Pathways Among Asian Americans' Family Ethnic Socialization, Ethnic ...

Asian American Journal of Psychology 2015, Vol. 6, No. 3, 273–280

© 2015 American Psychological Association 1948-1985/15/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/aap0000026

Pathways Among Asian Americans’ Family Ethnic Socialization, Ethnic Identity, and Psychological Well-Being: A Multigroup Mediation Model Chi P. Nguyen and Y. Joel Wong

Linda P. Juang

Indiana University Bloomington

University of Potsdam

Irene J. K. Park This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Indiana University School of Medicine, South Bend The present study examined the mediating role of ethnic identity in the relation between family ethnic socialization and psychological well-being among Asian American college students. In addition, it explored the moderating role of gender in the pathways among 3 variables. Participants were 970 Asian American college students who were part of the Multi-Site University Study of Identity and Culture (MUSIC). Results from a multigroup structural equation model indicated that family ethnic socialization was positively and significantly related to ethnic identity and psychological well-being, whereas ethnic identity was also positively and significantly related to psychological well-being. Furthermore, family ethnic socialization was related to psychological well-being through different pathways for Asian American women versus men. Ethnic identity significantly mediated the association between family ethnic socialization and psychological well-being for women, but not for men. In contrast, family ethnic socialization was more strongly related to psychological well-being for men than for women. The practical implications for mental health professionals working with Asian American families are also discussed, particularly with regard to the role of family ethnic socialization in Asian American families. Keywords: Asian Americans, ethnic identity, family ethnic socialization, psychological well-being

and psychological well-being for Asian American female and male college students. We begin with an overview of the literature on family ethnic socialization and its effects on psychological wellbeing. Next, we discuss the role of ethnic identity as a potential mediator between family ethnic socialization and psychological well-being. Finally, we explore gender as a possible moderator of the relations among these variables.

Asian Americans are one of the fastest growing minority groups in the United States (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010), and of all the major racial/ethnic groups in the United States, Asian Americans have the highest percentage of immigrants (69%; Harris & Jones, 2005). As they settle into their new lives in the United States, many Asian American immigrant families also strive to maintain their culture of origin and teach it to their children. Moreover, preserving parental culture, language, and ties to the ethnic community can facilitate well-being in children of immigrants (Portes & Rumbaut, 2001). A substantial body of research has emerged in recent years showing the importance of ethnic identity to the well-being of individuals (Smith & Silva, 2011). Specifically, Nguyen and Wong’s (2013) literature review identified many studies that found significant, positive relations between Asian Americans’ ethnic identity and well-being. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to build on this body of literature by examining the relations among family ethnic socialization, ethnic identity,

Family Ethnic Socialization Among Asian American Families One of the most comprehensive developmental models relevant for ethnic minority children was proposed by García Coll et al. (1996). In this integrative developmental model, attention to how heritage culture and social position variables (e.g., race and gender) contribute to the development of children of immigrant and ethnic minority backgrounds is essential. Social position variables, for instance, indirectly contribute to a child’s development by exposing them to social mechanisms such as racism and discrimination, which ultimately affect developmental outcomes and wellbeing. Subsequently, Asian American families engage in socialization practices that integrate aspects of their heritage culture, mainstream culture, and current contextual demands (e.g., acculturative stress, see Lau, 2010) to best prepare their children to live in such a society. Promoting a stronger ethnic identity by instilling a sense of pride in their heritage culture, for instance, is one way that families create a positive context for their children’s wellbeing (Gartner, Kiang, & Supple, 2014). Our study focuses on such socialization practices for Asian American families.

This article was published Online First July 13, 2015. Chi P. Nguyen and Y. Joel Wong, Counseling and Educational Psychology Department, Indiana University Bloomington; Linda P. Juang, University of Potsdam; Irene J. K. Park, Department of Psychiatry, Indiana University School of Medicine South Bend. Data for this study were collected via MUSIC, and all members of the collaborative are gratefully acknowledged. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Chi P. Nguyen, Counseling and Educational Psychology Department, Indiana University Bloomington, School of Education, 201 North Rose Avenue, Suite 4000, Bloomington, IN 47405. E-mail: [email protected] 273

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

274

NGUYEN, WONG, JUANG, AND PARK

For Asian American immigrant and refugee children, the family environment often provides the foundation for the development and understanding of one’s ethnic background (Moua & Lamborn, 2010). Parents often teach their children about their culture of origin and ethnic language, discuss their ethnic group’s history, and encourage children to learn about their cultural traditions (Hughes et al., 2006). The term ethnic socialization is used in the literature to refer broadly to the transmission from adults to children of information regarding race and ethnicity (Hughes et al., 2006). Examples include exposure to cultural practices and objects, efforts to instill pride and knowledge about heritage culture, discussions about discrimination and how to cope with it, and strategies for succeeding in mainstream society (Hughes et al., 2006). Brown, Tanner-Smith, Lesane-Brown, and Ezell (2007) proposed several reasons why families socialize their children about ethnicity and race that is consistent with García Coll et al.’s (1996) integrative developmental model: (a) the context in which the children live exposes them to ethnic/racial diversity, (b) some families are warm and communicate with children regardless of topic, (c) the children are being prepared to live in a society that may be hostile toward them because of their membership in a marginalized ethnic/racial group, or (d) all of these reasons. Studies have consistently shown that teaching about one’s ethnic culture is a salient part of child rearing and that most ethnic minority parents have engaged in these practices at some point (Hughes et al., 2006). There are a variety of ways that parents can transmit information about their ethnic culture to their children. In a study with Hmong Americans, several family ethnic socialization practices were identified, including (a) participating in cultural events, (b) sharing history, (c) preparing traditional food, (d) language use, (e) wearing traditional clothes, (f) strengthening family ties, (g) preparation for marriage, (h) participation in religion, and (i) encouraging ethnic pride (Moua & Lamborn, 2010). Hughes et al. (2006) suggested additional strategies of cultural socialization, which include talking about important historical or cultural figures and exposing children to culturally relevant books, artifacts, music, and stories. The parents’ cultural values define how each family member functions and shape the ethnic socialization practices at home. A core factor in the family ethnic socialization process is the parent– child interaction, and parents who are engaged in their children’s daily lives are more likely to invest time in the ethnic socialization process (Lo, 2010). For Asian American families, ethnic socialization happens both directly and indirectly (Hughes et al., 2008). Asian American families can engage in ethnic socialization directly, such as verbally explaining to their children about specific customs, traditions, and associated meanings. Families may also engage in ethnic socialization indirectly by modeling behaviors (Pahlke, Bigler, & Suizzo, 2012) and creating a home environment promoting family cultural heritage (e.g., decorating with cultural items; see Umaña Taylor, 2001). Because more traditional Asian American families may prefer indirect and nonverbal communication instead of direct and verbal communication (Hwang, 2011), taking into account both types of socialization is important. Importantly, there is also strong evidence indicating that children and adolescents’ well-being outcomes, such as fewer externalizing behaviors, lower fighting frequency, higher self-esteem,

and better cognitive outcomes, are influenced by cultural socialization by the family (Hughes et al., 2006). Ou and McAdoo (1993) suggested that there was a positive correlation between parents’ ethnic socialization practices (i.e., bilingual practices) and children’s well-being. The researchers found that Chinese American parents who encouraged bilingualism at home had boys who developed a positive self-concept, because bilingualism signified acceptance of one’s own and the host cultures. Nevertheless, research on mediators linking family ethnic socialization to wellbeing has been relatively scarce. We propose that ethnic identity might be a mechanism through which family ethnic socialization contributes to psychological well-being.

Ethnic Identity Ethnic identity is a multidimensional construct that refers to the degree to which one has a sense of belonging and attachment to one’s ethnic group (Phinney, Berry, Vedder, & Liebkind, 2006). The dimensions of ethnic identity include a sense of cognitive clarity (e.g., understanding what one’s ethnic background means), affective pride in one’s ethnic group, and behavioral engagement (e.g., talking to others about one’s ethnic group; Lee & Yoo, 2004). Research indicates that when Asian American families provide strong positive images of their ethnicity, convey cultural pride, display culturally specific items at home, and maintain involvement in their ethnic community, children will likely form positive ethnic identities, which in turn leads to better well-being (Park, Kim, Cheung, & Kim, 2011). During adolescence, family ethnic socialization was strongly related to ethnic identity achievement among American youth of Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, and Vietnamese descents (Umaña-Taylor et al., 2006). And in a study of emerging adults that included Asian Americans, greater family ethnic socialization was linked to ethnic identity exploration and commitment (Juang & Syed, 2010). Taken together, family socialization practices may be effective in prompting Asian American children’s positive ethnic identity. Importantly, studies using various measures and methodologies have found significant relations between Asian Americans’ ethnic identity and well-being, including mental health, school outcomes, self-esteem, racial discrimination, and health behaviors (see Nguyen & Wong, 2013 for a recent review). Among a community sample of Chinese Americans, Japanese Americans, and Korean Americans, ethnic identity was related to greater overall quality of life and life satisfaction (Chae & Foley, 2010). More specifically, those who chose to maintain a strong ethnic identity and affiliation to their ethnic heritage and community avoided culture shock and acculturative stress. In addition, Yip and Fuligni (2002) showed that among Chinese American adolescents who reported moderate or high global ethnic identity, ethnic identity salience was associated with positive well-being at the daily level. Moreover, Smith and Silva (2011) found in their meta-analysis of 184 studies that ethnic identity exploration and affirmation was consistently associated with mental health outcomes. And finally, a meta-analysis of feeling positively toward one’s ethnic group—a key component of ethnic identity—showed consistent effects with self-esteem, academic, and health outcomes (Rivas-Drake et al., 2014). Given the extant literature on the links among family ethnic socialization, ethnic identity, and well-being, ethnic identity might


ASIAN AMERICANS’ ETHNIC IDENTITY

be a mechanism through which family ethnic socialization relates to psychological well-being. Indeed, Rivas-Drake (2011) found that ethnic identity mediated the link between parental ethnicracial socialization and psychological adjustment among Latino college students. Ethnic identity also mediated the link between parental cultural socialization and self-esteem among Asian American adolescents (Gartner et al., 2014). Nonetheless, research on how the pathways among these three variables differ for Asian American women and men is scarce. Consequently, the current study contributes to the literature by illuminating gender differences in the pathways among family ethnic socialization, ethnic identity, and psychological well-being among Asian American college students.

