Aculturacion País Vasco

International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 425439
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Intercultural Relations
j our nal home page: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ i j i nt r el
Social identication and acculturation in the Basque Autonomous
Community
Elisa Montaruli
a
, Richard Y. Bourhis
a,
, Maria-Jose Azurmendi
b,1
, Nekane Larra naga
b,1
a
Universit du Qubec Montral (UQAM), Dpartement de Psychologie, CP 8888, Succ. Centre-Ville, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3C 3P8
b
University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, Facultad de Psicologa, Campus de Gipuzkoa, Avenida de Tolosa 70, 20018 Donostia, San Sebastin, Spain
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 15 February 2010
Received in revised form
28 November 2010
Accepted 28 January 2011
Keywords:
Acculturation
Host-community
Immigrants
Identity
Integration
Basque
Spain
a b s t r a c t
Basque origin undergraduates in four universities of the Basque Autonomous Community
(BAC) completed the Host Community Acculturation Scale (HCAS) in three life domains:
marriage, culture, and work. Undergraduates with a strong Basque identity (N =308) and
those with a strong dual Basque-Spanish identity (N = 219) completed the HCAS towards
the co-national Spanish minority and devalued Moroccan immigrants residing in the BAC.
Results indicate that (1) undergraduates have a preference for individualism and integra-
tionismtowards Spanish co-nationals and Moroccans; (2) Strong Dual identiers endorse
individualism and integrationism more than Strong Basque identiers towards Spanish
co-nationals; (3) Strong Dual identiers favored Spanish co-nationals over Moroccan immi-
grants in their acculturation orientations, whereas Strong Basque identiers endorsed
more welcoming acculturation orientations towards Moroccans than towards Spanish
co-nationals; and (4) undergraduates endorsed more individualism, integrationism, and
assimilationism in the work domain, while they endorsed more segregationism and exclu-
sionism in the culture domain. Results are discussed using the Interactive Acculturation
Model.
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Sociologicallyandsociolinguistically, Spainhas longbeena multilingual/multicultural society(Moreno-Fernndez, 2007).
Multicultural settings challenge individuals from contrasting ethnolinguistic backgrounds to adapt to each other as they
interact in private and public domains of life. Acculturation can be dened as the process of bi-directional change that takes
place within contrasting cultural groups whose members experience sustained intercultural contact (Redeld, Linton, &
Herskovits, 1936). In countries of settlement, acculturation implies that host majorities and immigrant minorities are inu-
enced and transformed by their mutual intercultural contacts. Traditional models of acculturation proposed that immigrant
minorities experienced a unidirectional linear process of assimilation within mainstreamsociety (Sam, 2006). During their
lifetime or across generations, immigrant minorities were expected to shift from their culture origin to a bicultural phase
reecting maintenance of heritage culture and adoption of the host culture, and inevitably ended up completely assimilated
by the dominant host majority culture (Alba, 2003). In the last decades, mainstream conceptualizations of acculturation
shifted fromunidimensional to bidimensional perspectives (Berry, 2006). Three major conceptualizations of acculturation
Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 514 987 3000x4852; fax: +1 514 987 7953.
E-mail addresses: montaruli.elisa@uqam.ca (E. Montaruli), bourhis.richard@uqam.ca (R.Y. Bourhis), ehu-azurmendi@telefonica.net (M.-J. Azurmendi),
nekane.larranaga@ehu.es (N. Larra naga).
1
Tel.: +34 943 01 5683; fax: +34 943 015670.
0147-1767/$ see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2011.02.007
426 E. Montaruli et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 425439
dimensions have been proposed (Snauwaert, Soenens, Vanbeselaere, & Boen, 2003). One conceptualization refers to main-
tenance of immigrant culture and contacts with host society members (Berry, 1990, 1997). Another one assesses adoption of
host culture and maintenance of immigrant culture (Bourhis, Mose, Perreault, & Sencal, 1997; Navas et al., 2005). A third
one considers identication with mainstream and minority cultures as acculturation dimensions (Sayegh & Lasry, 1993;
Tadmor, Tetlock, & Peng, 2009). However, acculturation should not be reduced to identity changes alone. Instead, accul-
turation should be conceptualized as a broader construct than ethnic identity, encompassing a wide range of behaviors,
attitudes and values that change with contact between cultures (Liebkind, 2006, p. 83).
This study explores the following issues of (1) the interplay between ethnic identity and acculturation of host community
members and (2) the specic role of life domains in modulating acculturation orientations of host community members.
The Interactive acculturation model (IAM; Bourhis et al., 1997) highlights the dynamic interplay between immigrants and
host community acculturation orientations. Because of its concern for host community acculturation orientations, we will
use the IAMas the theoretical basis for exploring these relations.
1.1. The interactive acculturation model
The IAMframework proposes relationships among four mainelements: State immigrationandintegrationpolicies, immi-
grants acculturation orientations, host communitys acculturation orientations, and relational outcomes. The IAMproposes
that the acculturation orientations of dominant host community members can have a major impact on the acculturation
orientations of immigrant minorities (Bourhis, Montreuil, Barrette, & Montaruli, 2009). Drawing on Berrys (1997) immi-
grant acculturation orientations, the IAMproposes that dominant host community members may endorse ve acculturation
orientations towards immigrants. Integrationism is endorsed by host community members who accept that immigrants
maintain some aspects of their heritage culture and also accept that immigrants adopt important features of the host
majority culture. Integrationists value a stable biculturalism/bilingualismamong immigrant communities that, in the long
term, may contribute to cultural and linguistic pluralism as an enduring feature of the host society. Assimilationism corre-
sponds to the traditional concept of absorption whereby host community members expect immigrants to relinquish their
language and cultural identity for the sake of adopting the dominant culture and language of the host community. Seg-
regationism refers to host community members who accept that immigrants maintain their heritage culture as long as
immigrants keep their distance from host members, as they do not wish immigrants to transform, dilute or contaminate
the host culture. Segregationists prefer immigrants to remain together in separate urban/regional enclaves, and are ambiva-
lent regarding the status of immigrants as rightful members of the host society. Exclusionists deny immigrants the right to
adopt features of the host community culture. They also deny immigrants the choice to maintain their heritage language,
culture or religion and believe that some immigrants have customs and values that can never be socially incorporated
within the host community mainstream. Individualists dene themselves and others as persons rather than as members
of group categories. Because it is personal qualities and individual achievements that count most, individualists will tend
to interact with immigrants in the same way they would with other individuals who happen to be members of the host
community.
These ve acculturation orientations are measured using the validated Host community Acculturation Scale (HCAS;
Bourhis & Bougie, 1998; Montreuil & Bourhis, 2001). The HCAS uses the combined statements format to monitor how
respondents rate their endorsement of each distinct host community acculturation orientations. For instance, respondents
can rate their strong or weak endorsement of the following combined statement item for assimilationism: Immigrants
should give-up their culture of origin for the sake of adopting the Spanish culture.
The IAM takes into account the fact that acculturation orientations endorsed by host community individuals may be
concordant or discordant with those held by members of specic immigrant communities. The degree of concordance may
result in harmonious, problematic or conictual relations between host majority and immigrant minorities. The IAM also
takes into consideration howpublic policies regarding immigration and integration relate to the acculturation orientations
endorsed by host community and immigrant group members. Most democratic states have formulated and applied immi-
gration policies regulating the national origin, type, and rate of immigration accepted within their boundaries (Lahav, 2004).
In contrast, state integration policies consist of the approaches adopted by national, regional, and municipal governments
to help immigrants and host communities adapt to the growing ethnic, linguistic, and religious diversity of modern states
(Bourhis et al., 1997). State integration policies can be situated on a continuumranging frompluralism, civic, assimilationist
to ethnist policies. The IAMproposes that adoption of state or regional integration policies may reect and also shape host
community acculturationorientations as well as more general opinions concerning the ideal or preferred ways of integrating
immigrant within mainstreamsociety.
1.2. Host community endorsement of acculturation orientations
Over a decade of research using the IAM suggests that host community members in Canada, the United States, West-
ern Europe, and Israel prefer individualism and integrationism over assimilationism, segregationism, and exclusionism
(Bourhis, Montreuil et al., 2009). Most participants in such studies are undergraduate students for whom strong endorse-
ment of individualismand integrationismis concordant with the meritocratic and individualistic organizational culture of
higher education institutions. Similar endorsement of integrationismwas obtained in other acculturation studies conducted
E. Montaruli et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 425439 427
with host community adolescents and adults (Jasinskaja-Lahti, Liebkind, Horenczyk, & Schmitz, 2003; Rohmann, Florack, &
Piontkowski, 2006; Zagefka & Brown, 2002).
Some exceptions to the predominance of individualism and integrationism were found using the IAM. For instance, in
a study conducted with undergraduate Jewish students in Israel, Likud right-wing party sympathizers endorsed segrega-
tionism (M=4.5) more than integrationism (M=2.6) towards Israeli Arabs (Bourhis, Montreuil et al., 2009). In contrast,
left-of-centre labour party sympathizers endorsed more integrationism (M=3.9) than segregationism(M=3.3). This study
testies to the relevance of not only taking into account state integration policies, but also individual political ideologies.
