CROSS CULTURAL

COMMUNICATION
3th Week
SOME RELATED TERMS
-ACCULTURATION

-CULTURE SHOCK
WHAT IS
"ACCULTURATION
"?
 cultural modification of an individual,
group, or people by adapting to or
borrowing traits from another culture
 For example: the acculturation of
immigrants to american life also : a
merging of cultures as a result of
prolonged contact
 the process by which a human being
acquires the culture of a particular society
from infancy (Merriam-Webster)
ACCULTURATION
 Acculturation is defined as “the process of cultural change that occurs when individuals from
different cultural backgrounds come into prolonged, continuous, first-hand contact with each
other” (redfield, linton, & herskovits, 1936, p. 146).
 This first-hand contact results in changes at both individual (i.e., values, attitudes, beliefs and
identities) as well as group level (i.e. social and cultural systems) (Berry, 2003).
 Salient forms of the acculturation process are composed of antecedent factors (acculturation
conditions), strategies (acculturation orientations), and consequences (acculturation outcomes)
(see Figure 1; Arends-Tóth & van de Vijver, 2006b).

 https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?date=1322787131&article=1105&context=orpc&preview_mode=
Framework of
acculturatıon
ACCULTURATION CONDITIONS
 These are individual- and group-level factors, such as the
characteristics of the receiving society (e.g., perceived or objective
discrimination), characteristics of the society of origin (e.g., political
context), characteristics of the immigrant group (e.g., ethnic vitality)
and personal characteristics (e.g., expectations, norms and
personality).
 These characteristics define the context that impinges on the process
of acculturation (Arends-Tóth & van de Vijver, 2006b).
ACCULTURATION ORIENTATION
(strategies)
 The second dimension of the process, acculturation orientations (also
referred to in the literature as acculturation strategies, styles, and
attitudes) involves the way immigrants prefer to relate to the
 society of settlement (cultural adoption) and
 country of origin (cultural maintenance).
 Acculturation orientations are mostly related to acculturation attitudes
(preferences). It is argued that there are two major theoretical
perspectives on acculturation which are related to acculturation
orientations:
 1-dimensionality (boyutluluk) and
 2-domain specificity (alan özgüllüğü) (Arends-Tóth & van de Vijver, 2003).

 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
276058005_Dimensions_in_acculturation_One_two_or_many [accessed
Oct 18 2018].
Dimensionality
 Dimensionality refers to the relations between cultural adoption and
maintenance. A unidimensional model describes cultural maintenance and
adoption as bipolar opposites.
 An individual can either maintain the culture of origin or adapt to the culture
of settlement. A major critique of the unidimensional model was leveled at
the main assumption that the
 acculturation process varies along a single continuum from identification with
the country of origin to the country of settlement (Benet-Martínez, in press).
 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
276058005_Dimensions_in_acculturation_One_two_or_many [accessed Oct
18 2018].
 One-Dimensional Model

 Historically, the first model of acculturation held that the process

of acculturation can be viewed as successive adjustment to the
new context, thereby gradually losing the ethnic heritage
(Gordon, 1964).
 The model was mainly inspired by European immigration to the
US in the 19th and early 20thcentury.
 When these immigrants arrived, they did not know the American
culture and did not speak the language. With the passing of time,
the new immigrants became fully adjusted to the new context.
 This adjustment often meant that they lost their original
language and became Americanized. What typically did not
change during the acculturation process was the religion.
 Even if many immigrants took great pride in their ethnic heritage,
ties with this culture were often loose. Dimensions in
acculturation: One, two, or many? | (Vijver, 2015)
 Request PDF. Available from:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276058005_Dimensio
ns_in_acculturation_One_two_or_many [accessed Oct 18 2018].
European's immigration
to America
 America is well-known as a land of
immigrants; a notion that is essential to
its identity. European migration to
America may be dated from 1620 when
100 Pilgrims from England set out on the
difficult four-month journey across the
Atlantic Ocean.
 Most Europeans emigrated to America
between 1820-1920. They came in two
major waves, first from northern and
western Europe in the early 19th century,
then from southern and eastern Europe
between 1860 and 1920 (Sharma)
https://www.quora.com/Why-did-European-flee-to-America-in-the-19th-century
 While the Pilgrims left their homeland seeking freedom from religious
persecution, immigrants in the 19th and early 20th centuries were
also fleeing poor economic conditions or political oppression
(Sharma)