Gender Differences Although the family is an important contributor to ethnic identity, Asian American male and female young adults from immigrant families have different experiences of familial ethnic socialization (Suárez-Orozco & Qin, 2006). Researchers have found greater parental expectations for immigrant daughters to embody traditional cultural ideals of behaviors than sons (Dion & Dion, 2001). Dion and Dion (2001) hypothesized that threat to ethnic cultural values is an important underlying factor contributing to gender-related socialization in immigrant families. The values regarded as most important are often related to family relationships and traditions, where women are designated as the “keepers of culture.” Therefore, immigrant parents may place much stricter control over their daughters’ activities outside the house than their sons. Immigrant girls may be less likely to be allowed to go to parties, spend time with friends after school, or participate in afterschool programs and other activities that immigrant boys can do freely (Suárez-Orozco & Qin, 2006). Compared with their sisters, boys from immigrant families may be given more freedom and face less pressure to conform to traditional ethnic cultural practices (Suárez-Orozco & Qin, 2006). Hence, whereas both Asian American women and men may experience family ethnic socialization via exposure to ethnic symbols, traditions, and oral history, family ethnic socialization might also include experiences of social control and pressure for women. For that reason, family ethnic socialization might have a more indirect effect on psychological well-being for Asian American women than for Asian American men. As a result of these differences in gender socialization, the pathways through which family ethnic socialization influences psychological well-being may be different for Asian American women and men. Scholars have theorized that components of identity that connect women to their ethnic group (i.e., ethnic identity) may be more salient to their psychological well-being (Iturbide et al., 2009). Dion and Dion (2001) suggested that the differential gender-related socialization pressure may heighten the psychological salience of ethnocultural heritage for women compared with men from immigrant families. In support of these theoretical propositions, research has demonstrated that ethnic identity was a stronger predictor for well-being among women from racial/ethnic minority backgrounds (Iturbide et al., 2009; Martinez & Dukes, 1997; Navarro et al., 2014). Yap, Settles, and Pratt-Hyatt (2011) theorized that because women may be more relationship-focused, their social identities might be a stronger

275

predictor of their well-being; therefore, their ethnic identity may affect their well-being more so than men’s ethnic identity. For Asian American males, their ethnic identity might be a weaker predictor of their well-being because of exposure to masculine gender role norms that emphasize self-reliance rather than a sense of belongingness to others (Mahalik et al., 2003). Taken together, we posit that for women, ethnic identity might be a more salient mechanism through which family ethnic socialization influences psychological well-being, whereas family ethnic socialization may exert a stronger and more direct influence on the psychological well-being of Asian American men.

Research Hypotheses In this study, we proposed a multigroup mediation model predicting psychological well-being among Asian American college students (see Figure 1). We focused on psychological well-being as an outcome rather than on symptoms of mental illness because a recent meta-analysis found that ethnic identity was more strongly related to positive well-being than to distress symptoms, suggesting that ethnic identity may be a less effective buffer against psychological distress (Smith & Silva, 2011). We expected that family ethnic socialization would be indirectly associated with higher levels of psychological well-being via its association with ethnic identity; however, this indirect (mediation) effect would differ depending on gender. Specifically, we hypothesized that this mediation effect would be stronger for women than men. Within this model, we also predicted that gender would moderate the relationships (a) between ethnic identity and psychological well-being as well as (b) between family ethnic socialization and psychological well-being. That is, we hypothesized that high ethnic identity would be more strongly associated with better psychological well-being for women than for men. In contrast, the direct effect between family ethnic socialization and psychological well-being would be stronger for men than for women.

Method Participants Participants were 970 Asian American college students who were part of the Multi-Site University Study of Identity and

Figure 1. Multigroup structural equation model predicting psychological well-being for Asian American women and men. The numbers outside and inside the parentheses represent standardized coefficients and standard errors, respectively. The numbers above and below the arrows are for women and men, respectively. Indicator variables, which consist of item parcels based on subscales of each measure, are omitted from this figure. ⴱ p ⬍ .01, ⴱⴱ p ⬍ .001, ⴱⴱⴱ p ⬍ .0001.


276


Culture (MUSIC; Weisskirch et al., 2013). The original dataset included students of color from diverse racial backgrounds, although we focused only on students who identified as East Asian/ Asian American (76%) or South Asian/South Asian American (24%). The survey did not ask participants to indicate their specific Asian ethnic group. The data were collected online between September 2007 and October 2009 from 30 colleges and universities around the United States. The participants’ average age was 19.97 years (SD ⫽ 2.22). Thirty-six percent of the participants identified as male, and 64% identified as female. Sixty-four percent indicated that they were born in the United States, whereas the rest were born outside the United States. The average number of years the participants had been in college is 2.29 (SD ⫽ 1.29).

Procedures The entire study was administered through an Internet-based computer program. Information about the study was disseminated using printed or e-mail announcements. Participants completed the survey online, and they received course credit for their participation. Completion time for the survey ranged from 1 to 2 hours. Students were asked to provide their e-mail addresses and student numbers for crediting purposes, but this information was not linked with the participants’ responses.