Studies using more representative samples of host community populations and different methods of measuring accultur-
ation orientations obtained preference for assimilationismover integrationismamong adult Dutch and Spanish respondents
(Arends-Tth & van de Vijver, 2003; Navas, Fernndez, Rojas, & Garca, 2007). These studies used the two-statement mea-
surement method whereby the scores obtained on two separate items in the questionnaire are combined to categorize each
respondent as endorsing a specic host community acculturation orientation. Thus a respondent agreeing strongly with
the item Immigrants should give-up their culture of origin and also agreeing strongly with the item Immigrants should
adopt the Spanish culture would be categorized as an assimilationist host community member. A recent study compar-
ing the two-statement and combined-statement method (HCAS) showed that each presentation format yielded similar
acculturation results (Arends-Tth & van de Vijver, 2007). Acculturation studies using vignette depictions of acculturation
orientations have found equal or higher endorsement of assimilation in comparison with integrationism(Kosic, Mannetti,
& Sam, 2005; van Oudenhoven, Prins, & Buunk, 1998).
1.3. Endorsement of acculturation orientations towards valued and devalued immigrants
One important proposition of the IAM is that the valued or devalued status of a minority group may inuence the
acculturation orientations of host community members (Bourhis et al., 1997). Valued immigrants are perceived favorably
by host community members because they are seen to benet the local economy and/or because they are seen to share
a common language, culture or religion with the host majority. Conversely, devalued immigrants are usually the targets
of negative stereotypes either because they are seen as economic rivals for employment and housing, a drain on health
and welfare services, a cause of insecurity in certain neighborhoods or a threat to the authenticity and cohesion of
the host majority culture. To date, many studies have shown that host community members tend to endorse more indi-
vidualism and integrationism towards valued than towards devalued outgroups. Conversely, host community members
tend to endorse more assimilationism, segregationism, and exclusionism towards devalued outgroups than towards val-
ued outgroups (Barrette, Bourhis, Personnaz, & Personnaz, 2004; Bourhis, Barrette, El-Geledi, & Schmidt, 2009; Bourhis
& Dayan, 2004; Bourhis, Montreuil et al., 2009; Montreuil & Bourhis, 2001, 2004; Safdar, Dupuis, Lewis, El-Geledi, &
Bourhis, 2008). The rhetoric justifying which immigrant groups are ascribed a valued or devalued status usually reects
the historical, economic, and intergroup dynamics of the particular city or country under scrutiny. The present study
was conducted in the Basque Autonomous Community (BAC), whose social historical context needs to be briey dis-
cussed.
1.4. Social historical context of the Basque Autonomous Community
The BAC has a population of 2,157,122 inhabitants (INE, 2008). Its strategic location on the Atlantic shore at the border of
France, as well as its mineral resources, industrial, and naval development account for many special treatments and advan-
tages granted throughout history by the kings of Spain (Shar, 1995). However, during the monarchy up to the nineteenth
century and Francos dictatorship in the twentieth (19391975), assimilationist and exclusionist policies reied Castilian
as the national language and the Spanish culture as the core identity of Spain to the detriment of regional languages and
cultures. Across the regions of Spain, the use and teaching of minority languages such as Euskara in the BAC, Catalan and
Galician, were not allowed, nor were the manifestations of regional cultural activities tolerated (Lecours, 2001). The rise
of language revival movement, along with the death of General Franco, provided a favorable context for the adoption of
the 1978 Spanish Constitution, which declared Castilian the national language of Spain but also allowed the creation of 17
Autonomous Communities. These Communities enjoyed varying degrees of regional autonomy including tax levying and
tax spending powers, measures that fostered regional economic and social development. As a rst step towards regional
language recognition, six of these Autonomous Communities claimed and obtained an ofcial bilingual status for their
respective language in addition to the Castilian language, including the BAC (Hoffmann, 1995).
Thanks to sustained language planning efforts since the 1980s, Euskara is spoken by 30% of the BAC population either as
a rst or second language (Comunidad Autnoma del Pas Vasco, 2008). The language decline fostered by Francos assim-
ilationist policies is evident when one considers that at the beginning of the century, 83% of the Basque population could
speak Euskara (Lasagabaster, 2001). Although measures to reverse language shift have been adopted since the 1980s mainly
through the school system, the situation remains problematic given that even those who knowthe language do not neces-
sarily use Euskara in private and public settings (Azurmendi, Bachoc, & Zabaleta, 2001). The BAC has had a history of radical
nationalism represented by both a political party and an urban guerilla faction (ETA; Euskadi ta Askatasuma [Freedom for
the Basque Country]), which was most active fromthe 1970s to the 1990s but declined by the early 21st century (Conversi,
1997). Even tough ETA is still present today, the Basque population endorses less radical views as exemplied by the demo-
cratic Basque nationalist party (PNV) whichpursues its language policies infavor of Euskara, while promoting greater Basque
autonomy within the Spanish State (Zabilde, Nicholas, Erize, & Azurmendi, 2006).
1.5. Valued and devalued groups in the BAC
The BAC is a region of strong economic development that has attracted immigrants from the rest of Spain since the
19th century. Also, during the dictatorship, Franco encouraged Spaniards to immigrate in bilingual regions, especially in
the Basque and Catalan territories. One objective of this strategy was to undermine the demographic vitality of the local
linguistic and cultural population while asserting the political ascendancy of the Castilian language and culture in such
regions (Hoffmann, 1995). Many Spaniards established in the BAC were seen as contributing to the decline of the Basque
language and culture during the civil war and the ensuing Franco regime up to the mid 1970s.
Today, residents originating fromCastilian Communities of Spain have a double status in the BAC. At the national level,
they are the Spanish majority, while at the Autonomous community level they represent a co-national minority. Decades
of Basque language revival efforts has succeeded in promoting the learning of Euskara by Spanish ancestry residents many
of whom also send their children to Euskara medium schools. However some Basque nationalists still consider Spanish
residents as threatening the Basque language and culture as they symbolize the power of the Spanish state within the BAC.
Individuals of Basque origin also have a double status in the BAC: while they represent a minority in Spain, they are the
dominant host majority at the Autonomous level. The history of conicts between Spanish and Basque is likely to position
the Spanish minority established in the BAC as a potentially rival minority especially for individuals who only identify as
Basque nationals. In contrast, Basque individuals whose background includes Spanish parents or grandparents may feel
more ambivalent towards the Spanish minority in the BAC. The co-national status of Spanish background individuals settled
in the BAC may grant thema valued position as contributors to the emerging bilingual and bicultural identity of the BAC.
Whereas the more or less threatening status of the Spanish minority in the BAC is not clear, we may posit that feelings
of Basque host community members might be more positive towards themthan towards foreigners fromNorth Africa. The
BAC is a destination of choice among international immigrants to Spain. In 2007, 100,701 legal immigrants were established
in the Basque Country. The two largest immigrant groups are Colombians (12,532; 0.6%) and Moroccans (8140; 0.4% of
the total population in the BAC; INE, 2008). As North Africans across the straight of Gibraltar, Moroccans are the largest
non-European immigrant group in Spain. They are a highly stigmatized immigrant outgroup whose distinctive language
as Arabophones and religion as Muslims are the object of negative media coverage, while their employment status in the
BAC is low and precarious. In contrast with Moroccans, the Spanish co-national minority established in the BAC shares
Catholicism and knowledge of Castilian with the Basque host community while enjoying good employment conditions in
the region. Consequently, acculturationorientations of Basque undergraduates were monitored towards devalued Moroccan
immigrants and towards Spanish co-national minority group members.
1.6. Ethnic identication and acculturation: Strong Basque and Strong Dual identiers
Thoughpeople canbe categorizedas being of Basque origin, suchBasque individuals may identify strongly or weakly with
their owngroup category membership. We posit that the ethnic identication of host community members is a key element
to consider when assessing acculturation orientations (Bourhis, El-Geledi, & Sachdev, 2007). Social identity theory proposes
that individuals are more likely to identify with social groups that provide themwith a positive social identity than to social
groups that do not contribute to positive social identity (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). Identication with single non-permeable
ethnic group was shown to relate to the endorsement of less welcoming acculturation orientations towards outgroups.
For instance, in Quebec, the more Francophones endorsed an ethnic national belonging as Qubcois, the more strongly
they endorsed the exclusionist orientation towards immigrant outgroups (Bourhis, Barrette, & Moriconi, 2008). Overall,
strong identication with a single owngroup ethnic, political or religious category fosters harder us-them boundaries with
outgroups and thus results in less welcoming orientations towards outgroups (Bourhis & Dayan, 2004; Montreuil, Bourhis,
& Vanbeselaere, 2004).
