Asian-American participants responded to the validation tasks, there was a significant relationship between their level of acculturation and one of the error scores. Table
18 highlights the results of the regression analysis for the
Asian-American participants. When the phase sorting validation task was used as the dependent variable, the results indicated that their level of acculturation as measured by the SL-ASIA was a poor predictor of phase sorting error. However, when the item sorting validation task was used as the dependent variable, the results indicated that Asian-American level of acculturation was a good predictor of item sorting error. While only 7% of the variance was explained by the acculturation level, it was enough to be significant (p < .01). 95 Table 18
Regression Analysis Using Asian-American Identity to Predict Error Scores
Dependent Measure SL-ASIA Overall Model
Beta T Beta
Phase Sorting Error .045 -.123 .000 .0151
Item Sorting Error -4.8 -2.75** .073 7.56**
Note. SL-ASIA= Suinn-Lew Asian Self Identity Acculturation Scale. Significance levels: .05*, .01**, .001*** CHAPTER V
Discussion
Multicultural counseling is a growing area within psychology which continues to create an increasing number of models and theories to address cultural diversity. Within group differences among various oppressed groups have attracted much attention especially in the area of identity development stage models.
While the number of models continue to grow* few identity development models of oppressed people have been systematically developed and even fewer have been empirically validated.
The present investigation involved a validation study of a new model called the Self-Identity Development Model of Oppressed
People (SIDMOP) which was created by a research team from The
Ohio State University. Based upon a review of the literature and the opinions of the SIDMOP research team, a methodological plan was created that would best test the assumptions of the SIDMOP framework. Three measures were created to collect information on participants' responses to SIDMOP. In addition, data were collected on the degree to which their racial/ethnic Identity and social desirability levels affected how they responded to the
SIDMOP measures. A diversity of oppressed groups could have been
96 97 targeted for this study; however, the sample group was limited to Black and Asian-American students (including Chinese,
Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese) from a major west coast university.
The primary purpose of this chapter is to discuss and integrate the information gained from this study. Limitations of the findings and methodology of this study will be explored as will implications for future validation work of identity development models. Finally, possible directions for future research of the SIDMOP framework will be presented.
Validity of the SIDMOP Framework
In order to gain support for the SIDMOP framework, this study explored several research questions. From these questions several hypotheses were formed prior to the collection of data.
This section will examine these hypotheses 1n terms of the supportive and contradictory evidence available for the validity of SIDMOP.
There were 121 participants in this study including 31
Blacks, 30 Chinese-Americans, 18 Japanese-Americans, 20
Korean-Americans and 22 Vietnamese-Americans. All were enrolled as undergraduates at a major West Coast university. In reviewing the racial/ethnic identity information available for participants 98 of this investigation* some statements can be made about their representativeness. Although Asian-Americans as a whole are believed to becoming increasingly assimilated (Sue, 1977), the more recent Immigrants of this sample, Korean- and
Vietnamese-Americans, did appear to be slightly more Asian identified. Of all the Asian-American groups, the
Japanese-Americans were the most western identified and most likely to label themselves as Japanese-Americans rather than
Asian, Asian-American or American. This high level of assimilation for Japanese-Americans is well documented 1n the literature and has been strongly Influenced by historical factors such as internment in the United States during World War II (Endo
& Della-Piana, 1981; Sue & Kirk, 1973). Considering the literature, the Asian-American participants do seem reflective of the culture in general. Less Information 1s available on the general patterns of racial Identity within the Black community so similar comparisons are unavailable.
Participants' responses to the two SIDMOP validation tasks offered general support for the SIDMOP framework. This support was consistent with the first two hypotheses: (a) SIDMOP phases occur in a specific and recognizable order and (b) SIDMOP phases are clearly identifiable and understandable as unique and separate phases of development. In responding to the first validation task of place the SIDMOP phases 1n a developmental sequence, there was support for the order hypothesized by SIDMOP.
The phases were correctly sorted between 31% and 56% of the time.
For the entire sample, the mean error was 5.5 out of a maximum possible error of 16 which is less than 35% error for the task.
For the second validation task of matching descriptor Items with a SIDMOP phase in order to gain support for the uniqueness and recognizabmty of each of the five phases tested, there was also support for the placement hypothesized by SIDMOP. The descriptive statements were correctly sorted between 7% and 82% of the time. The majority of the errors were connected with the statements for the Internalization phases. These errors may be the result of several factors: 1) difficulty 1n differentiating the Internalization phases in the measures used or 2) the
Internalization phase may not be theoretically distinct enough from Integration or Transformation to warrant a separate phase of development. Although both of these explanations are possible, until more research is done and the measures are refined, no definitive statements about the Internalization phase can be made. For the entire sample, the mean error was 23.5 out of a 100 possible maximum error of 96 which 1s less than 2558 error for the entire task.
For both validation tasks, an analysis of variance was completed to check for any significant differences 1n sorting between the five racial/ethnic groups. The results supported the third hypothesis which stated that there would be no significant racial/ethnic difference for the two validation tasks. Because
Blacks and Asian-Americans are very diverse groups* and since
Asian-Americans are believed to be generally more assimilated
Into White culture, one might expect the two groups to respond differently to the validation tasks which would then challenge
SIDMOP's ability to apply to a diversity of oppressed groups.
However, this evidence does support the notion that SIDMOP is, in fact, a pluralistic model which can address the concerns of very diverse oppressed groups.
There was partial support gained for both the fourth and fifth hypotheses which explored whether social desirability and radal/ethnic Identity had a measurable effect on participants' responses to the validation tasks. Correlation analysis and/or multiple regression analysis were calculated to gain support for these two hypotheses. There was a significantly positive correlation between all participants' level of social 101 desirability and their responses to the first validation task.
Therefore, as participants became Increasingly concerned with social desirability, they made more sorting errors 1n placing the
SIDMOP phases In a developmental sequence.
This error may have been due to one of several factors: (a) since this was their first Instrument, they may not have felt comfortable with the task, and/or (b) the "test-Uke" quality of the matching task may have led to difficulties in responding.
Although it is not clear how much more support for the model might have been gained without the impact of social desirability, the implication is that the support available for the SIDMOP phases occuurlng in a specific, recognizable order was understated.
In exploring the relationship between racial/ethnic identity and participants' responses to the validation tasks, a negative connection was found between Asian-American acculturation level and the second validation task of matching descriptor Items with one of the five SIDMOP phases. Therefore, the more acculturated or Western identified they were, the fewer sorting errors they made. This relationship was supported by both the correlation and regression analyses. Although it is not clear why there is a connection for the Asian-Americans participants and not for the 102
Black participants, some of the differences may have been due to language difficulties and the newly Immigrant status of at least
25% of the Asian-American participants. Clearly more Information and understanding about how the Identity process differs for
Asian-Americans and Blacks 1s needed. Some of the differences may be due to language difficulties and the newly Immigrant status of at least 20% of the Asian-American participants.
With the exception of one positive correlation, Black
Identity was negatively correlated with both validation tasks.
While none of these correlations were statistically significant, this relationship Implies that the more Black participants endorsed any of the four racial attitudes, the less likely they were to make sorting errors. Although this positive connection 1s consistent, 1t does not necessarily fit with what one might predict. In reviewing the Cross model more positive correlations might be expected. The one exception of a positive correlation, although not significant, occurred between
Preencounter attitudes and the item sorting task. Therefore, the more Black participants were feeling White Identified and separate from Black culture, the more likely they were to have difficulty sorting items dealing with oppression. 103
While the overall reliability of the SIDMOP self-measure was low* correlations between the subscales and other Instruments
Tended additional support to the SIDMOP framework. Although the low reliability of the SIDMOP self-measure 1s problematic* there may be several explanations which could be addressed 1n future studies. Possible Influences Include: testing conditions* language difficulties* Improper sampling of content areas* and distilling the 13 phases Into five phases for the measurement task. Item analysis and refinement need to be undertaken to further strengthen this measure of SIDMOP identity.
In reviewing scale intercorrelatlons there was some support for the theorized order and connections between the various
SIDMOP phases; however, there were also some contradictions. For example* the Transformation phase was positively correlated with all of the other phases even though they are theorized to be very different. The positive correlation between Immersion and
Transformation as well as the Dissonance and Transformation while not statistically significant especially seems to contradict the
SIDMOP framework. While some of the mismatch between scale correlations and the SIDMOP theory may be due to low reliability 104
of the self-measure, more research of the self-measure and the
SIDMOP framework needs to be completed.
Support was also gained for the SIDMOP framework and, to a lesser extent, for the SIDMOP self-measure, by examining the relationships between participants' racial/ethnic Identity and their responses to the SIDMOP self-measure. Response patterns showed a parallel process of where participants placed themselves using both Instruments. These results offer strong support for the belief that the SIDMOP framework encorporates the Issues and developmental process of racial/ethnic oppressed groups. This support was consistent for both Asian-American and Black participants.
The more acculturated the Asian-American participants were, the less likely they were to either be Immersed 1n Asian culture or embrace a non-Eurocentric world view. For Black participants several strong relationships occured between Black identity and
SIDMOP Identity. As Blacks Internalized their Black identity, they were less likely to feel discomfort with their Identity as oppressed people and were more able to expand their community and connect with otehr oppressed groups. When Blacks were Immersed in their own culture, they were less able to expand their 105 community and connect with other oppressed people. In addition, the more White identified the Blacks were, the lejs likely they were to consider themselves Immersed in their oppressed identity.
There were also strong positive correlations between the
Immersion and Internalization phases of both models. All of these connections do support the SIDMOP theory.
There were two areas where significant relationships did not support the SIDMOP theory. The first area involved a lack of connection between Encounter racial attitudes and any SIDMOP phase. Considering the SIDMOP framework, a positive relationship might be expected with the Dissonance phase of SIDMOP which most closely parallels the Encounter stage of Black identity. In addition, negative correlations might be expected between
Encounter racial attitudes and the SIDMOP phases of
Internalization, Integration and Transformation. This result may, in fact, be related to how the SIDMOP framework was distilled Into five phases which may have minimized distinction between phases. There was also an unexpected positive relationship between how White Identified the Black participants were and their ability to Internalize their oppressed Identity and expand their community to include other oppressed groups. As stated previously, these theoretical challenges may be the result 106
of measurement error, and more research is needed to identify the
underlying Issues.
Overall considering all of the evidence, there 1s strong
support for the SIDMOP framework as it is currently defined.
While additional research is definitely needed, this Initial
investigation shows positive results and helps to Identify future
areas for research. Limitation?
Although the present investigation is crucial in
understanding and validating the SIDMOP framework, several
limitations must be discussed when Interpreting Its results. The
limitations of this study can be categorized into several areas.
Although every attempt was made to get a representative sample, by focusing exclusively on university students the sample was
inherently biased. Despite the pluralistic nature of SIDMOP, the complexities of measurement and validation seem to require an approach using the widest range of oppressed people. To insure that SIDMOP truly is pluralistic and because oppressed groups are
1n fact quite diverse, a wider range of oppressed people should be studied (e.g., sexual/affect1onal preference, gender, age, etc). In addition, samples should also utilize a range of 107 education and socioeconomic levels. Generational level seemed to have an Impact on the results for the Asian-American participants, and without further Investigation 1t 1s not clear whether such an Impact was significant. With further study of this data and future research, additional Insight Into the Impact of generational level could be gained.
Another major limitation 1s the difficulty in knowing whether or not the results definitively validate the model. Is it possible that Individuals can do the matching tasks without agreeing with the model? There was no direct measure taken to assess to what degree participants believed the model described their experience. Using a diversity of empirical methods would help to answer this concern. Incorporating some of the Cass
(1984) methodology 1n which participants were asked to identify where in the model they saw themselves would have also been helpful. Since data on the descriptor items indicated that some items were poorly sorted, there 1s some question as to what impact that poorly written Items or even descriptor paragraphs may have had on the validation process.
In addition, a major shortcut was taken 1n implementing this validation study. Only five out of SIDMOP's 13 phases were tested in the interest of simplifying the measurement task 108
because it was felt that the participants would have become bored
with the task using all 13 phases. Within the model there 1s a
specified difference between transitions and the corresponding
phases yet for this study they were combined. It is not clear
what effect this choice had on the validation task; therefore,
these results may not be generalizable to the entire model and
can only speak for the five combined phases tested in the study.
A third limitation of this study deals with the
instrumentation Itself. According to Sue and Zane (1985), 1t is
"always problematic to select or develop questionnaires for use
with ethnic or minority group populations" (p. 572). The Social
Desirability Questionnaire may not be culturally relevant for
non-Western cultures. The instrument does not appear to have been specifically validated with culturally diverse populations; therefore, its assumption that all Individuals are concerned with
responding in socially desirable ways may be questionable. In addition, the implications for using two different types of scales for racial/ethnic identity are not clear. Since there is no research exploring the relationship between acculturation
level and racial/ethnic Identity, the impact of such potentially diverse constructs is not measureable. More study should be done to clarify the similarities and differences between these two 109
constructs and possibly create similar racial/ethnic Identity
Instrumentation for Asian-Americans.
The SIDMOP measures were created specifically for this study and clearly need more work. An attempt was made by Including a pilot study and soliciting feedback from SIDMOP and cultural experts to create measures which were reflective of and able to measure the validity of SIDMOP. The low reliability scores for the self-SIDMOP measure Indicate that additional empirical study of the instrument is necessary. In general* there may have been the confound of language difficulties for some of the recently immigrated Asian-American participants. Although directions and language were tested for in the pilot study* the pilot sample appeared more acculturated than the participants of the validation study. Some participants felt the instruments were too long and repetitive* and it is not clear what effect this had on their responses. Considering some of SIDMOP's assumptions about growth* how does one measure a nonlinear growth process when most measurement tools are based 1n linear thinking? Even with the inherent limitations of this study* the results do show support for the SIDMOP framework and hopefully with future research those results will be replicated. 110
There were many theoretical and methodological challenges in designing this validation study. The literature has few examples on which to base such work. More empirical work must be done to expand the methodology available for such validation work. If we can improve and expand the validation methodology, maybe future psychologists will be less likely to develop models or theoretical frameworks without testing them. Psychology must also become more willing to use qualitative methodologies which seem well suited to understanding developmental processes. Using a multimethodological approach to validation is, without a doubt, the most thorough way to test a model; however, because of time and resource demands, a shorter route 1s often taken.
The research team approach used to create SIDMOP, along with the diversity of empirical methods being explored, has created more of an emic process in which an individual's situation is viewed from within her or his own culture. Cross-cultural psychology has supported emic research because 1t creates the opportunity to discover what is important within a culture firsthand (Lonner, 1985; Pederson, Rodrlquez, & Brown, 1986). As
Wampold (1987) states, "if one of the primary goals of multi and cross-cultural counseling 1s the creation of a pluralistic Ill society then we must model pluralism 1n our endeavors within counseling psychology" (p. 5). Clearly the questions raised 1n doing this study need to be examined so that we can refine the process of doing research on Identity development models for oppressed people. Future Research on SIPMQP
There are many possible areas for future research on the
SIDMOP framework. Clearly, additional validation work with a diversity of oppressed groups 1s the place to start. In addition, making revisions on the methodology and Instruments used 1s also necessary. Content specific Instruments would need to be developed for other oppressed groups. To better test
SIMOP, It would also be helpful to have two additional
Instruments: (a) a measure of attitudes, feelings, and behaviors towards other oppressed groups and (b) a measure of spiritual-material Integration. Once the model is validated, there must be further research to establish the reliability and validity of the measures used. Once the instrumentd themselves are found to be valid and reliable, additional research could be completed (e.g., counseling process).
There are several areas of the SIDMOP framework that could use additional in-depth study such as exploration of the 112
Transformation phase. The uniqueness of this phase calls for a thorough Investigation. A qualitative approach would be one way to uncover the dynamics of this phase. By Identifying
Individuals believed to be experiencing the Transformation phase and Interviewing them* much information about Transformation could be gained. Studies on "recycling" and the dynamics of the developmental process is another Important area for 1n-depth research. An additional area of importance would be a study of the effects of multiple oppression. How does multiple oppression affect a person's identity? How is the growth process different for someone experiencing multiple oppressions?
According to Atkinson (1988), a measure of a good theory 1s its ability to stimulate research in the area. As articultated here, there are many research possibilities available for SIDMOP which makes it a promising theory in the field of Identity development of oppressed people. Clearly more research is needed for SIDMOP specifically and the field of Identity development for oppressed groups in order to increase our understanding and ability to work with effectively diversity. LIST OF REFERENCES
Atkinson, D.R. (1988). SIDMOP: Inclusive model for all? American Psychological Association Convention. Atlanta, Georgia.
Atkinson, D.R. and G1m, R.H. (1988). Asian American cultural identity and attitudes toward mental health services. American Psychological Association Convention. Atlanta, Georgia.
Atkinson, D.R., Morten, G. and Sue, D.W. (1983). Counseling American minorities; A cross-cultural perspective. Dubuque, IA.: Wm. C. Brown.
Avery, D.M. (1977). The psychological stages of liberation. Illinois Personnel and Guidance Association Quarterly. 63_, 36-42.
Awakuni, G. (1988). An exploration of the relationship between ethnic identity and preference for counselor race among Korean and Chinese American college students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University.
Banks, J.A. (1984). Teaching strategies for ethnic studies (3rd Edition). Boston: Alyn and Bacon, Inc.
Berry, J.W. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaption. In A.M. Padilla (Ed.), Acculturation Theory, Models and Some New Findings. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, Inc.
Betz, N.E. (1987). Issues in multi- and cross-cultural research. National Conference on Counseling Psychology. Atlanta, GA.
Brandell, J.R. (1988). Treatment of the Biradal child: Theoretical and clinical issues. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development. J£, 176-187.
Butler, R.O. (1975). Psychotherapy: Implications of a black consciousness process model. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice. 12, 407-411.
113 114
Cass, V.C. (1979). Homosexual identity formation: A theoretical model. Journal of Homosexuality. 4_, 219-235.
Cass, V.C. (1984). Homosexual identity formation: Testing a theoretical model. The Journal of Sex Research. 2Q# 143-167.
Chance, N.A. (1965). Acculturation self-identification and personality adjustment. American Anthropologist, 6.1, 372-393. Chow, E.N.L. (1982). Acculturation of Asian American professional women. Washington, DC: NIMH, Department of Health and Human Services.
Conner, J.W. (1974). Acculturation and family continuities in three generations of Japanese-Americans. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 2£, 159-165.
Cross, W.E. (1971). The Negro-to-Black conversion experience. Black World. Z, 13-27.
Cross, W.E. (1980a). Black identity: Rediscovering the distinction between personal Identity and reference group orientation. SRCE Study Group. Atlanta, Georgia. Cross, W.E. (1980b). Models of psychological nigrescence: A literature review. In R.L. Jones (Ed.), Black Psychology (2nd Edition). New York: Harper and Row.
Cross, W.E. (1981). Black families and Black identity development. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 12, 19-50. Crowne, D. and Marlowe, D. (1964). The approval motive. New York: Wiley.
Cuellar, I., Harris, L. and Jasso, R. (1980). An acculturation scale for Mexican American normal and clincial populations. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Science. 2, 199-217.
Dahlqulst, L.M. and Fay, A.S. (1983). Cultural Issues in psychotherapy. In C.E. Walker (Ed.), The handbook of clinical psychology; Theory, research, and practice (Vol. 2). Homewood, IL: Irwin. 115 de Monteflores, C. and Schultz, S.J. (1978). Coming out. Similarities and differences for lesbians and gay men. Journal of Social Issues, 2A» 59-72.
Downing,. N„E. and Roush, K.L. (1985). From passive acceptance to active commitment: A model of feminist Identity development of women. The Counseling Psychologist. 12., 695-705.
Endo, 6.T. and Della-Piana, C.K. (1981). Japanese Americans, pluralism, and the model minority myth. Theory into Practice. 2Q, 45-51.
Faderman, L. (1984). The "New Gay" Lesbians. Journal of Homosexuality. J£, 85-95.
Goldensteinerahler, J. (1985). A proposed use of the semantic differential technique in studies involving acculturation. Journal of the Plains Anthropologist. 3J2, 1-8.
Hall, W.S., Cross, W.E., and Freedle, R. (1972). Stages in the development of Black awareness: An exploratory investigation. In R. Jones (Ed.), Black Psychology (pp. 156- 165). New York: Harper & Row.
Hall, W.S. and Freedle, R.O. (1975). Culture and language: The Black American experience. N.Y.: John Wiley & Sons.
Hardiman, R. (1979). White identity developmental theory. New Perspectives, Inc.
Heath, A.E., Neimeyer, G.J. and Pedersen, P.B. (1988). The future of cross-cultural counseling: A Delphi poll. Journal of Counseling and Development, 67, 27-30.
Helms, J.E. (1984). Toward a theoretical explanation of the effects of race on counseling: A Black and White model. The Counseling Psychologist, 12, 153-165. Henderson, G. (Ed.) (1979). Understanding and counseling ethnic minorities. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Hess, E.P. (1983). Feminist and lesbian development: Parallels and divergencies. Journal of Homosexuality, 21» 67-78. 116
Highlen, P.S., Myers, L.J., Hanley, C.P., Speight, S., Reynolds* A.L., Adams, E.M. and Cox, C. (1986). Seed Grant Proposal. Unpublished manuscript.
Highlen, P.S., Reynolds, A.L., Adams, E.M., Hanley, C.P., Myers, L.J., Cox, C. and Speight, S. (1988). Self-Identity Development Model of Oppressed People: Inclusive model for all? American Psychological Association Convention. Atlanta, Georgia.
