You are on page 1of 48

The Crucible within: Ethnic Identity, Self-Esteem, and Segmented Assimilation among Children of Immigrants Author(s): Ruben

G. Rumbaut Reviewed work(s): Source: International Migration Review, Vol. 28, No. 4, Special Issue: The New Second Generation (Winter, 1994), pp. 748-794 Published by: The Center for Migration Studies of New York, Inc. Stable URL: . Accessed: 10/02/2012 10:25
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact

The Center for Migration Studies of New York, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Migration Review.



Within: and Among Segmented



Self-Esteem, Assimilation Immigrants1 Ruben G. Rumbaut State University




Focusing on the formation of ethnic self-identities during adolescence, the psychosocial of children of immi? this article examines adaptation grants from Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean. The data are drawn from a survey carried out in the San Diego and Miami metropolitan the eighth and areas of over 5,000 children of immigrants attending ninth grades in local schools. The sample is evenly split by gender and nativity (half are U.S. born, half foreign born). The results show major in their patterns of ethnic self-identification, both between differences and within groups from diverse national origins. Instead of a uniform assimilative paths to identity formation. path, we found segmented are sketched social portraits for each ethnic identity type. Detailed of assimilative Multivariate and analyses then explore the determinants ethnic self-identities and of other aspects of psychosocial dissimilative such as self-esteem, affect, and parent-child depressive adaptation for gender, socioeconomic conflict, status, and national controlling and practical implications of these results origin. The theoretical the effects of acculturation, location and discrimination, especially socialization and family context, ethnic density of schools, parental of children of recent immigrants to adaptation upon the psychosocial the United States - are discussed. / wish I knew some other way to render the mental life of the immigrant child of reasoning age . . . What the child thinks and feels is a reflection of the hopes, desires, and purposes of the parents who brought him overseas, no matter how precocious and independent the child may be . . . My parents knew only that they desired us to be like American children . . . In their bewilderment and uncertainty they needs must trust us children to learn from such models as the tenements afforded. More than this, they must step down from the throne of parental authority, and take the law from their children's mouths; for they had no other means of finding out what was good American form. The result . . . makes for friction, and sometimes ends in breaking up a family . . . This sad process of disintegration of home life may be observed in almost any immigrant family of our class and with our Research supported by grants from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the Spencer Founda? tion, and the National Science Foundation. 748 IMR Vol. xxviii, No. 4

The Crucible



traditions and aspirations. It is part of the process of Americanization . . . It is the cross that the first and second generations must bear. . . These are the pains of adjustment, as racking as the pains of birth. And as the mother forgets her agonies in the bliss of clasping her babe to her breast, so the bent and heart-sore immigrant forgets exile and homesickness and ridicule and loss and estrangement, when he beholds his sons and daughters moving as Americans among Americans. (Antin, 1912:198, 271-272)

written before she was 30, Ironically, Mary Antin's popular autobiography, in The Atlantic Monthly in the same year the Immigration was serialized its 42-volume Commission (Dillingham) presented report to the U.S. Con? gress, including five volumes on children of immigrants, fueling fears about the danger to the nation posed by a putatively inferior stock of inassimilable "new" immigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe. A Russian Jew who at a immigrated young age to Boston with her family in 1894 and went to in Antin was the precocious schools and independent Chelsea, public of a confined the "Pale of in the empire trader to Settlement" daughter petty of the czars, and her book is at once perceptive about the "the mental life of the immigrant child" and pregnant with the unabashed and patriotism of a former stateless person who finds in America, newfound freedom "a nest to homeless birds" (1912:231). despite many hardships, of immigrant children, now Nearly a century later a huge new generation from Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean, is growing up in American cities in contexts that seem both familiar and sharply different from those are raised about the reported long ago by Antin. Once again, questions - because of their race, of newcomers the assimilability language, culture, or to one-size-fits-all Procrustean, supposed unwillingness speak English. panethnic labels - such as Asian, Hispanic, Black - are imposed willy-nilly by the society at large to lump ethnic groups together who may hail variously from Vietnam or Korea, India or China, Guatemala or Cuba, Haiti or Jamaica, and who differ widely in national and class origins, phenotypes, languages, cultures, genera? in the United States. tions, migration histories, and modes of incorporation in the Their children, adolescents and especially process of constructing a to social are what "out there" is identity, challenged crystallizing incorporate into what is "in here," often in dissonant social contexts. In California, on the opposite coast from Mary Antin's, a ninth-grade Filipino immigrant girl, eager to fit in her new milieu, reports that "our parents don't come [to school functions] because they don't know any English. I don't even tell them when they are supposed to come. They dress so different and I don't want our parents to come because the others will laugh at them and tease us. We are ashamed" (Olsen, 1988:82). When Lao teens in a San Diego junior high school are teased by white classmates and told to "go back to China," the Lao kids fire back:"Go





back to Europe!" And a 16-year-old Cambodian girl, a survivor of Cambo? dia's "killing fields" of the late 1970s living in an inner-city neighborhood in San Diego with her widowed mother and unlikely to finish high school, is puzzled by a question about American identity: "How could I be Ameri? can? I black skin, black eyes, black hair . . . My English not good enough and my skin color black" (quoted from case histories in Rumbaut and Ima, 1988; cf. Hatcher and Troyna, 1993).

BACKGROUND In some respects, especially in the racial-ethnic diversification and stratification the current transformation of the American population, may be unprece? dented in the American experience. Class, not color, shaped the fates of the "white ethnics" - Italians, Poles, Greeks, Russian Jews, and many others -whose arrival by the millions during the previous peak period of immigration of the I in War the era culminated restrictionist national-origins quota laws pre-World of the 1920s. The groups that had then occasioned such vitriolic alarms were and absorption into the European whites whose assimilation, amalgamation, of American life over the succeeding mainstream decades, notably in the aftermath of World War II, was aptly captured in the subtitle of Richard Alba's 1985 study of Italian Americans: Into the Twilight of Ethnicity. For those white Americans, at least, one outcome of widespread social mobility and intermar? riage in a span of three or more generations is that ethnic identity has become an optional, familial, leisure-time form of symbolic ethnicity (Alba, 1990; Gans, models of immigrant acculturation and 1979; Waters, 1990). Our conventional self-identification of processes largely derive from the historical experience those (and earlier) European immigrants and their descendants. to the United States is Today's new and rapidly accelerating immigration in of its and national color, class, extraordinary diversity origins. The 1990 U.S. census counted 19.8 million immigrants, an all-time high. In terms of color, most new immigrants self-reported as nonwhite in the 1990 census (cf. Frank? of white immigrants declined from 88 percent of lin, 1993). The proportion those arriving before 1960, to 64 percent in the 1960s, 41 percent in the 1970s, and 38 percent in the 1980s.2 This changing racial-ethnic makeup will change Black immigrants increased from 2% of pre-1960 arrivals to over 8% in the 1980s; Asians from 5% pre-1960 to 31% in the 1980s; and other-race groups from 5% pre-1960 to 23% in the 1980s. Immigrants from the Americas are the most racially mixed, with less than 45% self-reporting as white (mostly from Argentina and Cuba, then Colombia and Nicaragua), 13% as black (most from Haiti, Jamaica and the English-speaking Caribbean, then the Dominican Republic), and 41% as other (predominantly mixed populations of mestizos from Mexico and certain countries in Central and South America; mulattoes from the Spanish-speaking Carib? bean). Significantly, half of all black immigrants in the U.S. are concentrated in the New York metropolitan area and another 16% in Miami; half of the mestizo and Asian populations are concentrated in California, above all along the megalopolitan corridor stretching from San Diego to Los Angeles (Rumbaut, 1994).

creating a growing pool of persons with mixed ethnic ancestry and raising significant questions about the meaning and construction of ethnic identities among their children. arriving since 1970.8 million foreign-born persons counted in the 1990 census. patterns In terms of national origins. Jamaica. made up barely 8 percent of the total 1990 Moreover. population than was the case earlier in this proportion . those figures to not include the significant number of Hispanics married to a member of a different Hispanic group (such as a Cuban-Mexican intermarriage). the proportions of Hispanics married to non-Hispanic persons were 25% for those self-identifying as Cuban. They also differ greatly in their English language skills. Filipinos ranked second. age/sex structures. Given pines.4% in 1980 and 6. largest Hispanic immigrant groups today. 35% for Puerto Rican. and forms of family organization. Taiwan and India in Asia. with close to one million immigrants and 5 percent of the total. today's immigrants include by far the most marriage. . 28% for Mexican. (Filipinos) and with the highest (Laotians . and Haiti in the Caribbean Basin. of fertility. Mexicans alone accounted for 22 percent (4.2% in 1990. fully 5 million .a much lower U. just over a dozen countries have accounted for over two-thirds of all immigrants since 1970: Mexico. and the Philip? South Korea. and 44% for other Hispanics. Mexicans and Filipinos comprise. can Republic.3 million) of the total foreign-born and 26 percent of all immigrants population. from 1.S. El Salvador. Current intermarriage rates seem bound to rise even further in the future. while Dade County in South 3Hirschman (1994) has recently reported that.their effects are more than may seem at first glance century pronounced in particular states and localities.9% in 1970 to 3. The numbers of black-white intermarriages have been edging upward as well.resided in the Los Angeles and New York metropolitan areas alone. lowest poverty rates in the U. will grow at a still faster rate and current trends. history. Over half of these non-European immigrants 1980s alone. according to 1990 census data on married persons. as a result.a reflection of polar-opposite and Cambodians) types of migrations in very different historical embedded and structural contexts.S. the and in Asian the U. Guatemala. The propor? tion of Asians married to non-Asians was similar. and of classifications based on ascriptive and increasingly tenuous categories such as Hispanic and Asian.S. because of their patterns of concentration Of the 19. the Domini? Nicaragua. just south of Los Angeles. China. Taiwanese) and the least educated groups in American society.25 percent of the total .25% to 50% for different nationalities and generational groups. by country surpassed arrived during the Europe. the immigrant population will be further diversified its composition during the 1990s (Rumbaut. Cuba. as well as the groups with the Salvadorans) (Mexicans. Orange and San Diego Counties. in still more 1994). Vietnam. added 1 million immigrants. In fact.3 educated groups (Asian Indians. while immigrants .S. and for the first time in U.The Crucible Within 751 rates of ethnic inter? complex ways due to rapidly increasing In terms of class. by 1990 Latin American and Caribbean in the peoples had replaced Europeans as the largest immigrant population in the total and born also in Asia the total born far.

are in Caribbean San in and Miami. and national identity. of a first wave of over 5.: Hialeah (70%) residents greatest proportion in and Miami (60%). inner-city and suburban communities of the United States. Few in-depth studies have been conducted can population so of far on the adaptation children and of their immigrant process prospects for the future. and even of the Ameri? though they will form an increasingly important component and society. 187 initiative of that would (the deny public education.g..000 immigrants. . This article is an effort to contribute to our empirical knowledge in those areas of immigrant psychosocial adaptation.g. Research about these new immigrants and refugees has focused largely on the situation of first-generation adults. self-esteem and psychological well-be? indices of their ing. of discrimination. the perception of immigrants as a threat to children). the Lao in San Diego. involves not only economic domestic and fiscal issues but psywell-being chocultural and symbolic concerns. Proposition passage health care. fact. cultural preferences. primary area of in the U.S. in the greater Miami Colombians. much less is known about their children. forms of intergenerational cohe? sion or conflict within their families. and how these may be related to more objective such as their school and work performance and language shifts experience. in ethnic enclaves. we refer to here as the "crucible within" their modes of ethnic including or national self-identification. from the mother tongue to English. especially those touching on language. This permits a broader comparative diverse groups of children of immigrants on both East and West coasts. perceptions aspirations for their adult futures. and what is known about their actual adaptation patterns to Even less is known about the subjective aspects of the date is fragmentary. assessment of the adaptation of area). However.what experience. Mexicans.from Asia. Cubans and Nicaraguans settlement in Miami) or they are among the top urban areas in the country in degree of concentration and Cambodians in {e. even though they are already a very visible presence in the schools and in the streets of many American communities.S. loyalty. Haitians.752 International Migration Review the two cities with the Florida contained 875.000 teenage children study planned longitudinal in the San Diego and Miami metropolitan of immigrants areas. Vietnamese and Jamaicans San Diego. (e. Most of the . focusing on identity formation The findings reported are from a 1992 survey . and other social services to illegal immigrants and their And as in the past. including of foreign-born in the U.. Filipinos. It is precisely in these areas of dense concentration which heated public debate about the costs and benefits of immigration has most dramatically in California in 1994 by the as illustrated intensified. in given social contexts. for amply represented Diego San and of those Miami are either the many Diego groups. Latin America of new and the immigrants major groups . as processed within their phenomenal children's field .the during adolescence.

period spans identity crisis (Erikson. 1993. was not in common Erik H. changes. 1981). in his well-known an Childhood Erikson. Recent scholarship has suggested that the incorporation of today's new is likely to be segmented second generation and to take different pathways to adulthood. Portes and Zhou. the paper addresses these principal research are their ethnic (or panethnic) choices? What self-identity ethnocultural. 1990. Erikson observed that his coinage of the terms identity and identity crisis was inspired by "the of emigration. an opposite type of adaptation may lead to downward and into the inner city underclass. one path society a particular immigrant group assimilates" (1993:82). con? identities. and Society (1950) and many subsequent works. cf. questions/What characteristics THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES It is of more than passing interest to note that the concept of identity use as recently as 1950 . socioeconomic. flict? Some theoretical issues guide our analysis of ethnic identity. passage by major physical. in a country and Americanization. linguistic. For children of immigrants." experience immigration. "which attempts to make a super-identity of all the identities by imported its constituent But he applied 1981:31). self and we will briefly consider these before turning esteem. Abramson. psychological) distinguish different national origins groups from each other. like ethnicity. "the question is to what sector of American Thus. of a healthy sense of identity (Rosenberg. may follow the relatively straight-line theory (or "bumpy-line theory. generational. depressive symptoms. Indeed. and assimilation. and parent-child and of self-esteem. 1968). see Phinney. geographic. 1992. An essential task of development during this time of heightened when the self-concept is most malleable. vulner? depending abilities and resources (Gans. immigrants" (quoted in Gleason. and the different types of ethnic (or panethnic) identities from each other? And among those which are the main predictors of different types of ethnic characteristics. assimilation mobility yet another may .The Crucible Within 753 For this diverse sample. the familial. for a review of various developmental models of identity formation). 1979. is the formation self-consciousness. the concepts to analyze adolescent rather than immigrant development a Adolescence of adaptation.was which. that developmental process can be complicated by experi? ences of intense acculturative and intergenerational conflicts as they strive to adapt in social identity contexts that may be racially and culturally dissonant. on a variety of conditions and contexts. to the presentation of results." as Gans [1992] suggests may be a more apt term) of assimilation into the white middle-class majority. developed by immigrant. academic. a to marked adulthood and social emotional. As Portes and Zhou argue. (demographic.