Studies conducted with undergraduates in the Bilingual Autonomous Communities of Spain documented strong and
weak autonomous identiers within each bilingual region (Ros, Azurmendi, Bourhis, & Garca, 1999). Results showed that
undergraduates who identied strongly with their Autonomous language and culture but not to the Spanish language
and culture came from ethnically homogeneous Autonomous families who were more likely to transmit the Autonomous
language to their children. These Strong Autonomous identiers were uent in the Autonomous language and they also
used their respective language frequently in private and public settings. Most of their contacts were with family members
and friends from the Autonomous ingroup, whereas they had much less contacts with Spanish origin outgroups. Results
obtained with Autonomous respondents also revealed intergroup attitudes and behaviors favoring the Autonomous ingroup
over Spanish co-national outgroups.
Although acculturation orientations were not included in the psychological proles of strong autonomous identiers
in these previous studies, we expect that Strong Basque identiers will endorse less welcoming acculturation orientations
towards Spanish co-national outgroups in the BAC. The history of conicts between Spanish and Basque may situate the
Spanish co-national minority as a more threatening outgroup than Moroccan immigrants whose precarious minority status
and low institutional support pose little objective cultural threat to the Basque majority. However, Moroccans remain
a double outgroup on linguistic and religious grounds compared to co-national Spanish minority outgroup. Consequently,
Strong Basque identiers may endorse less welcoming acculturationorientations towards Moroccanforeigners thantowards
Spanish co-nationals.
Whereas some individuals may identify with a single ethnic group, others may endorse dual or multiple identities.
Individuals may also identify at many levels: group level, super-ordinate level, and subordinate level (Turner, Hogg, Oakes,
Reicher, &Wetherell, 1987). Self-categorization theory further proposes that specic levels of identities may be turned on or
off depending on the meta-contrast features of the situation or setting. Recent ndings suggested that in comparison with
single identication, bicultural identication is related to heightened integrative cognitive complexity (Tadmor et al., 2009).
In turn, cognitive complexity was linked to open-mindedness (Tadmor &Tetlock, 2006). These ndings provide some ground
to propose that in comparison with individuals who identify strongly with a single owngroup ethnic category, individuals
who identify to multiple groups are likely to be more open towards others and to endorse more welcoming acculturation
orientations towards outgroups.
The psychological prole of Strong Dual Autonomous-Spanish identiers residing in the Bilingual Autonomous Com-
munities of Spain were also explored in the Ros et al. (1999) study. Strong Dual Autonomous-Spanish identiers were
more likely to come from mixed marriage between Autonomous and Spanish individuals. They reported being uent in
the Autonomous language but they use the Spanish language more often in private and public settings. Their network of
contact with members of the Autonomous and Spanish groups was more balanced than that of Strong Autonomous identi-
ers. They also reported more favorable attitudes and behaviors towards Spanish co-nationals than did respondents with a
Strong Autonomous identity. On the basis of these studies, we can extrapolate that Strong Basque-Spanish Dual identiers,
by virtue of their mixed Basque and Spanish ancestry, are likely to have more welcoming acculturation orientations towards
Spanish co-national minorities in the BAC than Strong Basque identiers. We can further propose that their acculturation
orientations will be more welcoming towards Spanish co-national outgroups than towards Moroccan immigrants.
1.7. Acculturation orientations in private and public life domains
Notwithstanding the ethnic identity of host community member or the valued or devalued status of target groups,
scholars agree with the importance of taking into account life domains in the study of acculturation (Arends-Tth & van
de Vijver, 2003, 2004; Arends-Tth & van de Vijver, 2007; Berry & Sam, 1997; Horenczyk, 1997; Navas et al., 2005). The
IAM specically proposes that acculturation orientations may vary depending on the public versus private domains of life
(Bourhis et al., 1997). Studies conducted with the IAMgenerally used composite scores of acculturation domains among the
following: employment, rental housing, culture, values, customs, and marriage. Internal consistency of composite scores
was generally acceptable or good, ranging from Cronbach alpha of .55 to .89 (Bourhis et al., 2008; Bourhis & Dayan, 2004;
Montreuil & Bourhis, 2001, 2004; Safdar et al., 2008). In some cases, lowinternal consistency (=[.24.79]) suggested that
acculturation orientations are not endorsed in a systematic fashion across domains (Bourhis, Barrette et al., 2009; Montreuil
et al., 2004), In other studies, internal consistency was weak and analyses were conducted separately by domains (Barrette
et al., 2004, marriage only).
Most studies of host community acculturation adopt a combination of domains to provide a general portrait of accultura-
tion orientations. In contrast, Arends-Tth and van de Vijver (2003) measured immigrant and host community acculturation
orientations separately in ve domains and then presented the results for the composite score of the private domains (child-
rearing, cultural habits and ways of thinking) and the public ones (language use, social contacts, education). Results showed
that Turkish-Dutch immigrants preferred the separation orientation in private domains, but endorsed more strongly the
integration orientation in public domains. In contrast, Dutch host community members endorsed the assimilation orienta-
tion in all domains. The authors suggested that differentiating acculturation preferences according to life domains is clearly
important for immigrants, but maybe less so for host community members, who tend to endorse the same acculturation
orientation towards immigrants across all domains.
The importance of differentiating between life domains in acculturation has been the focus of a recently proposed frame-
work, theRelativeAcculturationExtendedModel (RAEM; Navas et al., 2005). TheRAEMseeks aner analysis of thedistinction
between public and private domains of acculturation. The model proposes a continuum of seven life domains ranging
from the most central at one pole to the most peripheral at the other in the following order: religious customs/beliefs;
ways of thinking/principles/values; social relations/friendships; family relations; consumption habits/family economy;
work/employment; and political system/government. In presenting this model, the authors propose that immigrants will
favor separation in the most private, central, symbolic domains, whereas they will prefer assimilation or integration in the
most public, distal or instrumental domains. In contrast, the authors propose that host community members will be less
differentially sensitive as a fonction of life domains: they expect that host community members will favor assimilation or
integration in all domains, fromprivate to public.
The rst study devoted to test host community acculturation orientations using the RAEM was conducted in South-
ern Spain in Andalusia (Navas et al., 2007). Moroccan immigrants endorsed separation/segregation in the private/symbolic
domains, while in the public/peripheral domains they endorsed assimilation. Moroccan immigrants also preferred integra-
tion for social relations, an intermediate domain on the RAEMprivate to public continuum. While Spanish host community
members also showed a preference for integration in social relations, they endorsed assimilation in most other domains.
Taken together, results suggested that the endorsement of acculturation orientations in the seven life domains along the
private to public continuumwas not straightforward, especially for host community members.
One aim of the present study is to achieve a better understanding of the specic role of life domains in accounting for
acculturation orientations of host society members. As such, we will revisit the work of Navas and her colleagues in Spain
but this time in the BAC (Navas et al., 2005, 2007). However, we will remain focused on host community acculturation
orientations only. Navas et al. (2007) and Arends-Tth and van de Vijver (2003) have found that host community members
donot differentiate as muchbetweenacculturationdomains as immigrants do. Therefore, three acculturationdomains might
be sufcient to account for host community acculturation orientations: marriage, culture and work domains. Marriage is
prototypic of the private domain of acculturation. Though current democratic states do not seek to regulate exogamous
unions, cultural communities may be very prudent when it comes to open the sacred family unit to ethnocultural external
inuence through mixed marriages. Conversely, the work world is a prototypic public domain in democratic states. In
this public domain, laws govern the behavior of individuals and institutions by prohibiting discrimination in employment,
promotion and remuneration. Host community member who engage in segregation and exclusion in the work domain could
be accused and sentenced by the state for such practices. The culture domain may best be considered as an intermediate
domain on the continuumas it implies both private and public elements. In democracies, cultural consumption is a matter
of personal choices not constrained by state laws of regulations. However, institutional support generally plays a key role
in the development of cultural industries given that many governments use public money to support the arts. We note that
Navas et al. (2005, 2007) omitted the culture domain from their continuum even though it is a relevant life domain that
has been widely used in the acculturation literature. Including the culture domain of acculturation provides a convenient
midpoint for our private to public continuumof host community acculturation orientations.
1.8. Hypotheses
On the basis of our review of the current research, we can propose three hypotheses concerning the effect of host
community single and dual identities on the endorsement of acculturation orientations in private and public domains
towards valued and devalued outgroups:
H1. Group based prototypic identities: We expect Basque individuals with a Strong Dual identity to endorse more welcoming
acculturationorientations towards minority groups thanBasque individuals witha Strong Basque identity. That is, compared
with Strong Basque identiers, we expect Strong Dual identiers to endorse more individualismand integrationismand less
assimilationism, segregationism, and exclusionismtowards outgroups.
H2. Comparison of target groups: A number of competing hypotheses must be considered regarding the effect of prototypic
identityonacculturationorientations towards Moroccanimmigrants andSpanishco-national outgroups. First, strongBasque
identiers may express a preference for Spanish co-nationals as compared to foreign devalued immigrants. This preference
may be reected by more welcoming acculturation orientations (integrationism, individualism) towards the Spanish co-
national target group than towards immigrants fromMorocco. Second, strong Basque identiers may perceive both target
groups as devalued/threatening outgroups and endorse assimilationism, segregationism, and exclusionismtowards Spanish
co-nationals and Moroccan immigrants Third, strong Basque identiers may express an enduring resentment against their
historical Spanish co-national rival outgroup and endorse less welcoming acculturation orientations towards Spanish co-
nationals thanMoroccans target groups. StrongDual identiers, who share a categorymembershipwithSpanishco-nationals
through mixed ancestry may endorse more individualismand integrationismand less assimilationism, segregationism, and
exclusionismtowards the Spanish co-national target group than towards Moroccan immigrants.
H3. Comparison of domains: We expect Basque host community undergraduates to hold more welcoming acculturation
orientations in the public domain of work regulated by anti-discrimination laws than in the private domain of marriage
not subjected to state control. Basque undergraduates are expected to endorse more individualismand integrationismand
less assimilationism, segregationism, and exclusionismin the domain of work than in the domain of marriage. No specic
predictions can be made for the intermediate domain of culture.
2. Method
Participants in this study were undergraduates fromuniversities chosen to represent the three provinces of the Basque
Country in Spain. Undergraduates were recruited at campuses of the bilingual public University of the Basque Country in
Gipuzkoa (N=243), Bizcaia (N=300), Araba (N=162) and at the private University of Deusto in Gipuzkoa (N=109). Under-
graduates were recruited fromthree classic elds of university studies in the Basque Country: health sciences, engineering
and social sciences. The mean age of respondents was 21 (sd=4.2). We excluded fromthe analyses 48 participants who were
one standard deviation over the mean age, that is, older than 25years old. Another 35 participants were excluded because
they hadnot beenresiding inthe Basque Country for all of their life. The nal sample of respondents was 727undergraduates,
of which 68% were female, and 32% were male.
Following permission from professors, anonymous questionnaires were completed on a voluntary basis during class
time. Questionnaires were written in Castilian and took approximately 30min to complete. Questionnaire included items
on demographic background as well as a battery of pertinent psychosocial scales. Most of the items were answered on a 7
points Likert scale ranging from1 not at all to 7 totally. The scales used in the questionnaire are described in the following
sections.
2.1. Psychological prole of Strong Basque identiers and Strong dual identiers
The multiple identication scale was used to classify respondents as Basque only, Spanish only and Basque-Spanish dual
identiers (Bourhis &Bougie, 1998). Thescaleincluded13items relatedto(1) global identication(Towhat extent doyouiden-
tify as [Basque/Spanish/Basque-Spanish]?); (2) cultural identication (To what extent do you identify with [Basque/Spanish/both
Basque and Spanish] culture(s)?); (3) linguistic identication (To what extent do you identify with [Basque/Spanish/both Basque
and Spanish] language(s)?); (4) political identication (To what extent do you identify [as a Basque sovereignist/with Spanish
unity]?); and (5) desired identication (To what extent do you desire to be [Basque/Spanish]?). Three identication variables
with good internal coherence were created using this scale: the combination of the ve items related to Basque identi-
cation (c.alpha =.87); the ve items related to Spanish identication (c.alpha =.93); and the three items related to Dual
identication (c.alpha =.80).
Using a similar methodology as a previous study on ethnolinguistic identication in the Bilingual Autonomous Com-
munities of Spain (Ros et al., 1999), we composed prototypic identities based on participants weak, moderate, and strong
degrees of Basque, Spanish, and Dual identications. Participants with a Strong Basque identication had a score 5 on the
Basque identication variable, 3 on the Spanish identication variable, and 4 on the Dual identication variable. Partici-
pants with a Strong Dual identication had a score 5 on the Basque identication variable, 5 on the Spanish identication
variable, and 4 on the Dual identication variable. This procedure led us to uncover two main identication prototypes
among Basque undergraduates: Strong Basque identiers (N=308) and Strong Dual identiers (N=219), while Spanish only
identiers were so few that they could not be considered for the study. Thus, analyses presented in this paper were con-
ducted only on participants who were categorized as having a Strong Basque identity or Strong Dual identity, for a total of
527 participants (72% of the 727 participants).
Key individual variables were assessed to establish distinguishing proles of Strong Basque identiers and Strong dual
identiers. First, ethnic origin was dened according to the place of birth of each parent. When both undergraduates and
their parents were born in the BAC, the participant was assigned an Autonomous ethnic origin. When undergraduates
and their parents were born in Spain outside of the BAC, the participant was assigned a Spanish ethnic origin. When one
parent was born in the BAC while the other was born in Spain outside of the BAC, the participant was assigned a mixed
ethnic origin. Second, participants were asked to report on a single item the extent to which they were competent in the
Basque language (Euskara). Likewise, they evaluated the frequency with which they spoke Euskara. Third, the Individual
network of ethnic contact (INEC; Landry & Bourhis, 1997) scale was used to assess the frequency and quality of contacts
with immediate family members and friends of various backgrounds. This four items rating scale combined to form an
index of frequency of contacts with individuals of Basque origin that speak Euskara (c. alpha =.85), Spanish origin that speak
Spanish (c. alpha =.83), Spanish origin that speak Euskara (c. alpha =.83), and Moroccan immigrants (c. alpha =.70). Finally, a
thermometer measure ranging from0
(very unfavorable) to 100
(very favorable) was usedto monitor intergroup attitudes

(Esses, Haddock, & Zanna, 1993). Respondents indicated their overall intergroup attitude towards specic groups including
people of Basque origin that speak Euskara, people of Spanish origin that speak Spanish, people of Spanish origin that speak
Euskara, and Moroccan immigrants.
2.2. Host community acculturation scale
The Host Community Acculturation scale was used to measure the endorsement of individualism, integrationism, asimi-
lationism, segregationism, and exclusionisminthree meaningful domains of life that vary along our proposed privatepublic
continuum(Bourhis & Bougie, 1998). We used the private domain of marriage, the intermediate privatepublic domain of
culture, and the public domain of work. In addition, the HCAS was presented for two different target groups present in
the BAC: Spanish co-nationals and Moroccan immigrants. Here are sample items for segregationism towards Spaniards in
the three domains: marriage (I would prefer to marry a Basque person than a Spanish person because it is better not to mix
cultures); culture (Spanish people can preserve their culture of origin, as long as it does not inuence Basque culture); work (Some
employment sector should be strictly reserved for Basque candidates and the remaining for Spanish people).
2.3. Hypothesis testing
To test whether Strong Dual identity undergraduates endorsed more welcoming acculturation towards minority groups
than Strong Basque identiers (Hypothesis 1), we conducted a mixed design 252 MANOVA. The between-subject factor
corresponds to the two groups of respondents as per their prototypic identities: Strong Basque identiers and Strong Dual
identiers. The rst within-subject factor corresponds to the ve acculturation orientations collapsing across the three
life domains. The other within-subject factor corresponds to the two target groups: Spanish co-nationals and Moroccan
immigrants. This latter factor was used to test whether acculturation orientations were more welcoming towards Spanish-
co-nationals than towards foreign born Moroccan immigrants (Hypothesis 2). To test if Basque undergraduates endorsed
more welcoming acculturation orientations in public than in private life domains (Hypothesis 3), we conducted a 3 (life
Table 1
2
and F tests for individual variables dening prototypic Strong Basque identiers and Strong Dual identiers.
% and M(sd)
2
and F tests
Strong Basque identiers N=308 Strong Dual identiers N=219
Basque ethnic origin 79.5%
a
34.7%
b
Spanish ethnic origin 4.2%
b
30.6%
a

2
(2) =119.16***
Mixed ethnic origin 16.2%
b
34.7%
a
Euskara mother tongue 55.2%
a
6.4%
b

2
(1) =145.70***
Spanish mother tongue 36.4%
b
88.1%
a
High school in Euskara 82.5%
a
19.6%
b
High school in Spanish 10.7%
b
57.1%
a

2
(2) =208.11***
Bilingual high school in Euskara and Spanish 6.5%
b
23.3%
a
Language competence Euskara 6.25 (0.93)
a
4.83 (1.48)
b
F(1,523) =258.42***
Frequence of Euskara language use 5.25 (1.92)
a
2.55 (1.77)
b
F(1,525) =270.12***
INEC with Basque origin-Euskara speakers 6.29 (0.97)
a
4.57 (1.86)
b
F(1,525) =191.45***
INEC with Spanish origin-Euskara speakers 3.71 (1.94)
b
5.83 (1.35)
a
F(1,525) =193.87***
INEC with Spanish origin-Spanish speakers 2.80 (2.00)
b
3.62 (2.21)
a
F(1,524) =19.87***
INEC with Moroccans 1.09 (1.00)
b
1.29 (1.39)
b
F(1,523) =3.93; p=0.05
Attitudes towards Basque origin-Euskara speakers 91.96 (11.80)
a
79.08 (18.46)
b
F(1,523) =94.94***
Attitudes towards Spanish origin-Spanish speakers 60.79 (26.88)
b
79.19 (21.67)
a
F(1,521) =69.74***
Attitudes towards Spanish origin-Euskara speakers 73.08 (22.61)
b
73.99 (21.75)
b
F(1,517) =0.21; p=0.65
Attitudes towards Moroccans 50.76 (20.25)
b
46.78 (25.73)
b
F(1,512) =3.84; p=0.05
Note. For
2
and F tests: *p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001. Mean scores for the following variables come from 7-point Likert scales: Language competence in
Euskara, Frequency of use of Euskara, Individual network of ethnic contact (INEC). Attitudes mean scores are measured on a 100-point-scale where a score
above 50 is a positive attitude, a score of 50 is neutral and a score below50 is negative. Mean scores on a same rowthat do not share a common alphabetical
subscript differ at p<.05 (a >b).
domains: marriage, culture, work) 2 (target groups: Spanish, Moroccans) within-subjects design MANOVA for each of the
ve acculturation orientations.
3. Results
3.1. Psychological prole of Strong Basque identiers and Strong Dual identiers
A series of one-way ANOVA and chi-square analyses showed that Strong Basque identiers differed systematically from
Strong Dual identiers on key individual variables. As seen in Table 1, 80% of Strong Basque identiers had both parents born
in the BAC and 55% of themhad Euskara as a mother tongue. As many as 83% attended high school in Euskara. They reported
a high level of competency in Euskara and a frequent use of the language. Strong Basque identiers reported more contacts
with Bascophone family members and friends of Basque origin than with Castilian speakers of Spanish background (INEC
scale). It is noteworthy that strong Basque identiers reported fewer contacts with Euskara speakers of Spanish background
than with those of Basque origin. Strong Basque identiers reported virtually no contacts with family members and friends
of Moroccan origin. Strong Basque identiers had the most positive attitudes towards people of Basque origin that spoke
Euskara, positive attitudes towards Spanish people who spoke Euskara and mildly positive attitudes towards people of
Spanish origin that spoke Castilian. In turn, their attitudes towards Moroccan immigrants were neutral.
Strong Dual identiers were as likely to be of Basque (35%), Spanish (31%) or Mixed (35%) origin, but 88% had Spanish
as a mother tongue. More than half (57%) of Strong Dual identiers attended high school in Spanish and 23% attended
a bilingual secondary school in Euskara and Castilian. As seen in Table 1, Strong Dual identiers reported many contacts
with family members and friends of Basque and Spanish background. However, they reported more contacts with people
who spoke Euskara of both Spanish and Basque origin than with Spanish origin others who spoke Castilian only. Strong
dual identiers reported no contacts with family and friends of Moroccan origin. Strong Dual identiers held similarly
positive attitudes towards bothBasque andSpanishindividuals regardless of their language skills, but their attitudes towards
Moroccan immigrants were neutral. Taken together, these results conrmthe distinctiveness of strong Basque and Strong
dual identiers in this study.
3.2. Strong Basque and Strong Dual identier acculturation orientations (Hypothesis 1)
Results of the 2 (prototypic identities) 5 (acculturation orientations) 2 (target groups) MANOVA revealed an accul-
turation main effect F(4,522) =845,83, p<.001. Post hoc analyses with a Bonferroni correction indicate that endorsement
of all acculturation orientations differed from one another. As seen in Table 2, the preferred acculturation orientations of
Basque undergraduates were individualism(M=5.43) followed by integrationism(M=4.73) and segregationism(M=3.25),
whereas assimilationism(M=2.46), and exclusionism(M=2.02) were the least endorsed.
Table 2
Mean scores of acculturation orientations (collapsing 3 domains and 2 target groups).
Acculturation Grand Mean (N=527) StrongBasqueidentity(N=308) StrongDual identity(N=219)
Orientations M (sd) M (sd) M (sd)
Individualism 5.43
a
(1.08) 5.18 (1.14) < 5.77 (0.87)
Integrationism 4.73
b
(0.98) 4.82 (0.99) > 4.61 (0.94)
Assimilationism 2.46
d
(0.84) 2.63 (0.85) > 2.22 (0.77)
Segregationism 3.25
c
1.03) 3.46 (1.10) > 2.96 (0.85)
Exclusionism 2.02
e
(0.94) 2.24 (1.01) > 1.70 (0.72)
Note. A 5 (acculturation orientations) 2 (self-identication) MANOVA was conducted. Scores range from1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree). For the
acculturation main effect (2nd column), post hoc analyses were conducted with a Bonferroni correction and means that do not share a common alphabetical
subscript differ at p<.05 (a >b>c >d>e). For the self-identication main effect (3rd and 4th columns), post hoc analyses with a Bonferroni correction are
indicated through mathematical symbols (> < =), with signicant differences between means on the same rowat p<.05.
The signicant interaction effect between acculturation orientations and prototypic self-identication (F(4,522) =17,13,
p<.001) indicates that Strong Basque identiers endorsed less welcoming acculturation orientations than did Strong Dual
identiers on four of the ve acculturation orientations, thus supporting Hypothesis 1. Table 2 shows that Strong Basque
identiers endorsed less individualism(M=5.18) than did Strong Dual identiers (M=5.77). Strong Basque identiers also
endorsed more assimilationism (M=2.63), segregationism (M=3.46), and exclusionism (M=2.24) than did Strong Dual
identiers (respectively: M=2.22; M=2.96; M=1.70). However, Strong Basque identiers endorsed marginally more inte-
grationism(M=4.82) than did Strong Dual identiers (M=4.61).
3.3. Acculturation orientations towards Spanish co-nationals and Moroccan immigrants (Hypothesis 2)
Results presented in Fig. 1 address Hypothesis 2. When breaking down the signicant higher-order interaction effect of
the 252 MANOVA (F(4,522) =61,30, p<.001), results show that the tendency for Strong Basque identiers to endorse
less welcoming acculturation orientations than Strong Dual identiers is essentially limited to the Spanish co-national
target group and does not extend to Moroccan immigrants. Looking at the results separately by acculturation orientation,
we obtained four signicant interaction effects on the 2 (identication) 2 (target groups) MANOVA (Fig. 1 and Table 3).
Post hoc analyses indicate that Strong Basque identiers and Strong dual identiers did not differ in their endorsement of
individualism(M=5.32 and M=5.31, respectively) and exclusionism(M=1.91 and M=2.06, respectively) towards Moroccan
immigrants. Though statistically different, they were also very similar in their endorsement of assimilationism(M=2.35 and
M=2.51, respectively) and segregationism(M=3.28 and M=3.49, respectively) towards Moroccan immigrants.
Fig. 1. Acculturationorientations of Basque host community members witha strong Basque identity or a Strong Dual (Basque andSpanish) identity towards
Moroccan immigrants and Spanish co-nationals residing in the Basque Autonomous Community (BAC).
Table 3
MANOVA 2 (self-identication) 2 (target groups) for each acculturation orientation (collapsing across 3 domains): Main effects, interaction effects and
post hoc analyses.
F(1,525) p
p
2
M M
Individualism
Self-identication (ID) 41.71 *** 7% Strong Dual 5.77 > Strong Basque 5.18
Target group (TG) 33.84 *** 6% Spanish 5.64 > Moroccans 5.31
ID TG interaction 116.08 *** 18%
TG =Spanish 124.18 *** 19% Strong Dual 6.24 > Strong Basque 5.04
TG =Moroccans .01 .92 0% Strong Dual 5.31 = Strong Basque 5.32
Integrationism
Self-identication (ID) 6.34 .01 1% Strong Dual 4.61 < Strong Basque 4.82
Target group (TG) 24.74 *** 5% Spanish 4.84 > Moroccans 4.59
ID TG interaction .15 .70 0%
TG =Spanish 3.74 .05 1% Strong Dual 4.74 = Strong Basque 4.94
TG =Moroccans 5.81 .02 1% Strong Dual 4.47 < Strong Basque 4.71
Assimilationism
Self-identication (ID) 32.53 *** 6% Strong Dual 2.22 < Strong Basque 2.63
Target group (TG) .00 .98 0% Spanish 2.43 = Moroccans 2.43
TG =Spanish 104.36 *** 17% Strong Dual 1.93 < Strong Basque 2.92
TG =Moroccans 4.61 .03 1% Strong Dual 2.51 > Strong Basque 2.35
Segregationism
Target group (TG) 52.31 *** 9% Spanish 3.03 < Moroccans 3.38
TG =Spanish 136.07 *** 21% Strong Dual 2.44 < Strong Basque 3.63
TG =Moroccans 4.71 .03 1% Strong Dual 3.49 > Strong Basque 3.28
Exclusionism
Target group (TG) .29 .59 0% Spanish 1.96 = Moroccans 1.98
TG =Spanish 168.80 *** 24% Strong Dual 1.34 > Strong Basque 2.57
TG =Moroccans 2.85 .09 1% Strong Dual 2.06 = Strong Basque 1.91
Note. Scores range from1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree). Main effects and interaction effects are signicant at *p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001. Post hoc
analyses with a Bonferroni correction are indicated through mathematical symbols (> < =), with signicant differences between means on the same rowat
p <.05.
