lnrernorionol Journd ofInrercu/rum/ Relurions. Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. Vol. 12. pp. 305-315, 1988 Copyright 0147.1767/88 53.00 + .OO 6 1988 Rrgamon Press plc ETHNIC IDENTITY AMONG JAPANESE-AMERICANS IN HAWAII A Critique of Hansen’s Third-Generation Return Hypothesis BARBARA 1 NEWTON University of Hawaii (West Oahu) ELIZABETH B. BUCK Institute of Culture and Communication, East- West Center DON T KUNIMURA Honolulu, Hawaii CAROL I? COLFER Hawaii Institute of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawaii DEBORAH SCHOLSBERG Honolulu, Hawaii ABSTRACT Ethnic identity is a zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQ complex phenomenon involving the interaction of cultuml elements and contemporary social relationships. Hansen’s third-generation hypothesis offers a monocausal explanation that has been tested in several l_LS. sites with various ethnic groups. The mixed results from US. mainland studies andfmm the studies conducted in Hawaii with Japanese-Americans show the inadequacy of generational position as an explanation of ethnic identity. In the Hawaii study reported here, 30 Nisei (second generation) and 30 Sansei (third generation) male Japanese-Americans between the ages of 31 and 55 were given Meredith’s Ethnic Identity Questionnaire. Results showing the Sansei signifcantly more assimilated than the Nisei requite a rejection of Hansen’s hypothesis. These findings are discussed in relation to other studies of Hansen’s hypothesis and to theories of ethnicity that view ethnic identity as less a function of time and generational position than of social position in complex societies. Requests for reprints should be addressed to B. J. Newton, Psychology Department, University of Hawaii (West Oahu), 96443 Ala Ike, Pearl City, HI %782. 306 B. .I Newton et al. “What the son wishes to forget the grandson wishes to remember.” So states Hansen (1952) in a one-liner encapsulating his “third-generation return” or “third-generation interest” hypothesis that has stimulated so much research among social psychologists. When one considers the conflicting results and inconclusiveness of this research, it is evident that Hansen’s hypothesis fails to explain why and how certain cultural groups are more “ethnic” than others. Ethnic identity is always a relational phenomenon, having to do with cultural, historical, and social differences vis-a-vis other groups in the same society. Ethnic identity includes race, language, religion, cultural practices, socioeconomic status, political power, and country of origin, among others. For minorities, ethnicity is less a question of essence than it is of position in the political and social structure of a society (JanMohamed & Lloyd, 1987). The studies of Hansen’s third-generation hypothesis tell us that time (generational position) is sometimes related to ethnic identity, but it is certainly not the only factor, or even the most important factor, in the multidimensional framework of ethnic identity. Embedded within the concept of identity (ethnic or otherwise) is that of “otherness” or “difference,” which means that identity is a dialectical relationship whereby a group is defined, or defines itself, by how it is not the same as another group. Individual identity is based on social relationships and attributes that cut across class, gender, and age, as well as ethnicity. When one moves to the larger level of group identity and the different ways that social groups can be distinguished, no categorizing concept has been as problematic as ethnicity, primarily because ethnicity has social, cultural, biological, and psychological components (Gordon, 1964; Uchendu, 1975; Uyeki, 1960). In light of these complexities, Hansen’s emphasis on generational position seems much too simplistic. Hansen believed that the first-generation immigrants adjusted to the larger society. The second generation denied their ethnic heritage and adopted the American culture. The third generation, in contrast to the second, became interested in rediscovering their ethnic past and formed historical and religious societies to recapture their ethnicity. Hansen based his ideas upon observations and research done in Europe and supported his thesis by an in-depth study of white American immigrant groups such as the Scotch-Irish, Germans, and Swedes (Hansen, 1952). Several studies have investigated Hansen’s hypothesis among white American groups. Herberg (1955) found that the third generation of Polish and Italian groups remembered only the religion of their grandparents, the language and culture being irretrievably lost. There was an observable return to Catholicism, but not to “Polishness” or “Italianness.” The third-generation Jews, on the other hand, followed