Phinney. by disparagement group accompanied In theory. 1990) (Portes identity by divergent modes of ethnic self-identification..that is. accent. Youths see and compare Rosenberg. categories combine have suggested of social identity and self-esteem Theories various social the formation of ethnic self-images mechanisms underlying psychological 1993. where the level of social dissimilarity is higher along to negative stereotypes with exposure and reflected appraisals about one's . based on their social similarity or dissimi? larity with the reference groups that most directly affect their experiences to with visible and socially categorized such markers as gender. is seen as (which protect 1979).754 International Migration Review ethnic awareness within solidary upward mobility and heightened communities. on the degree of disso? depending of the social contexts which are basic to identity nance or consonance For youths in a consonant formation.but mechanisms of perceptual defense are deployed to group of origin self-esteem a basic human drive. Historical and contemporary field studies have portrayed the complexity in the second generation. context. ethnicity is not salient. family.g. in For a classic example. regard e. become optional or it may become for others a resilient of the white Europeans. to become similar) within the relevant social context. ethnicity may for some groups as it did for the and recede into the social twilight.. Still other variants may range from resource or an engulfing identities to panethnogenethe formation of bilingual-bicultural-binational of such officially constructed sis and the eventual acceptance supranational as Hispanic and Asian (cf Espiritu. as has occurred among in American the aftermath of the 1992 riots (Min. Thus. 1981). 1992). Portes. in themselves 1979. self-esteem and discrimination. Ethnic self-awareness is heightened or blurred.from linear to reactive of ethnic solidarity of ethnicity and processes formation and and hence Rumbaut. language. religion. race. {cf Bernal and Knight. Porter and Washington. class. 1984). Child (1943) described . in adaptations segmented the same school. relation to those around them. An alternative reaction direction to the rise and reaffirmation of ethnic may lead in an opposite and self-consciousness Korean solidarity e. psychological study of second-generation Italian immigrants in New Haven in the late 1930s. of multiple Such paths to identity resolution have been observed for the same ethnic group. Tajfel. ?/. 1991. The youth may cope with the psychological pressure produced by such dissonance by seeking to reduce conflict and to assimilate (literally. and even in the same the same ethnic neighborhood. should be lower in dissonant social contexts . We would expect that such divergent modes of immigrant will be accompanied by changes in the character and salience incorporation . and nationality. 1993. cf Rosenberg. youths in Los Angeles 1995. but dissonance the salience of ethnicity contextual and of ethnic heightens when it is all the more boundaries. descendants master status.g. respectively.

from Mexican immigrants. Glazer. and use of English in social life. 1981. by an absence of prejudice in the core society. of identificational greater the probability citizenship would tend to be that shifts of assimilation variant theory predicts identity . 1988). 1955). either in tandem with or subsequent of like a row of tenpins assimilation have all taken "the remaining types place For the bowled over in rapid succession by a well placed strike" (1964:81). process in that "the greater risk consisted was so "overwhelmingly triumphant" that could alienation from family ties and in role reversals of the generations If predictions from subvert normal parent-child (1964:107). and the "apathetic" or marginal reaction. Fieldwork in the 1980s with Mexican-de? five different ethnic scent students in a California high school distinguished . by U. to assimilated and Cholos . theory" (see but cf. Gleason. nativity and in. for a parallel recent ethnography in an inner-city neighborhood). (Suarez-Orozco gang members in this study.S. profoundly Other field studies of Mexican-origin youth have observed that even in the same family each child may resolve identity issues and conflicts differently from Cholo to anglicized. and the assimilated "corner boys. 1980) apply to the current from Asia and the Caribbean waves of immigrants Basin. 1987. In perhaps the most influential assimilation" "identificational can life. detailed the divergent trajectories of the "college boys. in fact. and is accompanied lation and indicated of their level acculturation that the by fluency greater expect for. from assimilated youths to Spanglish-speaking and Suarez-Orozco. 1995.-born Mexican Ameri? who did especially well in school. from bilingual a spectrum to and occupy to English-only-speaking. relationships" also Warner and assimilation so-called "straight-line Srole.S." who out of the ethnic colony and into the larger society. For Gordon. 1945. recently arrived and longer-term identity types U. preference . Milton Gordon (1964) considered as an unhyphenated as the end point of a American i. "in-group" type (who retained an Italian ethnicity). done at about the same time in Boston's (Whyte. Vigil. then we would . the acculturation children of white European immigrants." who were loyal above all to their peers and stayed behind (cf.the A assimilation. 1986). a self-image proceeds through structural assimi? process that begins with acculturation. 1993. some specific hypotheses can be derived For our purposes and assimi? from the available theoretical literature on ethnic identification in Ameri? statement on assimilation lation. of divergent ethnic fates Macleod. each shaped and centrifugal social forces. lation has occurred.The Crucible Within 755 within the sphere of the three main reactions to the dilemma of remaining of or of it out breaking family origin altogether: the "rebel" (who immigrant the into the American assimilated milieu). Another classic ethnog? by a set of centripetal Italian "slum district" raphy. once structural assimi? and discrimination to acculturation. Abramson..e.all of whom differed cans and the more troubled Chicanos in their achievement and aspirations (Matute-Bianchi.

even despite a high (Yinger. from A segmented assimilation identificational takes however. their children concentrated groups undercut the immigrant ethos of their parents) may be expected to lead to assimilation into the oppositional identities of native racial minorities (Portes and Zhou. family parental have effects on this and all other aspects of should relationships significant . some of the contextual factors that are most likely to shape the prospects of the new second generation location in or have to do with the presence or absence of racial discrimination. how is critically affected by the these youths think and feel about themselves and by the strength of the attachment parents' modes of ethnic socialization that the child feels to the parents and to the parents' national origins. all other things being degree of acculturation that the children of higher status immigrant we hypothesize parents equal. a large but ethnic community. official hostility and widespread racial dis? disadvantaged in inner city schools where native peer crimination. and One of those paths leads to assimilation of straight-line we would expect the above predictions theory to apply. perspective. into white middle class society. Fordham and Ogbu. and the presence or absence of Contexts that combine the positive a strong receiving coethnic community.756 International Migration Review lower to higher status groups. as in Miami's Little Haiti. By contrast. and insulates them both from native minorities and general prejudice) to lead to a may be hypothesized resilient sense of ethnic identity. including private bilingual schools. among other things.g. multiple ethnic identities may emerge. may instead prejudice reaffirm their ethnic identity or adopt a panethnic label.. contexts that combine the negative features of those factors (e. a well-established economic enclave that provides a wide range of resources and role models to their children. group ethnicity. 1981). and more likely to of with the their ethnicity identify parents. if not unidirectional of a relatively unilinear issue with the assumption into the dominant as Instead. will be less a form sizeable of contemporary (who proportion immigrants) into the dominant likely to assimilate group ethnicity. features of those factors (e. corresponding and social distinct modes of immigrant contexts of adaptation reception. where social mobility is blocked by lower status group members and discrimination. 1987). we expect that dren's sense of identification and the quality of parent-child characteristics. a measure of the degree of the chil? self-identity with their parents. differential association from areas hence with the reactive (and away inner-city adversarial subcultures of underclass youths). on contexts and processes above has focused attention discussion outside the family that may influence modes of ethnic self-definition. However. as Portes and Zhou (1993) have argued. Indeed. cf. 1993. As a corollary. Ethnic is. as in Cuban Miami. In this study we are concerned with the influence of relevant social and contexts on self-concept.g. process of identification described to above. The psychological self-regard. However. structure.. well-being.

California. acculturation (espe? -would have posi? U. the sample of a huge and highly diversified is representative Cuban exile community. Rumbaut. the includes children of two the sample largest immigrant groups in the United States today . nativity. and psychological Those that tive effects on self-esteem increase well-being. form a majority of the population of the metropolitan area and immigrants have fundamentally transformed it over the past three decades.g. 1991. symptoms. In San Diego. however. from and other West Indian Haiti.S. recently-arrived groups from well as children of the largest refugee to be resettled in the United States since 1975. 1993). citizenship cially in English competency). contextual dissonance and expose the youth to negative reflected appraisals from significant others. 1993. We families will be most that the most recently arrived immigrant expect and to to dissonant social contexts dissonant about exposed messages hence we would expect the psychosocial of those themselves.Mexicans and Filipinos . and Cambodians (cf. DATA AND METHODS The data presented below are derived from the first phase of a study of children of immigrants enrolled in schools located in two research sites in Southern California and South Florida. a level at which dropout rates are still relatively low. dissonance factors that may reduce contextual e. 1990. in Latin America (see Portes and Stepick. self-esteem. national origin. especially parents and peers .would have negative effects.such as discrimina? tion and conflictual relations with parents . controlling gender. to a brief discussion of the sample and measures used in this research.The Crucible Within 757 we hypothesize that the psychosocial adaptation process. the Vietnamese.. The survey was conducted during Spring 1992 in collaboration with the unified school districts of San Diego. These will be tested through multivariate analyses of ethnic general hypotheses and depressive for self-identifications.1995). populations In Miami. Florida's Broward County provides a contrasting . and a variety of individual and family charac? teristics. in South and of Dade (Miami) and Broward (Fort Lauderdale) Counties Florida. Psychologically. The students sampled in the initial survey were in the eighth and ninth grades. and elsewhere Colombia. adaptation teens to be more difficult and to affect their sense of self-worth. as well as of the second largest concentration of immigrants from the who have entered under very different circumstances Afro-Caribbean. where Laotians. especially Jamaica English-speaking island nations . age. As mentioned above. the groups sampled include most of the major immigrant and refugee populations in the United States today and reflect their diverse origins and patterns of concentration in those sites. to avoid the potential bias of differential dropout rates between ethnic groups at the senior high school level. We turn first. Portes and Zhou.and of sizable.

The sample middle.800 Cuban. Chileans.264: over 2.4 At the time of the survey. Laotian. for the Diego and Miami metropolitan of this article. Those students. were administered at school during the the Spring 1992 semester. as noted earlier. All eligible students then took parental consent of the parents in forms home. Other Asians includes mainly Chinese (from the mainland. grade. and other Asian and Latin American students in San Diego Colom? city schools. a student had to be either foreign born or U. Koreans. Nicaraguan. including magnet dozens of different of nationalities represents origin.758 International Migration Review setting as a location away from the main centers of immigrant concentration but is also the source of more than half of the in Miami and Hialeah. Peruvians. and other Latin American Broward Counties. Japanese. but primarily Dominicans. and Belize. immigrants focusing analyti? cally on the largest ten national-origin groups from these regions.2. All others attended public schools which ranged from predomi? white schools in the nantly nonwhite central city schools to predominantly and schools. roughly correspond? of particular immigrant ing to the varying concentrations groups in the San areas. Caribbean. The total sample is evenly split by gender. the survey questionnaire in turn. . Thus. born with at least one foreign-born parent. Hondurans. The final sample of students who completed Cambo? survey totaled 5. with an age range from 12 to 17). Haitian. and Indians. Argentinians. Vietnamese.400 Mexican.127 children of from Latin and the America. we exclude from the analysis a small mixed group purposes in the Miami area with a parent born in any one of of 137 respondents several dozen countries in the Middle East.S. junior high. Africa. and 4ln the data presented (Tables 2 through 7). Ecuadorans. and West Indian students in Dade and bian. However. Filipino. suburbs. About 200 of the students in the Miami sample (primar? in two bilingual Cubans) were enrolled ily upper middle-class private schools. Asia. and Canada. these were returned signed by three-fourths San Diego and two-thirds of the parents in South Florida. we report data here for the sample of 5. Salvadorans. students in the sample. Other Latin Americans includes most Central and South American countries. Since the school on the nativity or immigration districts do not collect information status of parents. most of the respondents were 14 or 15 years old (the mean age was 14. Other West Indians come mainly from Trinidad and Tobago. Europe. Australia. a brief initial survey of all eighth and ninth graders was carried out to determine eligibility. Jamaican. dian. as well as Taiwan and Hong Kong). Jamaican Sample Selection To be eligible for inclusion in the study. and Guatemalans. the Bahamas. and over 2. and were born in 1977 or 1978. smaller national-origins groups from these regions are aggregated for ease of analysis and presentation.

S. family nativity and citizenship size and structure. along with their scoring and reliability coefficients instruments alphas). and. Rosenberg scale (Rosenberg. The sample reflects a wide range of socioeco? nomic and cultural backgrounds. 1993. while the other half had lived in the United States nine years school age in their native or less (that is. Among the [Rumbaut the is also evenly split by age at arrival:about youth. they had reached elementary country but arrived in the United States before reaching puberty/adoles? children is not cence). demographic of both the respondents and their parents. educational and occupational aspirations. for ten years or more (that is. Some are standardized widely used in the research literature. home ownership). percep? tions and experiences of discrimination. status. cf. see Cropley. as well as types of family structures. Thus. time in the United States for these immigrant a of of American also measure to an indicator but life. 1988]). perceptions motives and ethnic self-identities. and related variables were gifted and handicapped obtained from the respective school systems for all students in the sample. and a range of attitudinal and other psychosocial and depres? variables. spent daily language proficiency. Vega and . and respondents' migration peer rela? and use hours on homework tionships. Stanford reading test scores. Self-esteem was measured using the ten-item 1965. The items and response formats composing the major scales used in the (Cronbach's analysis. generation long ago as the half-second or 1. migration histories and contexts of recep? and neighborhoods tion.. school data on grade point averages. socioeconomic status (parents' education and occupa? the respondents' of their parents' tion. notably for Cubans in the (including Miami area.The Crucible Within 759 are U. Measures The survey gathered data on respondents' the characteristics.1979).-born children of immigrant parents (the second generation:half and half are foreign-born to the youths who immigrated generation).5 generation and one-and-a-half Ima. inner city and suburban areas.S. length exposure solely of different at the time of (on the developmental stages immigration of these different at and arrival importance ages stages among immigrant children. LEP/FEP (English Language Proficiency) and math achievement classification. and watching television. (CES-D) ies-Depression predictive of major depression among adolescents (Vega et al. In addition. Depressive symptoms were meas? subscale from the Center for Epidemiological ured with a four-item Stud? have been to be these items found scale. sample foreign-born half had lived in the U. United States before age twelve (what Thomas and Znaniecki referred to and we have called the [1958:1776]. they were preschool age at arrival). 1983). are detailed in Table 1. dense immigrant enclaves). including measures of self-esteem sion. schools.

much better. ing three items and measuring conflict (see Table 1 for specific items composing ent-child these scales. an item measuring children a not uncommon at (as illustrated among immigrant experience the outset of the article( read as follows: Linda and Luis are both students whose parents are foreign-bom. with an overall index score calculated as the mean of the four items. Finally. response formats. p < . Luis." Which comes closest to how you feel? [Linda. and par? familism. were scored 0. actually having been discriminated and to a key item about expected discrimination: No matter how much I get. feelings of being embarrassed by one's parents. index was strongly correlated (. and scoring). An English language index was developed the respon? using four items measuring proficiency to and write dent's self-reported read. well.50 were greater than one and factor loadings eigenvalues We report findings from three scales thus created. as a data reduction technique. not well. Respondents' of their family's perceptions to five years ago were measured economic situation compared on a scale from 1.O.0001) with This English proficiency test score.0001) for the sample as a whole. Linda says. and main factors with greater than . 5 or more hours. very well). Hours per weekday spent on and hours per weekday watching television homework are here scored. Here we report results from responses about against (and if yes. scoring each item from 1 to 4 (1. assessing the respondent's read. Finally. very true). I am sometimes embarrassed because my parents don't know American ways. and so on through 5. 3. providing the objective Stanford reading achievement evidence index was similarly of its validity. write the parental native language also scoring each of the four items from 1 (not at all) to 4 (very well) with the overall index score as the mean of the are measured as the mean of two items four items. people will still discriminate education against me (scored from 1. much worse. 1. to 5. Educational aspirations level of the education the respondent for would like to highest asking the score ranges from achieve and the highest level realistically expected. American preferences. with 4 equal to finishing sets of attitudinal variables college. or neither]. Luis says: "I am never embarrassed by my parents. not true at all to 4. In this analysis. why and by whom). understand. A foreign con? language proficiency structed. and experiences of discrimination were measured by several Perceptions to a direct question items. each contain? identified. 1 (less than high school) to 5 (a graduate degree). answers checking Linda were scored 1 and the others . were also factor-analyzed using varimax rotation.42. 1991). ability speak.760 International Migration Review between self-esteem and depres? Rumbaut. I like the way they do things. understand. and ability to speak. and 4. 2. less than 1 hour. English. The Pearson correlation sion was -.39 (p < . not at all. 1 to 2 hours.

scored 1 to 5) And realisticallyspeaking. 2=Not well. 4=Agreealot . 2=Disagree. 1= Disagree a lot. at least on an equal basis . understand. My parents are usually not veiy interested in what I have to say.The Crucible Within 761 TABLE 1 Composition and Reliability of Scales Cronbach's Items and Measures Scale and Scoring Alpha Index How well do . My parents do not like me very much.56 Parent-ChildConflict Scale (3 items: scored 1 to 4) things. read.57 One should find a job near his/her parents even if it FamilismScale means losing a betterjob somewhere else. what is the highest level of education that you think you will get? 1=Less than high school. 1=Not true at all. 4=Finish college. I am able to do things as well as most other people. I wish I could have more respect for myself [reverse score]. I am satisfiedwith myself. At times I think I am no good at all [reverse score]. I am inclined to think I am a failure[reverse score]. 1= Rarely.80 What is the highest level of education you would like to EducationalAspirationsScale achieve? (2 items. 4=Very well . 2=Disagree. 3= Agree. 3=Occasionally (3 or 4 days). 3=Mostof time. 4=Very well . 5=Finish a graduate degree I feel I am a person of worth. I feel I do not have much to be proud of [reverse score]. I certainly feel useless at times [reverse score]. 3=Partly tine. _4=Very true_ . write) Foreign Language Index (4 items: scored 1 to 4) [foreign language]? 1=Not at all. 3= Well. In helping a person get ajob. 3= Well.93 How well do you (speak. 1= Disagree a lot.74 CES-D Depression Subscale [Howoftenduringtliepast week:] I did not feel like eating. 2=Notwell.2 =Some of the time (1 or 2 days). read. (3 items: scored 1 to 4) How often you prefer American way of doing things. (10 items: scored 1 to 4) I feel I have a number of good qualities. 3= Agree. How often your parents prefer American way of doing things. All in all. understand. (3 items: scored 1 to 4) When someone has a serious problem.4=Most of the time (5 to 7 days) .92 you (speak. (4 items: scored 1 to 4) I could not "get going. On the whole.57 American Preference Scale Believe there is no better country to live in than the United States. l=Never. my appetite was poor. only relativescan help. 3=Some college. write) English Proficiency (4 items: scored 1 to 4) English? l=Notat all. I take a positive attitude towardmyself. a lot 4=Agree .81 Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale with others. 2=Sometimes. I felt sad. 2=High school.' I felt depressed. it is alwaysbetter to choose a relative rather than a friend. 2 =Not very true. 4=All of the time In troublewith parents because of different way of doing .

In 12. analysis of parent-child conflict outcomes. born. foreign born) and the national origins of their parents.-born woman of Mexican descent).S. clearly across nationality (e. of ethnicity based in the first instance on should be straightforward and unambiguous. Table 6 presents the results of multiple linear regressions self-esteem predicting 7 while Table a scores and depressive similar provides symptoms. only threeincreasing patterns of intermarriage in the sample had parents who were fourths (76. Table 3 then provides a detailed portrait of the major national origins groups. one parent was U. in some. such as the Hmong from Laos and ethnic Chinese from Vietnam. including all of the measures discussed and type and location of characteristics above plus other basic individual schools.g. of their the However. Only selected findings from these tables for discussion.the in and of the mother took prece? marriages stepfamilies nationality dence (unless she was U. on the birth? respondents. In these cases. and the assignment to their respective ethnic groups. Table 4 breaks down those same variables by the different types of ethnic identities.g.S. Table 2 presents the chosen by the respondents. In still others. place reflecting fluidity of ethnicity and the parents. Haitian. born vs.. Table 5 presents logistic regressions self-reported predict? ing the odds of selecting four main types of ethnic self-identity. Where none of the above steps resolved the ambi? in cases of mixed guity involved in ethnic group assignment especially . Finally. a Mexican immigrant marriages married to a U. a Haitian married to a Dominican).. languages spoken.S. sometimes these involved coethnic (e. noted (see Note 3. a Cubanserviceman (e... and other indicators had to be checked to determine ethnicity. born.S.S. a black American born man married to an Anglo wife.9%) of the children conationals as is (and these rates of homogamy vary widely by nationality. Who is Cuban. ethnicity cut Other cases reflected a variety of mixed nationalities. birthplace was not a proxy for ethnicity (e.6 percent of the cases. such and Laotian children in the sample were as the fact that many Cambodian born in refugee camps in Thailand or elsewhere in Southeast Asia). or Mexican turns out to be a complicated methodological problem rather the determination than a simple matter of fact. reflecting both the mother's more influ- . In principle. those involving ethnic minori? ties from the countries of origin. shown in Table 3).g. Laotian.g.762 International Migration Review FINDINGS Results are summarized below in six tables of data. supra). if U. or involving unique historical circumstances. but often they did not married to a Filipina woman. are highlighted concerns the determination of Perhaps the first result to be highlighted of the respondents ethnic groups by national origins. surnames. the birthplace of foreign-born or. Filipino. a Chinese man from Hong Kong married to an ethnic Chinese woman from Burma) but not in most. various types of ethnic self-identification broken down by the nativity of the children (U. born).

broken down by the respondents' Four main nativity and their parents' nationality.S. of ethnic self-identities became which be characterized types apparent. In the much smaller number of mixed cases where the mother was absent but the father was not.. identity (e. just over a tenth (11%) identified two-tenths self-identifications (21%) selected racial or panethnic (or. second generation. but to their American present. Among the foreign born. or hyphenated Jamaican. the fourth reflects a denation? origin or of destiny. Asian). or a bridging alized identification with racial-ethnic minority groups in the country of in relation to the white Anglo and self-conscious differences destination. syncretic.5 generation great identity selected. if at different of experience immigrant degrees closeness. remaining reported identities that are not connected to those origins. the nationality of the father he U. the as whole For a (N = 5. over a just quarter (27%) identified by national or ethnic origin. Whether the respondent was born in the whether the respondent is a member of the . identity (e. Vietnamese-American). The self-identity. Chicano.. two-thirds of the respon? dents ethnically with their or their parents' immigrant self-identified ori? the either one-third assimilative or dissimilative gins. Hmong). Cuban-American. and (3) an assimilative racial or panethnic Latino..The Crucible Within 763 ential role in the children's socialization (a pattern that is documented further below) and the fact that fathers were absent in fully 30 percent of the homes in the sample.makes a half-second or 1." The first three also focus chiefly on national identifications of (whether of both).g. (4) a dissimilative identity (e. immigrant.g.S. or American national identity. The first two of these explicitly identify with the and original homeland. a plurality (40%) chose a hyphenated-American as "American. in was given precedence was born) (unless respondents assigning clear. 43 percent . Filipino-American. results (and the wording of the question) are presented in Table 2. Black.g. United States or not .that is. As should become problem to the researcher is a central psychosocial problem to an adolescent in arriving at a meaningful ethnic self-definition. what is a methodological by national origin. Hispanic. Ethnic Identities An open-ended ethnic question was asked to ascertain the respondent's and the answers were subsequently coded and quantified." and over identification.A. in less than 4% of the cases. whereas the last two are exclusively identities "made in the U. sample to the nativity of the respondents. may or national-origin as follows: (1) an ancestral. Seen another way. (2) an additive.127). or of the difference in the type of ethnic as Table 2 shows. without regard majority population. without the hyphen. Nicaraguan. indicated a mixed or other identity not classifiable among the four main types).

106 Total Sample for Seetext doyoucall "How doyouidentify.2 7. from who anethnic Laos TheHmong are "Vor "Mexican.5 0. identified notasLaotian. 10 FB 16.0 26.5 orMixed % Racial/Panethnic Identity4 US 49. 19 FB 47." "Cuban-American. asHmong.-Born 26 122 242 (US) > "American" oHyphenated-American' oNational Origin' FB US 0 3.9 2.6 13." minority example.2 US 20.4 21. though apply majority group Laos).3 US 38.1 33.4 29.5 22.3 39.7 4.4 3. 67.6 22. FB US 0 0.5 3.1 35.7 15.5 7.9 26.9 2.1 2.2 TABLE andSout in SouthernCaldpornia Self-Reported Ethnic Identity of Childrenof Immigrants Nativity of the ChildrenandNational Originof ThetrParents_ _by Caribbean Latin America and West NicaLatin PhilipMexico Cuba ragua Colombia America Haiti Jamaica Indies Ethnic pines Vietn Identity byNativity 93 35 368 313 301 354 318 105 101 Total 236 (FB) Foreign-Born 58 71 450 77 62 456 873 Total U.0 29.6 FB US bMixed Other Identity.8 0 10.5 51.4 39.1 o"Hispanic"'1 FB 41.6 28.2 9. inSouthea and elsewhere from Vietnam to ethnic Chinese from not reflected in the Similar distinctions.2 1.S.2 0.9 32.9 6.6 65." "His choosing They significantly Diego.5 7.2 23.3 55.5 17. here are include chose "Latino".0 31. 3.6 48.8 8.1 41." example.0 13.8 FB 36.0 50. 3." "Latino.7 12." 4For "Asian-American.7 0.4 28.1 11.5 46. choosing youth respondents .7 US 24.2 4.what analysis.5 1.6 40.5 14.9 7.8 34.4 2.8 21. only those from inSan differ "Chicano" were allMexicn-origin (The123 "Latino.6 6.6 39.2%) they "Hispanic.7 44.3 63. table." "Chicano." (0.9 10. yourself?" survey question: Responses etc." Only respondents example.2 31.8 5. Thelatter indicated a "Hispanic" while 28(18ofMexican :>A of631respondents ethnic total origin) identity." "Cuban.2 42.8 34.5 8.0 9. 2For "Mexican-American.0 24.8 16.0 22. 0 0.6 FB 3.7 7.8 5.4 6.9 42.2 9.4 22.7 3.9 14.7 9. that totheopen-ended is.7 28." "Hmong-American.6 3." "Filipino-American.3 23.5 45.7 3.5 19.6 14.3 13.1 36. 48.0 33.0 26.5 5.3 35.5 19." they group "Filipino.0 8.8 2.9 3.2 US 8. are here inclu or as "Asian" 11 identified "Black.

1993. 1991. By Latin American contrast. context (see Hurtado.S. a substantial number identified as all of them Chicano. label for all Latin American nationalities remains. born who still identify in terms of their parents' nationalities.opt for racial of self-definition. a substantial proportion of the sample .S. a historical and of problematic identity unique to that group which adds to the complexity in the U. of the 3.9%) as Latino.about one fifth of the foreign born and an equal proportion of the U. Latin Americans. ethnic identities and Suarez1986. born.033 youth of Spanish-speaking origins.5 generation to the nonimmigrant second It immigrant generation. especially ethnic identities. panethnic Asian panethnicity is a moot issue (cf. are the most likely to opt for additive or hyphenated are most likely to sustain a national-origin as are the Cubans. Sanchez. although so from 63 centage identifying drops percent among those born in Jamaica to 23 percent among those born in the United States. 631 (21%) identified as Hispanic. in fact. less than 4 percent of exception Among identified Mexican-descent as American of lowest (the youth proportion any group).S. and another 28 (0.S. Jamaicans into the second even among them the per? identity generation. however. (123) very virtually U. The most assimilative tification from one generation groups in to be the Latin Americans.S.. pinos.S. with the very notable this regard appear of Mexicans. in sharp contrast to 29 percent of the Cubans.The Crucible Within 765 identify by their own national origin. born . the Vietnamese and Fili? Asian-origin groups.-born Assimilative "American" selfpercent generation. Espiritu. Matute-Bianchi. born and all of them in California.S. Among or Asian labels Asian at least among these Asian-origin American. a quarter of all Mexican-de? scent second-generation students self-defined as Chicano. 1992). but that proportion drops sharply to 11 percent among the U. Suarez-Orozco . only 11 chose the groups.655 Asian-origin youth surveyed. Among the 757 Mexican-origin youth.S. born. 32 percent of the and even higher proportions of the Nicaraguans and other Colombians. a significant except the Cubans. racial or panethnic forms of self-definition are by far the least common of all those groups. Among the Cubans. born . identifications jump sharply from a miniscule 3 percent among the foreign of born to over 20 percent among the U. At the same time. adolescents. 1994. The use among Hispanic identity label appears to be tied to Spanish language the less sizable and more recently arrived Latin American immigrant groups and to decline use) from the very rapidly (as does Spanish language 1. the U.double the proportion These the U. By contrast. Mexican et al. who form a numerical majority in the Miami area. hyphenated-American iden? 49 tities increase from 32 percent among the foreign born to a prevailing of second the U. trend in ethnic self-iden? findings are suggestive of a significant assimilative to the next. or panethnic modes but again there are significant variations within as well as between and regional-origin national-origin the 1.

. There are wide differences in socioeconomic status among them. the distinct patterns of concentration of these groups.766 International Migration Review Orozco.a higher proportion by far than other. Characteristics Groups Table 3 sketches of Children of Immigrants by National Origin a broad psychosocial portrait of all of the major nationalorigin groups. by far have the highest proportions a reflection of the fact that they exhibit the highest rates of poverty and in the United States (Rumbaut.) The Cubans. Here. especially of parents who are not in the labor force. on the other hand. respondents (especially Hmong. however. Levels are lowest for the Mexicans. first of all. the Cubans were the their preponderance a majority of the popula? only ethnic group in the sample who constituted tion in their community.S. have been here the longest. (The relatively small number of U. a is chosen small it although by relatively minority and it is particularly rare Of 439 in our the the youths from the Afro-Caribbean among Jamaicans. sample. The Filipinos and the Other Asians (mainly Chinese. Finally. born. This is a pattern that appears likely over time and that may reflect processes of identificational to expand in with native minority assimilation inner peer groups city areas (cf. Still. the majority coming during the 1980s. born the teenagers are children Vietnamese of the elite first wave of 1975 refugees. Japanese.S. as Black. The size of the Cuban any large sample (1. and the the Laotians and the the Indochinese Indochinese. born. a Black or Black American racial identity is observ? able essentially Haiti. Koreans. Woldemikael. 1989). the choice of a Black all for of these increases identity significantly groups among the U. only 10 percent identified and other West Indian youths already identify as Black more Haitian-origin than they do as Haitian or West Indian.S. their families' lower class status. only among the youth from the Afro-Caribbean: Jamaica and the other West Indies. indeed. Mexican and Reflecting Indochinese the and Lao Cambodian. and over 70 percent of them were born in the United States . Cambodians. The Nicaraguans and the Indochinese are the most recent arrivals. among the U.227) accurately reflects in Dade County schools. born. welfare dependency 1994). the pattern is the reverse self-identification:that of that seen for Hispanic is. and Indians) show the highest proportions of college graduates and among mothers fathers. 1995). and few of are yet U. and their basic demographic geographic All of the groups from the Afro-Caribbean characteristics. and their families are much more likely to own rather than rent their homes. These data make clear. without exception differ from the others in their disproportionately number of females high in the sample (cf Foner. 1987).S. of parental education the Haitians.

Stanford standardized test data in (The reading All of the Latin American groups have Table 3 reflect national percentiles. The Laotians and the Cambodians also have the lowest scores in index and in the Stanford both the four-item English language proficiency achievement test scores. despite on achievement their poor performance tests. preferred speak English only with their a smaller interestingly. then the Vietnamese) inner city schools in San Diego. language from the English-speaking Caribbean. the Hmong had earned the academic GPAs of all the groups except for the high-achieving highest and other Asians. although. Vietnamese. The Filipinos. who are the most loyal to their mother tongue. Jamaicans in inner while much higher proportion to a schooling city contexts. including substantial majorities in every group and nearly nine out often Filipinos. although even among them 45 percent More than one-third English. The Hmong are perhaps the most dramatic opposite example/virtually no Hmong parent speaks in English with their children and the families are the most linguistically to 1990 census data.The Crucible Within 767 were by far the most likely to be attending youths. 3 also presents information on patterns of English and foreign use and With obvious exception of immigrants the proficiency. followed by Haitian students in the Miami and Colombians were the least likely to be area. however.) index (Spanish) higher scores in the four-item foreign language proficiency than any others. Various indicators of educational attainment and aspirations are pro? vided in Table 3. In general. Filipinos. For example. are well below national math norms. Mexicans. However. but over isolated. with those from the homework . according of the Hmong children report speaking English only with their one-third friends. One measure of effort in Table 3 provides a Vietnamese main reason: the Hmong devote by far more hours per day to homework than any other group. Asian-origin students put in the most time and Latin American students the least. with their close friends (who in most cases are also children of immigrants). the single exception are the Mexicans. with the Mexicans scoring highest in their self-reported Table Spanish ability. very few of the respondents spoke English only (7. proportion speak English only parents. and a nontrivial number of Filipinos and Other Asians. to academic grade point averages (GPAs). Cubans. and Colombians. exposed of the Cubans sampled were enrolled in private schools in Miami than any of the other national-origin groups. followed by the Lao and Cambodians and the Haitians. The other Asians show a level of ability in the Stanford test that is well above national norms.3% of of the total sample pre? the total sample). The student rankings in math test scores generally reflect the socioeconomic status of their parents. followed by the math achievement the Hmong. nearly three-fourths ferred English. The association between social attainment class and educational outcomes does not similarly extend.

4 24.2 30.4 2.9 58.8 2.81 0.28 2.8 59.1 19.9 41.07 56.0 66.90 1.0 % Males 14.5 19.4 % Broward County and Gender Age 49.5 73.1 33.7 29.9 44.6 11.8 11.2 73.3 40.6 43.8 25.7 88.0 1.9 27.3 45.2 28.0 67.1 8.5 19.S.4 26.6 30.6 52.24 0.5 % Own home Language % only English speak % prefer English with % English parents speak with friends % English speak Index (1-4) Proficiency English Index (1-4) Foreign Language Education test Stanford Reading (percentile) Math test Stanford (percentile) Grade (GPA) average point Hours onhomework (0-5) daily ratio Hours-of-homework-to-TV Educational (1-5) aspirations 2.2 Age (years) and Nativity Citizenship 55.2 2.2 27.1992.6 48.5 1.8 37.2 14.2 20.2 3.4 14.4 14.0 60.-born % One parent Status Socioeconomic 17.1 26.6 3.58 2.24 1.47 3.40 4.7 34.6 74.4 14.41 4.4 75.82 0.1 60.8 49.8 52.06 0.4 0.88 3.< 1.3 20.2 33.4 29.42 4.4 38.44 4.36 4.3 25.8 3.8 17.80 2.69 3.3 % Dade County 0.9 7.6 85.1 15.90 4.3 18.9 29.84 2.42 4.1 30.8 63.0 55.85 3.8 27.1 is U.3 85.0 1.2 0.S.7 76.02 1.87 2.5 55.5 69.8 8.32 2.4 58.5 38.1 10.4 3. citizen % 28.1 %U.7 42.10 4.4 9.0 31.6 33.79 3.1 20.9 88.45 1.6 19.6 47.2 77.227) (344) (227) (478) (178) (155) (106) (818) (371 Social Location 97.6 11.3 3.7 50.3 51.3 10.8 29.2 19.5 32.00 4.byN of Childrenof Immigrants Social Characteristics Caribbean Latin and American West Latin NicaPhilip? America Haiti Jamaica Indies Mexico Cuba raguaColombia pines Vietn Characteristics N= (757) (1.9 30.4 11.4 3.5 97.1 U.6 26.5 67.1 37.1 % co-nationals Both parents 19.0 88.5 17.S.4 62.3 1.16 1.3 57.0 74.6 48.6 59.6 19.6 51.5 9.3 14.0 15.93 1.2 28.2 5.33 2.8 36.1 12.4 55.6 3.87 0.5 10.3 2.3 70.0 15.51 4.0 76.3 84.3 36.9 53.87 0.91 2.7 42.31 2.3 89.6 18.-Bom 78.9 28.1 .82 1.1 14.15 1.46 l.5 49.1 75.6 23.9 58.4 45.7 82.4 47.9 26.9 1. 28.7 80.8 43.1 23.3 0.9 54.6 1.4 53.7 10years inU.3 12.5 80.21 1.8 3.28 2.2 27.8 81.2 14.0 22.1 76.0 1.34 47.9 59.9 30.1 14.9 96.4 3.5 iscollege %Mother graduate 17.0 iscollege % Father graduate 38.4 22.0 34.7 29.4 17.12 1.4 45.S.6 36.41 51.89 0.7 force 21.6 7.0 4.8 44.6 63.4 % than Less 76.8 3.4 3.0 11.8 30.28 1.2 52.2 % San County Diego 1.5 force % notinlabor Mother 73.5 0.0 44.0 63.0 57.93 3.82 3.0 44.1 notinlabor %Father 13.88 0.06 0.4 3.21 1.3 23.3 64.6 53.2 71.1 71.9 61.2 14.TABLE3 in SouthernCaliforniaandSouth Florida.2 97.65 18.24 2.3 82.3 4.

0001 are between national *A11 thedifferences depression except significant origin groups their and scales ofitems scoring.5 37.25 1.2 2.83 1.5 73.9 19.3 44.1 1.6 16.20 3.83 29.81 2.8 8.5 13.3 48.2 1.9 2.1 2.7 35.4 36.71 1.4 1.4 13.70 2.0 36.33 1.5 61. atthe.6 5.12 2.1 29.4 33.1 29.3 55.76 26.45 3.8 3.9 38.59 2.2 59.0 1.3 34.5 0 63.2 2.1 37.4 7.70 45.9 2.7 9.67 1.9 1.S.9 2.9 20.33 3.American (1-4) preference Status Psychological scale Self-esteem (1-4) subscale CES-D depression (1-4)_1.0 23.0 57.79 2.5 13.11 2.40 1.1 8.7 6.4 0 74.9 5.3 9.3 16.03 2.31 2.2 25.2 51.9 44.3 48. isbest (1-4) country scale .31 2.83 2.0 0 62.7 3.6 which score is fortheCES-D level forallvariables.07 24.7 1.3 35.1 16.9 3.36 1.4 8.47 79.3 1.66 3.1 4.0 25.9 47.1 3.2 12.3 58.1 4.17 24.9 16.5 0 45.4 46.60 62.0 27.2 51.21 2.66 67.4 8.3 65.1 22.8 6.04 2.2 17.5 2.5 55.79 23.1 64.9 3.68 18.8 1. Views and Discrimination discriminated % been against discrimination (1-4) Expects U.68 59.7 4.60 15.63 1.67 3.4 3.77 1.77 38.68 3.6 43.1 33.8 27.1 11.27 2.Parents and Family athome natural % Both parents from home % Father absent size Family-household scale values Famflism (1-4) main school are % Parents help % Embarassed byparents scale Parent-child conflict (1-4) ofMother Ethnic Identity as"American" % Identify % asHyphenated-American % National Identity Origin % Racial/Panethnic/Mixed Schools schools %Ininner-city schools % Inbilingual private ofU.74 1.21 3.0 14.3 25.41 1.7 4.0 58.1 14.50 2.69 1.8 58.0 51.67 15.5 5.8 3.8 20.63 20.1 1.87 2.49 1.4 3.8 41.6 11.6 57.9 23.5 1.7 2.5 9.S.0 2.37 2.8 1.57 2.1 1.37 1.0 0.56 3.75 39.81 1.6 24.44 3.91 16.3 12.5 0 61.76 1.5 1.2 1.4 2.68_1.1 33.81 2.7 3.3 12.3 1. specific composing description .65 2.3 29.33 3.

that scale. 1988. along with Haitian children. the Jamaicans and other Asians. Filipinos. Olsen. Jamaican along with English-speaking Indian parents. Haitians. 1989. The highest GPAs are found for students with Afro-Caribbean hours (all the Asianthe highest ratios of homework-to-television-watching over time and generations Significantly. Rumbaut and Ima. 1987).770 International Migration Review in between. than all other groups. as do GPAs finding in students similar findings California and confirms among immigrant elsewhere (Caplan d al. who also have the largest family-households. Vega. origin groups plus the Jamaicans). The research literature has pointed to the high levels of and orientation sense of obligation to the familism . on the other hand. Most of 1995. 1991. harsh contexts of exit (Rumbaut. 1990. levels of parent-child conflict as measured and by Jamaican their Mexican youths are the least likely to feel embarrassed by parents. of families origin groups and the rest of the sample in the higher proportion with both natural parents at home. of all families from the Afro-Caribbean have no father About one-half present at home. 1983).g. of practically about threeSubstantial every group majorities including fourths of the Jamaicans and two-thirds of the Mexicans. A high score in this measure of collectivistic to the family contrasts with the pull of individu? obligations alistic values in the American milieu.of a deeply ingrained in particular (e. test scores go up but the number in the United States. are the most likely to be the principal source of school-re? Cubans and Nicaraguans lated help to their children. with one major exception: score even higher on groups. Rumbaut. 1995.. 1988. exhibit notably lower aspirations Table 3 also presents data on family size and structure. report the lowest our scale. Gibson. the somewhat higher incidence of father the Cambodians is due not to absence among the Hmong and especially divorce but to the death of the father prior to arrival in the United States. Yet the lack of parental resources is among the Indochinese underscored by the fact that their parents are least likely by far to be the main source of help to their children with their school work.a that of hours spent on homework goes down. A crucial . Indochinese embarrassed their 36% of the Hmong) and to exhibit by parents (including conflict scale scores. the national origins groups report very high educational led by aspirations. and Mexicans. Suarez-Orozco. Sung. At the same children are the most likely by far to report feeling time. 1989. et al. and on the quality There is a notable contrast between all Asianof parent-child relationships. Our data here confirm that Mexican exhibit significantly higher scores on the familism values scale respondents all of the Indochinese than any other group. of the extraordinarily a reflection 1991). the Laotians. see Suarez-Orozco family among Mexican immigrants and Suarez-Orozco. reading achievement . of our exploratory dimension and study involves perceptions of our racial-ethnic discrimination reported by experiences respondents. the highest parent-child and other West Cuban parents. Cambodians.

living in smaller households. as American were in Dade County 82 percent of all respondents identifying white respondents).-born males. who reported the most experiences in the sample . mediocre tional aspirations grades and lesser effort despite comparatively . are inversely related. Briefly. self-esteem the from Jamaica and the other English-speaking West Indies. with at least one U. might earn.S. Miami reported lower levels of prejudice and generally disagreed with the of edu? statement that people would discriminate against them regardless cational merit. as American.S. The Cubans and then the Indochinese state-sponsored refugee groups who have been the recipients of substantial public assistance with the statement that "There is reported the highest level of agreement no better country to live in than the United States. Haitians preferences preferences and Jamaicans. but they are not simply two Self-esteem and depression sides of the same psychological further coin. along with the Filipinos and other Asians. Cuba. but broken down by the major types of ethnic identities reported by the respondents. self-esteem scale Finally. with the lowest score in the sample found The highest scores were found among for the Hmong. at the other extreme. Colombian. self-identi? (as were most phenotypically Respondents fying as American are much more likely to be U. Cuban. However.also exhibited the highest depression discrimination scores. Table 3 presents the scores on the Rosenberg and on the CES-D depression subscale for all of the nationality groups.-born parent who also (especially if it is the mother) self-identifies and higher social status families. While less than one-half the sample is in the Dade County (Miami) area. lowest global self-esteem scores. Table 4 makes it quite clear that each identity type has a statistically and distinct social profile. this issue will be examined below through multiple regression analyses of these two variables. a few main points should be significant here and then examined more closely in the logistic regressions highlighted that follow. Characteristics of Children of Immigrants by Ethnic Identity Table 4 presents data on the same set of variables as in Table 3. and the other Latin American groups. also scored highest on the American scale (indicating for "American ways").the the Haitians and the Jamaicans principal groups from the Afro-Car? with and expectations of racial ibbean. with high educa? These respondents are more linguistically assimilated." Those groups. the Indochinese the Mexicans and especially showed the Significantly.The Crucible Within 771 and Indochinese-reported against and many also having felt discriminated to be discriminated against no matter how much education they expected and other Latin Americans in Nicaraguan. respondents followed by Haiti. . scored by far the lowest on those measures.

93 0.9 iscollege 30.60 2.9 home % Own Language % only English speak % English prefer with % English parents speak with friends % English speak Index (1-4) Proficiency English Index (1-4) Foreign Language Education test Stanford Reading (percentile) Math test Stanford (percentile) Grade (GPA) average point onhomework Hours (0-5) daily ratio Hours-of-homework-to-TV Educational (1-5) aspirations 10.84 4.9 91.9 14.3 40.1992.6 13.8 1.6 39.1 7.2 67.0 36.4 72.1 46.96 4.1 0 45.0 4.8 Less 10years % 77.8 Diego County 58.89 4.9 2.4 2.5 13.4 Father notinlabor force % 33.3 3.6 % Dade 82.29 1.2 47.1 44.6 28.2 42.2 53.66 3.3 55.5 5.30 1.7 76.7 iscollege 22.1 15.8 45.6 16.79 2.S.6 20.5 16.63 .4 % San 12.7 76.3 14.9 3.37 5.6 89.3 14.3 than inU.8 63.5 60.4 12.0 % 14.3 22.2 36.2 60.1 60.0 Mother notinlabor force 28.23 34.9 55.58 3.7 % 38.1 3.391) (2.2 47.4 47.2 51.4 % U.59 0.6 90.8 26.62 44.062) (592) Location 37.6 100.7 13.0 2.-born % One 25.25 4.4 43.2 22.58 2.9 52.39 1.42 78.6 19.4 37.0 U.56 1.6 Father 23.20 2.3 14.1 3.4 3.85 4.7 46.8 parent Status Socioeconomic 17.S.3 County 0 4.23 0.2 4.0 50.9 % Broward County and Gender Age 43.2 22.6 isU.4 14.12 0.1 Males 63.6 4.2 (years) Age and Nativity Citizenship 38.1 14.6 30.5 Mother 25.8 60.1 34.89 0.9 52.9 28.3 61.8 2.37 0.S.8 17.99 34.2 26.4 29.5 45.S.5 54.1 3.3 % graduate 3. 8.4 25.6 3.-Born 95.1 47.2 61.8 33.9 49.0 27.56 3.3 12.61 1.7 % graduate 23.8 Both conationals % parents 8. citizen 91.9 59.9 19.87 2.61 49.6 8.7 43.0 23.082) (1.1 14.1 % 40.85 38.14 22.3 74.05 4.63 1.8 2.19 0.bySe Social Characteristics of Childrenof Immigrants o Racial/Planet Ethnic Identity Types Racial/ Panethnic or Hyphenated"American" American National Identity "Hispanic" "Chican OriginMixed Social Characteristics (659) (123) (1.TAJBLE 4 in SouthernCaliforniaandSouth Florida.

85 1.9 17.75 1.0 31.31 3.5 schools inbilingual % private Views of U.72 2.68 scale conflict Parent-child (1-4) of Mother Ethnic Identity 10.2 54.6 size Family-household 1.0 37.78 2.2 0.3 71.3 4.6 22.9 41.6 %Embarassed byparents 1.0 3.S. (1-4) country 2.8 42.2 38.01level.2 61.2 34.08 2.89 2.34 2.Parents and Family 55.4 54.84 scale Familism values (1-4) 24.6 National % Identity Origin 13.3 80.32 2.7 9.27 3.4 4.67 1.95 1.5 13.00 2.2 50.6 .2 22.4 athome % Both natural parents 38.4 26.28 3.5 62.9 28.2 20.2 13.1 23.9 15.75 1.7 42.4 12. composing specific significant .0 22.27 2.7 4.3 17. and Discrimination 54.0 64.86 isbest U.3 schools % ininner-city 0 1.9 33.70 1.3 % asHyphenated-American 52.1 3.1 main school % Parents are help 9.98 discrimination (1-4) Expects 2.3 5.7 50.13 1.0 4.9 % Racial/Panethnic/Mixed Schools 66.8 12.0 13.81 1.0 from home absent % Father 4.0001 level forallvariables.41 scale Self-esteem (1-4) subscale CES-D depression (1-4)_L59_L64_L69_L68_L69_L63_L75_L67_1. 11.8 66.6 9.15 3.23 3.66 *Alldifferences subscale sc fortheCES-D the.8 0.60 2.9 5.7 31.72 1. are ethnic between depression beyond except identity significant groups their and ofitems 1fordescription and Table Seetext scales.9 discriminated %been against 1.38 2.S.95 1. scoring.10 1.2 % as"American" Identify 12.2 21.8 22.62 2.7 35.9 24.5 66.6 4.7 59.7 4. atthe.4 23.27 2.5 31.1 19.5 57.93 2.53 scale American (1-4) preference Status Psychological 3.55 3.

082 respondents and panethnic (21%) does linear movement not at all fit the seemingly toward identificational assimi? The category lation into the the these cohorts unfolds over the course intermarriage among process The sustained development of the next generation. psychological hyphenated-American identity. of vibrant. although perhaps more difficult to maintain perhaps even unstable as bilingualism and other additive adaptations as inherently have life (cf Child. such as television). and the to a 1. between the ancestral and the assimilative as a middle position national . 1993). 1990:131-139).and identities. to live. Rumbaut. and hinges on a variety of factors . Indeed. Woldemikael. out of 5. in Table 4.not the least on future patterns of . 1992. pointing potentially large-scale generational On the other hand. Gans. increasing decreasing The binational well-being. and to have a robust psychosocial profile (higher self-esteem. born second-generation while as a more inclusive. absorbs a variety of distinct racial-ethnic (Chicano. there appears to be a linear progression as one moves along the continuum from a national to to American. reactive ethnic identities (cf Portes and chiefly U. with most of the variables listed in Table 4.toward greater identificational tion experience assimilation Americanization or identificational accompanied by upward socioeconomic and greater acculturation. describes rather well the hypothesized expectation of one form to one sector of American of assimilation society. Portes and Zhou. in fact.127 (11%) identified as American. the white middle-class mainstream (cf Alba. however. proven Cropley. This general picture. to endorse individualistic values (lowest familism scores). mobility. to be in American 1943:67. That remains to be seen empirically. Black.S. 1990. Hispanic appears alternative for born (1.5 panethnic foreign generation) youths of smaller . least likely to be attending schools in the inner city or to have experienced most likely to view the United States as the best country in which discrimination. discrimination. appears as a transitional It can be seen intergenerational identity.391 (27%) who remained loyal national-origin identity.062 an crafted who additive or (40%) hyphenated-American identity. The origin identity hyphenated-American strong impres? level of analysis is that of a sion that these data give at this bivariate movement distant from the original immigra? generational increasingly and its ethos . the profile shown in Table 4 for the dissimilative racial identities reported by another 1. 1983:90. Hispanic) minority group self-identifications must be examined that are shaped by and ultimately in their own concrete Chicano and Black emerge in these data as social and historical contexts. lower depression). in comparison with the 2. the evidence to shifts cannot be ignored.774 International Migration Review invested in homework (but more in leisure time activities. 1989:105ff). institution? communities as in Cuban Miami may yet be able ally complete immigrant to provide fertile ground for the long-run maintenance of such syncretic But while it is well to keep in mind that only 592 respondents adaptations.

as well as for San Diego and Broward County locations County serves as the comparison group). the multivariate purposes construed not as direct causal influences but as relationships between ethnic and selected factors. 1991. stand in sharp contrast to those of youths who select ancestral. 1974. and experiences/expectations of socialization.) Dummy variables for all of the major national-origin groups are also included in the equations (Cubans serve as the comparison (Dade group).are entered to test the hypothesized discrimination effects on ethnic status is provided by a dummy identity choices. Ogbu. and for inner city and private Of course. as Table 4 shows. (Fordham Matute-Bianchi. with cross-sectional such reciprocal effects unambiguously. McLeod. Predictors of Ethnic Identities:An Odds Ratio Analysis Table 5 presents the results of maximum-likelihood logistic regressions the odds of selecting each of the four main types of ethnic predicting self-identification. The acquisition of such counteridentities among in inner-city neighborhoods these adolescents may thus reflect processes of differential association within their relevant social contexts.The Crucible Within 775 Americas (such as Nica? national-origin groups from the Spanish-speaking is and Discrimination and expected to Colombians). Several sets of predictor variables . however. and development into the urban underclass of assimilation and Ogbu. identity A first intriguing in difference finding is that gender makes a significant the choice of most forms of ethnic self-identification. Males are more likely . 1987. additive. or assimilative identities. (Parents' education in Table 5 but had no significant and home ownership are not included effects in earlier runs. A measure of socioeconomic variable for parents who work in high-status professions. is not possible to disentangle For our in Table 5 should be results presented here. aspects of relationships and acculturation. especially with measures of subjective percep? school contexts. The everyday school contexts and associated peer subcultures of students who identify in racial or panethnic terms. 1993). while that is not the case for those identifying as Hispanic (or other mixed identities). language . tions and preferences. A much greater proportion of Chicano-identified youths (67%) are concen? trated in inner city schools than of any other identity type. 1986. experienced raguans as a greater extent by respondents Chicano and Black than identifying by any other. 1987. Portes and Zhou. with parents and ethnic nativity and citizenship. and they are followed by youths self-identifying as Black and Hispanic (43% of whom attend inner city schools).measuring gender. 1987. the including of oppositional or adversarial subcultures and outlooks. ethnic self-identification may have the effect of as well as being influenced data it influencing by them. 1991.

61 1.66 -0.39 0.54 Gender (l=male.46 b b NS NS a b NS NS NS a b NI 1.00 -0.13 0.04 -0.26 0.08 -0.16 -0. Odds Sig.68 1.S.04 -0.20 1.52 0.06 0.52 -0. Nativity.97 0.89 NS b NS c a 0.83 1.12 0.28 -0.06 -0.66 -0.31 -0.01 -0.50 1.13 0.71 -0.83 1. citizen 0.61 7.26 -0.45 0.11 0.33 0.44 1.03 0.06 0.39 0.20 0.56 0.57 Naturalized Socialization Parents andEthnic Both conationals parents U.-born One parent as identifies Mother "American" Hyphenated-American oforigin Nationality minority Racial/panethnic Mixed orother ethnic identity are Parents professionals homework are main Parents help Embarassed byparents and Acculturation Language with friends English Speaks Prefers English Index (1-4) Proficiency English Index (1-4) Language Foreign scale American preference (1-4) Discrimination Been discriminated against discrimination (1-4) Expects Location schools Ininner-city schools Inprivate InSan County Diego InBroward County InDade County -0.84 -0.43 NI ? NS NS 0.45 0.01 U.94 0.37 -0.24 a NS NS NS NI NS 0.TABLE5 Childrenof Im of Ethnic IdentityAmong PredictorsandOddsof Selecting Four Types LogisticRegressions Resultsof Maximum-Likelihood "American" Nationa Hyphenated-American B Variables B Predictor Sig Sig.25 0.41 0.-born 1.37 -0.19 -0.05 0.05 0.11 -0.03 -0.29 0.33 NS a NS NS NI ? b NS c NS a b NS NS NS NS NS b c NI 1.48 2.26 0.49 0.17 -0.18 -0.04 -0.84 -1. Odds andCitizenship Gender.58 0.19 0.29 0.60 -0.S.79 1.04 -0. 0.43 0.26 -0.09 -0. 0=female) 1.S.77 U.17 -1.20 0.71 0.68 0.39 1.46 0.00 0.94 0.56 -0.56 -0.70 0.19 0.59 1.11 0.39 ? c NS c NI .77 0.71 0.69 0.

