Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

During much of the 19th and early 20th centuries, the term assimilation was used to describe the process by which immigrants inevitably gave up their culture of origin for the sake of adopting the mainstream language and culture of their adopted country. However, by the late 20th century, the term acculturation was adopted by scholars to describe the more fundamental process of bidirectional change that occurs when two ethnocultural groups come into sustained contact with each other. From this latter perspective, assimilation is only one of the many acculturation strategies that immigrant and national minorities may adopt as they strive to adapt to mainstream society.

Such strategies have become more and more necessary as immigration, legal or illegal, has become increasingly common across the globe. Through immigration and the recognition of the rights of indigenous and national minorities, most 19th-century nation-states have been transformed from being more or less unicultural to being multicultural, multiethnic, and multilingual states. Following the height of nation building in 19th-century Europe, the term host majority was ascribed to the “core founding members” of a nation who constituted the dominant ancestral community in control of the state.

Traditionally, host majorities expected immigrants to assimilate to the culture and values of the receiving society. Host majorities have found it easier to assimilate immigrants when their cultural differences were reduced to exotic manifestations such as ethnic restaurants, music, and dance. However, host societies have found it difficult to share jobs, housing, and welfare with immigrants, whom they often see as unentitled to compete for such limited resources and as contributing to the growing cultural and physical insecurity of the society. At stake is whether or not host communities wish to accept, nurture, assimilate, or reject the distinctiveness of immigrants as members of cultural communities. Ultimately, will dominant majority members allow immigrant minorities not only to maintain their distinctive culture and language, but also to transform the institutions, culture, and values of the host society?

This entry examines various models of acculturation and how strategies of acculturation may be linked to political views, socioeconomic characteristics, and personality traits.

Acculturation and Deculturation

From the cross-cultural psychology perspective, acculturation implies that both immigrants and host majority members are influenced and transformed by their intercultural contact and are expected to modify some aspects of their respective cultures. Host majority members enjoy some control over the degree of contact they have with immigrants and may experience acculturation either through direct interpersonal contacts in school and at work or through indirect contacts via mass media portrayals. However, relative to dominant majorities, cultural minorities are more likely to be transformed by such intergroup contacts. Immigrants and national minorities have in common their vulnerability to the tolerance or intolerance of dominant host majorities, whose demographic strength, prestige, and institutional power within the national state can result in much acculturative pressure.

The following types of minorities are likely to experience much acculturation pressure: first- and second-generation immigrants, sojourners, refugees, asylum seekers, and national minorities. An extreme case of acculturation pressure was that of South and North American aboriginals in the 17th through 19th centuries, as they had no control over the unwanted, massive, and sustained immigration of Northern Europeans whose demographic, economic, technological, and military supremacy physically decimated their indigenous communities while causing acculturation pressures that often resulted in outright deculturation. The term deculturation is used to describe the cultural, linguistic, religious, psychological, and health breakdown that occurs in minority communities that experience sustained contact with a dominant majority, which by ignorance, indifference, or design has sought to subjugate immigrant or indigenous communities through forced assimilation, segregation, cultural genocide, ethnic cleansing, or extermination.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading