ACCULTURATION: THE SOURCE OF DIFFICULTIES AND FAVORABLE CIRCUMSTANCES

Interaction between people of various cultures is not a new phenomenon. Throughout Homo sapiens history, humankind has travelled around the world for different occasions, either in exploring of greener steppes, evading from persecution and natural disasters, to exchange or to conquer and settle. These movements have resulted in the interacting between millions of people from diverse heritage. In addition, this mechanism has also induced to changes in the indigenous behaviours and patterns of people concerned, as well as the establishment of new civilizations. The interaction between cultures and resulting alteration en masse has come to be defined as acculturation (Sam & Berry 2006, p. 1). Although acculturation involves the interaction between people from diverse cultures, yet acculturation is a source of difficulty and also favorable circumstance for individuals and societies..

This paper will focus on analysing the process of acculturation by giving some examples. The analysis is modelled on three aspects. Firstly: how acculturation occurs and people’s adaptation base on Bennett’s development model of intercultural sensitivity. Secondly: Acculturation from past to present. And lastly: The difficulties people encounter while going through this process.

Bennett (Hammer, Bennett & Wiseman 2003) states that when people contact with others from different backgrounds or cultures, they might attain intercultural sensitivity which means the competence to segregate and undergo relevant cross-cultural. Intercultural sensitivity may then empower them to cultivate intercultural competence which also means the capability to conceive and respond in interculturally appropriate approaches. This process is also known as Bennett’s development model of intercultural sensitivity. The phases introduced by Bennett (Hammer, Bennett & Wiseman 2003) are ‘denial, defence reversal and minimisation, which are part of an ethnocentric worldview; and acceptance, adaption and integration, which are part of an ethnorelative worldview’. In this framework, Bennett defines denial is the default reaction for most people, who are acculturated into an alien culture with very limited experience of that culture. In this circumstance, all individuals are alien to the indigenous culture are “the other”, and could be treated with apathy or offensive. The second phase introduced by Bennett is “defense reversal”, he claims that “defense reversal” takes place when ‘people of one culture perceives another culture not to be inferior, but superior, and pays tribute to that culture by “going native” or “passing” ’ (Bennett, Hammer & Wiseman 2003). This phase is much the same as denial and still induced by ethnocentrisms. Moving to “minimisation” which is the third phase of this framework, and also the transitional phase between ethnocentrism and ethnorelativism. “Minimisation” occurs when an individual neutralises the anxiety of the “denial” phase and preferably begins to apprehend universals or extensive amongst “us and them”, but only at a superficial level. The fourth stage of Bennett’s process is “acceptance” which is the first stage in ethnorelative phase. The author illustrates this phase as the indigenous culture is now interacting in the background of the alien cultures. People in this stage may experience others as alien, but still in same ethnic race. In addition, they are capable to identify how culture affects human experience and they have a mechanism for cataloguing investigations of cross cultural. The fifth phase of this framework is “adaption” and it takes place when an individual is capable to experience the empathy with a different culture. The individuals are capable to expand their subjective worldviews to comprehend other cultures and respond in a wide-range of culturally appropriate methods. The last phase of Bennett’s model is “integration” which occurs when individual sees their identity as being marginal to any particular culture; and can take a negative direction resulting in a feeling of alienation. However, a positive or constructive form which allowing this individual to shift in and out of cultures are observed as an essential and positive part of individual’s identity. Ultimately, Berry claims that there are different extents of cultural diverse which assist to define acculturation mechanism, such as diversity, wealth, space, equality and time, etc. There is no doubt that acculturation is the process of cultural and psychological change that influences intercultural interact (Berry 2003). Cultural changes also take into account diversifications in a group’s rituals, and in their economic and political positions (Phinney 2003).

Whether acculturation occurs usually depends on the conjunction between the culture which is receiving the new characteristics and the host culture. O’Neil (2009) states that ‘If one society is militarily dominant in the culture contact and they perceive their own culture as being superior in terms of technology and quality of life, it is not likely that they will be acculturated’. This can be observed thoroughly via the case of the English settlers and the Aborigines they met. Nowadays, when observing an Australian city, it is plain to recognise European culture is dominant in this country. There is no doubt the British did not maintain Aboriginal culture, yet some minor characteristics, such as words for animals, geographic regions, were used by the settlements. Because English settlements were in control of the interaction, they were able to decide upon the characteristics that would be assimilated into their own culture. However, if one society is militarily governed yet still recognise its culture to be elite, it is not be acculturated by the dominant culture. This type of pride helps to deny the process of acculturation and used to happen in the destruction of Roman Empire during the fifth century. The destruction ultimately occurred as a result of multiple invasions by the German. However, it was paradoxical that German language and its culture were not adopted by the Roman. For example, The Roman Christianity was general adopted by the Goths and some Germanic tribes. As the same case as the religion, Roman political system and the language (Latin) were still adopted by the German. However, interaction between cultures those are equal in both technology, military power, and quality of living hardly ever causes acculturation. This is proven to be true when both societies emphasis their identity and believe to be the superior. The best example for this situation is between France and Great Britain. Words, cuisine, and other comparably superficial cultural characteristics often disseminate from side to side between the two cultures, however there is no extensive influence of cultural characteristics. Consequently, the British man remains proudly British and the Frenchman remains strongly French in culture. In contrast, when societies those are both military dominated admit themselves to be inferior in term of both technology and quality of life, a rapid and overwhelming acculturation could take place. A lot of indigenous culture of North America and Australia underwent this circumstance. The people in those societies were not only impotent from the invasion, but also could not control the influence of the alien culture on their own civilisation. The result was usually immense acculturation and the displacement of aboriginal culture with little syncretism with their own indigenous cultural traits. Despite the dilemmas and difficulties people experience during acculturation, it is an essential and critical factor which decides the existence of a culture. Such a situation corresponds to what may be described as The Easter Island Syndrome. The very first settlers of Easter Island had come to the island by accident, at the beginning they maintained their cultural traits and technology, yet then, marooned for hundred years in absolutely isolation, deprived of foreign interaction, interrogation and cultivation. Their following generations constantly could no longer maintain the energy to stimulate their strong culture. As a result, the very first memory and customs were lost in loneliness and isolation. There is no doubt that Easter Island is the perfect example of acculturation deficiency and hence shows the important of acculturation (Pierre 1996).