93 0.42 1.93 0.58 -0.04 0.98 -0.54 1.36 -1.77 0.936 0.26 0.44 2.11 NI c NS b NS NS NS c NS NS NS 0.0001.56 0.68 -0.16 -0.05.39 2.01 -1.39 -0. cp<.59 0. significance: ap<.46 0.580 NI c c NS NS b c c NS c NS offreedom) Model X2(degrees 1.75 0.45 0.82 0.211_ a (35 4.54 -0.ofParents National Origin Cuban Mexican Nicaraguan Latin Other American Haitian Jamaican Indies Other West Filipino Vietnamese Cambodian and Laotian Other Asian -0.34 -0.59 0. p<.89 0.158 (35) inanalysis ofcases Number 4.78 0. .44 1.69 0. inequation NI=Not included NS=Not Statistical Significant.46 0.93 shown.936 Mean ofdependent variable_J15_402_:271_.82 a -0.39 0.25 0.77 0.31 0.43 0.01.16 0.60 961 NI NS a a b a a a a NS c (35) 4.85 -0.42 0.

the evidence meaning in the self-identity discontinuities vs. Moreover. Indeed. In a review of 70 empirical studies in the relevant research Chicano.778 International Migration Review in unhyphenated terms as American or by national to identify origin. nationality moderately. generational profiles of a finding that merits underscoring in our analysis.S.and of their children of immigrants to foreign-born varying attachment the homeland of their parents . with an shift in one's frame of reference. In addition.84 to 1).have far and effects on ethnic self-identifica? nativity citizenship stronger tion than our measure of years in the United States. but rather the nature of one's status that is more determinative of the psychol? sociopolitical membership ogy of identity. U. types of identities racial/panethnic among the Latin American-origin youths in our more likely to choose a Hispanic identity. Citizenship matters.S. these variables accompanying .48 to 1). root. Indeed. controlling all other variables in the equations. U. exerts a strong influence in the ethnic both parents born in the same nation the child will identify with the parents' the odds of keeping part of it by identia naturalized . suggests that the between different types of identity are more fluid and perme? boundaries able for girls than for boys and that the task of developing a racial and ethnic identity is bound up with issues of gender identity as well. in a recent about gender differences conclusions of gender.S. She including identity. It may be interpreted here as signaling a stake in the society as a full-fledged member. citizen (which for legal immigrants requires of five years after arrival or admission to waiting period to this pattern. and ethnicity among adolescent study of the intersection in New York. birth is the strongest negative (odds-ratio for predictor of identifying by national origin (odds of 1 in 5). Phinney (1990) found only fragmentary in ethnic identity. However. results that allow no firm literature.-born . second rather than 1. legally as well as subjectively.e. Nativity (the word share siwth "nation" and "nation" a common of "birth") is very closely linked to identity. sample. Waters (forthcoming) children of black Caribbean immigrants that the attached to different gender reports shapes meanings types of American an ethnic self-identity.5 generation status) is by far the strongest predic? generation as American tor of identifying (odds or probability ratio of 7. race. It is a significant of selecting a hyphenated-American label positive predictor of 1. Becoming a minimum The parents' own nativity itself of the child. permanent residency) adds moderately over and above nativity. Having socialization boosts the odds that significantly more and. whereas females are more likely to choose an additive binational (hyphen? in separate analyses of different ated) identity label.. females were significantly males were much more likely to identify as among Mexican-origin youths. Table 5 shows that being born in the United States (i. suggesting that it is not so much the length of time in the country.

pointing to the possibly stronger effect of mothers in ethnic (and other) socialization processes. connected to the formation and of ethnic identity . the above set of variables involving and the parental resources of the underscore fundamental influence parent-child relationships quality of the family as a crucible of ethnic socialization in this diverse processes sample of children of immigrants (cf Alba. Language maintenance Cropley. On the other hand. this volume. while reducing families the child may have identity. Phinney.6 likely parents identify assimilatively In short. In such upper middle-class immigrant more reason to associate social honor with and to feel pride in the national has observed the child's (1979:13). In this instance. adopting in that minority label if they believe their mother self-identifies panethnic way as well. parents who analysis relationship identity). 1991. are significantly Immigrant parents who are higher-status professionals their children's more likely to influence selection of a national origin the odds of choosing a hyphenated-American identity.and. in and influential interested.and hence not who respondents by report feeling embarrassed proud of .both within and without the family (see and Suarez-Orozco. are the main source of help or social support with their children's school work . assimilatively unhyphenated Having one parent born in increases the United States and the other foreign born significantly the will that a of a the children binational adopt strategy choosing probability American identity. In of the of status and addition. a racial or by origin. the net result suggests a linear extension and reaffirmation of the cultural past rather than an emergent reaction to the American present.The Crucible Within 779 It also significantly the odds of self-defining decreases tying binationally. 1976). 1981.5 The effect of the mother's perceived identity was stronger than the father's. along with the actual absence of fathers in a substantial number of these families. other aspects of the children's their ethnic socialization lives. is also closely. 1990. Rumbaut and Rumbaut. they by roughly national or of a hyphenated-American. increase their odds of identifying as American similar increase their chances of identifying as 2-to-l odds. 1990. see Waters. Respondents in the same manner . all other for a related things being equal (Yinger. An even stronger and very rather than an unhyphenated of the mother's own clearcut pattern evident in Table 5 is the influence who perceive their mother identifying herself ethnic identity. and affectively. an as American. self-identity . 1983.their are much more to as American. This finding is in accord with theoretical expectations that identity shifts tend to be from lower to higher status groups. identity of the parents.and hence perhaps more involved. including reduce the odds that their children will pick up either an significantly or a racial/panethnic American label. As Rosenberg sense of self-worth is in part contingent on the prestige of the elements of social identity. Suarez-Orozco .

youths in their and who native report greater fluency parents' prefer English are most apt to identify by national origin. Such experiences/perceptions . their close friends are significantly and national who less likely to self-define do not by origin. tion are significantly who Respondents expect that people will discriminate against them no matter the level of education they may achieve are also more likely to maintain a national-ori? of exclusion and rejection on gin identity. identity only linguistic acculturation patterns but also how and which languages are used with close relevant social contexts. the social contexts of in which these youths are growing up . Net of language prefer? friends in interpersonally in our data set was also significantly ences. The likelihood that type of hyphenated-American with both a greater level of English proficiency and identity is associated friends children of with close whom do not (also immigrants) they having in these reflect choices not Thus.also counts school and community a great deal. In the middle. ^This familiar latter result reflects Child's (1943) depiction of the "rebel"reaction to intergen? erational conflicts among second-generation Italian Americans.those associated with ethnic self-identity youths with higher scores in the scale (i. Precisely the opposite effect is seen for those attending the two upper middle-class private schools. of discrimination were significantly associated perceptions only with the selection of a Chicano self-identity. respondents bSeeAlba (1990:187-194) for related results on the effects of parents' ethnic identity status. another measure of acculturation . as Table 5 shows. respondents less likely to identify as American.. compared in San Diego are much less likely to identify to the Miami area. Indeed.that is. Location . Conversely. 1993). . On the other hand. These results provide empirical assimilation (Portes and Zhou. support for a segmented perspective here applied to the process of ethnic self-definition. Attending inner city schools where most students are racial-ethnic minorities increases the odds of significantly a racial or for panethnic developing identity (particularly youths reporting while decreasing a Black self-identity) the odds of identifying ancestrally by national origin. youths with lower scores are apt to self-identify ancestral by origin. who prefer American ways) are more apt American preferences as unhyphenated to identify themselves Americans.780 International Migration Review who prefer English and who speak only English with 1995). speak only English. among the various racial and panethnic identity types.e. Respondents more likely to identify as American. languages acquiring not only a mother tongue but also a personal English may entail abandoning identity. In addition. on ethnic self-identity What are the effects of discrimination among these who have experienced discrimina? youths? As Table 5 shows.on ascribed rather than achieved statuses racial-ethnic grounds clearly undercut the prospect of identificational assimilation into the mainstream. are the bilingual children who choose additive or of selecting identities.

as well as Haiti and the other West Indies groups. To a large extent national identities (i. almost all nationalities of Mexicans and wash out of that analysis. Finally. the effects of particular nationalities and racial/panethnic the selection of additive/hyphenated identities. issue. On the other hand. but much more likely to identify in racial or panethnic minority terms. coming from certain self-defining panethnic Latin American countries. The results show that a Hispanic self-identification . discrimination. nations greatly decreases the odds of coming from any of the Asian-origin in racial or minority terms. First. Hispanic subsample Latin American origins. despite its turns out to be more of immigrants.e. with the notable exceptions are less mainstream to call themselves The Americans). high proportion extraordinarily maintream identities among to the development of assimilative conducive in our sample than expected. especially Vietnamese and Filipinos. are far more likely to develop additive binational identities. we would expect to find few if any nationality effects. with all other predictor variables controlled of national origins on the mode of ethnic the influence Table 5 examines This is an important self-identification. the Mexicans. National origin indicators are in effect proxies for the and diverse histories. all of the Latin American and Afro-Caribbean groups. cal and ethnographic Predictors of Hispanic and Chicano Ethnic Identities (not shown in Table 5) were run for selected Separate logistic regressions to explore the association of variables with specific types of subsamples as such self-identities. while not reducible grant communities. analysis of the odds of selecting a may briefly of 3. Ironically. Two here. in are very pronounced However.The Crucible Within 781 as American with or without a hyphen.033 respondents we the examined of identity.. American this is the case for the two unhyphenated American in particular is largely accounted and national origin). the Asian-origin groups. racial/panethnic Hispanic and Chicano. Becoming for by predictor variables already discussed above. compared to Cubans in Miami (the broad patterns emerge the reference group in these analyses). Why this is so poses intriguing theoretical significantly and policy questions. require research. by esses. in this study. the teenage respondents in these equations. likely Filipinos (who Jamaicans emerge here as the group most likely to identify in national-ori? gin terms. nonetheless the of their self-definitions shape significantly will To extensive delve into these issues comparative-histori? youth. since if ethnic identification and related social proc? was determined acculturation. except for are significantly less likely to do so. increases those odds. the Miami area. These results For summarized an be here. social structures and cultures of these immi? complex to the variables employed which.

1990. In both equations. Vigil.-born. and nativity. as Chicano. 1995. English and foreign family socioeconomic school and expectations of attainment. Both equations examine the effects to influence those cognitive of several sets of variables hypothesized and of psychosocial affective dimensions adaptation:gender. age.-born high school youth with the devel? of adversarial modes of reaction.are shown to be much more likely to select Hispanic as an ethnic identity.S. 37 to 1) and whose close friends are also U. who are U. and who speak in Spanish with their parents and close friends. and rejection of school and rejection of behaviors in contrast to the more optimistic of teachers.782 International Migration Review more likely to be made by females: who are foreign-born.S. For an analysis of the odds of selecting a Chicano identity.the Colombi? Latin-origin identity. 1991. The smaller-size groups Nicaraguans. It supports related findings reported in the literature that link a Chicano self-definition among U. They are significantly more to feel that have been discriminated Moreover. we focused of Mexican origin in San on the subsample of 729 respondents separately show that Chicano The a self-identification is significantly results Diego. discrimination. they against. Suarez-Orozco. ans. 1988). proficiency. Predictors of Self Esteem and Depressive Symptoms Table 6 shifts our focus to a multiple regression analysis of two key psycho? 10-item variables: self-esteem (the scale) and logical dependent Rosenberg depressive symptoms (CES-D subscale). is significantly in U. given the importance of such inter? parent-child conflict in psychosocial processes among children generational adaptation . of bleak adult futures. born (the odds are huge. outlook and valuation of Mexico-born Vos and reported among immigrant youth (De schooling Suarez-Orozco. status and parent-child relations. 1986. whose English is poor but whose Spanish the living is very good.281) was our measure of conflict. 1991.S. experiences language and ethnic identity and national origins. less than 10 years. variable associated with lower self-esteem by far the strongest predictor (beta = -. This significant the odds of their identifying association of and low educational attainment with a Chicano ethnic flattened aspirations in our identity is not found for any other type of ethnic self-identification data set. and whose parents are not and themselves terms or as a mixed conationals identify in panethnic . Matute-Bianchi. strategies learning anticipation defined as acting white. and occupational and the lower their educational the greater aspirations. and other Latin Americans (but not Cubans or Mexicans) . These include defensive nonopment in the classroom. more likely to be made by males.267) and higher depression (beta = . likely among the lower their academic grade point averages (GPAs) these 729 teenagers. For that reason.S. who are not embarrassed by their parents.