Hilliard, A.G. (1985). Multicultural dimensions to counseling human development in an age of technology. Journal of Non White concerns in Personnel and Guidance. 12., 17-27.
Jackson, B. (1975). Black identity development. MEFORM; Journal of Educational Diversity and Innovation, Z» 19-25. Jackson, B.W. and Hardiman, R. (1983). Racial identity development: Implications for managing the multiracial work force. NTL Managers' Handbook (pp.107-119).
Jackson, C.C. and Kirschner, S.A. (1973). Racial self-designation and preference for a counselor. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2Q, 560-564.
Katz, J.H. (1985). The sociopolitical nature of counseling. The Counseling Psychologist* 13_, 615-624.
Keefe, S.E. and Padilla, A.M. (1987). Chicano Ethnicity. Albuquerque, N.M.: University of New Mexico Press.
La Framboise, T. (1983). Assertion training with American Indians. Las Cruces, NM Educational Resource Information Center, Clearinghouse on Rural Education in Small Schools.
Leong, F.T.L. (1986). Counseling and psychotherapy with Asian- Americans: A review of the literature. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 3J., 196-206.
Lim, H. (1978). (Ed.) Understanding the Pan Asian client; A handbook for helping professionals. San Diego, CA: Union of Pan Asian Communities. 117
Lonner, W.J. (1985). Issues in testing and assessment 1n cross-cultural counseling. The Counseling Psychologist, 12., 599-614.
Masuda, M., Matsumoto, G.H., and Meredith, G.M. (1970). Ethnic identity in three generations of Japanese Americans. The Journal of Social Issues. £L, 199-207.
Matsumoto, G.M., Meredith, G.M. and Masuda, M. (1970). Ethnic Identification: Honolulu and Seattle Japanese-Americans. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1, 63-76.
Mayovich, M.K. (1973). Political activation of Japanese American youth. Journal of Social Issues, 22, 167-185.
McDonald, G.J. (1982). Individual differences in the coming out process for gay men: Implications for theoretical models. Journal of Homosexuality. £, 47-60.
McLellan, E.A. (1977). Lesbian identity: A theological and psychological inquiry into the developmental stages of identity in a Lesbian. Unpublished manuscript, School of Theology at Claremont, Ann Arbor, MI.
Mendoza, R.H. and Mart.lJiez, J.L. (1981). The measurement of acculturation. In A. Baron Jr. (Ed.), Explorations in Chicano psychology (pp. 71-82). N.Y.: Praeger Publishers.
Minton, H.L. and McDonald, G.J. (1984). Homosexual identity formation as a developmental process. Journal of Homosexuality. 2» 91-104.
Myers, L.J. (1980). The meaning of development: Its psychosocial determinants. Unpublished manuscript.
Myers, L.J. (1981). Oneness: A Black model of psychological functioning. Association of Black Psychologists Convention. Denver, Colorado.
Myers, L.J. (1981). Transpersonal psychology: The role of the Afrocentric paradigm. Journal of Black Psychology, 12, 31-42. 118
Olmedo, E.L. (1979). Acculturation: A psychometric perspective. American Psychologist. 3_4> 1061-1070.
.* Olmedo, E.L. and Padilla, A.M. (1978). Empirical and construct validation of a measure of acculturation for Mexican Americans. The Journal of Social Psychology, lfl5_, 179-187. Padilla, A.M. (1980). (Editor). Acculturation Theory. Models and Some New Findings. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, Inc.
Parham, T.A. (in review). Cycles of psychological nigresence. The Counseling Psychologist.
Parham, T.A. and Helms, J.E. (1981). The influence of Black student's racial preferences for counselor's race. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 2fi, 250-257.
Parham, T.A. and Helms, J.E. (1985a). Attitudes of racial identity and self-esteem. Journal of College Student Personnel. 26, 143-147.
Parham, T.A. and Helms, J.E. (1985b). Relation of racial identity attitudes to self-actualization and affective states of Black students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 22, 431-440.
Pedersen, P., Rodriquez, L., and Brown, D.L. (1986). Cross- cultural counseling. ETIC/EMIC approach: The triad model. AACD Convention. Syracuse, Mew York.
Ponterotto, J.G. (1988). Racial consciousness development among White counselor trainees: A stage model. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development. J£, 146-156.
Smith, E.M. and Vasquez, M.J. (1985). Introduction: A special issue of cross-cultural counseling. The Counseling Psychologist. I2» 531-536.
Stone, W.0. (1984). Multicultural perspectives of career development. In H.D. Burck and R.C. Reardon (Eds.), Career Development Interventions. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. 119
Sue, D.w. (1981). Counseling the culturally different; Theory and practice. N.Y.: John Wiley and Sons.
Sue, D.W., Bernier, J.E., Durran, A., Feinberg, L., Pedersen, P., Smith, E.J. and Vasquez-Nuttal1, E. (1982). Position paper: Cross-cultural competencies. The Counseling Psychologist, lfi, 45-51.
Sue, D.W. and K1rk, B.A. (1973). Differential characteristics of Japanese-American and Chinese-American college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2Q, 142-148.
Sue, D.W. and Sue, D. (in press). Counseling the culturally different: Theory and practice. N.Y.: John Wiley & Sons.
Sue, S. (1977). Psychological theory and implications for Asian Americans. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 3_, 381-389.
Sue, S. and Morishima, J.K. (1982). The mental health of Asian Americans. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Sue, S. and Sue, D.W. (1971). Chinese-American personality and mental health. Amerasia Journal, 1, 36-49.
