比利时多数人对移民文化适应的期望:以人为本、针对具体领域的方法

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL International Journal of Intercultural Relations Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2024.102038
Katrín Árnadóttir, Cecil Meeusen
{"title":"比利时多数人对移民文化适应的期望:以人为本、针对具体领域的方法","authors":"Katrín Árnadóttir,&nbsp;Cecil Meeusen","doi":"10.1016/j.ijintrel.2024.102038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The current research employed a person-centered and domain-specific approach to examine Belgian majority group members’ expectations regarding immigrant acculturation in private and public domains, utilizing a large-scale national probability sample. Applying latent profile analysis, we identified three expectation profiles: The largest profile consisted of people who made a clear distinction between the public and private domain, expecting assimilation to Belgian culture in public but favoring immigrants maintaining their heritage culture in private (public-private division profile, 58.7%). People in the remaining two profiles held similar expectations across domains, either expecting assimilation (‘assimilation’ profile, 13.2%) or favoring integration of Belgian culture and immigrant’s heritage culture (‘integration’ profile, 28.1%). Subsequent multinomial logistic regression revealed that the profiles differed in perceived symbolic threat, with those in the integration profile feeling the least, and those in the assimilation profile most threatened. Moreover, those in the integration profile were more likely to have intergroup friends than those in the assimilation profile, and they supported religious expression in public more. Our findings illustrate the value of employing a simultaneous person-centered and domain-specific approach. In the absence of our person-centered approach, we might have captured only an overall preference for adoption in public and maintenance in private, which proves to not hold true for all participants. Conversely, had we only examined the public domain, we might have concluded that over 70% strongly expect assimilation. Taken together, we thus encourage researchers to adopt both a person-centered and domain-specific approach when examining acculturation attitudes and expectations.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48216,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Intercultural Relations","volume":"102 ","pages":"Article 102038"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Majority expectations regarding immigrant acculturation in Belgium: A person-centered, domain-specific approach\",\"authors\":\"Katrín Árnadóttir,&nbsp;Cecil Meeusen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijintrel.2024.102038\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The current research employed a person-centered and domain-specific approach to examine Belgian majority group members’ expectations regarding immigrant acculturation in private and public domains, utilizing a large-scale national probability sample. Applying latent profile analysis, we identified three expectation profiles: The largest profile consisted of people who made a clear distinction between the public and private domain, expecting assimilation to Belgian culture in public but favoring immigrants maintaining their heritage culture in private (public-private division profile, 58.7%). People in the remaining two profiles held similar expectations across domains, either expecting assimilation (‘assimilation’ profile, 13.2%) or favoring integration of Belgian culture and immigrant’s heritage culture (‘integration’ profile, 28.1%). Subsequent multinomial logistic regression revealed that the profiles differed in perceived symbolic threat, with those in the integration profile feeling the least, and those in the assimilation profile most threatened. Moreover, those in the integration profile were more likely to have intergroup friends than those in the assimilation profile, and they supported religious expression in public more. Our findings illustrate the value of employing a simultaneous person-centered and domain-specific approach. In the absence of our person-centered approach, we might have captured only an overall preference for adoption in public and maintenance in private, which proves to not hold true for all participants. Conversely, had we only examined the public domain, we might have concluded that over 70% strongly expect assimilation. Taken together, we thus encourage researchers to adopt both a person-centered and domain-specific approach when examining acculturation attitudes and expectations.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48216,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Intercultural Relations\",\"volume\":\"102 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102038\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Intercultural Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014717672400107X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Intercultural Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014717672400107X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目前的研究采用了以人为本和特定领域的方法,利用大规模的全国概率样本,考察了比利时多数群体成员在私人和公共领域对移民文化适应的期望。通过潜在特征分析,我们确定了三种期望特征:其中最大的一种是对公共领域和私人领域有明确区分的人,他们在公共领域期望与比利时文化同化,但在私人领域则倾向于移民保持其传统文化(公共-私人划分特征,58.7%)。其余两种情况的人对不同领域的期望相似,要么期望同化("同化 "情况,13.2%),要么赞成比利时文化与移民传统文化的融合("融合 "情况,28.1%)。随后进行的多项式逻辑回归显示,这两种特征在感受到的象征性威胁方面存在差异,融入特征的受访者感受到的威胁最小,而同化特征的受访者感受到的威胁最大。此外,与同化倾向的人相比,融合倾向的人更有可能拥有跨群体的朋友,而且他们更支持在公共场合表达宗教信仰。我们的研究结果说明了同时采用以人为本和特定领域方法的价值。如果不采用以人为本的方法,我们可能只能捕捉到在公开场合采用宗教信仰和在私下保持宗教信仰的总体偏好,但事实证明这并不适用于所有参与者。相反,如果我们只研究公共领域,我们可能会得出超过 70% 的人强烈希望被同化的结论。综上所述,我们鼓励研究人员在研究文化适应态度和期望时,同时采用以人为本和针对具体领域的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Majority expectations regarding immigrant acculturation in Belgium: A person-centered, domain-specific approach

The current research employed a person-centered and domain-specific approach to examine Belgian majority group members’ expectations regarding immigrant acculturation in private and public domains, utilizing a large-scale national probability sample. Applying latent profile analysis, we identified three expectation profiles: The largest profile consisted of people who made a clear distinction between the public and private domain, expecting assimilation to Belgian culture in public but favoring immigrants maintaining their heritage culture in private (public-private division profile, 58.7%). People in the remaining two profiles held similar expectations across domains, either expecting assimilation (‘assimilation’ profile, 13.2%) or favoring integration of Belgian culture and immigrant’s heritage culture (‘integration’ profile, 28.1%). Subsequent multinomial logistic regression revealed that the profiles differed in perceived symbolic threat, with those in the integration profile feeling the least, and those in the assimilation profile most threatened. Moreover, those in the integration profile were more likely to have intergroup friends than those in the assimilation profile, and they supported religious expression in public more. Our findings illustrate the value of employing a simultaneous person-centered and domain-specific approach. In the absence of our person-centered approach, we might have captured only an overall preference for adoption in public and maintenance in private, which proves to not hold true for all participants. Conversely, had we only examined the public domain, we might have concluded that over 70% strongly expect assimilation. Taken together, we thus encourage researchers to adopt both a person-centered and domain-specific approach when examining acculturation attitudes and expectations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
122
期刊介绍: IJIR is dedicated to advancing knowledge and understanding of theory, practice, and research in intergroup relations. The contents encompass theoretical developments, field-based evaluations of training techniques, empirical discussions of cultural similarities and differences, and critical descriptions of new training approaches. Papers selected for publication in IJIR are judged to increase our understanding of intergroup tensions and harmony. Issue-oriented and cross-discipline discussion is encouraged. The highest priority is given to manuscripts that join theory, practice, and field research design. By theory, we mean conceptual schemes focused on the nature of cultural differences and similarities.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board The odyssey of Turkish school leaders in Africa: An expedition into professional identity, challenges, and cultural adaptations Geographical and aesthetic inclusiveness: A new cultural worldview? The case of nine European countries The effects of refugees’ emotional tears on felt emotions and helping behaviors Interethnic workplace relations in times of heightened social tension: Israeli-Arab teachers in Jewish schools post-10/7
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1