https://www.quora.com/Why-did-European-flee-to-America-in-the-19th-century
 In early 19th century America, immigrants worked as farmers and domestic
servants.
 As the country moved from an agricultural to an industrial economy in the
latter half of the 19th century, they laid railway tracks and worked in
factories.
 They opened small restaurants, barbershops, and shoeshine parlous.
 They worked in the textile industry and in coal mines.
 They helped produce iron and steel, and worked on gas, electricity, and water
projects.
 America’s immigrants settled the country, developed its infrastructure, and
advanced its politics and culture (Sharma)
https://www.quora.com/Why-did-European-flee-to-America-in-the-19th-century
The two-dimensional model of acculturation.
 The development of the two-dimensional model started from the observation
that there some immigrant groups have been able to maintain their language and
culture for many generations.
 Examples are groups of Chinese in various places such as Singapore. Another
example is the maintenance of religion by many Muslim groups in the diaspora.
 So, complete immersion is not the inevitable or desired outcome for all
immigrants. (Vijver, 2015)

 Request PDF. Available from:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276058005_Dimensions_in_acculturation_One_two_or_many [accessed Oct 18 2018].
Berry's two-dimensional model of acculturation
 The most influential two-dimensional model of acculturation has been proposed by Berry
(1997, 2001).
 The model holds that an immigrant has to deal with two cultures:
 the culture of the country of origin
 and the culture of the host country.
 The first question is whether the immigrant finds it important to maintain the ethnic culture.
 The second question is whether the immigrant finds it important to adopt the mainstream
culture.
 It is a crucial characteristic of the two-dimensional model that answers to the two questions
are conceptually independent: an affirmative answer to the question of cultural maintenance
does not imply a negative answer to the question of cultural adoption, as would be argued in
the one-dimensional model (Vijver, 2015).

 Dimensions in acculturation: One, two, or many? | Request PDF. Available from:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276058005_Dimensions_in_acculturation_One_two_or_many [accessed Oct 18 2018].
 Unlike unidimensional models, bidimensional models treat cultural
maintenance and adoption as two distinct dimensions which are conceptually
unrelated and empirically often show weak, negative correlations (Berry, 1997).
 Studies have addressed acculturation preferences among mainstreamers; these
expected acculturation orientations reflect ways mainstreamers like to see
immigrants deal with the ethnic and mainstream cultures.
 It is suggested that there can be differences in dimensionality among immigrant
members and the mainstreamers;
 for example, it is found to be unidimensional in majority group members and
bidimensional in minority groups in the Netherlands (Van Oudenhoven, Prins, &
Buunk, 1998; Verkuyten& Thijs, 1999).
Domain Specificity
 Domain-specificity refers to the finding that acculturation orientations
and behaviors can vary across life domains and contexts.
 The main distinction is between public and private life spheres. Thus,
it has been found that Turkish and Moroccan immigrants in the
 Netherlands and Belgium prefer differing acculturation strategies in
the public domain (preference of cultural adoption) and private
domain (preference of cultural maintenance)
 (Arends-Tóth & van de Vijver, 2003; Snauwaert, Soenens,
Vanbeselaere, & Boen, 2003).
Acculturation Outcomes
 The final component of the acculturation process refers to acculturation outcomes.
 A distinction has been made between
 1-psychological outcomes (internal adjustment) and
 2-behavioral adaptation (social, external adjustment) (Van Oudenhoven, Judd, & Ward, 2008;
Ward, Leong, & Law, 2004).
 Internal adjustment is composed of the emotional and affective (psychological)
acculturation outcomes, which involve well-being, mental health, and satisfaction
with life in the new cultural context.

 https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
date=1322787131&article=1105&context=orpc&preview_mode=
Acculturation Outcomes
 The second acculturation outcome, external adjustment, can be thought
of as acquiring culturally appropriate knowledge and skills, which results
in interacting with the mainstream culture and dealing with stressors.
 It is predicted by cultural knowledge, cultural distance, cultural identity,
language ability, length of residence in the new culture, and amount of
contact with hosts (Ataca & Berry, 2002; Galchenko & van de Vijver,
2007).