Sue, S., Sue, D.W., and Sue, D.W. (1975). Asian Americans as a minority group. American Psychologist, 906-910.
Sue, S. and Zane, Z.W. (1985). Academic achievement and socioemotional adjustment among Chinese University students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 22, 370-379.
Suinn, R.M., Rickard-Figueroa, K., Lew, S. and Vigil, P. (1987). The Suinn-Lew Asian Self-Identity Acculturation Scale: An Initial Report. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41, 401-407.
Thomas, C.W. (1971). Boys no more. Beverly Hills, CA: Glencoe Press.
Vasquez, M.J. (1987). Diversity and multicultural counseling from a counseling psychologist's perspective: A reaffirmation. National Conference for Counseling Psychology. Atlanta, Georgia. 120
Vontress, C.E. (1971). Racial differences: Impediments to rapport. Journal of Counseling Psychology, lfi, 7-13.
Wampold, B.E. (1987). Multi and cross-cultural research: Where are the much needed results? National Conference for Counseling Psychology. Atlanta, Georgia.
White, J.L. (1984). The psychology of Blacks: An Afro- American perspective. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Yiu, L.C.R. (1979). Degree of assimilation and its effect on the preference of counseling style and on self- disclosure among Chinese-Americans in Hawaii. Dissertation Abstracts International. 3J>, 5340A. -121 Appendix A TA8UE1 PWVliELS BETWEEN SCMCPAM>OT€R EENTTTY CEVaCRYENTMtmS TCR OPPRESSED PECR£
SOMOP BWcOrecas- BbckOracBUS- Hcntaoatt Rs*at MUttaSnc Mrrty BhekOBn- PsyctaaoeM (H£ter\ neasflhmas, 1971) neasPoaa, 1971) kfettyRim- ktartty Rwescf kfertiyOMtp sccuaneaa Shgajtf etal,l9BB) AcnQes, Qawv Daefcprert mert(»ttincneUl MfcraOSBQ Wirarts 1979I19B4 rgannach @*te,1979 19B) Lbaotcn 1SBE) (*VHy,1977)
Ataeroe cfOon- 9CBa rlMKnBBS TonBtJon Abaenoecf QTBXUS
tohdu&n- ten inAttafcn Tcanatcn tDdsacnanoe Ftetrcartar OJCLIBUJLB BBbeflvDtw) tisrlty Dbscnanoe Ernuier QT*JBObsrlty I RBBM Bfroertqy CMbnty GdrAflon AooaptaRB Tarefcn WttJwd kfertiiderdy feuttonRMUDI Oacrvn Ctrtcrtatcn Epctay/O* Qsacfloncs TeatiyiQ Ccnparacn, tokiumui litjiiotui Tcfetaroe
Inroacn AdMy ImmBsen ttrttyttrtty EntettdEfrtatM*- EBiuatmn ResBtan»& MB nBBB Tanstan Emaratm Hmapactcn Emaprne kiiiHaui
"lERtf- ktertiy Syntmt EfrnyMbm izaton Syrtteas **» QjiuiiiBi Tiareoan Morakstton TtLDBOidy Acton ir—*-—- tDMBgalGn Irttgatm Tmcendalal FMvtiy Synodic AttUttM
Tw&iut Tiamtamtoi PLEASE NOTE:
Copyrighted materials in this document have not been filmed at the request of the author. They are available for consultation, however, in the author's university library.
These consist of pages:
Appendix B 122-127
Appendix C 128-130
Appendix D 131-132
UMI 133
Appendix E
Research has shown that there is a process through which people develop their identity. This process 1s slightly different for people who are oppressed and must endure discrimination or prejudice on a continual basis. After reading the following descriptions of 5 stages of Identity development for Asian/Black people* place the stages in the order in which you believe a(n) Asian/Black person might experience them. Order them from A through E using A to Indicate the first stage that a(n) Asian/Black person might experience and E to indicate the final stage, of development.
1. Internalization: In this stage* Asians/Blacks feel secure and confident of their Asian/Black Identity and see it as only one part of their overall identity as a person. While Asians/Blacks may still be a primary reference group* their community expands to include strong connections with other oppressed people. They no longer accept everything that is Asian/Black as being good or right for them.
2. Dissonance; In this stage, some significant events or personal insights challenge their negative feelings about being Asian/Black and their view of the world. They may experience some prejudice or discrimination and realize that society does not understand or value them as Asians/Blacks. These encounters may shake their self-image and cause them to redefine their Asian/Black identity.
3. Integration; In this stage, Asians/Blacks see similarities and connections among all people. This connection to others is quite strong and others'oppression strikes a very personal chord for them. They are often Involved with a diversity of people across oppressed groups and are more likely to experience some understanding and sympathy for people in power (e.g.. Whites) as well. They work towards ending the oppression of all life.
4. Transformation; In this stage* Asians/Blacks experience a shift 1n their world view toward a more spiritual or wholistic view. They strive to understand all human culture and history and feel spiritually connected to all life. They experience a conscious "at peace" feeling with the world and 134
are able to feel good about themselves even when others devalue them.
5. Immersion; In this stage* Asians/Blacks actively Involve themselves with other Asian/Black people as a way of feeling better about themselves and their heritage. Such connections create a sense of belonging and self-celebration. They become concerned and often angry with the social Issues that affect Asians/Blacks and actively work to change the prejudice and discrimination against Asians/Blacks. Appendix F Listed below are 30 items that are descriptive of the 5 stages listed on the previous page. Each item can be placed into only one stage. For each item, mark the stage that best represents how Blacks might feel or think at that point in their life. Complete a matching task by assigning the stage letter (e.g.* A, B, etc.!: to the correct and corresponding items.