Hansen’s thesis by reasserting their “Jewishness.” Herberg attributed the Jews’ Ethnic Identity Among Japanese-Americans 307 successful return to the fact that Jewish culture and religion are so intimately intertwined. In 1975, Abramson conducted a study in three Connecticut towns using religion as a measure of return to ethnic heritage. He found that religious behavior was influenced by the ethnic group and dependent on the religion-ethnic culture itself rather than on the duration of American residence. Ellman (1977) studied the impact of the awakening ethnicism in the United States on Jews and other white groups. He supported Hansen’s thesis, concluding that the more American the ethnic individual felt, the less fearful and reluctant he was of exhibiting his ethnic background. In 1985, Constantinou and Harvey explored intergenerational differences in ethnicity among Greek Americans using two dimensions: externalities and internalities. Externalities encompassed seven attributes related to linkage with the old world, among them the use of Greek at home and in correspondence, ethnic shopping, and interest in Greek politics. Internalities focused on church and family as shapers of Greek American ethnic identity. Constantinou and Harvey concluded, “Over three generations, a pattern of decreasing ethnic sentiment is noted” (p. 235). Appel (1961) investigated immigrant historical societies and reported evidence refuting Hansen’s thesis. He found that group organizers were more concerned with challenging historical and sociological theories or with influencing social, religious, or political issues of interest to them than with an investigation of their ethnic past. Lazerwitz and Rowitz (1964) performed a secondary analysis of data from two national surveys conducted by the University of Michigan’s Survey Research Center. They looked at frequency of church attendance among first-, second-, and third-generation immigrants. In general, Lazerwitz and Rowitz had reservations about the Hansen-Herberg trigenerational model, considering it rather crude. In 1967, Meredith developed a psychometric device designed to measure Japanese identification in acculturating groups. It was called an Ethnic Identity Scale and consisted of 50 statements. A high score indicated higher identification with “Japaneseness” and a low score indicated greater acculturation to the surrounding group. Meredith’s findings, in a Seattle, Washington study, supported the hypothesis that acculturation to mainstream American society would result in a higher ethnic identity score for the Nisei (second generation Japanese-Americans) than the Sansei (third-generation Japanese-Americans), in effect, supplying evidence for rejecting Hansen’s model. Masuda, Matsumoto, and Meredith (1970) tested three generations of Japanese-Americans, again in the Seattle, Washington area. Their findings likewise indicated a gradual erosion of ethnic identification over 308 B. J Newton et al. generations. In a companion study they also compared ethnic identity scores between Seattle and Honolulu subjects (Matsumoto, Meredith, & Masuda, 1970). The findings showed that all three Honolulu generations scored lower in ethnic identity than their Seattle counterparts. All Honolulu males scored higher than the females while the Seattle sample showed no significant differences between sexes. The Seattle groups showed a decrease in ethnic identity from Nisei to Sansei; but the Honolulu NiseiSansei scores were similar. In 1973, Masuda, Hasegawa, and Matsumoto replicated their 1970 work on subjects in Tachikawa, Japan. Scores were almost identical to those found in the earlier Seattle sample, perhaps revealing the Westernization of Japanese even in Japan. Connor (1977) used Meredith’s questionnaire in his study of Sacramento Japanese-Americans. Like the Matsumoto et al. (1970) Honolulu study, his findings also showed no significant differences between Nisei and Sansei ethnic identity scores. It is clear that the research generated in response to Hansen’s thirdgeneration hypothesis has provided conflicting and ambiguous results, whether dealing with the various white ethnic groups or with JapaneseAmericans. Our reading of the literature and our experience in Hawaii led us to hypothesize that there would be a significant generational decline of ethnic identification from the Nisei to the Sansei, but that current cultural events might produce a higher interest in ethnicity overall. We defined Japanese ethnic identity as “the ‘degree of Japaneseness,’ as measured by self-perception, identification, and participation in ethnic activities” (Kitano, 1973, p. 193). For example, “Japaneseness” is stereotypically evidenced by obedience and adherence to a hierarchical system of