 https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
date=1322787131&article=1105&context=orpc&preview_mode=
 It is argued that acculturation outcomes are mostly linked to
acculturation behaviors.
 Sam (2006) referred to behavioral adaptation as long-term acculturation
outcome and acculturation behaviors as short-term acculturation
outcomes.

 https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
date=1322787131&article=1105&context=orpc&preview_mode=
 The emphasis of these definitions is upon the interactive viewpoint of the
acculturation process which understands change to occur in both immigrants
and members of the host society.
 Others view the acculturation process as “monistic” 104 (i.e., changes occur
primarily on the part of the immigrants).
 This approach was illustrated by the definition of Marden and Meyer (1968),
stated earlier in this discussion, where the emphasis was on immigrants
“...who take over traits from another culture” (p. 36).
 Obviously over the long haul, both the host society and immigrants will
experience change, but the greatest change will occur among the immigrants.
 https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?date=1322787131&article=1105&context=orpc&preview_mode=
 The acculturation process, therefore, is an interactive and continuous
process that evolves in and through the communication of an immigrant
with the new sociocultural environment.
 The acquired communication competence, in turn, reflects the degree of
that immigrant’s acculturation (p. 380) (Lakey, 2003).

 Kaynak: https://web.uri.edu/iaics/files/10-Paul-N.-Lakey.pdf
 Researchers interested in acculturation and intergroup relations have drawn attention
to two key issues affecting both immigrants and mainstream societies in receiving
societies (göç alıcı toplum)
 One of these issues is related to the continuation of group characteristics, the other is
related to interaction and communication within the group (Berry 1997, 2001).
 Sam (2006) states that people from different cultures who have to live together due to
migration have inevitably interacted and the changes caused by this interaction resulted
with acculturation (akt.

 http://www.psikguncel.org/archives/vol10/no3/cap_10_03_04.pdf
 In the process of acculturation, a result of their mutual interaction; there are changes in
the language, values and behavior of both the mainstream society and the immigrant
minority community.
 Despite these changes, it is stated that the essences of both groups continue to be
different from each other (Flaskerud 2007).
 Although the process of acculturation affects both the mainstream society and the
immigrant minority community, the findings of the research suggest that İmmingrant
minority is more affected with the process. (Berry 2001, Flaskerud 2007, Rohman et al.
2008).
 Cultural adaptation studies (Berry 2001, Flaskerud 2007) Rohman et al. 2008) can often
be said to focus on these immigrant individuals.

 http://www.psikguncel.org/archives/vol10/no3/cap_10_03_04.pdf
 Glossary
 Acculturation conditions: Refer to the resources behind the  Acculturation attitudes: Refers to acculturation
 preferences.
acculturation process. Antecedent conditions can include
 They are believed to be mostly related to acculturation
 factors such as perceived discrimination, personality,
  orientations.
situational context.
  Acculturation behaviors: Refers to actual acts. They
Acculturation orientations: Refer to acculturation strategies,
are
 styles. Mediators in the acculturation process such as cultural
 assumed to be mostly related to acculturation
 maintenance vs. cultural adoption, or integration, outcomes.
 marginalization, separation and assimilation.  Domain-specificity: Refers to private (marriage, family)
 Acculturation outcomes: Refer to consequences of the vs.
 acculturation process which can be psychological (internal  public (school, work) life domains. It is argued that
 adjustment, well-being) and behavioral (external adjustment,  acculturation orientations are domain-specific; they
 doing well). From our perspective, acculturative stress is may vary among private and public domain.
 presumed to be part of psychological adjustment and is  Dimensionality: Refers to unidimensional (individual
 either
believed to be affected by acculturation conditions and
 maintenance the ethnic culture or adopt the dominant
 orientations (unlike other disciplines which may evaluate it as
culture) and/or bidimensional (individual may both
 input to other resources) maintain the ethnic culture and adopt the dominant
culture depending on the context) conceptual models.
Kreuzberg
 Kreuzberg is a district of Berlin, also known as
Little İstanbul among the Turks.
 Zentrum Kreuzberg sign in the center of the
neighborhood in the form of the "Kreuzberg
Merkezi" in Turkish,
 Over the youth of Kreuzberg, African-American,
hip hop, rap, breakdance and Turkish cultures
have a significant impact.
 After the law that came into force in 1998, the
district merged with Friedrichshain and took the
name Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg.
 The Kreuzberg district, where the immigrants
live mainly in Berlin, Germany, attracts the
attention of people of all ages and races with its
colorful environment, sights and multicultural
structure. Killa Hakan, Massaka 361, 36 Boys
gang as famous rappers and celebrities from
both Germany and Turkey Turks.