However, as seen in Fig. 1, Strong Basque identiers held less welcoming acculturation orientations towards Spanish
co-nationals than did Strong dual identiers. That is, Strong Basque identiers endorsed less individualism(M=5.04) than
did Strong Dual identiers (M=6.24) towards Spanish co-nationals. Further, Strong Basque identiers endorsed more assim-
ilationism(M=2.92), segregationism(M=3.63), and exclusionism(M=2.57) towards Spanish co-nationals than did Strong
Dual identiers (M=1.93, M=2.44 and M=1.34, respectively). Results regarding integrationism depart from this pattern,
with signicant main effects for self-identication and target groups, but a non-signicant interaction effect. As seen in
Table 3, Strong Basque identiers (M=4.82) were somewhat more integrationists than Strong Dual identiers (M=4.61).
Further, the overall endorsement of integrationismwas higher for Spanish co-nationals (M=4.84) than for Moroccan immi-
grants (M=4.59). However, as illustrated in Fig. 1, post hoc analyses suggest that Strong Basque identiers were more
integrationists towards Moroccan immigrants (M=4.71) than were Strong Dual identiers (M=4.47), but the two groups
were equally integrationist towards Spanish co-nationals (M=4.94 and M=4.74, respectively).
3.4. Acculturation orientations in public and private life domains (Hypothesis 3)
Inlinewithhypothesis 3, didBasqueundergraduates endorsemorewelcomingacculturationorientations inpublic (work)
thaninprivate (marriage) life domains?The 3(life domains: marriage, culture, work) 2(target groups: Spanish, Moroccans)
within-subjects design MANOVA analysis was conducted for each of the ve acculturation orientations separately. For each
acculturation orientation, the hypotheses were tested twice, once with Strong Basque identiers (Table 4) and once with
Strong Dual identiers (Table 5), for a total of ten analyses. As seen in Tables 4 and 5, domain main effects, target group main
effects, andinteractioneffects are signicant for all tenMANOVAconducted, attestingtothe fact that individuals differentiate
between target groups and life domains when it comes to endorsement of host community acculturation orientations.
As seen in Table 4, post hoc analyses with a Bonferronni correction show that only once out of 15 possibilities did
Strong Basque identiers endorse more welcoming acculturation orientations towards Spanish co-nationals than towards
Moroccans foreigners. This was the case for integrationism in the marriage domain. Five times out of 15, they did not
differentiate between Spanish and Moroccans: they endorsed individualismin the marriage domain, integrationismin the
culture and work domains, assimilationism in the work domain and segregationism in the culture domain to the same
Table 4
Mean scores of acculturation orientations for Strong Basque identiers.
Acculturation Domains Grand Mean Target groups 32 MANOVA
Orientations M(se) Spanish M(sd) Moroccans M(sd)
Individualism Marriage 5.21
b
5.24 (1.78) = 5.17 (1.87) Domain F(2,301) =60.65***
Culture 4.64
c
4.38 (2.04) < 4.89 (1.84) Target gr F(2,302) =17.35***
Work 5.72
a
5.48 (1.62) < 5.95 (1.30) Interaction F(2,301) =11.11***
Integrationism Marriage 4.28
c
4.68 (1.86) > 3.88 (1.88) Domain F(2,305) =73.05***
Culture 4.53
b
4.54 (1.93) = 4.52 (1.77) Target gr F(2,306) =12.25**
Work 5.65
a
5.59 (1.68) = 5.71 (1.43) Interaction F(2,305) =22.17***
Assimilationism Marriage 2.07
b
2.51 (1.63) > 1.63 (0.93) Domain F(2,300) =187.41***
Culture 1.95
b
2.37 (1.66) > 1.54 (1.00) Target gr F(2,301) =82.52***
Work 3.91
a
3.9 (1.85) = 3.91 (1.55) Interaction F(2,300) =30.80***
Segregationism Marriage 2.91
b
3.32 (2.11) > 2.50 (1.64) Domain F(2,304) =436.00***
Culture 5.18
a
5.13 (1.68) = 5.22 (1.60) Target gr F(2,305) =34.52***
Work 2.28
c
2.42 (1.83) > 2.13 (1.39) Interaction F(2,304) =25.45***
Exclusionism Marriage 2.14
b
2.41 (1.76) > 1.87 (1.40) Domain F(2,304) =127.63***
Culture 2.95
a
3.50 (1.98) > 2.41 (1.49) Target gr F(2,305) =104.21***
Work 1.63
c
1.81 (1.28) > 1.46 (0.89) Interaction F(2,304) =25.52***
Note. A 3 (domains) 2 (target groups) MANOVA was conducted for each acculturation orientation. Scores range from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally
agree). Main effects and interaction effects (last column) are signicant at *p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001. For the domain main effects (3
rd
column), post
hoc analyses were conducted with a Bonferroni correction and means that do not share a common alphabetical subscript differ at p<.05 (a >b>c). For the
target groups main effects (4th and 5th columns), post hoc analyses with a Bonferroni correction are indicated through mathematical symbols (> < =), with
signicant differences between means on the same rowat p<.05.
extent no matter the target group. Finally, in the remaining nine of 15 possibilities, Strong Basque identiers endorsed more
favorable acculturation orientations towards Moroccan immigrants than towards Spanish co-nationals.
As seen in Table 4, post hoc analyses of the domains main effects indicate that Strong Basque identiers endorsed
integrationismthe most in the work domain (M=5.65), followed by culture (M=4.53), and then marriage (M=4.28). Strong
Basque identiers were more individualists in the work domain (M=5.72), followed by marriage (M=5.21), and then culture
(M=4.64). They were the most segregationists in the culture domain (M=5.18), and the least in marriage (M=2.91) followed
by work (M=2.28). They were the most exclusionists in the culture domain (M=2.95), followed by marriage (M=2.14),
and they were the least segregationists in the work domain (M=1.63). Strong Basque identiers more strongly endorsed
assimilationismin the work domain (M=3.91), while they did not differentiate between the marriage (M=2.07) and cultural
(M=1.95) domains.
As seen in Table 5, post hoc analyses with a Bonferronni correction showthat Strong Dual identiers endorsed more indi-
vidualismand integrationismand less assimilationism, segregationism, and exclusionismtowards the Spanish co-national
group than towards the Moroccan foreign outgroup in each of the three life domains. There is only one exception to this
Table 5
Mean scores of acculturation orientations for Strong Dual identiers.
Acculturation Domains Grand Mean Target groups 32 MANOVA
Orientations M(se) Spanish M(sd) Moroccans M(sd)
Individualism Marriage 5.71
b
6.50 (1.02) > 4.93 (1.91) Domain F(2,213) =31.45***
Culture 5.41
c
5.75 (1.60) > 5.07 (1.78) Target gr F(2,214) =119.86***
Work 6.19
a
6.46 (1.05) > 5.92 (1.34) Interaction F(2,213) =60.65***
Integrationism Marriage 3.74
b
3.94 (2.08) > 3.55 (1.81) Domain F(2,209) =204.89***
Culture 3.97
b
3.67 (1.88) < 4.27 (1.76) Target gr F(2,210) =11.87**
Work 6.10
a
6.61 (0.94) > 5.58 (1.55) Interaction F(2,209) =33.47***
Assimilationism Marriage 1.69
b
1.58 (1.17) < 1.80 (1.09) Domain F(2,211) =207.89***
Culture 1.51
c
1.39 (0.95) < 1.62 (1.09) Target gr F(2,212) =77.82***
Work 3.47
a
2.82 (1.83) < 4.13 (1.65) Interaction F(2,211) =26.31***
Segregationism Marriage 2.14
b
1.50 (0.99) < 2.77 (1.74) Domain F(2,211) =296.17***
Culture 4.75
a
4.29 (1.91) < 5.22 (1.49) Target gr F(2,212) =171.14***
Work 2.05
b
1.59 (1.14) < 2.51 (1.60) Interaction F(2,211) =4.02*
Exclusionism Marriage 1.52
b
1.21 (0.66) < 1.82 (1.36) Domain F(2,215) =69.50***
Culture 2.14
a
1.59 (1.01) < 2.69 (1.55) Target gr F(2,216) =94.17***
Work 1.45
b
1.24 (0.78) < 1.66 (1.13) Interaction F(2,215) =21.19***
Note. A 3 (domains) 2 (target groups) MANOVA was conducted for each acculturation orientation. Scores range from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally
agree). Main effects and interaction effects (last column) are signicant at *p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001. For the domain main effects (3rd column), post
hoc analyses with a Bonferroni correction and means that do not share a common alphabetical subscript differ at p<.05 (a >b>c). For the target groups
main effects (4th and 5th columns), post hoc analyses with a Bonferroni correction are indicated through mathematical symbols (> < =), with signicant
differences between means on the same rowat p<.05.
overall result: Strong Dual identiers endorsed more integrationism towards Moroccans (M=4.27) than towards Spanish
(M=3.67) in the cultural domain.