sacrificing self-interest for others (Buck, Newton, & Muramatsu, 1984). A higher ethnic identity score by the Sansei than the Nisei generation would support Hansen’s thesis; a lower score by the Sansei would tend to refute it. Since age is confounded with generational differences in all of the Japanese studies cited here, we decided to minimize age differences insofar as possible. METHOD zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYX Subjects The subjects were 60 male Japanese-American residents of Hawaii. The sample included 30 male Nisei, and 30 male Sansei subjects with ages ranging from 40 to 55 years for the Nisei (Mean =47.8), and 3 1 to 44 years for the Sansei (Mean=37.8). Previous studies have reported mean ages of 43-47.8 for Nisei and 20.7-23.1 for Sansei. To eliminate gender differences, questionnaires were given only to male subjects. Approximately 85% of the respondents indicated participation in organizations with Ethnic Identity Among Japanese-Americans 309 mixed ethnic membership, and 6% participated in organizations with exclusively Japanese-American members. zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXW TestM aterial The research instrument used in this study was the Meredith Ethnic Identity Questionnaire (Meredith, 1967). The questionnaire includes 50 items on (a) preferences for Japanese things, (b) personality characteristics, and (c) possession of Japanese cultural items. The respondents indicated degree of agreement or disagreement on a 5-point scale (5 = high ethnicity, 1 =low ethnicity). The total ethnic identity score for an individual was the sum of the scores on the 50 questions (the highest possible score=250). The questions and scoring methods as developed by Meredith (1967) were used in this study without modification. Procedure The subjects were contacted individually and an informal screening process was initiated before administering the Ethnic Identity Questionnaire (EIQ). Screening criteria required that the subjects were: (a) born and raised in Hawaii and from Japanese stock; (b) either second- or thirdgeneration; and (c) between the ages of 30 and 55. Subjects meeting these requirements were given a prepared introductory statement on the purposes of the study, followed by the Ethnic Identity Questionnaire. Any questions regarding the instructions were discussed, and subjects were asked to skim through the questionnaire and bring up any questions before completing it. RESULTS The questionnaire was administered to 64 persons. Of these, four failed to return their questionnaires. Of the nonrespondents, one was from the Nisei group and three were from the Sansei group, yielding a final sample size of 30 subjects in each group. Data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test for three reasons: (a) it was used in previous studies of this topic (Masuda et al., 1970; Matsumoto et al., 1970; Meredith, 1967); (b) we were satisfied with its reliability and wanted to provide analyses that were comparable; and (c) this test is considered more powerful when a normal distribution cannot be assumed (Hodges, Krech, & Crutchfield, 1975). As predicted, the Sansei showed a significantly lower ethnic identity score (EIQ) than the Nisei (z=2.16, p< .03). The Nisei scores ranged from 129 to 190 points with a mean of 150.2 points. The Sansei scores ranged from 102 to 181 points with a mean of 141.53 points. Questions 55, 62, 310 B. J. Newton et al. 63, 64, and 68 on Meredith’s scale pertain to ethnic preference. Consistent with their overall scores, the Sansei show a significant decrease in ethnic preference for Japanese things (z= 1.99, zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcb p< .05).The Nisei scores ranged from 13 to 16 points with a mean of 14.53 points. The Sansei scores ranged from 10 to 15 points with a mean of 13.57 points. DISCUSSION Our data show a decline in ethnicity scores from the second to the third generation, and, for both generations, higher ethnicity scores than data reported elsewhere. That the mean age of our Sansei group (37.8) was 16.8 years older than Matsumoto’s Honolulu Sansei sample (21 .O) may partially explain the generational decline in EIQ scores in our sample and the similarity in generational scores in Matsumoto’s sample. In Honolulu, it is customary for young adults to remain in their parents’ homes until they marry or leave the islands for educational or vocational opportunities on the mainland. Our Sansei group was much older and therefore out of their parents’ homes, and less likely to adhere to parental views compared to Matsumoto’s Sansei group (a phenomenon Glass, Bengtson, and Dunham (1986) observed in their study of attitude similarity in threegeneration families). The problem of age versus