http://www.celebialper.com/ulkeler/almanya/kreuzberg-
berlin.html
Pictures from Kreuzberg -
Berlin
 36 Boys was a gang of Turkish youth in the
Kreuzberg district of Berlin.
The gang was active from the late 1980s to
the mid-1990s.
The gang, consisting of up to 300 people, was
not only Turkish youth but also young people
of different nationalities.
Areas where the gang is active; Kottbusser
Tor neighborhood, residential areas between
Naunynstrasse street and Waldemarstrasse
street, around the Görlitzer Bahnhof railway
station. 36 Boys' gang gets its name from
Kreuzberg's postal code ini 36

http://www.celebialper.com/ulkeler/almanya/kreuzberg-
berlin.html
In pursuit of the German Dream: Turks at Düsseldorf
airport in 1970. Source: DPA
Famous symbolism about assimilatıon and acculturatıon

ASSIMILATION! ACCULTURATION
DIFFERENCES OF ACCULTURATION and ASSIMILATION
 Meeting of cultures always produces results in terms of changes in both the cultures,
and acculturation and assimilation refer to two important and different changes in
these cultures.
 Assimilation refers to the process where some of the majority community’s cultural
aspects are absorbed in such a manner that the home cultural aspects get mitigated
or lost.
 Acculturation is a process where the cultural aspects of the majority community are
adapted without losing the traditions and customs of the minority community.
 Minority culture changes in the case of assimilation whereas it remains intact in the
case of acculturation.
 Assimilation is the blending or fusing of minority groups into the dominant society. It
is a slow and gradual process. It is an unconscious process.
 Acculturation is the process of transmitting cultural traits from one culture to another
https://www.differencebtw.com/difference-between-
for a longer time so as to make both cultures similar to each other.
acculturation-and-assimilation/
 Cultural assimilation (often called merely assimilation) is a process of
integration whereby members of an ethno-cultural community (such
as immigrants, or ethnic minorities) are “absorbed” into another,
generally larger, community.
 This implies the loss of the characteristics of the absorbed group,
such as language, customs, ethnicity and self-identity.
 Acculturation is the exchange of cultural features that results when
groups come into continuous first hand contact; the original cultural
patterns of either or both groups may be altered, but the groups
remain distinct.
 https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?
qid=20080518075209AAIpoib&guccounter=1
 Assimilation may be spontaneous, which is usually the case with
immigrants, or forced, as is often the case of the assimilation of ethnic
minorities.
 Acculturation comprehends those phenomena which result when groups
of individuals having different cultures come into continuous first-hand
contact, with subsequent changes in the original culture patterns of
either or both groups.
 Acculturation involves learning how to survive and prosper in another’s
culture. Assimilation involves it becoming your culture.
 http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?
doi=10.1.1.917.1215&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Cultural Assimilation of
Native Americans
 One of the more shocking and lesser
known parts of the Europeans
colonization of the United States is the
demolition of various Native American
social orders and societies.

With whites feeling that Native

Americans were on “their” property,
the United States attempted to drive
them to acclimatize to white individuals
in the United States through a forced
assimilation of Native Americans.
Local Americans were constrained into
winding up noticeably new natives in
the United States. The repercussions of
this enormous demolition of the
American Indians is still felt today in
some ways.