Measures Family ethnic socialization. The Family Ethnic Socialization Measure (FESM; Umaña-Taylor & Fine, 2004) is a 12-item scale assessing participants’ reports of the degree to which they perceive that their families promote participation in cultural activities and contact with ethnic traditions. The measure has two subscales: overt socialization (5 items) and covert socialization (7 items). Overt aspects refer to the family’s intentional socialization practices (e.g., “My family teaches me about our family’s ethnic/ cultural background”). Covert aspects refer to indirect socialization practices through their choice of activities or décor (e.g., “Our home is decorated with things that reflect my ethnic/cultural background”). Response options ranged from 1 (not at all) through 5 (very much), corresponding to the respondents’ level of agreement with each statement. Items were averaged to create a mean score. Umaña-Taylor et al. (2006) showed that the FESM was related to ethnic identity achievement among samples of Asian Americans. Coefficient alpha for the measure in this study was .93. Ethnic identity. The Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM; Roberts et al., 1999) is a 12-item measure that assesses individuals’ degree of identification with their ethnic group. The measure has three subscales, reflecting three factors identified in a factor analysis conducted in a sample of Asian American college students (Lee & Yoo, 2004): (a) cognitive clarity (e.g., “I have a clear sense of my ethnic background and what it means for me”), (b) affective pride (e.g., “I have a lot of pride in my ethnic group”), and (c) behavioral engagement (e.g., “In order to learn more about my ethnic background, I have often talked to other people about my ethnic group”). The items were scored on a 5-point Likert scale, with end points of 1 (strongly disagree) and 5 (strongly agree). Items were averaged to create an overall score. Items were coded so that higher scores indicated greater identification with one’s ethnic group.

Research has shown that the MEIM can be used as a global assessment of ethnic identity among ethnic minorities, including Asian Americans (Yap et al., 2014). Previous research also demonstrated positive correlations with measures of psychological well-being (coping, mastery, self-esteem, optimism, and happiness) and negative correlations with loneliness and depression (Roberts et al., 1999). Coefficient alpha for this scale in this study was .91. Psychological well-being. The Questionnaire for Eudaimonic Well-Being (QEWB; Waterman et al., 2010) is a 21-item measure of psychological well-being based on eudaemonist philosophy. An important feature of this theory involves leading a full life to achieve self-fulfillment (Haybron, 2008). A recent factor analysis of the QEWB (Schutte, Wissing, & Khumalo, 2013) identified three factors reflecting a sense of purpose (e.g., “I can say that I have found my purpose in life”), purposeful personal expressiveness (e.g., “I feel best when I’m doing something worth investing a great deal of effort in”), and effortful engagement (e.g., “I find it hard to get really invested in the things that I do” – reverse-scored). The items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). Items were summed to create an overall score. High scores represent greater psychological well-being. Waterman et al. (2010) indicated a positive correlation between the QEWB and measures of subjective well-being and psychological well-being in a demographically diverse sample of college students. The coefficient alpha was .84 for the measure in this study.

Results Preliminary Results The means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations of the main measures are presented in Table 1. FESM, MEIM, and QEWB were all significantly and positively correlated. Further, a series of t tests revealed that female participants did not report significantly different FESM, MEIM, and QEWB scores than male participants, p ⬎ .05. Three t tests and a chi square test were used to test differences in the main measures (FESM, MEIM, QEWB, gender) as a function of place of birth (U.S.-born vs. foreign-born). Using a Bonferroni-corrected p value of .013, no significant differences were found.

Table 1 Means, Standard Deviations, and Intercorrelations Among Study Measures for Female and Male Participants Measures FESM MEIM QEWB M SD

FESM

MEIM

QEWB

— .56ⴱⴱ .38ⴱⴱ 3.80 .84

ⴱⴱ

ⴱⴱ

.61 — .25ⴱⴱ 3.57 .81

.21 .25ⴱⴱ — 72.23 9.94

M

SD

3.90 3.63 72.23 — —

.79 .75 9.82 — —

Note. Scores for women (n ⫽ 620) are above the diagonal; scores for men (n ⫽ 350) are below the diagonal. FESM ⫽ Family Ethnic Socialization Measure; MEIM ⫽ Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure; QEWB ⫽ The Questionnaire for Eudaimonic Well-Being. ⴱ p ⬍ .05. ⴱⴱ p ⬍ .01.


Given the nested structure of our data (students nested in universities), we initially used multilevel modeling to address potential statistical dependency. However, the intraclass correlation for psychological well-being, our outcome variable was only .02, indicating that a very small amount of the variability in our outcome variable was accounted for by group-level university effects. This finding suggests that statistical dependency was not a concern in our data and that multilevel modeling was not necessary to account for the nested structure of our data (Kahn, 2011).


Analytic Plan To test our hypothesized model (see Figure 1), we used structural equation modeling (SEM) in Mplus 7.11 (Muthén & Muthén, 2012). Small’s omnibus test of multivariate normality indicated that our data did not reflect multivariate normality, ␹2(11) ⫽ 146.69, p ⬍ .001. Therefore, we used the maximum likelihood estimator with robust standard errors (MLR). We created latent variables with multiple indicators using item parceling. The item parcels were based on the subscales of each measure: (a) overt socialization and covert socialization represented family ethnic socialization; (b) cognitive clarity, affective pride, and behavioral engagement represented ethnic identity; and (c) sense of purpose, purposeful personal expressiveness, and effortful engagement represented psychological well-being. Compared with using all items in a scale as indicators, the benefits of item parceling include stronger model fit, fewer parameters, increased reliability, and a more inclusive representation of latent constructs (Little, Cunningham, Shahar, & Widaman, 2002). We used several fit indices to assess model fit: the comparative fit index (CFI; a value close to or at least .95), the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA, a value close to or less than .06), and the standardized root-mean-square residual (SRMR; a value close to or not exceeding .08) (Hu & Bentler, 1999). To test for mediation effects, we used bias-corrected bootstrapping. The mean of 1,000 estimated indirect effects was calculated by creating 1,000 bootstrap samples via random sampling with replacement. If the 95% confidence intervals of the indirect effect did not include zero, significant mediation effect was inferred. Simulation studies comparing different mediation procedures (MacKinnon, Lockwood, & Williams, 2004) have found that bias-corrected bootstrapping is the best mediation procedure for obtaining high statistical power and low Type I error rates.