With the respect to the third question: The difficulties people encounter while going through this process, a few examples are given to assist the acculturation process. When there is clash between comprehending new concepts of the host culture, and displacing the concepts of the culture of origin, the acculturative stress theory becomes applicable (Berry 1997) and coping policy are necessary to minimise physiological and emotional reactions. Acculturative stress is beyond daily life stress and involves acculturation-specific circulation, for example: cultural values, the ability to think and act in intercuturally appropriate methods, 

ethnic coherence, segregation, and second-language proficiency (Liebkind & Jasinskaja-Lahti, 2000). Taking into deeper, when immigration is not an option, as in the case of Vietnamese refugees who were forced to leave Vietnam after the liberation day in 1975, acculturation may act as a greater impact on the stress already suffered by grudgingly being expelled from Vietnam. Advanced levels of acculturative stress have been connected with the jeopardy of mental depression resulting in suicide and can be a long term negative health problem. More critical risk of acculturative depression can also occurs when there is great cultural difference, such as: the number of discern incompatibility and parity between immigrant’s indigenous background and the host culture. Language is also a factor in the mechanism of acculturative stress. Language is the nuclear of acculturation as it is the key of integration through interacting and communication of both own and host cultures. Language proficiency is the most important factor to achieve education excellent and pursuit career opportunities; however illiteracy was the problem experienced by both junior and senior Vietnamese refugees, hence resulted with interrupted schooling in the host country. This has resulted to depression in the school between the academic requirements of the educational institution and the literacy demands of these refugees. There is no doubt that the better the ability to perceive second-language competence the greater the self-satisfaction, hence stress is minimised and second-language obstacles have been considerably cooperated with subcultural definition (Poppitt & Frey, 2007).

Ultimately and consequently, acculturation is an indispensable process that occurs when people interact with “the other” in ways of varying friendliness, discrimination, understanding and confusion. In addition, acculturation is also a reciprocal process that takes place all over the time and also known as a source of difficulties for people those are alien to a new society. Those difficulties are also known as acculturative stress, such as language proficiency, cultural difference, and ethnic identity. Even though, acculturation is a source of stress and difficulties, it also enriches and refreshes the host culture. If there is no interaction between cultures, there will be no acculturation, hence the destruction and isolation like the case study of Easter Island.


REFERENCE LIST


Berry, JW 1997, Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation, Applied Psychology: An International Review, vol. 46, no. 1. Available from: EBSCOHOST [4 August 2011].

Berry, JW 2003, Psychology in Human and Social Development, Sage Publications, India. Available from: Google books. [2 August 2011].

Berry, JW & Sam, DL 2006, The Cambridge Handbook of Acculturation Psychology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Hammer, MR, & Bennett MJ, & Wiseman, R 2003, Measuring intercultural sensitivity: The intercultural development inventory, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, Available from: < http://www.helsinki.fi/hum/kvv/opetus/Ter%C3%A4s%20V.pdf>. [30 July 2011].

Liebkind, K, & Jasinskaja-Lahti, I 2000. Acculturation and psychological well-being among immigrant adolescents in Finland: A comparative study of adolescents from different cultural backgrounds. Journal of Adolescent Research, vol. 15, no. 4,pp. 446–469. Available from: EBSCOhost [5 August 2011].

O’Neil, D 2009, Acculturation: Part 1, Available from: <http://anthro.palomar.edu/change/change_3.htm >. [5 August 2011].

Phinney, J 2003, Acculturation: Advances in theory, measurement, and applied research . American Psychological Association. Washington D.C. Available from: Google books [2 August 2011].

Pierre, R 1996, The View From The Bridge, ABC Radio National, Sydney.

Poppitt, G, & Frey, R 2007, Sudanese Adolescent Refugees: Acculturation
and Acculturative Stress, Australian Journal of Guidance & Counselling,
vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 160-181, Australia/New Zealand Reference Centre, EBSCOhost,
[7 August 2011].