http://www.gwichinsteeringcommittee.org/the-forced-
assimilation-of-native-americans.html
Forced ASSIMILATION
 Forced assimilation is a process of forced cultural assimilation of
religious or ethnic minority groups, into an established and generally
larger community.
 This presumes a loss of many characteristics which make the minority
different.
 The Native Americans suffered both Ethnic and religious assimilation.
The assimilation process took place between the years 1790 and
1920.
Boarding Schools
 George Washington and Henry Knox were the first people to propose americanization of the Native
Americans to euro-american ways.
 In 1887 the Dawes act was formulated.
 This act was formulated to "encourage" native americans to assimilate.
 What they used to bribe the native americans was citizenship, land and education.
 In exchange for these things, the native americans had to give their culture and religious views.
 After the Indian wars were over, it became illegal for Native Americans to practice traditional native
american ceremonies.
 The Native Americans that decided to become citizens were treated unfairly. Their children were taken away
from them, and they were sent off to boarding schools.
 The boarding schools that the native americans were sent to, were typically ran by missionaries.
 At these boarding schools they were forced to go to church, speak only english, learn standard subjects,
and never revisit their old tribal ways.
 They were given new euro-american clothing, haircuts, and names (Caldwell, 2011). Kaynak:
https://www.vintag.es/2018/03/native-americans-forced-assimilation.html
Forced Asimilation of Native
Americans in Boarding Schools
 An informative video about understanding the cultural pluralism
 Please watch that!
 https://www.differencebtw.com/difference-between-acculturation-an
d-assimilation/
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yo1bYj-R7F0
MODELS OF ACCULTURATION
 Berry (2001) states that anthropologists and sociologists have discussed intercultural interaction under two main headings.

1-The first of these topics is about the degree of the relationship between the groups or the fusion of groups with each
other
 According to this approach, the two communities can be fused at different levels.

2-The second topic is about the declaration of the continuation of each group's own culture.
 The second heading points to the fact that each community may want to maintain its cultural existence independently of
the other.

 http://www.psikguncel.org/archives/vol10/no3/cap_10_03_04.pdf
 According to Berry (2001), knowing differences between these two possible forms of interaction is
important for understanding cultural and psychological adjustment.
 According to Berry, if the interaction between the groups is strong, while one culture falls into the
other, the characteristics of both societies disappear or diminish. As a result, a new formation
emerges.
 Both members of the mainstream society and members of the minority community confront
culturalization (Berry 1997, 2006a).

 http://www.psikguncel.org/archives/vol10/no3/cap_10_03_04.pdf
CULTURE SHOCK!
 Oberg (1960) is generally credited with introducing the concept of culture shock, described as
an “occupational disease...the anxiety that results from losing all of our familiar signs and
symbols of social intercourse” such as customs and words (p. 177).
 Adler (1975, 1987) prefers viewing culture shock in the broader context of “transition
shock,” a process in which one experiences “profound learning, self-understanding and
change.”
 Zaharna (1989) integrates the idea of “self shock,” emphasizing the “double-binding challenge
of identity” (p. 501). The challenges faced in “self shock” include loss of communication
competence in consideration of the self, distorted self-reflections regarding feedback from
others, and the demand of changing identity-bound behavior.

https://web.uri.edu/iaics/files/10-Paul-N.-Lakey.pdf
DEFINITIONS OF CULTURE
SHOCK
 Culture shock is the name given to many uncomfortable emotions and reactions that people experience
when they move into a new culture that is very different from their own.
 Culture shock is the term we use to describe the feelings of confusion and uncertainty that are
experienced when you come into contact with a culture that is vastly different from your own. Culture
shock can be commonly seen in foreign students, immigrants and refugees. Even students who stay in
their home countries suffer from culture shock as they make the transition into the foreign environment
known as college.
 Culture shock is the feeling of uncertainty, confusion or anxiety that people experience when visiting,
doing business in or living in a society that is different from their own. Culture shock can arise from a
person's unfamiliarity with local customs, language and acceptable behavior, since norms can vary
significantly across cultures.

 Read more: Culture Shock https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/culture-shock.asp#ixzz5UDzMCPf1

https://worldreliefdurham.org/culture-shock
 From the above, it is apparent that acculturation studies have come predominantly from
anthropologists and sociologists. Psychologists have been notable by their absence.
 Kaynak: http://www.psikguncel.org/archives/vol10/no3/cap_10_03_04.pdf
 https://www.thoughtco.com/acculturation-definition-3026039
FOR CONTACT:
E-mail: zeynepsaribek@beykent.edu.tr

@mervezeyynep