Main Results We first examined the basic model for the entire sample without distinguishing between female and male participants. The measurement model was an adequate fit to the data, scaled ␹2(17) ⫽ 107.63, p ⬍ .001; RMSEA ⫽ .07, 90% CI [.06, .09]; CFI ⫽ .97; SRMR ⫽ .03. Moreover, all factor loadings on the latent variables were significant (p ⬍ .001), suggesting that the indicator variables adequately measured the latent variables. The full structural model explained 19% of the variance in psychological well-being. The direct path from family ethnic socialization to psychological wellbeing was positive and significant, ␤ ⫽ .33, SE ⫽ .06, p ⬍ .001, as were the path from family ethnic socialization to ethnic identity, ␤ ⫽ .66, SE ⫽ .03, p ⬍ .001, and the path from ethnic identity to psychological well-being, ␤ ⫽ .14, SE ⫽ .06, p ⫽ .017. Supporting

277

our mediation hypothesis, the indirect effect from family ethnic socialization to ethnic identity to psychological well-being was also significant, ␤ ⫽ .10, 95% CI [.02, .18]. Next, we tested a series of multigroup models with gender (women vs. men) as the grouping variable. Compared to the unconstrained model, the model with factor loadings constrained to be equal across gender did not demonstrate a significantly poorer model fit, ⌬ scaled ␹2(8) ⫽ 13.60, p ⬎ .05, suggesting measurement invariance across gender. In contrast, the model with structural parameters and factor loadings constrained to be equal across gender was a significantly poorer fit to the data than the unconstrained model, ⌬ scaled ␹2(11) ⫽ 21.31, p ⬍ .05, providing evidence of structural noninvariance. Hence, we removed the equality constraints on the structural parameters of the multigroup model, but retained the equality constraints on the measurement model. This multigroup model, which was adopted as our final model, was an adequate fit to the data, scaled ␹2(47) ⫽ 155.44, p ⬍ .001; RMSEA ⫽ .07, 90% CI [.06, .08]; CFI ⫽ .96; SRMR ⫽ .07. The model explained 26% and 15% of the variance in psychological well-being for men and women, respectively. As shown in Figure 1, the direct paths from family ethnic socialization to psychological well-being and from family ethnic socialization to ethnic identity were positive and significant for both women and men. The path from ethnic identity to psychological well-being was significant and positive for women, but not for men. In partial support for our moderation hypotheses, the Wald test of parameter constraints revealed that the direct path from family ethnic socialization to psychological well-being was significantly stronger for men than for women, ␹2(1) ⫽ 7.01, p ⫽ .008, but that the parameters for the paths from ethnic identity to psychological well-being were not significantly different for women and men, ␹2(1) ⫽ 1.88, p ⫽ .170. The indirect effect from family ethnic socialization to ethnic identity to psychological well-being was significant for women, ␤ ⫽ .14, 95% CI [.04, .25], but not for men, ␤ ⫽ .03, 95% CI [⫺.08, .14], providing support for the hypothesis that the mediation effect would be more apparent for women than for men.

Discussion Based on the integrative model of ethnic minority development (García Coll et al., 1996), the purpose of this study was to explore the relations among family ethnic socialization, ethnic identity, and psychological well-being for Asian American college students. Consistent with previous research (Hughes et al., 2006; Juang & Syed, 2010; Umaña-Taylor et al., 2006; Yip & Fuligni, 2002), family ethnic socialization was positively and significantly related to ethnic identity and psychological well-being, whereas ethnic identity was also positively and significantly related to psychological well-being. The first hypothesis, that family ethnic socialization would be indirectly associated with levels of psychological well-being via its association with ethnic identity, and this indirect (mediation) effect would be more apparent for women than men, was supported. For women only, higher levels of family ethnic socialization were positively related to stronger ethnic identity, which was in turn associated with greater psychological wellbeing. Second, after controlling for the effects of family ethnic socialization, ethnic identity was positively related to psychological well-being for women, but not for men. Despite these differ-