1995). very strong positive underscoring of in acculturation for children of logical importance linguistic immigrants More than the other . findings regard unexceptional conventional theories. The unemployment economic stress for the adolescents of the father and even more so. lower self-esteem is also associated with being U.S. 1991) among immigrant/nonimmigrant majority and minority populations (see Vega and Rumbaut. when the respondent feels embarrassed by his or her parents. a finding that parallels research in Britain that found that the self-esteem of West Indian girls born in Britain was lower than those born in the West Indies That may be related to differing comparative frames (Cropley. Family contexts clearly shape psychological among these in the this are and in line with youths. and especially. and the higher the academic GPA. among females in this sample. the objective their that economic situation respondents' family's perception compared to five years before had worsened was significantly associated with decreased self-esteem as well as increased and parent-child conflict . 1991). By contrast a significant though relatively weak effect is seen in the net association between being a recent arrival to the United States and depressive symptoms.The Crucible Within 783 of immigrants. the absence of the father from the home are related to higher depression and lower self-esteem.self-esteem Both psychological self-esteem. of as well as adults ney. 1990. the results of a multiple regression analysis of parent-child conflict are presented correlates principal Table 7. Knowledge association with the psycho? self-esteem. (see Rosenberg. by the level of parent-child conflict and dero? outcomes gation. and especially higher levels of well-being.a depression result that points to the psychological costs of downward and mobility in our sample. variables and dependent -worsen when the respondent has no one at home or elsewhere depression to help with school work. born (second-generation status). and educational achievement measures English language competence are significantly and positively related to self esteem and psychological the higher the English language proficiency index Specifically. well-being. the higher the self-esteem score and the lower the depression of English in particular showed a score. The father's level of education is significantly and positively related to (but not the mother's) . 1983:107-108). and to the shift from immigrant into ethnic minority status (cf Suarezgenerational Orozco and Suarez-Orozco. to identify separately the in Gender emerges here as the next strongest predictor of psychological lower self-esteem. 1991). Vega and Rumbaut. a finding consistent with the expec? tations of theories of acculturative stress among immigrants (Laosa. Interestingly. Significantly are found depressive symptomatology. of reference between the foreign born and the native born. a finding consistent with other studies of adolescents Phin1979:287. measures of socioeconomic status.

099 -.138 -.063 .008 . self-reported origin groups inthese effects significant equations. Gender 0=female) (l=male. of course. identities ornational had [Noother ethnic (American.051 .035 .011 . ap<. especially in the schools.020 .054 . associated Limited English Proficient (LEP) student in school is significantly not with depressive A with diminished self-esteem (although symptoms).071 .015 .009 .090 .046 from home absent Father situation -.021 -.010 .S.065 .016 .-born < 10years inU.057 Grade (GPA) average point Discrimination Been discriminated against discrimination (1-4) Expects National Ethnic Identity. for non-English-speaking LEP status is a common designation immigrants status which typically places them in public schools.008 . cp<.784 International Migration Review TABLE 6 Symptoms andDepressive Among Childrenof Immigrants: Predictorsof Self-Esteem Multiple Regressions_ of Least-Squares _Results Y=Self-Esteem Y=Depressive Symptoms Beta B S.060 .018 .281 NSNotSignificant Statistical significance: p<. Also.039 -.E.098 -. higher self-esteem ent variable.026 .267 -.036 NS NS NS R*=. Nativity Age.015 .011 .222 .150 Limited-English-Proficient .042 R2=.008 -.035 -. Foreign-bom .200 NS NS . net of the level of English language being labeled and assigned to classes as a proficiency.020 -.S.042 .027 NS -. Chicano) Hyphenated-American.009 .022 . B S. statistically American social contexts.102 .281 . strongly associated with higher educational ously With cross-sectional data. the foreign language teasing and ridicule by other students.281 .035 NS NS Status Socioeconomic Family level educational Father's (1-6) notemployed Father -. Indeed.040 -. Age(years) U.026 economic Worse family Parents conflict scale Parent-child (1^1) Embarassed byparents are main homework Parents help with Noonehelps homework and Schooling Language Index (1^1) Proficiency English Index (1^1) Language Foreign (LEP) -.01.028 .E.052 . Sigand Gender.012 .106 .083 . Beta Sig. although is aspirations.05. Origin1 Black Filipino Vietnamese variance Explained .169 -.017 .097 NS NS .050 NS .113 .022 -. Hispanic.022 .0001. we cannot here untangle unambigu? or even the sequence the causal dynamics of effects in all of these .014 .044 .118 .019 . as well as a stigmatized curriculum and exposes them to outside the mainstream English-language By contrast.017 .023 .033 -. index score was not significantly associated with either depend? proficiency not shown in Table 6.014 .076 .

We examined a broad array of poten? ing parent-child and will briefly highlight some of tial objective and subjective predictors. captured here by our data may be linked to a diminished All other nationalities. Table 7 presents the results of a multiple regression analysis predict? conflict scale scores. Conversely. Specifically. With perceived and the other variables controlled. washed out of the regression equation outcomes. self-esteem analyzing Predictors of Parent-Child Conflict Finally. Faunce. It may be that but such objective aspirations. 1984). a Black self-identity was positively associated depression a result suggesting that such a mode of self-identi? with higher self-esteem. on not have a significant effect self-esteem. Rosenberg. 1991. 1993). among national-origin groups. the sample in 1995 and add a longitudinal dimension to our study in order to more clearly sort out the temporal ordering of variables and effects. fication serves a psychologically protective function (cf Porter and Washing? ethnic self-identity showed any significant ton. agreeing with the statement that "people will discriminate against me regardless of how far I go with my education" . associations effects of racial-ethnic discrimination The noxious are psychological against apparent in the results shown in Table 6. No other reported or with self-esteem. self-identity scores. determi? Here is a the most noteworthy significant findings. Indeed. are effects involved Schooler and 1994. .e. Rosenberg. suggest? to other groups certain psychosocial vulnerabilities ing that in comparison or dynamics and Filipino children of immigrants not among Vietnamese sense of self-worth. the broad is that ethnic self-definitions may be chosen or accepted to the implication extent that they are protective of the youth's sense of self-regard in relevant social contexts.. expected tion -i. discrimina? However. however. again gender of immigrant nant.a involved in such conflicts and instances of parental derogation possible reflection of the clash between restrictive parental standards for behavior. (Owens. 1979). and we will need to wait to reinterview Schoenbach.The Crucible Within 785 with subjective variables such as educational particularly also with variables as GPA. reciprocal 1989. The daughters parents are more likely than sons to be . and but erroneous folk wisdom that minority group or debunks the enduring lower-SES children ipso facto must have lower self-esteem. one discrimination only type of ethnic was significantly and none with associated with self-esteem. That positive negative relationship finding is in accord with the available research literature (Phinney. the Vietnamese the Filipinos were the only nationalities still flagged by the and especially data as reflecting statistically significantly lower self-esteem scores. Having been discriminated it does elevates depressive symptoms significantly although significantly associated and decreased with both increased depression self-esteem.

family family support Conversely. Conflict with parents is also exacerbated by the greater the number of hours the children spent watching television and the fewer the hours they spent on homework.all of which here not only as indicators be of available may interpreted and social but also of resources cohesion. Instead. conflict is significantly Parent-child in reduced perceptively families with both natural parents at home and where both parents and siblings are available/relied upon as main sources of help with school work . is itself associated Lastly. 1988). Matute-Bianchi. 1991. families. age and U." the more conflict there appears to be in the parent-child relationship because the outlook that sees discrimination as perhaps implicit trumping education contradicts parents' folk theories of success (Gibson. immigrant . to avoid speaking which would require the son to use the numerous which due deference is paid to the authority pronouns through of the parents (Rumbaut and Ima.786 International Migration Review sense of and desire for dating and the like. posing problems of parental control and authority. Several objective and subjective features of the family context are particu? in the parent-child with frictions Table 7 larly associated relationship. 1988. where the youth feels embarrassed conflict with parents is exacerbated by his or her parents and where the youth has no one to seek out for help with school work. conflict is significantly increased in cases where the child prefers English and also has a poor command of the . with its egalitarian pronoun "you. the lower their academic GPA. Rumbaut 1995. and education are central issues in the relationship of immi? Language and which their conflict children and may spark grant parents derogation between them. against the girls' increasing from parental control in the transition and independence to individuality adulthood and Ima. nativity are not significantly conflict. In Vietnamese to take one example. infuriated when a teenage son parents are sometimes switches to English. 1989). as Table 7 shows. Waters. Net of the other factors controlled for in this analysis. forthcoming. the issue of discrimination conflict: the more the youth has experienced strongly with parent-child being discriminated against and the more the youth perceives that "people will discriminate against me regardless of how far I go with my education. Woldemikael.a as well as recipe for communication parental native language problems.S. in more that such frictions to occur are families where the likely suggests situation of the family has mother is less educated and where the economic worsened. and the lower the youths' educational aspirations -variables that paint a fairly vivid picture of the nature of the clashing discourses and concerns over which tensions develop in the parent-child rela? competing tionship. such conflicts appear more likely related to parent-child to occur among the most recently arrived immigrant families in our sample." in order deliberately in Vietnamese. As Table 7 shows. (cf Gibson.

immigrant parents tend to define the situation in instrumental terms (extolling the virtues of hard work and good grades). the Filipinos.060 -. Hispanic.078 -.E.034 .107 -.040 -.078 . NS NS b -.081 . associations with Only a handful of nation? significant parent-child alities were significantly related to such conflicts with parents:the Haitians. The degree of parent-child conflict was shown earlier (in the Laotians). bp<.101 -.045 -.045 .006 .168 -.050 . Variables Predictor and Gender. cp<. 0=female) Age(years) U.035 .060 Sig. groups (Vietnamese.018 .016 .112 .051 -. . however.162 .069 . origin groups self-reported in had effects these statistically equations.041 -.044 .007 .124 .0001.101 . Hyphenated-American.009 .121 .034 -.148 -.029 . in whereas their children tend to seek to fit in socially and to experience within an ethnic terms the of disparagement minority impact expressive status.011 .088 -.011 . significant 1995.049 .05. had statistically conflict.011 .-born < 10 years inU.167 .206 -. That is.01.074 .024 . and the Indochinese and Cambodians.The Crucible Within 787 7 TABLE Childrenof Immigrants Predictorsof Parent-ChildConflict Among Y=Parent-Child Conflict S.S.S. Black) (American. None of the different ethnic self-identity types.053 .028 .076 .083 -.023 -. 1991).005 . Foreign-bom Socioeconomic Status Family level educational Mother's (1-6) Worse economic situation family Parents athome natural Both parents Embarassed byparents are main Parents homework help are main homework help Siblings Noonehelps with homework and Schooling Language Index (1-4) Proficiency English Index (1-4) Foreign Language (LEP) Limited-English-Proficient Prefers 0=no) English (l=yes.018 .009 . Nativity Age.021 .018 .048 .010 . ornational [Noother ethnic identities Chicano. Grade (GPA) point average Educational (1-5) aspirations homework Hours perday doing TV Hours perday watching Discrimination Been discriminated against discrimination (1-4) Expects National Origin1 Haitian Filipino Vietnamese and Laotian Cambodian variance Explained -.032 .026 .011 .031 .048 NS c b NSNotSignificant Statistical significance: ap<.018 .021 .023 . Ogbu. Gender (1=male.097 .041 .

self-identity type suggesting ethnic identity may be connected. these data only begin to suggest a range and conflict . about one-tenth Americans and two-tenths (21%) selected racial or panethnic identity labels. derogation refers to at the outset of this article . CONCLUSION This article has touched on multiple aspects of the psychosocial adaptation of children of the new waves of immigration to the United States. certain findings are in patterns of ethnic especially noteworthy. Instead of a uniform assimilative or segmented path. another 40 percent chose a hyphen? ated-American (11%) identified as unhyphenated identity.both between and within groups from diverse national origins . gender was a significant of virtually every predictor of ethnic that of gender and issues chosen. The data show major differences self-identification children of from Asia. reported or dissimilative either assimilative identities that are not connected to those origins but to their American present. national identity (whether boys were more likely to choose an unhyphenated . as well as a Hispanic panethnic self-label. ethnic self-identification process. Several major patterns emerged from multivariate analyses of a wide range of factors that were theoretically to and of other expected shape the process of ethnic self-identification. is a gendered First. of issues around that Mary Antin the adolescents' in turn affect the their social iden? In any event. Latin among teenage immigrants America and the Caribbean . we found multiple Over one-quarter of the youths paths to identity formation and resolution. conflicts which self-esteem and psychological children's and well-being. that remains the case in the multivariate analysis for a variety of explanatory even after controlling factors. (27%) identified by national origin. such of as self-esteem and aspects psychosocial adaptation depression. two-thirds of the respondents ethnically the remaining or their parents' one-third immigrant origins.growing up in two distinct corners of the United States. that self-esteem. Girls were much more likely to choose additive or hyphenated identities. self-identified with their own Thus.are produced in with their immigrant relationship parents. suggesting be for both adaptation processes may psychosocial particularly problematic parents and children in those ethnic groups. tities. Among the many in the preceding results presented empirical analysis. It is worth results also showed that the Vietnamese that multivariate and repeating were the nationalities with associated lower only Filipinos significantly even with parent-child conflict controlled. Among the adoles? cents in the sample.788 International Migration Review bivariate results by nationality) to be more intense among those particular national-origin groups. focusing on the formation of ethnic identities during adolescence.the "friction" which tension.