generational differences appears again when we compare our EIQ scores with those of other studies. The mean scores of our Sansei group is 6.4 points higher than the Nisei of the 1970 Matsumoto study and our Nisei group at 150.2 compares with the previously studied Issei (first generation born in Japan) in Honolulu, Seattle, Tachikawa, Japan. Age may account for the Sansei sample discrepancies, but the Nisei among all samples were approximately the same age. The higher scores among our sample groups, tested ten years after the other groups mentioned here, may be reflecting a temporary Japanese cultural renaissance for both Nisei and Sansei in Hawaii. This study of Japanese-Americans in Hawaii was done in the wake of the 1985 Centennial celebration of Japanese immigration to Hawaii and at a time when the Hawaiians and part-Hawaiians were actively protesting their political, social, and economic treatment by the U.S. government and by the dominant social groups in the islands. We thought that the Centennial and the Hawaiian movement might have evoked increased interest in ethnic identification among the Japanese-Americans in Hawaii. That both Nisei and Sansei scores were overall much higher than those reported in previous studies suggests that many Japanese in Hawaii, irrespective of generation, may be experiencing an ethnic renaissance. We agree with the observation of Hanson and Mullis (1986) that systematic theory about generational transfer is undeveloped. It is crucial that we recognize important historical, social, and political dimensions of Ethnic Identity Among Japanese-Americans 311 ethnicity in complex societies such as the United States. The factors involved in preserving, maintaining and reproducing ethnic identities are extremely complex. Such factors are always influenced by larger social issues such as economic exploitation, ethnic conflict, political disenfranchisement, and ideological domination by the political elite of a society. If one takes a circumstantialist view of culture and ethnicity (Glazer & Moynihan, 1975; Keyes, 1981; Nagata, 1981), rather than a primordialist view (Geertz, 1973), ethnic identity is seen as primarily socially constituted and reactive, rather than based on biological and cultural inheritance. Such a view explains why some groups may define themselves (or be defined by other groups) primarily along lines of ethnicity-a common history, kinship, language, religion, etc. - while for other groups, ethnicity may be only marginally relevant, and factors of class (e.g., income, occupation, and status indicators) may be more important. Still other groups may separate themselves from the more inclusive ethnic or class dimensions by age (e.g., the youth culture) or by gender (e.g., feminists). This dialectical and circumstantialist view of ethnic identity brings relationships of struggle, power, and position into focus, and explains why, at certain points in history, different ethnic groups may become more or less consciously aware of the social implications of their ethnicity. The various studies testing Hansen’s hypothesis of third-generational return show that in some sites and for some ethnic groups, there is a new awareness of ethnicity, but for other groups in other locations, the third generation seems to have less interest (or no more than second generation) in things related to their ethnicity. Since the 1960s civil rights movement, ethnic consciousness for the most disadvantaged ethnic minorities -blacks, Hawaiians, and American Indians-has been related to ongoing conflict and struggle for increased social power. In the process of this struggle, new ideologies of ethnicity (e.g., the civil rights movement) and new self-definitions of identity (e.g., “black is beautiful”) emerge among groups struggling over access to wealth and power. In Hawaii, Japanese-Americans gained power in the Democratic Party after World War II, and succeeded in the 1950s in wresting power from the Republican party. If the strong political and social position of the Japanese-Americans in Hawaii continues to exist, it is possible that ethnicity for the Japanese (feelings of Japaneseness) will decline, surfacing only for cultural events (such as the Centennial or the annual Bon dances) which are nostalgic ties with the Japanese past, or during political elections. If that is so, whatever intergenerational transfer of ethnic identity that does occur will continue to be confounded bythe diversity of influences on each succeeding generation and by the complications of family relationships inherent in the process of acculturation (Glass, Bengtson, & Dunham, 1986). Though many Japanese customs are still observed, they are perceived as being part of an Island lifestyle shared by 312 B. 1 