278


ences, gender was not a significant moderator because the parameters for the paths from ethnic identity to psychological well-being were not significantly different for men and women. In contrast, gender was a significant moderator of the relation between family ethnic socialization and psychological well-being, with this relation being weaker for women than for men. Overall, these findings suggest different pathways through which family ethnic socialization relate to psychological wellbeing for Asian American women versus men. The weaker direct link between family ethnic socialization and psychological wellbeing for women might reflect the notion that women’s experience of family ethnic socialization was relatively different compared with males because perhaps it involved stricter parental control over their activities (Suárez-Orozco & Qin, 2006). Conversely, Asian American boys’ experience of family ethnic socialization includes a greater measure of freedom by Asian American parents (Suárez-Orozco & Qin, 2006). Our mediation results are also consistent with findings from studies of other ethnic groups showing that ethnic identity was a stronger predictor for well-being among women than among men (Iturbide et al., 2009; Martinez & Dukes, 1997; Navarro et al., 2014). Yap, Settles, and Pratt-Hyatt (2011) proposed that women are more relationship-focused, hence a sense of belonging developed through their ethnic identity may affect their well-being more than men’s. Thus, ethnic identity might play a more critical mediating role in the relationship between ethnic family socialization and well-being for women. For men, we did not find that ethnic identity mediated the relation between family ethnic socialization and well-being. Perhaps there are other factors that might mediate the link between family ethnic socialization and psychological well-being for boys. For example, family ethnic socialization might stimulate increased ethnic peer socialization for boys (Way & Chen, 2000; Phinney, Romero, Nava, & Huang, 2001), which in turn contributes to greater psychological well-being. Thus, whereas ethnic identity might play an important role in Asian American women’s well-being, nonfamilial contexts such as friend and peer groups may be even more so for males. More research that includes measures of both family and peer ethnic socialization is needed to confirm whether this is indeed the case.

chological well-being. Future research would benefit from exploration of potential differences among different Asian American ethnic groups with varying immigration statuses and acculturation levels. In addition, conducting longitudinal studies to clarify the direction of effects would be important for counseling efforts. A study of Mexican-heritage families showed that family ethnic socialization during adolescence predicted ethnic identity during emerging adulthood for those with immigrant parents, but ethnic identity during adolescence predicted family ethnic socialization during emerging adulthood for those with U.S.-born parents (Umaña-Taylor, Zeiders, & Updegraff, 2013). Likewise, it will be important to see whether family ethnic socialization is a more youth-driven or parent-driven process for Asian American families to better inform parents about their role in their children’s ethnic identity development and subsequent well-being. The present study was based on the college students’ reports of family ethnic socialization in their families; actual responses from parents were not obtained. Because of the potential biases of self-report measures, the study would be enhanced if parents’ perspectives on family ethnic socialization were also collected and compared with the parallel reports from the college students. Doing so would reveal whether parental ethnic socialization practices align with children’s perceptions. In some cases, they do not (Hughes et al., 2008). Although we did not have data from parents, asking participants about perceptions of their parents reveal, at least, how parenting is directly experienced (Blyth, 1982). Also, given that the results of this study suggest gender differences in the pathways through which family ethnic socialization relates to psychological well-being, future research should continue to examine the important role gender plays in immigrant family dynamics. For example, future studies can investigate the moderating role of gender in different stages of Asian Americans’ ethnic identity development. In addition, research might benefit from exploring ethnic socialization in different environments (i.e., low vs. high diversity, low vs. high interracial cooperation) and its effect on well-being.

Strengths Limitations and Future Directions for Research Several limitations in this study should be considered. First, the findings from a college sample cannot be generalized to all Asian Americans. Future studies should test this model with a community sample of Asian Americans as well as with younger Asian American adolescents to determine whether our results generalize to noncollege Asian American populations and whether the impact of family ethnic socialization changes over the course of development. Perhaps at the younger ages, family ethnic socialization is more consequential compared to the later ages. Additionally, we aggregated all Asian Americans into a single category; however, findings that apply to one particular Asian American ethnic group do not necessarily hold for other ethnic groups. Future research could examine whether the mechanisms that explain why parental ethnic socialization is related their children’s well-being varies across the different Asian American ethnic groups. Moreover, we did not examine acculturation, which may be related to Asian Americans’ family ethnic socialization, ethnic identity, and psy-

This study has notable strengths. First, the sample in this study includes students enrolled in universities across the United States, thus the results are not limited to one geographic location. Second, this study brought to light a greater understanding of one way that family ethnic socialization contributes to more positive psychological well-being— by encouraging a stronger ethnic identity. Third, this study is one of the first to examine the role of ethnic identity as a mediator of the relation between family ethnic socialization and psychological well-being among Asian Americans. The unique contribution of this study is in identifying the role of ethnic identity as a mediating variable connecting Asian American women’s family ethnic socialization and well-being. Moreover, the literature on Asian American immigrant experiences indicates the existence of gender differences in the cultural socialization process of males and females (Dion & Dion, 2001; Suarez-Orozco & Qin, 2006), and the results of this current study suggests the correlates of family ethnic socialization may differ for Asian American men versus women.



Practical Implications The findings of this study present several practical implications for mental health professionals who work with Asian American individuals. The results indicated a positive relation between family ethnic socialization and psychological well-being, particularly for Asian American men. Therefore, therapists can help their male Asian American clients process how their exposure to family ethnic socialization can be a source of strength for them. In addition, given the mediating role of ethnic identity in the relation between family ethnic socialization and women’s psychological well-being, therapists can help Asian American female clients view parental expectations that daughters are important figures in continuing their families’ culture of origin as a source of ethnic pride (Dion & Dion, 2001). Therapists who work with Asian American families can help them become aware of differences in how parents socialize their male and female children, and explore how this dynamic affects the family’s relationships and interaction patterns. In this way, therapists can facilitate better communication between family members and reduce potential resentment between individuals. Furthermore, therapists can help families renegotiate the parental and family expectations to decrease disagreements between the generations. Overall, our findings highlight the importance of paying attention to family ethnic socialization, ethnic identity, and gender dynamics when working with Asian American clients. In an increasingly diverse social world, gaining a clearer understanding of how families are socializing their children regarding issues of culture and ethnicity is critical for illuminating how young people can best adapt and grow (García Coll et al., 1996; Hughes et al., 2006).