1. These individuals struggle with how they as Asians/Blacks fit into White society.
2. These individuals believe that Asians/Blacks experience problems similar to other oppressed groups and the White culture.
3. These individuals actively seek out information about Asian/Black culture and people (e.g., social events, literature).
4. These individuals realize that people need to be where they are even when that conflicts with their view of the world.
5. These individuals feel confused, depressed or isolated because of White society's negative view of Asian/Black people.
6. These individuals are actively involved with other people besides Asians/Blacks who share a positive view of Asian/Black heritage.
7. These individuals accept some parts of Asian/Black culture and reject others.
8. These Individuals are willing to see the world differently from other Asians/Blacks even if it causes tensions or conflicts.
9. These individuals are Involved with other people besides Asians/Blacks who are also experiencing discrimination or prejudice.
10. These individuals search for a true understanding of how everything and everyone in the universe fit together. 136
11. These individuals no longer identify people by which "group" they belong (e.g., Asians/Blacks) because those labels distance them from others.
12. These Individuals do not feel good about being Black.
13. These individuals feel best about themselves when with other Asians/Blacks.
14. These individuals no longer see the oppressor (e.g.. Whites) as untrustworthy.
15. These individuals feel connected with other people and see their struggles as their own.
16. These individuals consciously choose to avoid those societal beliefs that limit their self-image and self-esteem.
17. These individuals are unaware of how other oppressed people are devalued by White culture.
18. These individuals are aware of limitations of valuing material things more than a spiritual understanding.
19. These individuals become increasingly aware of how White society views Asian/Black people in negative ways.
20. These individuals see almost everything about Asians/Blacks as being good and feel excitement and joy with other Asians/Blacks.
21. These individuals are more willing to work with Whites and see how oppression restricts them as well.
22. These individuals feel it is Important and good to be different from White society.
23. These individuals realize that all"people are in the same search for wholeness in their own way and at their own pace.
24. These Individuals challenge White society's values and assumptions that devalue Asian/Black people. 137
25. These Individuals tend not to spend much time with White people.
26. These Individuals focus more on similarities among people rather than the differences.
27. These individuals feel angry and frustrated with society's negative views of Asians/Blacks.
28. These Individuals experience an inner beauty and satisfaction that is not easily influenced by the opinion of others who see and experience the world as the White culture defines it.
29. These individuals wish they could change so that they could fit in with what White society considers "best" or "normal".
30. These individuals are highly focused on how Asians/Blacks are oppressed and are less involved with other oppressed groups. 138
Appendix G
This questionnaire 1s designed to measure social and political beliefs. Use the scale below to respond to each statement. On your answer sheet* please shade in the response that best describes how you feel.
A B C D E
Strongly Mildly Neutral Mildly Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Disagree
1. I struggle with how I as a(n) Asian/Black person fit into White society.
2. I believe that Asians/Blacks experience problems similar to other oppressed groups and the White culture.
3. I actively seek out information about Asian/Black culture and people (e.g., soda! events, literature).
4. I realize that people need to be where they are even when that conflicts with my view of the world.
5. I feel confused, depressed or isolated because of White society's negative view of Asian/Black people.
6. I'm actively involved with other Asian/Black people who share a positive view of Asian/Black heritage.
7. I accept some parts of Asian/Black culture and reject others.
8. I am willing to see the world differently from other Asians/Blacks even when it causes tensions or conflicts.
9. I am involved with other people besides Asians/Blacks who are also experiencing discrimination or prejudice.
10. I search for a true understanding of how everything and everyone in the universe fit together. 139
11. I no longer Identify people by which "group" they belong (e.g., Asians/Blacks) because those labels distance me from others.
12. I do not feel good about being Asian/Black.
13. I feel best about myself when with other Asians/Blacks.
14. I no longer see the opppressor (e.g.* Whites) as untrustworthy.
15. I feel connected with other people and see their struggles as my own.
16. I consciously choose to avoid those societal beliefs that limit my self-image and self-esteem.
17. I am unaware of how other oppressed groups are devalued by White culture.
18. I am aware of the limitations of valuing material things more than a spiritual understanding.
19. I am Increasingly aware of how White society views Asian/Black people in negative ways.
20. I see almost everything about Asian/Black as being good and feel excitement and joy with other Asians/Blacks.
21. I am more willing to work with Whites and see how oppression restricts them as well.
22. I feel it is Important and good to be different from White society.
23. I realize that all people are in the same search for wholeness in their own way and at their own pace.
24. I challenge White society's values and assumptions that devalue Asian/Black people.
25. I tend not to spend much time with White people. 140
26. I focus more on the similarities among people rather than the differences.
27. I feel angry and frustrated with society's negative views of Asians/Blacks.
28. I experience an Inner beauty and satisfaction that Is not easily influenced by the opinion of others who see and experience the world as White culture sees it.
29. I wish I could change my Asian/Black identity so that I could fit in with what White society considers "best" or "normal".