Post hoc analyses of the domains main effects show that Strong Dual identiers are more integrationists in the work
domain (M=6.10) than in the cultural (M=3.97) and marriage (M=3.74) domains. They endorse individualismand assimila-
tionismthe most in the work domain (M=6.19 and M=3.47, respectively), followed by marriage (M=5.71 and M=1.69), and
then culture (M=5.41 and M=1.51). Strong Dual identiers are more segregationists (M=4.75) and exclusionists (M=2.14)
in the culture domain than in the work (M=2.05 and M=1.45, respectively) and marriage domains (M=2.14 and M=1.52,
respectively).
4. Discussion
In line with previous research using the IAM, Basque host community members endorsed more individualismand inte-
grationism than assimilationism, segregationism, and exclusionism towards outgroups (Bourhis, Montreuil et al., 2009).
Undergraduates in the BAC share with undergraduates sampled in other acculturation studies a meritocratic organizational
culture which values individual achievement regardless of ethnocultural or linguistic background. Thus, Basque undergrad-
uate endorsement of individualismand integrationismis more concordant with the proximal organizational culture of the
University setting than with the distal assimilationist policies of the Spanish State. Though not representative of the gen-
eral population, undergraduates remain an interesting sample of the population as many of these respondents will become
decision makers in different spheres of Basque society.
In their study conducted in southern Spain with a more representative sample of the Spanish host population, Navas
et al. (2007) did nd an overall preference for the assimilationist acculturation orientation, a result more congruent with the
assimilationist policy adopted by the Spanish State. Thus, host community acculturation orientations may reect not only
the integration policies adopted at the national and regional level of the state but also those found at the more proximal
level of educational, health and business institutions where host community members actually work and study on a daily
basis.
The proposed distinction between Strong Basque identiers and Strong Dual identiers was conrmed as the back-
ground of these host community members differed systematically as regards ethnolinguistic origin, competence and use
of the Basque language, individual network of ethnic contact and intergroup attitudes. Previous studies of prototypic self-
identication in the Bilingual Autonomous communities of Spain found that Strong Dual identiers had more favorable
and harmonious relations with outgroup members than did undergraduates who strongly endorsed a single ethnic identity,
Autonomous or Spanish(Ros et al., 1999). However these previous studies didnot include acculturationorientations towards
Spanish co-national outgroups and foreign immigrants such as Moroccans.
In line with hypothesis 1, we found that Strong Dual identiers did endorse more individualismand less assimilationism,
segregationism, andexclusionismacculturationorientations thandidStrong Basque identiers. These results are inline with
other studies showing that identication with a single non-permeable ingroup is related to endorsement of less welcoming
acculturation orientations towards outgroups (Bourhis & Dayan, 2004; Bourhis et al., 2008; Montreuil et al., 2004). Our
results are also coherent with studies showing that compared with single ingroup identication, bicultural identication is
related to heightened cognitive complexity and open mindedness resulting in more welcoming acculturation orientations
towards outgroups (Tadmor & Tetlock, 2006; Tadmor et al., 2009).
Strong Dual identiers have both Basque and Spanish ancestry and as such share a category membership with their
Spanish co-nationals in the BAC. Supporting hypothesis 2, Strong dual identiers more strongly endorsed the individualism
and integrationism orientation towards the Spanish co-national target group than towards the Moroccan immigrant out-
group. Strong dual identiers were also less likely to endorse exclusionism, assimilationism and segregationism towards
Spanish co-nationals than towards Moroccan immigrants. The more welcoming acculturation orientations towards Spanish
co-nationals than towards outgroup Moroccans also constitute the classic ingroup favoritism effect, reecting that Strong
Dual identiers do indeed include Spanish co-nationals as members of their owngroup (Tajfel & Turner, 1986).
As seen in Fig. 1, Strong Basque identiers endorsed less welcoming acculturation orientations towards Spanish co-
nationals than did Strong Dual identiers, thus supporting one of the competing options presented in hypothesis 2. Strong
Basque identiers endorsed more assimilationist, segregationist and exclusionist orientations towards Spanish co-nationals
than towards foreign born Moroccan immigrants. Strong Basque identiers were also less individualists towards Spanish
co-nationals than towards Moroccan immigrants. These less welcoming acculturation orientations were corroborated when
analyzed separately in each domain of marriage, work and culture. These results were obtained despite the fact that Strong
Basque identiers not only had less favorable attitudes towards Moroccans than towards Spanish co-nationals, but also had
much more contacts with Spanish co-national than with Moroccan outgroups.
WhydoStrongBasqueidentiers endorseless welcomingacculturationorientations towards Spanishco-nationals settled
in the BAC? These patterns may reect the legacy of the harsh repression levied against the Basque culture and language
during decades of Spanish dictatorship under the Franco regime. This collective memory of Spanish oppression is more
likely to be vivid for Strong Basque identiers who can relate directly to grandparents who suffered political repres-
sion for using or promoting the Basque language and culture. Strong Basque identiers may consider todays Spanish
co-nationals as partly guilty for the wrong-doings of their predecessors as historical rival outgroups. Furthermore, the
BAC is still aficted by the sporadic violence of the urban guerilla ETA which receives little support among Basque inhab-
itants but whose actions are repressed through severe military and political measures applied by the Spanish State in the
BAC.
Taken together, our results showthat political and ethnolinguistic tensions are reected in the acculturation orientations
endorsed by host community members. In the BAC, endorsement of acculturation orientations towards Spanish co-nationals
reected the legacy of conicts between the Spanish and the Basque and was more salient for host community members
with a Strong Basque identication than for those with Spanish-Basque dual identication. Froma public policy perspective
one could propose a truth and reconciliation commission between Basque and Spanish co-nationals as a way to heal the
wounds of the Franco regime and the subsequent four decades of civil strife in the BAC. Our results suggest that Strong Dual
identiers may be those more likely to be the community brokers needed to launch such a reconciliation process.
Our results suggest that the distinction between the private domain of marriage and the public domain of work is
relevant for host community acculturation orientations. In line with hypothesis 3, Basque undergraduates endorsed more
individualism and integrationism in the work than in the marriage domain. Also, Basque undergraduates endorsed less
segregationismand exclusionismin the public domain of work than in the private domain of marriage. However, contrary
to hypothesis 3, endorsement of assimilationismby Basque undergraduates was weaker for the marriage domainthanfor the
work domain. The organizational culture of work settings may impose strong assimilation pressure on both host community
and immigrant employees, often to ensure the economic survival of business rms.
The moderatelystrongendorsement of integrationisminthe culture domain, suggests that Basque undergraduates valued
the distinctiveness of both the Spanish and Moroccan cultures. However, regardless of their identication prole, Basque
undergraduates endorsed more segregationism and exclusionism in the culture domain than in the work and marriage
domains. Endorsement of segregationismand exclusionismimplies rejection of the outgroup culture and may reect Basque
fear that their culture be transformed or diluted by contact with the Moroccan or the co-national Spanish cultures. This
suggests that in addition to the private-public continuum, other dimensions may contribute to the distinct endorsement of
host communityacculturationorientations indifferent domains: namelythesymbolic dimensionrelatedtoculture, language
and values.
Arends-Tth and van de Vijver (2003) suggested that immigrants do differentiate between private and public domains in
their endorsement of acculturation orientations while host community members have a tendency to endorse acculturation
orientations towards immigrants regardless of private or public domains. Host community members may be prone to the
outgroup homogeneity effect when considering their acculturation orientations towards immigrants. By considering most
members of the outgroup as being alike, host community members may endorse similar acculturation orientations towards
immigrants and national minorities regardless of the private or public domain being considered. In contrast, immigrants
endorse more nely tuned acculturation orientations concerning their own integration strategies, which may differ depend-
ing on each private or public domain of acculturation being considered. However, the present study showed that Basque host
community members did endorse differentiated acculturation orientations towards Moroccan immigrants and the Spanish
co-national minority depending on private and public domains of acculturation. As in the case of Navas et al. (2007), our
continuumof private to public domain was not fully supported, suggesting that culture as a symbolic acculturation dimen-
sion may be necessary to better account for the complexity of host community acculturation orientations. Still, as seen in
our previous research on host community acculturation orientations (Bourhis, Montreuil et al., 2009), it remains heuris-
tic to combine life domains to provide overall pictures of host community acculturation orientations towards immigrant
communities.
Finally, this study is the rst to document how patterns of strong single vs strong dual identications are related to the
endorsement of host community acculturation orientations towards co-national and immigrant minorities. This study also
shows the usefulness of the IAMmodel for understanding host community relations with immigrant and national minorities
in divided receiving societies.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported in part by the University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU; Spain), the Government of the
Basque Country (Spain), the Fonds Qubcois de Recherche sur la Socit et la Culture (FQRSC; Canada), and the Centre
dtudes Ethniques des Universits Montralaises (CEETUM; Canada).
References
Alba, R. (2003). Remaking the American mainstream: Assimilation and contemporary immigration. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Arends-Tth, J., & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2003). Multiculturalismand acculturation: Views of Dutch and Turkish-Dutch. European Journal of Social Psychology,
33, 249266.
Arends-Tth, J., & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2004). Domains and dimensions in acculturation: Implicit theories of Turkish-Dutch. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 28, 1935.