Newton et al. many ethnic groups as well as by members of the Japanese-American community. Therefore, observance of these customs may be rather superficial indicators of assimilation (or lack thereof) into the American mainstream. Perhaps items in Meredith’s scale should be revised in future studies. According to our findings, the Sansei are more “Americanized” than the Nisei, implying changes in values and social controls. Research on conformity behavior suggests a psychological explanation for the decline in ethnicity scores among Sansei in Hawaii. Studies of Japanese-American personality characteristics found them high in anxiety, “other” directed, and with a high need for approval (Arkoff, 1959; Caudill, 1952). These personality traits are characteristics attributed to individuals with high social conformity (Crawford & Haaland, 1972; Steiner & Vannoy, 1966; Trickett, 1971). It is possible, then, that low ethnic identity scores may reflect high social conformity to American norms. As this third generation assimilates into American culture, the Sansei’s personality characteristics, attitudes, and beliefs move toward the “norms” held by members of the dominant society (Arkoff, 1959; Berrien, Arkoff, & Iwahara, 1967; Caudill, 1952; Elizur, 1984). Such a hypothesis could be tested by comparing rates of assimilation among cultural groups differing in conformity behavior. Just as the “other-directed” characteristics of traditional Japanese culture may push Japanese-Americans to conform to American values, the omnipresence of American values (including “self-direction”) may pull Japanese-Americans toward a more self-directed view of social control. There are some indications (see Ogawa, 1978) that Sansei behavior is beginning to be determined more by what the individual thinks is right than by what others think is right. As the Japanese-Americans in Hawaii become more individualistic and continue to consolidate their social position and political power, we believe that individual factors of identity that cut across ethnicity, particularly class, gender, and lifestyles, will become increasingly important. REFERENCES ABRAMSON, H. J. (1975). The religious factor and the American experience: Another look at the three-generation hypothesis. Ethnicity, 2, 168-177. APPEL, J. (1961). Hansen’s “Third-Generation Law” and the origins of the American Jewish historical society. Jewish Social Studies, 23, 3-20. ARKOFF, A. (1959). Need pattern in two generations of Japanese-Americans in Hawaii. Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 75-79. BERRIEN, E K., ARKOFF, A., & IWAHARA, S. (1967). Generation differences in values: Americans, Japanese-Americans, and Japanese. Journal of Social Psychology, 71, 169-175. BUCK, E. B., NEWTON, B. J., & MURAMATSU, Y. (1984). Independence and Ethnic Identity Among Japanese-Americans 313 obedience in the United States and Japan. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 8.279-300. CAUDILL, W. (1952). Japanese-American personality and acculturation. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 45, l-103. CONNOR, J. W. (1977). Tradition and change in three generations of JapaneseAmericans. Chicago: Nelson-Hall. CONSTANTINOU, S. T., & HARVEY, M. E. (1985). Dimensional structure and intergenerational differences in ethnicity: The Greek Americans. Sociology and Social Research, 69,234-254. CRAWFORD, J. L., & HAALAND, G. A. (1972). Predecisional information seeking and subsequent conformity in the social influence process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 23, 112- 119. ELIZUR, D. (1984). Facet analysis of ethnic identity: The case of Israelis residing in the United States. The Journal of General Psychology, 111, 259-269. ELLMAN, Y. (1977). The ethnic awakening in the United States and its influence on Jews. Ethnicity, 4, 133-155. GEERTZ, C. (1973). The integrative revolution: Primordial sentiments and civil politics in the New States. In C. Geertz. (Ed.), The interpretation of cultures (pp. 255-310). New York: Basic Books. GLASS, J., BENGTSON, V. L., & DUNHAM, C. C. (1986). Attitude similarity in three-generation families: Socialization, status inheritance, or reciprocal influence? American Sociological Review, 51, 685-698. GLAZER, N., & MOYNIHAN, D. P. (1975). Ethnicity: Theory and experience. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. GORDON, M. M. (1964). Assimilation in American Life. New York: Oxford University Press. HANSEN, M. L. (1952). The third generation in America. Commentary, 14, 492-500. HANSON, R. A., & MULLIS, R. L. (1986). Intergenerational transfer of normative parental attitudes. Psychological Reports, 59, 711-714. HERBERG, W. (1955). Protestant-Catholic-Jew. Garden City, NY Doubleday & co. HODGES, J. L., JR., KRECH, D., & CRUTCHFIELD, R. S. (1975). StatLab: An empirical introduction to statistics. New York: McGraw-Hill. JANMOHAMED, A., & LLOYD, D. (1987). Introduction: Toward a theory of minority discourse. Cultural Critique, 6(l), 5-12. KEYES, C. (1981). The dialectics of ethnic changes. In C. Keyes (Ed.), Ethnic changes. Seattle: University of Washington Press. KITANO, H. H. L. (1973). Japanese-American mental illness. In S. Sue & N. N. Wagner (Eds.), Asian-Americans: Psychological Perspectives (pp. 181-201). Palo Alto, CA: Science & Behavior Books. LAZERWITZ, B. M., & ROWITZ, L. (1964). Three generation hypothesis. American Journal of Sociology, 69, 529-538. MASUDA, M., HASEGAWA, R. S., & MATSUMOTO, G. H. (1973). The ethnic identity questionnaire. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 4, 229-245. MASUDA, M., MATSUMCYIO, G. H., & MEREDITH, G. M. (1970). Ethnic identity in three generations of Japanese-Americans. Journal of Social Psychology, zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDC 81, 199-207. 314 B. J. Newton et al. MATSUMOTO, identification: G. H., MEREDITH, G. M., & MASUDA, M. (1970). Ethnic Honolulu and Seattle Japanese-Americans. Journal of CrossCultural Psychology, 1, 63-76. MEREDITH, G. M. (1967). Ethnic identity scale: A study in transgenerational communication patterns. Pacific Speech Quarter/y, 2, 57-67. NAGATA, J. (1981). In defense of ethnic boundaries: The changing myths and charters of Malay identity. In C. Keyes (Ed.), Ethnic changes (pp. 87-116). Seattle: University of Washington Press. OGAWA, D. W. (1978). Kodomo no tame ni=For the Sake of the children: The Japanese-American experience in Hawaii. Honolulu: The University of Hawaii Press. STEINER, I. D., & VANNOY, J. S. (1966). Personality correlates of two types of conformity behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 307- 315. TRICKETT, E. J. (1971). The interaction of achievement motivation, task difficulty, and confidence-enhancing information in producing conformity behavior. Journal of Social Psychology, 84, 233-242. UCHENDU, V. C. (1975). The dilemma of ethnicity and policy primacy in Black Africa. In G. DeVos & L. Romancci-Ross (Eds.), Ethnic identity: Cultural confinuities and change (pp. 265-275). Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield Publishers. UYEKI, E. S. (1960). Correlates of ethnic identification. American Journa/ of Sociology, 65,468-474. ABSTRACT TRANSLATIONS L'idzntiteethniqueest u1 #I&KXI&Y~axnplexeimpliquant l'interacticnd'&&ents culturelset de rapFortssociaux &la 'Troisi&neG&&ration"&nise contenprains. L'k'&qzoth&az pr Hansenoffre Lne explicationmonoausalequi a &6v&ifi& prmides groupesethnicpsvari&cku~5pllrsieursvilles des Etat+Un.iscontirenta~~~. Les rckultatsdivisk obtenus dans ces &&s aux Et&a-Llnisaontinxitauxet d'autresfaites‘aHa& rarmides Am&rains d'oricdneiap3naisemcntrentque i'+ication d'tme icknti& ethmque plr la plaae-relative & la Cansl'kti rfkli&e~Ha&i qlle g&xaticnest ina&qtate. r&s &rivons dans &t article,le questionnaire d’idsntitk ethnique da Meredith a Bti distriti a’ trente Japaro-Americains Nisei (secon& g%katicn) et trente Sansei (troisike &-&aticm). tous du sexe masculinet 24s & 31 2 55 ans. Les ~@xxx?es &&rant qua les Sarxrei &aiei% ptrs assimilds qt3e les Nisei, l’ty@I&%z & Hansen cbit&re r&t&. L'article p&r&e les r6sultat.s & cette err&e pr raprt B d’autres &udes 8 l'&pth‘e~ &? Hansen et pir raprt awthkies d'ethnicitiqui aonai&rentqtx? l'identidethnique d$end teauaqpllr; durarqsocial &nsckssoci&soanplexesque &I tenp et&la plas relatived'me g&&ation. (author-swied atxstract) Laidentidade'tnicaes u7 axnplejofendinerx~ que implkala interaccidnb elenentosculturalesy ck relacionessociales contxmprkeas. LaHipStesis ck Hansen, 'lkr@raGeneraci&, rxx ofrece inaexplicaci&1monocausallacual hasitipuestaa pueba, entrediferentesgr~sBtniax, endistintas prtes ck zyxwvutsrqponm Ethnic identity Among Japanese-Americans 315 10s E.E.U.U.Los diversos resultacbsck dictrosestudiosy ck quellos realizadosenHa~aiiwnjap3rre~~anericrl~smue~ran uu faltade uxici6n w-fxacionalmraewlicarlaidenticbd anim. m ei estudio-reptab .&i en Hh&ii, el Questicmario, de E!arickth, ck Ickntidadhica filedistrituicb a treintaU& (seguncb ghxacibn) y a treintaa (teraxa~rkxaci&) ha'nbresjapnesea-rmericanos, entrelos31~55 arw 12 e&d. zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihg DadDque 10s resultadDsmclestranquelos~ sig-Afi=tivanente resultarcnmkasimila&squelos~, rx2 rcxiquedam&squerec!h&xulaHipkesisck Hansen. Fstos cksahrimientos sa disaztenenrelacibnaotrosesttioshsacbs enlaHi$tesis & Hanseny a otrasteorias etnogrdficasqw axsi&ranlaidentibd6tnica ~naf~mci&ldepsici6nsoCialm& quecnafcncidndetianpoy~~p3sid~n~radonalen s~cieddes amplejas. (author-supplied abstract)