References Blyth, D. (1982). Mapping the social world of adolescents: Issues, techniques, and problems. In S. Serafica (Ed.), Social cognitive development in context (pp. 240 –272). New York: Guilford Press. Brown, T. N., Tanner-Smith, E. E., Lesane-Brown, C. L., & Ezell, M. E. (2007). Child, parent, and situational correlates of familial ethnic/race socialization. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69, 14 –25. http://dx.doi .org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2006.00340.x Chae, M. H., & Foley, P. F. (2010). Relationship of ethnic identity, acculturation, and psychological well-being among Chinese, Japanese, and Korean Americans. Journal of Counseling & Development, 88, 466 – 476. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6678.2010.tb00047.x Dion, K. K., & Dion, K. L. (2001). Gender and cultural adaptation in immigrant families. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 511–521. http://dx.doi .org/10.1111/0022-4537.00226 García Coll, C., Lamberty, G., Jenkins, R., McAdoo, H. P., Crnic, K., Wasik, B. H., & Vázquez García, H. (1996). An integrative model for the study of developmental competencies in minority children. Child Development, 67, 1891–1914. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1131600 Gartner, M., Kiang, L., & Supple, A. (2014). Prospective links between ethnic socialization, ethnic and American identity, and well-being among Asian-American adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43, 1715–1727. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10964-013-0044-0 Harris, P. M., & Jones, N. A. (2005). We the people: Pacific Islanders in the United States (Census 2000 Special Reports No. CENSR-26). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Haybron, D. M. (2008). Philosophy and the science of subjective wellbeing. In M. Eid & R. J. Larsen (Eds.), The science of subjective well-being (pp. 17– 43). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

279

Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 10705519909540118 Hughes, D., Rivas, D., Foust, M., Hagelskamp, C., Gersick, S., & Way, N. (2008). How to catch a moonbeam: A mixed-methods approach to understanding ethnic socialization processes in ethnically diverse families. In S. M. Quintana & C. McKown (Eds.), Handbook of race, racism, and the developing child (pp. 226 –277). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Hughes, D., Rodriguez, J., Smith, E. P., Johnson, D. J., Stevenson, H. C., & Spicer, P. (2006). Parents’ ethnic-racial socialization practices: A review of research and directions for future study. Developmental Psychology, 42, 747–770. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.42.5.747 Hwang, W.-C. (2011). Acculturative family distancing. In F. Leong, L. Juang, D. Qin, & H. E. Fitzerald (Eds.), Asian American and Pacific Islander children and mental health (Vol. 1, pp. 47–70). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. Iturbide, M. I., Raffaelli, M., & Carlo, G. (2009). Protective effects of ethnic identity on Mexican American college students’ psychological well-being. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 31, 536 –552. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0739986309345992 Juang, L., & Syed, M. (2010). Family cultural socialization practices and ethnic identity in college-going emerging adults. Journal of Adolescence, 33, 347–354. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2009.11 .008 Kahn, J. H. (2011). Multilevel modeling: Overview and applications to research in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58, 257–271. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0022680 Lau, A. S. (2010). Physical discipline in Chinese American immigrant families: An adaptive culture perspective. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16, 313–322. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0018667 Lee, R. M., & Yoo, H. C. (2004). Structure and measurement of ethnic identity for Asian American college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 263–269. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.51.2.263 Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151–173. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/ S15328007SEM0902_1 Lo, Y. (2010). The impact of the acculturation process on Asian American youth’s psychological well-being. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing, 23, 84 –91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6171 .2010.00227.x MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., & Williams, J. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 99 –128. http://dx.doi .org/10.1207/s15327906mbr3901_4 Mahalik, J. R., Locke, B. D., Ludlow, L. H., Diemer, M. A., Scott, R. P., Gottfried, M., & Freitas, G. (2003). Development of the Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 4, 3–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1524-9220.4.1.3 Martinez, R. O., & Dukes, R. L. (1997). The effects of ethnic identity, ethnicity, and gender on adolescent well-being. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 26, 503–516. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1024525821078 Moua, M. Y., & Lamborn, S. D. (2010). Hmong American adolescents’ perception of ethnic socialization practices. Journal of Adolescent Research, 25, 416 – 440. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0743558410361369 Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author. Navarro, R. L., Ojeda, L., Schwartz, S. J., Piña-Watson, B., & Luna, L. L. (2014). Cultural self, personal self: Links with life satisfaction among Mexican American college students. Journal of Latina/o Psychology, 2, 1–20. Nguyen, C. P., & Wong, Y. J. (2013). The influence of ethnic identity on