Location and nationality matter more here. those who perceive that people will discriminate against them no matter the level ofeducation they may achieve are more likely to remain loyal to a national-origin identity. having relatively little to do with acculturative as such.5 generation) being foreign-born U.S. for and fluent use of English with ized U.7 Still. citizenship.S. Being born in the United States (second generation status) greatly increases the propensity for an assimilative as does natural? self-definition. Youths in processes inner city schools where most students are racial-ethnic are more minorities in to define those themselves terms of Black identities. acculturation strongly affects the process of identificational lation. Such experi? . with They are also associated conflict. In general. report higher depression. of discrimination affect the way children define their Third. Those who have experienced being discriminated against are less likely to identify as American. and among as In was a main determinant Chicano. partly in line with expectations assimi? theory. perceptions ethnic identities. national by origin. higher levels of depressive symptoms and greater parent-child of dissimilative racial or panethnic self-iden? Fourth. Children of all very strong effects on the choice of a hyphenated to do so. drawn from classic assimilation Second. of psycho? addition. Conversely. The of the effects of acculturative on the strength and significance processes as a hyphenated-American odds of self-identifying lie between those two poles.on of and on exclusion racial-ethnic ences/perceptions rejection grounds ascribed rather than achieved statuses . likely particularly and less likely to identify ancestrally and Chicano. whereas most of nationalities are much more Asian-origin likely those coming from Latin America and the Caribbean are less likely to add the hyphen. citizen. . child conflict.undercut the prospect of identifi? cational assimilation into the mainstream. as well as a preference for and fluency in the parental native are associated with an ancestral or national-origin language. whereas as a rule parental nationality tends to wash out in our models as a predictor of the children's to propensity or by national origin. identity. the determination tities follows a different logic.The Crucible Within 789 American or national those of Mexican descent to origin). the hyphenated identity emerges here less as a qualita? different mode of ethnic self-definition than as as a bridge or middle tively the identificational between an American national position along spectrum identity and that of origin. parental nationality has identify either as American identity. and not a (1. and a preference close friends. Precisely the opposite effect is seen for those attending upper-middle-class 7Harold J. with girls being much more likely than boys to logical well-being lower and a greater level of parentself-esteem. gender identify outcomes. Abramson puts it this way:"The hyphenate synthesizes a larger loyalty to America with a historic loyalty to the ethnic past" (1981:156).

a mean? immigrants ingful place in the society of which they are its newest members. mother's) parents' (and especially in an ethnic looking-glass. In the final has been shaping identities is crucible it the without that shapes the crucible within. esteem and depressive American" takes different forms.defining an identity for themselves. conflictual and stressful. Children who feel embarrassed were reflections more likely to identify assimilatively as by their parents are significantly whereas higher-status Americans. Children born. chosen by only 10 percent of the youth from Afro-Caribbean backgrounds. The of immigrants. H. D.S. its extraordinarily Miami area. Fifth. MA: Harvard University Press. and "Becoming is reached by different paths. is shaped by the family context. professional parents are unhyphenated their children to identify by their national origin. 150-160. To be sure.S. but its use increases among the U.. despite high proportion of assimilative to the development main? turns out to be more conducive an ironic result that may be in part connected stream identities. J. but it declines by over 20 percent of those from Spanish-speaking in San Diego are of the U. 1981 "Assimilation and Pluralism. to race (the of phenotypically white youth in the sample overwhelming proportion reside in Miami) and to the effects of American racial categories and racism on perceived ethnic identity options. The process is also shaped within a much larger historical context of which the participants may be no more conscious than fish are of water.790 International Migration Review theoretical private schools. children's psychosocial adaptation of identificational assimilation is moderated The likelihood by parental social status.e. CT: Yale University Press. Cambridge. i. A Black or Black American racial identity was Asian or Asian American. born. R. A Hispanic identity was picked countries. and profoundly affects the consciousness of immigrant parents and children alike. Alba. But the process is one in which all children of are engaged .New Haven." In Harvard Encyclopedia of AmericanEthnic Groups. the process is complex. more likely to influence conflict emerged as the strongest determinant Parent-child of poorer selfaffect. . 1990 Ethnic Identity:The Transformation of WhiteAmerica. The results support a segmented-assimilation labels youth chose the panethnic Virtually no Asian-origin perspective. analysis. Pp. S. and in an American crucible that since the origins of the nation. REFERENCES Abramson.Ed. dren's ethnic self-identities of their strongly tend to mirror the perceptions own if they their ethnic as self-identities. Thernstrom. immigrants rapidly among much more likely to identify in racial or panethnic minority terms. has different meanings. and parent-child The chil? ethnic socialization. relationships.

New York:W. H. CA: Sage. Gans. L. 15(2): 173-192. London: Croom of Immigrant Helm." Social PsychologyQuarterly. Social Status. E. Erikson. Ogbu 1987 "Black Students' School Success: Coping With the Burden of Acting White. S.'" Urban Review." SociologicalFocus. and Self-Esteem. Philadelphia..Newbury Park. Foner. Colombia. and J. 15(3): 163-178. Knight. 1993 Ethnic Identity:Formation and Transmission AmongHispanicsand OtherMinorities. The Promised Land. W. N. Identity:Youth 1950 Childhood and Society. A Social-Psychological 1983 The Education Children: Introduction.Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.New Haven. CT: Yale University Italian orAmerican?TheSecondGeneration Press. 1982 "The Relation of Status to Self-Esteem: Chain Saw Sociology at the Cutting Edge. Y L. PA: 1992 Temple University Press.. M. San Diego: Center for U." In New Immigrantsin New York.Englewood Cliffs. 47(1):3-14. 1968 and Crisis. 1943 in Conflict. Foner.and Implications for EducationalPolicy. New York: Hough ton Mifflin. and M. 1992 "Second Generation Decline: Scenarios for the Economic and Ethnic Futures of the Post-1965 American Immigrants. Asian American Panethnicity:Bridging Institutions and Identities." Ethnic and Racial Studies. N. Choy. M. R. and G. DeVos. Fordham. E. H. J. Franklin. A. NJ:. M. M.Ed. Pp. U. Uni? versity of California. Antin.New York:W.-Mexican Studies. and J. MO: University of Missouri Press. eds. J." Ethnicand Racial Studies. H. 1979 "Symbolic Ethnicity: The Future of Ethnic Groups and Cultures in America. . A." In California's Immigrant Children:Theory. J. 1987 "The Jamaicans: Race and Ethnicity Among Migrants in New York City. 1995 "Additive Acculturation as a Strategy for School Improvement. Norton. 1984 "School Achievement. A. Cornelius. New York: Columbia University Press. I. W.2(1): 1-20. Caplan. A. Faunce. Cropley. W. Child. Ed. 18(3): 176-206. Rumbaut and W A. 195-217. 1912 Bernal. H.Prentice-Hall. Suarez-Orozco 1990 Status Inequality:The Self in Culture. G.New York: State University of New York Press. M. Gibson.Research.S. Whitmore 1991 Childrenof the Boat People:A Study of EducationalSuccess. Norton.The Crucible Within 791 1985 Italian Americans: Into the Twilightof Ethnicity. K. N. P. Espiritu. 1993 The Color Line: Legacyfor the Twenty-First Century.

Crichlow. P Gurin and T. S. and B. Comparative Ogbu."American Journal of Education. 205. Religionand National Origins. R. 41(1):129-151. C. tion. F. Troyna 1993 "Racialization and Children. MacLeod. 1994 "The Meaning of Race and Ethnic Population Projections. M. 1986 1974 Olsen. ed. 109-125. New York: Garland." In Minority Statusand Schooling: A Comparative Studyof Immigrantand InvoluntaryMinorities. U. 1987 "Variabilityin Minority School Performance: A Problem in Search of an Explana? & EducationQuarterly." In Minority Status and Schooling: A Study of Immigrantand InvoluntaryMinorities. McCarthy and W. 1991 "Situational Ethnicity and Patterns of School Performance Among Immigrant and Nonimmigrant Mexican-Descent Students. 1981 "AmericanIdentity and Americanization. 3-33.. A.A Framework for Studying the Adaptations of Immigrants and Ethnics: The Adaptation of Mexicans in the United States. G. 38-65. CO: Westview Press. Hurtado." Paper presented at 13th Albany Conference on American Diversity." Social Problems. Pp. Hirschman. Cambridge: MA: Harvard University Press. M. Pp. Pp. Gordon. 1990 "PsychosocialStress.Ed. in AmericanLife: TheRole of Race. Accomodation NY: Cornell University Press. Coping. OgbuJ. J. Laosa. 31-58. P.Boulder. U. M. April 15-16. and Development of Hispanic Immigrant Children. E.San Francisco: California Tomorrow. New York:Praeger." In HarvardEncyclopedia ofAmericanEthnic Groups. Ed. Matute-Bianchi. . M. 1987 Ain't No Making It: LeveledAspirationsin a Low-Income Neighborhood.U." In MentalHealth of EthnicMinorities." The Annals of the AmericanAcademyof Political and Social Science. A. New York: Routledge. Thernstrom. CA: SAGE Publica? tions.Thousand Oaks. Pp. Gibson andj. Academic Press.. New York: Garland. Serafica^a/. 1989 "Ethnic Identities and Patterns of School Success and Failure among Mexican-De? scent and Japanese-American Students in a California High School: An Ethno? graphic Analysis. New York: 1964 Assimilation Oxford University Press. 1991 "Immigrant and Involuntary Minorities in Comparative Perspective. Gibson andj.C. N.Ed. Identity. 1993 "Is Assimilation Dead?.Ithaca. M. Gleason. Glazer. M.530:122-136. the Schoolhouse 1988 Border: Crossing ImmigrantStudentsand the CaliforniaPublicSchools. P. Min.and Representation in Education. 1995 Asian Americans:Contemporary Trends and Issues.Pp.792 International Migration Review Without Assimilation:SikhImmigrants in an AmericanHigh School.Ed. Hatcher. Peng 1994 "Social Identities . Ogbu. L.18(4):312-334. C.247. L. State University of New York at Albany." In Race.Ed.95(l):233-255." Anthropology An Ethnography TheNext Generation: New York: of Educationin an UrbanNeighborhood.

A. 49(3):383-397. Rosenberg.Berkeley: University of California Press. A. Sociological Rumbaut. "Ethnic Identity in Adolescents and Adults: Review of Research. University of California. Baltimore. Portes. Stepick 1993 Cityon theEdge: The Transformation of Miami. G.and Services. 1993 Becoming Mexican American: Ethnicity. Rumbaut. 54:1004-1018. G. 11. R. Baltimore. Cornelius. Porter.Ed." American Journal of Psychiatry." Annual Review of Sociology. San Diego: Implications Center for U.530:74-96. and R. D. Phinney. DC: U. G. A.S. G. and J.Research. 1990 1965 Societyand theAdolescentSelf-image.CDS ImmigrantStudentsin CaliforniaPublic Schools: Report No. Rosenberg. Rumbaut 1976 "The Family in Exile: Cuban Expatriates in the United States." In Refugee Children:Theory.9(4):583-621. Sanchez. Rumbaut and W. MD: Center for Research on Effective Schooling for Disadvantaged Students. J. Office of Refugee Resettlement.Washington. C Schooler. Ima 1988 TheAdaptationof Southeast Asian RefugeeYouth: A Comparative Study.The Crucible Within 793 Owens. S." In California's ImmigrantChildren: Theory.S. 1900-1945. "The Agony of Exile: A Study of Indochinese Refugee Adults and Children. Zhou 1993 "The New Second Generation: Segmented Assimilation and Its Variants.. J.133(4):395-399. and A. 1991 A Summaryof CurrentKnowledge. for EducationalPolicy. and R. Washington 1993 "Minority Identity and Self-Esteem. 1991 "Ethnic Identity and Self-Esteem: A Review and Integration.-Mexican Studies. and R." SociologicalForum. December.Ed. R. Berkeley: University of California Press. 108(3):499-514. R. 1990 .Princeton. and M. MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. NJ: Princeton University Press. and C Schoenbach 1989 "Self-Esteem and Adolescent Problems: Modeling Reciprocal Effects. and K. G. F.A. R. 1994 "Two Dimensions of Self-Esteem: Reciprocal Effects of Positive Self-Worth and on Adolescent Problems/' American Sociological Review. Rumbaut. E. 13(2): 193-208. Culture and Identity in Chicano Los Angeles. Rumbaut A Portrait.19:139-161. J. Portes. Athey. L. Johns Hopkins University. 1995 "The New Californians: Comparative Research Findings on the Educational Pro? Research and gress of Immigrant Children." AmericanSociologicalReview. G. Portes. Jr. Self-Deprecation 59(3):391-407."TheAnnals Academy of theAmerican of Politicaland Social Science. 1990 America: Immigrant Portes." HispanicJournal of BehavioralSciences. 1994 "Origins and Destinies: Immigration to the United States Since World War II. T." Psychological Bulletin. 1984 "The Rise of Ethnicity: Determinants of Ethnic Perceptions Among Cuban Exiles in Miami. R." American Review. Ahearn.J. New York: Oxford University Press. M. 1979 Conceivingthe Self New York: Basic Books. L. A. M.

L..Ed. M. 1981 Human Groupsand Social Categories. R. Vega. 1981 "Toward a Theory of Assimilation and Dissimilation. B. and A. Srole 1945 The Social Systems of AmericanEthnic Groups.Ed. Romero 1983 "Family Life Patterns of Mexican-Americans." Ethnic and Racial Studies. and F.S. 1991 "Immigrant Adaptation to Schooling: A Hispanic Case.W L. 1990 EthnicOptions:ChoosingIdentitiesin America. Thomas. NY: Center for Migration Studies. London: Cambridge University Press. W I. W A. 2. New York: Garland.Austin: University of Texas Press. Rumbaut and W A. CT: Yale University Press.Research. 1989 BecomingBlackAmerican:Haitian and AmericanInstitutionsin Evanston. Tajfel. B. Vega. M. and R. Mexican Immigrant. J. AmericanRefugeesand U. C. "The Intersection of Gender.and Implications for Educational Policy. R. Ed.794 International Migration Review Suarez-Orozco. 4(3):249-264. and Non-Latino White American Youths in Schools. Gibson andj. New York: Bruner/Mazel. 1943. 1988 BarrioGangs: StreetLifeand Identityin SouthernCalifornia. M. M. Suarez-Orozco. New York: Dover. 194-215. Leadbeater and N. Woldemikael.Staten Island. M.d. 1993 "Acculturation and Delinquent Behavior Among Cuban American Adolescents: Toward an Empirical Model. University of California. Sung." American Journal of Community Psychology. In press. Pp.S. Illinois. and C. Waters.D. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Rumbaut 1991 "Ethnic Minorities and Mental Health. Race and Ethnicity in Identity Development of Caribbean American Teens. New York:AMS Press. Yinger. Cornelius. Vol. 1989 Vigil. G.-Mexican Studies. W A. et al.17:351-383. High Schools: A Psychosocial Central Studyof Motivationand Achievement. Pp. . J. 1987 TheAdjustment in New York Experience of ChineseImmigrantChildren City. j. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Znaniecki 1958 The PolishPeasantin Europeand America[1918?20]. H. 37-61. L." In Minority Status and Schooling:A ComparativeStudy of Immigrantand Involuntary Minorities." In The PsychologicalDevelopmentof MinorityGroupChildren. 21(l):351-383. San Diego: Center for U. Whyte." In UrbanAdolescentGirls: Resisting Stereotypes. A. W A. Warner. New York: New York University Press. U. Powell. and L." In California'sImmigrantChildren:Theory.. Ogbu. T. 2d ed.Berkeley: University of California Press. M." Annual Review of Sociology. Ed. Vega. M.New Haven. G. W F 1955 StreetCornerSociety:The Social Structure of an Italian Slum. Way. G. M. n. Hough. Suarez-Orozco 1995 "The Cultural Patterning of Achievement Motivation: A Comparative Study of Mexican. lsted.