Assessment of acculturation
Assessment of acculturation
复制标题
文化适应评估
DOI：
10.1017/cbo9781316219218.007
复制
发表时间：
2016
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
O. Celenk
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fons J. R. Vijver;J. Berry;O. Celenk
方法论问题是文化适应研究中的重要问题。基于我们研究的推论的质量可以通过使用适当的、最新的方法来提高。本章涉及两个方法论问题：文化适应研究的设计和评估文化适应的程序。本章的一个主要主题是，仔细选择研究的方法论方面，如研究和工具设计，可以大大提高文化适应研究的质量。设计和评估问题是跨文化心理学的核心课题。然而，我们不讨论这种更一般的方法学文献或具体的评估工具。这些问题在其他地方得到了解决：关于跨文化研究的设计，见货车de Vijver（2015）和货车de Vijver and Leung（1997）;关于测试改编和翻译，见Hambleton，Merenda，and Spielberger（2005）;关于越来越流行的定性和定量程序的组合，称为混合方法，见Tashakkori and Teddlie，（2003）;关于文化适应措施的概述，参见Berry，特林布尔，and Olmedo（1986），Celenk and货车de Vijver（2011，2014），Matsudaira（2006），and Rudmin（2009）。在过去的30年里，文化适应研究已经多样化。典型的文化适应研究考察了一个迁移到另一个国家的单一民族群体。这种类型的研究目前只是文献中报道的许多类型之一。如第二章所述，外地的多样化增加了外地要处理的问题的复杂性。例如，以前使用的术语已经变得不那么合适了，因此我们在这里提供了一个关于术语的注释，以澄清我们对术语的使用（参见图2.2对各种文化适应群体的描述）。首先，主流文化一词是指社会中占主导地位的群体的文化。在一种社会中，显然有一个这样的群体（例如，德国人在德国）。在许多其他国家，文化适应的背景可能是种族多样性的（例如，在许多群体共同生活的社会中，被称为超级多样性; Vertovec，2007年）;一个例子是伦敦，它在2012年奥运会申办中使用了“世界在一个城市”的口号，以表明世界上的每一个国家都代表了伦敦的人口。
Introduction Methodological issues are important in acculturation research. The quality of inferences based on our studies can be bolstered by using adequate, up-to-date methods. The present chapter deals with two methodological issues: the design of acculturation studies and procedures to assess acculturation. A leading theme of this chapter is that a careful choice of methodological aspects of a study, such as study and instrument design, can go a long way to enhancing the quality of acculturation studies. Both the design and assessment issues are core topics in cross-cultural psychology. However, we do not discuss this more general methodological literature or specific assessment instruments here. These issues are addressed elsewhere: for the design of cross-cultural studies, see Van de Vijver (2015) and Van de Vijver and Leung (1997); for test adaptations and translations, see Hambleton, Merenda, and Spielberger (2005); for the increasingly popular combination of qualitative and quantitative procedures, known as mixed methods, see Tashakkori and Teddlie, (2003); for overviews of acculturation measures, see Berry, Trimble, and Olmedo (1986), Celenk and Van de Vijver (2011, 2014), Matsudaira (2006), and Rudmin (2009). In the last 30 years, acculturation research has diversified. The prototypical acculturation study examined a single ethnic group that had moved to another country. This type of study is nowadays only one of the many kinds reported in the literature. As noted in Chapter 2, the diversification of the field has added to the complexity of the issues to be addressed in the field. For example, the terms that were used previously have become less adequate; hence we provide here a note on the terminology to clarify our use of terms (see Figure 2.2 for a description of the various kinds of acculturating groups). First, the term mainstream culture refers to the culture of the dominant group(s) in a society. In one kind of society, there is clearly one such group (e.g., Germans in Germany). In many other countries the context of acculturation may be ethnically diverse (e.g., in societies where many groups have come to live together, labeled super-diversity; Vertovec, 2007); an example is London, which used the slogan the “world in one city” in the 2012 Olympics bid to indicate that every nation of the world is represented in the population of London.
弥合文化适应差距：亲子关系质量作为墨西哥裔美国家庭的调节因素。
影响因子：
4
作者：
Schofield,ThomasJ;Parke,RossD;Kim,Young;Coltrane,Scott
通讯作者：
Coltrane,Scott