Arends-Tth, J., & van de Vijver, J. R. (2007). Acculturation attitudes: A comparison of measurement methods. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37,
14621488.
Azurmendi, M.-J., Bachoc, E., & Zabaleta, F. (2001). Reversing language shift: The case of Basque. In J. A. Fishman (Ed.), Can threatened languages be saved?
(pp. 234259). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Barrette, G., Bourhis, R. Y., Personnaz, M., & Personnaz, B. (2004). Acculturation orientations of French and North American undergraduates in Paris.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 28, 415438.
Berry, J. W. (1990). Psychology of acculturation. In J. Berman (Ed.), Cross-cultural perspectives: Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 457488). Lincoln:
University of Nebraska Press.
Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation and adaptation. Applied Psychology, 46, 534.
Berry, J. W. (2006). Contexts of acculturation. In D. L. Sam, & J. W. Berry (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of acculturation psychology (pp. 2742). Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press.
Berry, J. W., & Sam, D. (1997). Acculturation and adaptation. In J. W. Berry, M. Segall, & C. Kagitcibashi (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (pp.
291326). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Bourhis, R. Y., Barrette, G., El-Geledi, S., & Schmidt, R. (2009). Acculturation orientations and social relations between immigrant and host community
members in California. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40, 443467.
Bourhis, R. Y., Barrette, G., &Moriconi, P. A. (2008). Appartenances nationales et orientations dacculturationauQubec [National belongingandacculturation
orientations in Quebec]. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 40, 90103.
Bourhis, R. Y., &Bougie, E. (1998). Le modle dacculturation interactif: Une tude exploratoire. [The interactive acculturation model: An exploratory study].
Revue Qubcoise de Psychologie, 19, 75114.
Bourhis, R. Y., & Dayan, J. (2004). Acculturation orientations towards Israeli Arabs and Jewish immigrants in Isral. International Journal of Psychology, 39,
118131.
Bourhis, R. Y., El-Geledi, S., & Sachdev, I. (2007). Language, ethnicity and intergroup relations. In A. Weatherall, B. Watson, & C. Gallois (Eds.), Language,
discourse and social psychology (pp. 1550). NewYork: Palgrave/Macmillan.
Bourhis, R. Y., Mose, L. C., Perreault, S., & Sencal, S. (1997). Towards an interactive acculturation model: A social psychological approach. International
Journal of Psychology, 32, 369386.
Bourhis, R. Y., Montreuil, A., Barrette, G., & Montaruli, E. (2009). Acculturation and immigrant/host majority group relations in multicultural settings. In S.
Demoulin, J. P. Leyens, & J. Dovidio (Eds.), Intergroup misunderstanding: Impact of divergent social realities (pp. 3961). NewYork: Psychology Press.
Comunidad Autnoma del Pas Vasco. (2008). IV Encuesta Sociolingstica 2006 (231 pp). Servicio Central de Publicaciones del Gobierno Vasco: Vitoria-
Gasteiz.
Conversi, D. (1997). The Basques, the Catalans and Spain: Alternative routes to nationalist mobilisation. Las Vegas: University of Nevada Press.
Esses, V. M., Haddock, G., &Zanna, M. P. (1993). Values, stereotypes, and emotions as determinants of intergroup attitudes. In D. M. Mackie, &D. L. Hamilton
(Eds.), Affect, cognition, and stereotyping: Interactive processes in group perception (pp. 137166). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Hoffmann, C. (1995). Monolingualism, bilingualism, cultural pluralism and national identity: Twenty years of language planning in contemporary Spain.
Current Issues in Language & Society, 2, 5990.
Horenczyk, G. (1997). Immigrants perception of host attitudes and their reconstruction of cultural groups. Applied Psychology: An International Review,
46(1), 3438.
INE: Instituto Nacional de Estadstica de Espa na [Spain National Statistics Institute]. (2008). Population Now-Cast, July 1
st
2008 [Data File]. Available from
the Instituto Nacional de Estadstica de Espa na Web site, http://www.ine.es.
Jasinskaja-Lahti, I., Liebkind, K., Horenczyk, G., &Schmitz, P. (2003). The interactive nature of acculturation: Perceiveddiscrimination, acculturationattitudes
and stress among ethnic repatriates in Finland, Israel and Germany. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27, 7997.
Kosic, A., Mannetti, L., & Sam, D. L. (2005). The role of majority attitudes towards out-group in the perception of the acculturation strategies of immigrants.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29, 273288.
Lahav, G. (2004). Immigration and politics in the new Europe: Reinventing borders. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Landry, R., & Bourhis, R. Y. (1997). Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality: An empirical study. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 16, 2349.
Lasagabaster, D. (2001). Bilingualism, immersion programs and language learning in the Basque Country. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Develop-
ment, 22, 401425.
Lecours, A. (2001). Regionalism, cultural diversity and the state of Spain. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 22, 210226.
Liebkind, K. (2006). Ethnic identity and acculturation. In D. L. Sam, & J. W. Berry (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of acculturation psychology (pp. 7896).
Cambride, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Montreuil, A., & Bourhis, R. Y. (2001). Host majority acculturation orientations towards valued and devalued immigrants. Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, 32(6), 718739.
Montreuil, A., & Bourhis, R. Y. (2004). Acculturation orientations of competing host communities towards valued and devalued immigrants. International
Journal of Intercultural Relations, 28, 507532.
Montreuil, A., Bourhis, R. Y., & Vanbeselaere, N. (2004). Perceived threat and host community acculturation orientations towards immigrants: Comparing
Flemings in Belgiumand Francophones in Quebec. Canadian Ethnic Studies, 26, 113135.
Moreno-Fernndez, F. (2007). Social remarks on the history of Spain. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 184, 720.
Navas, M. S., Fernndez, P., Rojas, A. J., & Garca, M. C. (2007). Acculturation strategies and attitudes according to the Relative Acculturation Extended Model
(RAEM): The perspectives of natives versus immigrants. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31(1), 6786.
Navas, M., Garcia, M., Sanchez, J., Rojas, A., Pumares, P., & Fernandez, J. (2005). Relative acculturation extended model. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations, 29, 2137.
Redeld, R., Linton, R., & Herskovits, M. T. (1936). Memorandumfor the study of acculturation. American Anthropologist, 38, 149152.
Rohmann, A., Florack, A., & Piontkowski, U. (2006). The role of discordant acculturation attitudes in perceived threat: An analysis of host and immigrant
attitudes in Germany. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30, 683702.
Ros, M., Azurmendi, M.-J., Bourhis, R. Y., & Garca, I. (1999). Identidades culturales y lingsticas en las Communidades Autnomas Bilinges (CAB) de
Espa na: antecedents y consecuencias [Cultural and linguistic identities in the Bilingual Autonomous Communities (BAC) of Spain: Antecedents and
consequences]. Revista de Psicologa Social, 14, 6986.
Safdar, S., Dupuis, D. R., Lewis, R. J., El-Geledi, S., & Bourhis, R. Y. (2008). Social axioms and acculturation orientations of English Canadians toward British
and Arab Muslimimmigrants. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32, 415426.
Sam, D. L. (2006). Acculturation: Conceptual background and core components. In D. L. Sam, & J. W. Berry (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of acculturation
psychology (pp. 1126). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Sayegh, L., & Lasry, J.-C. (1993). Immigrants adaptation in Canada: Assimilation, acculturation, and orthogonal cultural identication. Canadian Psychology,
34, 98109.
Shar, G. (1995). Ethnic conict and accommodation in Catalonia, the Basque Country, Latvia, and Estonia. Albany: State University of NewYork Press.
Snauwaert, B., Soenens, B., Vanbeselaere, N., & Boen, F. (2003). When integration does not necessarely imply integration. Different conceptualizations of
acculturation orientations lead to different classications. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34, 231239.
Tadmor, C. T., & Tetlock, P. E. (2006). Biculturalism: A model of the effects of second-culture exposure on acculturation and integrative complexity. Journal
of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37, 173190.
Tadmor, C. T., Tetlock, P. E., & Peng, K. (2009). Acculturation strategies and integrative complexity: The cognitive implications of biculturalism. Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40, 105139.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The Social Identity Theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel, & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp.
724). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, J. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Basil
Blackwell.
van Oudenhoven, J. P., Prins, K. S., & Buunk, B. P. (1998). Attitudes of minority and majority members toward adaptation of immigrants. European Journal
of Social Psychology, 28, 9951013.
Zabilde, M., Nicholas, G., Erize, X., & Azurmendi, M.-J. (2006). In M.-J. Azurmendi, & I. Martinez de Luna (Eds.), The case of Basque: Past, present and future
(pp. 117139). Andoain: Soziolinguistika Klusterra.
Zagefka, H., & Brown, R. (2002). The relationship between acculturation strategies and relative t and intergroup relations: Immigrant-majority relations
in Germany. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 171188.

Aculturacion País Vasco

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Aculturacion País Vasco

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Aculturacion País Vasco

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (2011) 425439

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

(very unfavorable) to 100

(very favorable) was usedto monitor intergroup attitudes

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.