280


Asian Americans’ well-being: A critical review of the literature. In E. Nöhammer (Ed.), Psychology of well-being: Theory, perspectives and practice. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science. Ou, Y.-s., & McAdoo, H. P. (1993). Socialization of Chinese American children. In H. P. McAdoo (Ed.), Family ethnicity: Strength in diversity (pp. 245–270). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Pahlke, E., Bigler, R. S., & Suizzo, M. A. (2012). Relations between colorblind socialization and children’s racial bias: Evidence from European American mothers and their preschool children. Child Development, 83, 1164 –1179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012 .01770.x Park, I. J. K., Kim, S. Y., Cheung, R. Y. M., & Kim, M. (2011). Family socialization in the development of Asian American child psychopathology and psychological well-being. In H. E. Fitzgerald (Series Ed.) & F. T. L. Leong, L. Juang, D. B. Qin, & H. E. Fitzgerald (Vol. Eds.). Asian American and Pacific Islander children and mental health. Vol. 2: Prevention and treatment (pp. 149 –174). Santa Barbara, CA: ABCCLIO. Phinney, J. S., Berry, J. W., Vedder, P., & Liebkind, K. (2006). The acculturation experience: Attitudes, identities, and behaviors of immigrant youth. In J. W. Berry, J. S. Phinney, D. L. Sam, & P. Vedder (Eds.), Immigrant youth in cultural transitions: Acculturation, identity, and adaptation across national contexts (pp. 71–116). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Phinney, J. S., Romero, I., Nava, M., & Huang, D. (2001). The role of language, parents, and peers in ethnic identity among adolescents in immigrant families. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 30, 135–153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1010389607319 Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R. G. (2001). Legacies: The story of the immigrant second generation. New York, NY: Sage. Rivas-Drake, D. (2011). Ethnic-racial socialization and adjustment among Latino college students: The mediating roles of ethnic centrality, public regard, and perceived barriers to opportunity. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40, 606 – 619. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10964-0109564-z Rivas-Drake, D., Syed, M., Umaña-Taylor, A., Markstrom, C., French, S., Schwartz, S. J., . . . the Ethnic and Racial Identity in the 21st Century Study Group. (2014). Feeling good, happy, and proud: A meta-analysis of positive ethnic-racial affect and adjustment. Child Development, 85, 77–102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12175 Roberts, R. E., Phinney, J. S., Masse, L. C., Chen, Y. R., Roberts, C. R., & Romero, A. (1999). The structure of ethnic identity of young adolescents from diverse ethnocultural groups. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 19, 301–322. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272431699019003001 Schutte, L., Wissing, M. P, & Khumalo, I. P. (2013). Further validation of the questionnaire for eudaimonic well-being (QEWB). Psychology of Well-Being: Theory, Research and Practice, 3, 3. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1186/2211-1522-3-3 Smith, T. B., & Silva, L. (2011). Ethnic identity and personal well-being of people of color: A meta-analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58, 42– 60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0021528

Suárez-Orozco, C., & Qin, D. B. (2006). Gendered perspectives in psychology immigrant origin youth. International Migration Review, 40, 165–198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2006.00007.x Umaña Taylor, A. (2001). Ethnic identity development of Mexican-origin Latino adolescents living in the U. S. (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Missouri-Columbia, Colombia, MO. Umaña-Taylor, A. J., & Fine, M. A. (2004). Examining ethnic identity among Mexican-origin adolescents living in the United States. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 26, 36 –59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0739986303262143 Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Bhanot, R., & Shin, N. (2006). Ethnic identity formation during adolescence: The critical role of families. Journal of Family Issues, 27, 390 – 414. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0192513X05282960 Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Zeiders, K. H., & Updegraff, K. A. (2013). Family ethnic socialization and ethnic identity: A family-driven, youth-driven, or reciprocal process? Journal of Family Psychology, 27, 137–146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0031105 U.S. Census Bureau. (n.d.). The Asian population: 2010. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-11.pdf Waterman, A. S., Schwartz, S. J., Zamboanga, B. L., Ravert, R. D., Williams, M. K., Bede Agocha, V., . . . Brent Donnellan, M. (2010). The questionnaire for eudaimonic well-being: Psychometric properties, demographic comparisons, and evidence of validity. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 5, 41– 61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439760903435208 Way, N., & Chen, L. (2000). Close and general friendships among African American, Latino, and Asian American adolescents from low-income families. Journal of Adolescent Research, 15, 274 –301. http://dx.doi .org/10.1177/0743558400152005 Weisskirch, R. S., Zamboanga, B. L., Ravert, R. D., Whitbourne, S. K., Park, I. J. K., Lee, R. M., & Schwartz, S. J. (2013). An introduction to the composition of the Multi-Site University Study of Identity and Culture (MUSIC): A collaborative approach to research and mentorship. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 19, 123–130. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0030099 Yap, S. C. Y., Donnellan, M. B., Schwartz, S. J., Kim, S. Y., Castillo, L. G., Zamboanga, B. L., . . . Vazsonyi, A. T. (2014). Investigating the structure and measurement invariance of the Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure in a multiethnic sample of college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 61, 437– 446. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0036253 Yap, S. C. Y., Settles, I. H., & Pratt-Hyatt, J. S. (2011). Mediators of the relationship between racial identity and life satisfaction in a community sample of African American women and men. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 17, 89 –97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ a0022535 Yip, T., & Fuligni, A. J. (2002). Daily variation in ethnic identity, ethnic behaviors, and psychological well-being among American adolescents of Chinese descent. Child Development, 73, 1557–1572. http://dx.doi .org/10.1111/1467-8624.00490

Received August 29, 2014 Revision received May 29, 2015 Accepted May 29, 2015 䡲