30. I am highly focused on how Asians/Blacks art* oppressed and am less involved with other oppressed groups. 141
Appendix H
ASIAN/BLACK AMERICAN ATTITUDES SURVEY
This questionnaire is aimed at exploring how Asian/Black men and women feel about various aspects of their lives. Your responses will provide us with valuable information regarding the values* attitudes, and actions of Asian/Black Americans. Participation is voluntary and your responses are strictly confidential. Give your best answer to each question and work as quickly as you can. If you would like to make comments or qualify your answers, feel free to add information regarding the questions as you fill them out. If you feel the need to do so, there will be a space at the end to give feedback and suggestions about the study. Each questionnaire has been assigned a number; corresponding number appears on each face sheet. Immediately after we receive it, your questionnaire will be separated from the face sheet to maintain your anonymity. Again, please keep in mind that your Involvement is strictly voluntary and you may withdraw your participation at any time during the study. Thank you for being involved in this research endeavor. Your time and effort are greatly appreciated. If you would like a summary of the results of this survey after the data are analyzed, please check the appropriate box below.
Sincerely,
Amy L. Reynolds, M.A. Counseling Center University of California Irvine, CA 92717 (714) 856-6457
Your Name:
Address:
Phone Number: ( )
Yes, I would like you to send me a summary of the results. 142 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA IRVINE
CONSENT TO ACT AS A HUMAN RESEARCH SUBJECT
Asian-American and Black Identity: The Validation of a Self-Identity Developmental Model TITLE OF STUDY
Any L. Reynolds Counseling Center 856-6457 NAME, DEPARTMENT AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF INVESTIGATOR
You have been asked to participate in a research study which is exempt from review by a Human Subjects Review Committee. The purpose of this study, the terms of your participation, as well as any expected risks and/or benefits must be fully explained to you before you sign this form and give your consent to participate.
You should also know that:
1. Participation In research is entirely voluntary. You may refuse to participate or withdraw from participation at any time without jeopardy to future medical care, educational or employment status or other entitlement. The investigator may withdraw you from participation at his/her professional discretion.
2. If, during the course of this study, significant new information which has been developed during the course of the study becomes available which may re late to your willingness to continue to participate, this information will be provided to you by the investigator.
3. Confidentiality will be protected to the extent provided by law.
4. If at any time you have questions regarding the research or your participation, you should contact the Investigator or his/her assistants who must answer the questions.
5. If, at any time, you have comments or complaints relating to the conduct of this research, you may contact the Human Subjects Committees Office, 145 Administration Building, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA. 92717.
6. If this study is a medical.investigation/experiment, you must also read and be given a copy of the Experimental Subjects Bill of Rights as well as a copy of this consent form to keep.
I consent to participate in this study.
SIGNATURE OF SUBJECT (Age 7 and older) DATE
SIGNATURE OF PARENT/GUARDIAN (For Minor Subject—All persons under age 18) DATE
SIGNATURE OF WITNESS (Optional) DATE
Rev. 8/82 1 143
Appendix J
PERSONAL DATA SHEET
Please answer the following questions about yourself and your family for statistical purposes. All answers shall be confidential. Please shade in the response that best describes you and specify the requested Information in the blanks provided.
1. Class Standing: (A) Freshmore (C) Junior (B) Sophomore (D) Senior
2. Please identify your racial ancestry.
Racial Ancestry: (A) Chinese (E) Pillpino (B) Black (F) Vietnamese (C) Japanese (G) Other (D) Korean 3. Gender: (A) Female (B) Male
4. Age:
5. Marital Status: (A) Single (never married) (C) Married (B) Divorced (D) Other 6. State the highest level of education that you have completed.
Some college (# years ) A College graduate B Some graduate work C Graduate degree D (specify: )
7. Describe the highest level of education that your mother has completed.
8. Describe the highest level of education that your father has completed. 144
9. Which of these broad categories describes your total family Income before taxes 1n 1987? (If you are not sure, Indicate your response and put an asterick * next to the category so that we know that 1t 1s your best guess)
(A) Less than $5,000 (B) $5,000-$9,999 (C) $10,000-$14,999 (D) $15,000-$19,999 (E) $20,000-$24,000 (F) $25,000-$29,999 (G) $30,000-$39,999 (H) $40,000-$49,999 (I) $50,000 or more
10. Siblings (brothers and sisters): List gender and ages.
11. What is your religious affiliation?
(A) Baptist (B) Buddhist (C) Episcopalian (D) Jewish (E) Latter Day Saints (F) Lutheran (G) Methodist (H) Prebyterian (I) Roman Catholic (J) Seventh Day Adventist (K) Other (specify: ) (L) No religion
12. Using the previously listed categories, identify your mother's religious affiliation. 145
13. Using the previously listed categories* identify your father's religious affiliation.
14. What is or was your parents' profession/occupation (i.e.* j title and brief description of duties and responsibilities) during most of their lives?
Job Title Description
Mother:
Father:
15. What is your sexual/affectional orientation?
(A) heterosexual (B) bisexual (C) lesbian/gay (d) asexual (e) unsure
(FOR ASIAN-AMERICAN PARTICIPANTS ONLY)
16. Where have you spent most of your life? State the specific countries you lived in as well as the number of years spent in each place.
Mostly In Asian country (A) Yrs. Specify: Mostly in U.S. (B) Yrs. Specify: Equally in Asian country (C) Yrs. Specify: and U.S. Other (D) Yrs. Specify: 146
17. Where has your mother spent most of her life? State the specific countries she lived in as well as the number of years spent in each place.
Mostly in Asian country (A) Yrs. Specify: Mostly 1n U.S. (B) Yrs. Specify: Equally in Asian country (C) Yrs. Specify: and U.S. Other (D) Yrs. Specify:
18. Where has your father spent most of his life? State the specific countries he lived 1n as well as the number of years spent in each place.
Mostly in Asian country (A) Yrs. Specify: Mostly in U.S. (B) Yrs. Specify: Equally in Asian country (C) Yrs. Specify: and U.S. Other (D) Yrs. Specify: