2 - adjustment

8/2/2019 2 - Adjustment

1/20

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

This article was downloaded by: [German National Licence 2007]

On: 25 February 2010

Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 912873514]

Publisher Psychology Press

Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-

41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of PsychologyPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713659663

Psychological and Socio-Cultural Adjustment During Cross-CulturalTransitions: A Comparison of Secondary Students Overseas and at HomeColleen Ward a; Antony Kennedy aa University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

To cite this Article Ward, Colleen and Kennedy, Antony(1993) 'Psychological and Socio-Cultural Adjustment DuringCross-Cultural Transitions: A Comparison of Secondary Students Overseas and at Home', International Journal ofPsychology, 28: 2, 129 147

To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/00207599308247181URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207599308247181

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial orsystematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply ordistribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contentswill be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug dosesshould be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directlyor indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713659663http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207599308247181http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdfhttp://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207599308247181http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713659663


2/20

I N T ER N A T I O N A L J O U R N A L OF P S Y C H O L O G Y , 1993,L8 2) . 129-147

Psychological and Socio-cultural Adjustment duringCross-cultural Transitions: A Comparison ofSecondary Students Overseas and at Home

Colleen Ward and Antony KennedyUniversity of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

The study further explores th e distinction of psychological an d socio-culturaladju stm ent during cross-cultural transitions. O n e hund red a nd seventy-eightNew Ze alan d A merican Field Service (AFS ) stud ents residing in 23 differentcountries completed questionnaires which contained assessments of the fol-lowing: Personality (extraversion and locus of control) ; life changes (SocialRea djus tme nt Rating Questionnaire); homesickness, cultural distance, accul-turation (cultural identity and cultural integration-separation); attitu destoward host country; language ability; amount of contact with host and co-nationals; relationship satisfaction with co-nationals, host nationals and hostfamily; and outcome measures of socio-cultural (social difficulty) and psycho-logical adjustment (Profile of Mood States). Stepwise repressions revealedthat homesickness, external locus of con trol, life changes, a nd socialdifficultyaccounted for 55% of the variance in psychological adju stm ent. In contr ast,cultural distance, language ability, satisfaction with host national contact,cultural separation and mood disturbance explained 52% of the variance insocio-cultural adaptation. In the second part of the research, psychologicaland socio-cultural adjustment of AF S studen ts was com pared with a samp le of142 home-based New Zealand secondary school students. Although therewere n o significant differenc es in psychological ad jus tm en t betwe en th e twogroups, the students who were resident abroad experienced greater socio-cultural difficulties than t he stu de nts resident in New Zea lan d ( P < 0.0005),and, as hypothesized, the correlation between psychological and socio-cultural a dju stm en t was significantly gr ea ter in the home-based s tudents com-pared to the AFS group ( P< 0.0001).Cet te et ud e explore d'un e faGon plus approf ond ie la distinction e ntr e I 'ajuste-men t psychologique et socio-culture1 pen da nt de s transitions inter-culturelle s.

Requests for reprints should be sent to Colleen W ard , Dep artm ent of Psychology. U niversityof Canterbury, Christchurch I , New Zealand.This research was supported by grant No. 8914 from the Social Science Research FundCom mittee . currently the F oundation for Research. Science andT echn ology. W ellington. NewZealand. The authors would like to thank Stu Allan, the national director of American FieldService in New Ze alan d, and his staff for their cooperation and assistance with this pro ject . Weare also grateful to Pat Hubble and Gary Coburn for data collection i n the secondary schools.

~~ ~ ~0 993 Internationdl Union of Psychological Science

Downloa

dedBy:[GermanNationalLicence2007]At:15:4525Febru

ary2010


3/20

130 WARD AND KENNEDYCent mixante dix-huit etudiants de Nouvelle-ZClande inscrits dans le pro-gramm e AF S (American Field Service) et residant dans 23 pays differentsont complete des questionnaires contenant des evaluations des facteurs sui-vants: la personnalite (extraversion et lieu de con tr6le); les cha ng em ents d evie (questionnaire d evaluation d u reajustement social); le ma1 du p ays, ladistance culturelle, lacculturation (lidentite culturelle et la separation-integration culturelle); les attitudes vis-a-vis le pays h6te; Ihabilete de com-munication; la frequence des contacts avec des h6tes ou des com patriotes; ledeg re de satisfaction dan s les relations av ec des compatriotes, de s h6tes et leurfamille; ainsi que des mesures du resultat de Iadjustement socio-culture1(difficult6 sociale) et de Iajustement psychologique (profil des etats dhu-meu r). D es analyses de regression ont rCvClC q ue le ma1 du pa ys, le lieu decontr6le externe, les changements de vie et la difficulte sociale expliquaient55% de la variance dans Iajustement psychologique. Par contre, la distanceculturelle, Ihabilete de com munication, la satisfaction d u co nta ct avec IhBtenational, la se par ation culturelle et la perturb ation d e Ihumeur expliquaient52 % d e la variance de ladaptation socio-culturelle. Dans la seco nd e partie d ecette e tud e, lajustement psychologique et socio-culture1 des e tud iants A FS aete c om par e avec celui dun Cchantillon de 142 ttu dia nts neo-zelandais locauxde niveau secon daire. Bien quil ny avait pas de differences significatives ent reles deux group es po ur ce qui est de Iajustement psychologique, les etud iantsqui residaient a Ittra nge r ont connu d e plus grandes difficultes socio-cultur-elles que les etu dian ts qui resident en Nouvelle-Zelande (Pc .0005) et , telque prevu. la correlation entre Iajustement psychologique et socio-culture1Ctait significativement plus ClevCe chez les etud ian ts locaux p ar com paraisonavec le group e AFS ( P


4/20

PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIO-CULTURAL AD JUST MEN T 131extent of interaction with hosts (Sewell & Dav idsen, 1961); th e acquisitionof culturally ap pro pri ate behaviours and skills (B oc hn er, Lin, & McLeod,1979); academic competence (Perkins et al ., 1977); an d jo b perf orm ance(Harris, 1972). With this assortment of outcome indicators it has beenproblem atic for researchers to draw firm conclusions abo ut w hat preciselyfacilitates co m pe ten t coping in a changing cultural milieu.While acknowledging the pragmatic demands for the assessment ofspecific task performances such as job productivity or academic success,Ward a nd colleagues have m aintained that adjustment or a dap tation duringcross-cultural transitions can be broadly divided in to two c ateg ori es: psycho-logical and socio-cultural (Searle & W ard, 1990; Ston e Feinstein & Ward,1990; Wa rd & Ke nne dy, in press; W ard & Searle, 1991). T h e form er refersto feelings of well-being and satisfaction, whereas the latter is concernedwith the ability to fit in o r negotiate interactive aspects of the host culture.Th e theorizing by W ard and associates on psychological an d socio-culturaladaptation has borrow ed heavily from two divergent traditions in th e cul-tur e shock field. T h e first derives from research on psychology of adjust-ment. It is underpinned by the work of Lazarus and Folkman (1984) onstress an d coping, a nd is exemplified by th e research of B err y an d colleagueson acculturation and adaptation (e.g. Berry & Kim, 1988; Chataway &Berry, 1989). T h e second tradition is based on Argyles (1980) social skillsmodel which has bee n popularized by Furnham an d B och ner (1986) in theirculture learning ap pro ach to cross-cultural transition.Research by Ward and colleagues has demonstrated that psychologicaladjustment, defined in terms of depression or more global mood disturb-ance, is affected by personality factors, life changes, and social support.Both locus of control and extraversion have been linked to psychologicalwell-being in sojourners; however, while an internal locus of control hasbeen consistently associated with psychological adaptation (Ward & Ken-nedy , 1992a; in pre ss ), the effects of extraversion on mood disturbance havevaried ove r cultural context (A rm es & W ard, 1989; Searle & W ard, 1990),suggesting culture-specific as well as culture-general pa tter ns of ad ap tatio n.A s ex pe cted , a low incidence of life changes facilitates psychological adjust-m en t, and ad eq ua te social supp ort is essential for psychological well-being(Searle & W ard, 1990; Ward & Ken nedy, 1992a; in press). Sto ne Feinsteinand W ard (1990) repo rted that loneliness was the most powerful pred ictor ofmood disturbance of U.S. women in Singapore, and similar findings werepresented by Ward and Searle (1991) in a multi-national sam ple of stu den t

For exam ple, extrav ersion facili tated psychological adjustm ent in Malaysian and Singapo-rean students in New Zealand but was associated with greater mood disturbance in Euro-American expat r ia tes in Singapore . S ee Sear le and W ard (1990) for a discussion of this and th ecultural fit proposi t ion.

Downloa


ary2010


5/20

132 WARD AND KENNEDYsojo urn ers in New Ze ala nd . Th ese findings parallel theoretical and empiri-cal work on acculturation that have described the impact of extraversion(G ard ne r, 1962); locus of control (Dy al, Ryb ensk y, & Som ers, 1988; Ku o,Gray, & Lin, 1976); life changes (M asuda, Lin. & Ta zum a, 1982); and thequantity and quality of social sup po rt (A de lm an , 1988; Fo nta ine , 1986) onpsychological adjustment during cross-cultural transitions; the results arealso in accordance with the literature o n stress and coping fou nd in clinicaland commun ity psychology ( e.g. Co chra ne & Sobel, 1980).In cont ras t, the construction of predictive mo dels of socio-cultural ad jus t-ment, assessed in terms of social difficulty, is theoretically embedded in asocial learning-social cognition framework. Research has indicated thatgeneral cultural knowledge, length of residence in the host culture, andam ou nt of contact with host nationals, affect socio-cultural ad ap tatio n(Ward & K en ne dy , 1992a, b; in press; W ard & Sear le, 1991). On the mostbasic level, one learns the skills required in a new cultural environment.With emphasis on culture -learnin g, similarity/dissimilarity betw een originaland host cultures also comes to bear o n the ad aptatio n process. Tho se whoperceive greater cultural distance between their origins and destinationsare likely to experience more social difficulty during the transition process(Searle & W ard, 1990; Ward & K en ne dy , 1992a; in pres s). Social cognitionvariables, particularly acculturation strategies, further affect socio-culturaladaptation. A stro ng cultural identity an d cultural segregation im pe de so-cio-cultural adaptation in the host society (Ward & Kennedy, 1992a; inpress). These findings are congruent with social learning approaches tocross-cultural transition which have documented the effects of culturaldistance, general knowledge about host society, cultural assimilation andq u a a i ty of interaction with hosts on socio-cultural a djus tm ent (Fu rnh am &Boch ner, 1982; Klineberg & Hu ll, 1979; Pru itt, 1978; Westwood & Barker ,

The theoretical and empirical distinction of psychological and socio-cultural adjustment has been a major point of emphasis in our work andrepresents a basic attem pt to provide an overarching c onc eptu al frameworkfor the study of cross-cultural transition and adap tation. T h e primary thrustof this approach has involved the construction of predictive models of thetwo adjustment domains based on various samples of sojourning groups(e.g. foreign stude nts , international bu siness peop le, ex pa triat e wives, dip-lomats). E xamining the overall pa ttern of results, evidence suggests a coreof culture-general predictors of psychological an d socio-cultural a dju stm en tas well as the presence of more peripheral factors which appear to beculture - or situation-specific. In assuming this approa ch. ho we ver, the worhmay be criticized for the om ission of systematic interg ro up co m pa riso ns .A comparative approach is particularly useful in a field of resea rch whichhas been characterized by piecemeal investigations. Three basic types of

1990).Downloa


ary2010


6/20

PSYCHOLOGICAL A N D SOCIO-CULTURAL AD JUS TM EN T 133intergroup comparisons are available to cross-cultural researchers for thestudy of transition and adjustment. The first type relies on comparisonsamon g fundam entally different g ro up s of individuals (e .g. refugees, im-migran ts, sojourners, and native peoples) w ho have been exp osed t o culturecontact and change. Th is is exemp lified by Berry et al.s (1987) wor k whichdemonstrated that psychological and psychosomatic symptoms are rela-tively higher in native peoples and in refugees, lower in immigrants, and atan intermediate level in sojourners. The second alternative involves onetype of group (e.g. sojou rners , tourists, or immigrants) with variations ineither individuals origins or destinations. The form er approach has beenmore com m on; for example, H inkle (1974) reported that Hu nga rian im-migrants to the U nited States experienced mo re psychological a nd physicalillnesses than did the Chinese, whereas Co chra ne and Sto pes-R oe (1980)found that Indian immigrants were better adjusted than Pakistani immi-grants in the United Kingdom. T he latter appr oach , however, ha s also beenadopted, as illustrated by Torbiorn (1982) who emphasized sojournersdestinations and argued that ove rseas personnel are generally m ore c onte ntin developed and industrial countries. The third type of comparison isbetween groups who have and have not been involved in cross-culturaltransition. For example, Cole, A llen , and G reen (1980), found th at ethnicChinese students consulted university health services less in Au stralia thanat hom e in Singapore and Ho ng Ko ng.Intergroup comparisons of psychological and socio-cultural adjustmentallow for the more systematic investigation of cross-cultural transition andare particularly app rop riate for th e exam ination of: (1) V ariation s in thelevel of psychological and socio-cultural a da pta tion pro ble m s; and (2) vari-ations in the magnitude of the relationship between the two adjustmentdom ains. On the first count the au tho rs have arg ued that adjustme ntproblems vary among sojourning groups and that greater socio-culturaladap tation problems w ould be foun d in groups that mak e large rath er thansmall cross-cultural transitions. In accordance with the cultural distancehypothesis, Furnham and Bochner (1982) demonstrated that cultural dis-similarity and social difficulty we re significantly r ela ted ; differences in socio-cultural adaptation w ere reporte d in Eu rop ean . Middle Eastern , and Asianstud ents in the United K ingdom. T h e sam e pattern was described by W ardand Kennedy (in press) in their study of Asian students in Singapo re andNew Zealand. More specifically, greater socio-cultural difficulties wereexperienced by Chinese studen ts who relocated t o New Zea land com pare dto those who relocated to Singapore. Th ere is also evidence th at this patternholds when com parisons are mad e between so jour ning and sed entar ysamples. Zheng and B erry (1991) fou nd that Chinese stu den ts and visitingscholars from the Peoples R epu blic of C hina experienced m or e problemswith family, language and com m unic ation , accidents. homesickness an d

Downloa


ary2010


7/20

134 WARD AND KENNEDYloneliness, than either Chinese or non-Chinese Canadian students. Simi-larly, Chataway and Berry (1989) reported that H ong Kong Chinese evincedmore problems with communication difficulties, prejudice and generaladap tation in Canada than did a comparative group of Anglo- and Franco-Canadians.Differences in psychological adjustment across acculturating groupsmight also be expected. Certainly, intergroup differentiation would bepredicted by stress and coping theories and has been observed in imm igrantstudies; however, the empirical evidence for this distinction in sojournerresearch is somew hat less compelling. W ard and Kennedy (in press) failed toestablish differences in global mood d isturbance of Asian studen ts in NewZealand and in Singapore. Furnham and Tresize (1981) were unable todem onstrate differences in psychological adap tation of Europ ean, African ,Middle Easte rn, and A sian students in the U nited K ingdom, although theydid note that more psychological adjustment problems emerged in thesegroups than in a sample of British controls. Whereas Chataway and Berry(1989) reported more psychological an d psychosomatic symptom s in HongKong Chinese students compared to Anglo- and Franco-Canadian peers,Zheng and Berry (1991) found no significant differences in physical andpsychological symptoms between Chinese sojourners in Canada an d Chi-nese and non-Chinese Canadian groups. Similarly, Cole, A llen, an d Green(1980) failed to substantiate the proposition that foreign students in Aus-tralia utilized university health services more o ften than local students.The relationship between psychological and socio-cultural dimensions ofadap tation can also be exam ined through intergroup comparisons. O n thiscount it has been argued that while the two adjustment dom ains are inter-related, the magnitude of the relationsh ip varies, depending on charac ter-istics of the sojourning group and the host culture. More specifically, it hasbeen suggested that the association between psychological and socio-cul-tural adaptation fluctuates in accordance with the sojourning groups need ,capacity, or opportunity for integration into the host culture; that is, themore reliance on the host culture as the primary environment for interactionand support, the stronger the relationship between the two forms of adjust-ment. Along these lines and as predicted, Ward and Kennedy (in press)dem onstrated a significantly more robust correlation between psychologicaland socio-cultural adaptation in Asian students in Singapore compared toAsian students in New Z ealand. Com parisons between the magnitudes ofthe psychological-socio-cultural correlation coefficients in sojou rning andsedentary groups, however, have yet to be u nde rtaken .The studies presented here examine psychological and socio-culturaladjustm ent in two groups, a cross-cultural sojourning sample of N ew Zea-land American Field Service (AF S) stude nts, and a hom e-based sample ofNew Z ealand secondary school studen ts. The research has three objec tives:

Downloa


ary2010


8/20

PSYCHOLOGICAL AN D SOCIO-CULTURAL AD JUS TM EN T 135(1) The construction of predictive models of psychological and socio-cultural ad jus tm en t; (2) the comp arison of psychological and socio-culturaladjustment problems in a sojourning and a sedentary group; a'nd (3) thecom parison of the magnitude of the relationship between psychological andsocio-cultural adaptation in the two group s. T h e hypotheses ar e as follows:

la. Locus of control, homesickness, life changes, relationship satisfac-tion and social difficulty (socio-cultural adaptation) will predictpsychological adjustment.lb. Length of residence in the host culture, cultural distance, accultur-ation (cultural identity, cultural sep aratio n), attitude s toward hosts,language ability, quantity of contact with host nationals, and mooddisturbance (psychological adjustment) will predict socio-culturaladaptation.2a. T h e sojourning group will experience m ore socio-cultural adaptatio nproblems than the sedentary group.2b. T h er e will be no significant difference in psychological ad jus tm en t inthe two groups.

3. T h e magnitude of the relationship between psychological and socio-cultural adjustment will be gre ater in th e ho m e-ba sed sample than inth e sojourning group.STUDY 1

MethodSubjectsA total of 178 secondary school stu de nts (135 females an d 43 males) fromNew Z ealan d w ho were participating in the A m erican Field Service (A FS )pro gram m e were involved in this study. Stud ents ranged in age from 16 to 19

years with a mean age of 17.35 years (SD =O .7 5) . T h e majority of thesubjects (94%) described themselves as Pakeha (white New Zealanders),2 % as Mao ri , and 0.6% as Asian; seven su bjects (3.9 % ) declined to statetheir ethnicity.Th e A F S programme promotes cultural exch ange, and students residewith a h ost family during their overseas s oj ou rn . Su bje cts in this study wereplaced in 23 countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Honduras, Japan, CostaRica, Malaysia, Paraguay, Thailand, United States, Finland, Indonesia,Switzerland, Denm ark, Germany, Sw eden, France, Hong Kong, Turkey,Czechoslovakia, Cana da, Hungary, and the Dom inican R epublic. T he aver-age length of residence in the host country was 10 .88 weeks (SD= 11.83) atthe time of questionnaire completion (range = 2-77 week s). Of the tota lsample 76% resided in countries where English was not the primarylanguage.

Downloa


ary2010


9/20

136 WARD AND KENNEDYMaterialsAn 11-page questionnaire was employed in this study. In addition to

personal and dem ographic information, the qu estion naire includedm eas ur em en ts of: personality, hom esickness, life changes, cultural dis-tan ce, acculturation, attitudes tow ard host nationals, quality and qu an tity ofinterpersonal relations, language ability and psychological and socio-cultural adjustment.Personality. Extraversion and locus of control were examined in thisstudy. T h e 21-item subscale of the E ysenck Personality Qu estion naire (Ey -

senck & Eysenck, 1975), was em ploy ed to assess extraversion; scores rangefrom 0 to 21 with higher scores representing gre ate r levels of extraversion.Locus of control was m easured by 15 items exc erp ted from Collins (1974)modification of Rotters (1966) Internal-External Locus of Co ntr ol scale. ALikert-format was implem ented with sub ject s expressing their agree-ment/disagreement with each statement on a 5-point scale. Scores rangefrom 0 to 60 with higher scores reflecting a m ore e xte rna l locus of c on tro l.This modification of the Rotter scale proved reliable and valid in earlierresearch with New Zealand adu lts (W ard & Ken nedy, 1992a).

Homesickness. This measurement was based on nine items extractedfrom the Dundee Relocation Inventory (Fisher, 1989). Subjects rely on4-point scales (end points: com pletely false/completely tru e) t o resp on d tostatem ents pertaining to homesickness ( e.g . I c ann ot stop thinking abo utho m e) . Fisher originally defined homesickn ess as a cognitive-mo tivational-em otion al stat e. In this contex t, however, only items pertaining to cognitiveand motivational dom ains were retained in th e scale. Sta tem ents such as: Ifeel happy, unloved, lonely, secure, etc., were omitted because psycho-logical ad jus tm en t, defined in terms of mood distu rban ce, is considered asan outc om e measure. Scores ranged from 0 to 36 with higher scores rep re-senting more homesickness.

Life Changes. A modified version of the Social Readjustment RatingQu estionnaire (SR RQ ), devised by Ho lmes and R ahe (1967), as a m eans ofquantifying the am oun t of readjustive stress experienced d ue to life changes ,was utilized in this study. The questionnaire contains 29 life events, eachassigned a value (in life change units), according to how m uch r ead jus tm en tit requires. Subjects are asked to indicate which of the 29 events haveocc urred for them in the past six mon ths, an d the life change units for eachselected eve nt are summed; higher scores, there fore, are indicative of m ore

Downloa


ary2010


10/20

PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIO-CULTURAL AD JUS TM EN T I37life changes and greater adjustive demands. The mean life change unitscores fo r each of the 29 events were based o n judge me nts by a separ atesample of 164 secondary school stud ents in New Ze aland (see K enn edy &Ward, 1990).

Cultural Distance. The format of the open-ended Cultural DistanceIndex (CDI) developed by Babiker, Cox, and Miller (1980), was modifiedfor the purp ose of this study. Subjects were asked to ra te on a scale of 0-4how their own New Zealand backgrounds differ from their experiences intheir host co untries in ten areas. Scores rang e from 0 to 40 with h igh er scoresindicating greater cultural distance. Similar modifications have been usedsuccessfully in previous research by Ward and Kennedy (1992a) with NewZealand sojourners in Singapore.

Acculturation. Acculturation was assessed by two related measure-ments. The first index referred to cultural identity (Tajfel, 198l), andpertained to the salience and imp ortance of ones cultural gr ou p in relationto personal identity. Th e assessment includes 12 items which co nc ern issuessuch as similarity of own beliefs and values to those of other members ofones cultural gro up , similarity and differences between cultural gro up s, andperceptions of ot he rs in terms of gro up mem bership. Scores rang e from CL72with higher scores representing s tro ng er identity w ith on es cu ltur e of origin.This scale was used in previous research with foreign s tu de nt s in NewZea land an d New Zealand expatriates in Singapore and proved reliable andvalid (Ward & Kennedy, 1992a; W ard & Searle, 1991).T he second index (CIS) considers cultural integ ration -sep aration , m orespecifically: the relationship between original and host culture. The con-struction of the C IS was based on previous work by Kim (1988) and pe rtai nsto the separation-integration dimension of acculturation as discussed byBe rry et al. (1989). Th e questionnaire surveys 11 are as (e.g. m usic, clothing,values, friendships), and subjects are asked to indicate th e ex tent of theirpreference for New Zealand vs. host culture mo res, norm s, custom s, andtraditions. CIS scores range from 0-44 with higher scores indicating grea tersep ara tion from the host culture. A similar version of this ins tru m en t wasalso used successfully in Ward and K ennedys (1992a; in press) r esearch withAsian stud ents and with New Z ealan d adults.

Attitudes Toward Host Nationals. The 20-item scale was designed toassess subjects perceptions of their host coun tries. T h e me asu rem en t con-tained a mixture of positively and negatively worded descriptions (e.g.Many locals are prejudiced, This is a beautiful country), to which

Downloa


ary2010


11/20

138 WARD AND KENNEDYsubjects indicate their agreemenvdisagreement on 5-point scales. Scoresrange from 0-80 with higher scores indicating more favourable attitudestoward the host country. Similar attitude scales have proven reliable andvalid in past so jou rn er research (W ard & Kenned y, in p ress).

Interpersonal Relations. Both the quality and qu antity of interpersonalrelations were considered. Subjects utilized 4-point scales to rate thefrequency of contact with host and co-nationals in seven areas (e.g. study-ing, recr ea tio n). Scores range from 0-21 with higher scores indicative ofmore extensive social contact. Relationship satisfaction (low-high) was alsorated o n a 4-point scale for co-national and ho st national rela tion s as well asrelations with host family.

Language Ability. As language ability could not be assessed throughobjective testing in this study, students eva lua ted their o w n foreign languagecom petence o n a 4-point scale (end points: poor/excellent).Socio-culrural Adjustment. This 20-item scale focuses on the skills thatare required to cope with everyday social situations encountered in a newculture. T he development of the scale was based o n work by Furn ham andBochner (1982) with the Social Situations Questionnaire and two studieswhich considered problems faced by foreign stude nts in New Ze alan d (Ng,1962; N oo r, 1968). T h e questionnaire is constructed so tha t sub ject s utilize5-point scales to rate the amount of difficulty that they experience in 20social situations. U nlike the Fu rnham and B ochn er (1982) meas urem ent,how ever, difficulty in thi s assessment was not fr am ed in affective terms suchas anxiety, fear or embarrassment. Scores o n the socio-cultural adjustment

scale ran ge from 0-80 with higher scores indicative of greater social diffi-culty. The instrument has been utilized in previous research with studentsundergoing cross-cultural transitions and has proven reliable and valid(Searle & W ard , 1990; Ward & Sea rle, 1991).Psychological Adjustment. I ne Profile of Mood States (PO M S) servedas a measurement of psychological adjustment (McNair, Lorr, & Drop-plem an, 1971). T he PO M S includes 65 adjectives which relate to symptoms

of: tension, dep ress ion , ang er, fatigue, confusion and vigour (qualitiescommonly ascribed to sojourn ers who experience culture shock ). Sub-jects rate the intensity of these emotions, as experienced within the lastweek, on a 5-point scale; scores range fro m 0-260 with hig her scores reflect-ing greater mood disturbance. The POMS has been used in much of thesojo urn er research by W ard and colleagues.

Downloa


ary2010


12/20

PSYCHOLOGICAL AN D SOCIO-CULTURAL AD JUS TM EN T 139ProcedureQu estionnaires were posted overseas to students during the ir A F S place-ments, an d subjects were requested t o return com pleted qu estion naire s to

the researchers in enclosed, addressed envelopes. Participation was anony-mous an d voluntary although requests fo r participation carried a lette r ofsupport from AFS. Of the 357 questionnaires distributed, 181 (51% ) wereretur ned . Tw o were rejected because they were incomplete, and o n e arrivedafter the completion of data analysis; therefore, 178 respondents wereipcluded in the study .ResultsPreliminary data analysis consisted of testing the internal reliability of eachof the scales using Cronbachs alpha. Scales proved moderately reliable:Extraversion (0.72); locus of control (0.78); homesickness (0.82); culturaldistance (0.80); cultural identity (0.72); cultural integration-separation(0.76); attitude s toward hosts (0.83); contact frequency with ho st nationals(0.75); and fellow nationals (0.91); socio-cultural a dju stm en t (social diffi-culty: 0.85); and psychological adjustment (mood disturbance: 0.96).Scalar validity was examined through inter-correlations among thepredictor variables. Results corro bor ated the validity of mea sure m entsof cultural distance, cultural identity, cultural integ rati on -se pa rati on ,home-sickness, and social interaction scales. Strong cultural identity was signifi-cantly related to separation from the host culture (0.21, P


13/20

140 WARD AND KENNEDYTABLE 1

P red i c t o r s of M o o d D i s t ur b a n cePredictors Beta PSocial difficultyHomesicknessLocus of controlLife change s (SRRQ)

0.320.380.220.14

0.00010.0001O.OOO10.006

relations, however, (0.04) was unrelated to psychological adjustment. Insup por t of hypothesis ( l b ) , language ability (0.31, P < O.OOl), cultural dis-tance (0.45, P


14/20

PSYCHOLOGICAL AN D SOCIO-CULTURAL AD JUS TM EN T 141TABLE 2Predictors of Social Dif f iculty

Predicrors Beiu i PMood disturbance 0.39Cultural distance 0.33Language ability -0.17Satisfaction with host national relations -0.15Cultural separa tion 0.13

0.000IU. (N )OI0 .0020.0080.02

STUDY 2M e t h o d

SubjectsT he sam ple was composed of 132 state and private seco nda ry schoolstudents in C hristchurch , New Ze aland. Th e sample describe d themselvesas: Pakeha (90%); M aori (3 .5% ); Pacific Islanders (2. 5% ); an d Asian(1.4% ); 2 .1 % declined to state their ethnicity. Subjects' ag es ran ged from 16to 19 ( M = 17.45,SD = 0.53). T he sam ple included 49 females and 92 males;one subject failed to specify sex.Materials and ProcedureQuestionnaires were distributed to students during class periods, andsubjects we re requ ested to complete the Profile of M ood S tates (PO M S) andthe Social Difficulty scale. These scales were described in Study 1 in thispaper and functioned as measures of psychological and socio-culturaladjustment. The POMS measurement was identical in both studies; theSocial Difficulty a sse ssm en t, however, contained only 16 of the original 20

items (four items were not relevant to subjects in the secondary schoolsample). Participation i n the research was anony mo us and voluntary .ResultsResponses on the POMS and Social Difficulty scale were co m pa re d be twe enthese 142 subjects and the 175 AFS students. The C ronbach alpha for P OM Swas 0.96 for the secondary school sample, whereas the alpha forthe 16-item Social Difficulty scale was 0.8 3 fo r the seco nd ary school sam pleand 0.85 for the AF S sam ple. Using sex as a covariate, a main effect emerg edon the Social Difficulty scale ( F (1 , 317)= 11.6 . P


15/20

142 WARD A ND KENNE DYTABLE 3

M ea n Scores for Psychological an d Socio-cultural Adjus tmen t

AdjustmentSample

AFS LocalMood Disturbance 77.3 82. 3

(33.2) (38. )Social Difficulty 16.3 13.(8.2) (8.2)

Th e zer o ord er correlations between th e measures of socio-cultural andpsychological adjustment fo r the AFS and secondary school samples werealso compa red. i n support of hypothesis (3), the test for significant differ-ences between inde pen den t correlations revealed that the m agn itude of therelationship between psychological and socio-cultural adjustment was sig-nificantly greater in the secondary school sample (0.66) compared to theAFS sample (0.23); z = 4.92, P < 0.0001.DISCUSSION

T he research exam ined th e outcomes of cross-cultural transition in a gro upof ov erseas stud en ts via the construction of predictive mo de ls of psychologi-cal and socio-cultural adjustm ent and the comparative analysis of the adjust-men t indicators in relation to a sample of sedentary p eers. Re sults revealedtha t psychological well-being, as assessed by a me asu rem en t of m oo d dis-tur ba nc e, was predicted by life changes, locus of con trol, homesickness andsocio-cultural adaptation. In contrast, socio-cultural adjustment, ;ismeasu red by a social difficulty index, was dep en de nt on cultural distance,quality of sojo urn er-h ost relations, language ability, cu ltural separatio n,and psychological adaptation. As hypothesized, AFS stud ents experiencedgrea ter socio-cultural adju stm ent difficulties than did the com para ble h om e-based sample. Finally, psychological and socio-cultural adjustment weresignificantly related in both the AFS and secondary school samples;however, as ex pe cte d, the m agnitude of the relationship was g rea ter in thesedentary group.The findings on predictive models of psychological and socio-culturaladjustment are in broad agreement with past research by Ward and col-leagues and again corroborate the discriminant validity of the two adjust-ment d om ains. Th e results also supp ort the proposition that psychologicalad jus tm en t during cross-cultural transitions can best be analyzed w ithin thecontext of stress and coping theories, whereas socio-cultural adaptation ismo re ap pro pri atel y considered within a social learning-social co gnitionfram ew ork . T he predictive m odels sup por t the usefulness of th e distinctionof psychological an d socio-cultural ou tco m es of cross-cultura l transition s;

Downloa


ary2010


16/20

PSYCHOLOGICAL AN D SOCIO-CULTURAL AD JU ST ME NT 143how ever, given a series of studies which has led to the sam e conclusion, it isthe interg rou p comparisons which ad d a new perspective to our research anddeserve further comm ent.

As e xpe cted, A FS stu den ts abroad repo rted significantly mo re difficultyin the management of everyday social situations than did the secondaryschool pupils in New Zea land ; however, th ere were no significant differ-ences in psychological ad justm ent between the two group s. T h e forme rfinding is in accordance with previous intergroup assessments of socialdifficulty during cross-cultural transitions (Furnham & Bochner, 1982;Ward & Kennedy, in press). The latter result, although predicted, is setagainst a background of more controversial empirical research. There isboth eviden ce for (Chataway & Berry, 1989; Furnh am & Tresize , 198 l) , andagainst (C ole , Allen, & G ree n, 1980; Zhen g & Be rry, 1991), the propositiontha t sojourning group s experience m ore psychological an d physical distressthan do their native-born counterparts.Stress and coping appr oa ch es to acculturation suggest tha t psychologicaladju stm ent should be mo re problematic in sojourning, com pare d to sed en-tary, gro ups . All things being eq ua l, i t would be expected that the home-based sample would have advantages of fewer life changes, greater socio-cultural expertise, and, possibly, more effective social support systems.H ow ever , as adjustive outcomes emerge in a person-situation in teractio n, itis likely th at the specific types of samples used in this study had so m e bearingon the research findings. Perhaps students who are selected for the AFSprogramm e differ n som e way from those who choose to remain a t hom e. I tmight be plausibly argued, for example, that the sojourning group, inactively pursuing new experiences an d challenges, possess s up erio r psycho-logical resources for coping with t he stress. In addition, A FS stud ents areselected a nd trained for their overseas postings. The se factors may diminishthe hom e-base advantages and , in tu rn, narrow the potential g ap in psycho-logical adjustment.In addition to com parisons of the level of psychological an d so cio-culturaladap tation, the magnitude of the relationship between the two adju stm en tdomains in sojourning and sede ntary samples was also exa m ine d. In themost basic term s, it has been argued that a s the sojourners world becomesincreasingly defined by the host culture m ilieu, the exte nt of th e relat ion shi pbetween psychological and socio-cultural adjustment increases. Forexample, in the case of sojourners who reside primarily in an expatriatebubble, there should be little relationship between psychological andsocio-cultural adaptation. In contrast , a strong relationship betw een the twoadju stm ent domains would be expected in groups who are well integra tedinto the host culture. Along these lines Ward and Kennedy (in press)rep or ted a significantly gr eate r relationship between psychological an d so-cio-cultural adap tation in Malaysian stu den ts in Singapore (0.49) com pare d

Downloa


ary2010


17/20

144 WARD AND KENNEDYto Singaporean and Malaysian studen ts in New Zealand (0.28). Extendingthis rationale, the relationship between psychological and socio-culturaladaptation in a non-relocating sample should generally be g re ate r than in asojourning gro up. This was borne o ut in the findings pres ented he re (0.66;0.23, respectively). Of course, th ere a re many factors which may affect thewillingness an d opp ortun ity for integration into th e host c ultu re, includingthe availability of co-national sup po rt, cultural congru ence betw een hostand guests, and the receptiveness of the host cultur e, and these sho uld besystematically investigated in futu re research.Despite the theoretical justifications and the robust findings reportedhere, our work may be subjected to certain criticisms. As with all postalsurveys, return rates call into question the external validity of the results.W here as ove r half of the subjects (51%) responded to the q uestionnaire-and this exceeds the expected 30% return rate for postal surveys (Shaugh-nessy & Zec hm ei st er , 1985)-the re tu rn rate may w ar ra nt cau tion in thegeneralization of the findings. A more notable criticism, which has beenpreviously acknowledged by Searle and Ward (1990), involves the use ofmultiple regression an d the causal ordering of d epen den t an d ind epen den tvariables. Although the selection of psychological and social adjustmentindicators as outco m e measu res is typical of research in the a re a , the processand impact of cross-cultural transitions may be concep tualized in a nu m be rof ways. De pen ding on a researchers theoretical persuasions an d empiricalinterests, alternative ap pr oac he s might include the prediction of sojourner-host relations based on social skills, or the prediction of acculturativestrategies based on length of residence in the host culture. Following onfrom this, comm ents are warranted about the nature of th e variables un derexamination. W here as factors such as cultural distance, p erso nality, an d lifechanges are clearly antecedent to recent mood states or current socialdifficulty, relationships betw een variables such as the q ua ntit y an d quality ofhost contact and adjustment indicators are more difficult to isolate in 11temporal sequen ce. T h e antecedent-consequent patterning of the relation-ships amongst such variables requires clarification in future research.Finally, the nature of the sample may limit the generalizability of theresearch findings. AF S stud ents represent a particular type of sojourninggr ou p; they reside in a relatively sheltered environm ent an d ex pec t to live intheir new culture for a relatively brief period of t ime. T his should be takeninto account in the extension of the research findings.In conclusion, this study and the associated programme of sojournerresearch arose in response to a critical call for mo re systematic dev elo pm en tof theoretical perspectives and em pirical research o n cu lture sho ck . Th eauth ors have offe red a fram ew ork for the study of cross-cultural transitionand adjustment which has incorporated the two popular, but divergent,

Downloa


ary2010


18/20

PSYCHOLOGICAL AN D SOCIO-CULTURAL ADJU STM ENT 145theoretical ap proaches to acculturation and which is clear and consistent inthe definition an d operationalization of adjustive ou tco m es. Psychologicaland socio-cultural adjustment have been examined in different types ofsojourning groups (diplomats, inter natio nal business peop le, stude nts), OJvarious cultural origins and in a variety of cultural settings, bo th in longitudi-nal and cross-sectional studies. A t present we believe th at this framew orkmakes a modest contribution to research on acculturation and offers thepotential for the synthesis of th e cult ure shock liter atu re. We also recom-mend that the approach be extend ed to othe r groups in transition, such asimmigrants and refugees, in fu ture resea rch.

Manuscript received June 1991Revised manuscript accepted March 1992

REFERENCESAdelman, M . B. (1988). Cross-cultural adj ustm ent : A theoretical perspective on social sup-port. Internarional Journal of Interculrural Relations, 12 , 183-204.Argyle, M . (1980). Interaction skills and social competence. In P. Feldman & J . Orford(Eds . ) , Psychological problems: The social context. Chichester. U.K. : John Wiley.Armes, K. & W ard, C. (1981)). C ross-cultural transitions and so journ er adjustm ent in Singa-pore. Journal of Social Psyc hology, 129, 273-275.Babiker, I . E. , Cox, J . L . , & Miller, P. Mc G. (1980). Th e measurem ent of cultural distanceand its relationship to medical consultatio ns, symptom atology and exam ination of perform-ance of overseas students at Edinburgh University. Social Psychiatry, IS, 109-116.Berry, J . W. & K i m , U . (1988). Acc ulturatio nand men tal health. In P. Dasen. J . W. Berry ,&N. Sartorius (Ed s.), Health and cross-cultural psychology: Toward applications. London:Sage.Berry, J . W ., Kim, U., Minde, T.. & Mok, D. (1987). Com parative studies of acculturativestress. International Migration Review, 2 1 , 490-51 1.Berry, J. W ., Kim, U.. Power, S. , Young, M., & Bu jak i, M. (1989). Acculturation attitudes

in plura l societies. Applied Psychology: A n Inrernational R eview, 38, 1 8 5 2 0 6 .Bochner, S.. Lin, A . , & McLeod, B. Ll. (1979). Cross-cultural contact and the developmen tof an international perspective. Journal of Social Psychology, 107, 29-41.Brislin, R. W. (1981). Cross-cultural enco unter s. New York: Pergamon Press.Chataway, C. J . & Berry, J. W. (1989). Acculturation experiences, appraisal. coping andadaptation: A comparison of Hong Kong Chine se, French and English students in Ca nad a.Canad ian Journal of Behav ioral Science, 21,295-309.Cochrane, R . & Sobel, M . (1980). Life stresses and psychological con sequ enc es. In P. Feld-man & J . Orford (Ed s. ) , Psychological p roblems: Th e social conrexr. Chichester. U.K.:John Wiley.

Cochrane, R . & Stopes-Roe, M . (1980). Fac tors affecting the d istribution of psychologicalsymptoms in urban areas of England. A c f a Psychiarrica Scandinavia, 61 . 445-460.Cole ,J . , A l l e n , F . ,& Green, J . (1980). Survey of heal thproblemsofoverseass tudents . SocialScience and Medicine, 14 . 627-631.Collins, B. E. (1974). Four comp onents of the Rot ter Internal-External Scale: Belief in adifficult world, a just wo rld, a p redictable wo rld a nd a politically respon sive world. Journalo f Personality and Social Psychology, 2 9 , 381-391.

Downloa


ary2010


19/20

146 WARD AND KENNEDYDyal. J . A., Rybensky, L.. & Somers, M. (1988). Marital and acculturative strain amongIndo-Canadian and Euro-C anadian women. In J . W. Berry & R . C. Annis (Eds.) , Ethnic

psychology : Research and practice with immigrants. refugees, native people s, ethnic groupsand sojourners. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.

Eysenck, H. J. & Eysenck. S . B. G . (1975). Ma nua lofth e Eysenck Personality Questionnaire.London: Hodder & Stoughton.Fisher, S. (1989). Homesickness, cognition and health. Hove, U.K.: Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates Ltd .Fontaine, G . (1986). Roles of social suppo rt systems in overseas relocation: Implications forintercultural training. International Journal of Intercultural Relations. 10, 361-378.

Furnham, A.& Bochner. S. (1982). Social difficulty in a foreign culture: An em pirical analysisof culture shock. In S. Bochner (Ed.), Cultures in contact. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Furnharn, A. & Bochner, S. (1986). Culture shoc k: Psychological reactions to unfamiliarenvironments. London: Methuen.

Furnham, A. & Tresize, L. (1981). Th e mental health of foreign stu dents . Social Science andMedicine, 17 , 365-370.Gardner , G. H . (1962). Cross-cultural communication. Journal of Social Psychology, 58,Harris, J . G. (1972). Prediction of success on a distant Pacific island: Peace corps style.

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 38, 181-190.Hinkle, L. (1974). The effect of exposure of cultu re change, social change and changes ininterpersonal relationships on health. In B. S. Dohrenwend & B. P. Dohrenwend (Eds.) .

Stressful life events: Their nature and effects. New York: John Wiley.Holmes, T. H. & Rahe, R. H. (1967). The Social Readjustment Rating scale. Journal ofPsychosomatic Research, 11,213-218.Ibrahim, S . E. M. (1970). Interaction, perception and attitudes of Ar ab students towardAmericans. Sociology and Social Research, 5 5 , 2 9 4 6 .Kennedy. A. & Ward, C. (1990). [Secondary school norms for the Social ReadjustmentRating Questionnaire]. Unpublished raw data.Kim, U . (1988). Acculturation of Korean immigrants to Canada: Psychological, demograph ic,and b ehavioral profiles of emigrating K oreans, non-emigrating Korea ns and Korea n Ciz-nadians. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada.Klineberg, 0.& Hull, W. F. (1979). A t a foreig n universify-An intern ation alstud y of adap-tation and coping. New York: Praeger.

Kuo, W . , Gray, R., & Lin, N. (1976). Locus of control and symptoms of distress amongChinese-Americans. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 22, 1 7 6 1 8 7 .Lazarus, R. S. & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York: Springer.Masuda, M., Lin, K.-M., & Tazuma. L. (1982). Life changes among the Vietnamese refu-gees. In R. Nann (Ed.), Uprooting and surviving: Adaptation and resettlement of migrantfamilies and children. Boston, MA: Reidel.McNair, D., Lorr, M.. & Droppleman. L. (1971). Profile of mood states. San Diego, CA:Educational and Industrial Testing Service.Ng. W. S.-W. (1962). Overseas students: A general survey of the presence of overseas studentsin Christchurch and an investigation into the opinions of these students as to their generalproblems of adjustment to the conditions of living in Christchurch. Unpublished master'sthesis, University of Canterbury, Christchurch. New Zealand.Noor, M. Y. (1968). A study of overseas students in Christchurch. Unpublished mastei'sthesis, University of Ca nterb ury , Christchurch, New Zealand.Perkins, C . S. . Perkins, M. L., Guglielmino. L. M ., & Reiff, R . F. (1977). A comparison ofadjustmen t problems of three international student groups. Journal of College StudentPersonnel, 18.382-388.

24 1-256.

Downloa


ary2010


20/20

PSYCHOLOGICAL AN D SOCIO-CULTURAL AD JUS TM EN T 147Pruitt , F. J. (1978). The adaptation of African students to American society. InternationalJournal of Intercultural Relations, 2, 90-1 18.Rotter , J . B . (1966). Generali zed expectancies for internal vs. external control of reinforce-

ment. Psychological Monographs, 80 (1, Whole No. 609).Searle, W . & Ward, C. (1990). T h e prediction of psychological and socio-cultural adjustmentduring cross-cultural transitions. International Journal of lntercitltural Relations. 14 ,

449-464.Sewell, W. H. & Davidsen, 0. M. (1961). Scandinavian studenu on an American campus.Min neapolis , MN: University of Minnes ota Press.Shaughnessy,J . J . & Zechmeister, E. B. (1985). Research methoah inpsychology. New York:

Knopf.Stone Feinstein, B. E. & Ward, C. (1990). Loneliness and psychological adjustment ofsojourners: New perspectives on culture shock. In D. M. Keats, D . Munro & L. Mann(Eds.) , Heterogeneity in cross-culturalpsychology. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.

Tafel, H . (1981). Human groups and social categories. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.Tor bior n, I. (1982). Living abroad: Personal adjustment and personnel policy in the overseassetting. New Yo rk: John W iley.W a r d , C . & Kennedy, A. (1992, January). Crossing cultures: The relationship betweenpsychological and socio-cultural dimensions of adjustment. Paper presented at the FourthAsian Regional Confe rence of the Interna tional A ssociation for Cross-cultural Psychology,Kathm andu, Nepal.Ward , C. & Kenn edy, A . (1992a). Locus of control, mood disturbance and social difficultyduring cross-cultural transitions. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16,175-194.Ward, C. & Kenn edy, A . (in press). Wheres the culture in cross-cultural transition ? Co m-parative studies of sojo urne r adjustm ent. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology .Ward, C. & Searle, W. (1991). T he impact of value discrepancies and cultural identity onpsychological and socio-cultural adju stm ent of sojourners. International Journal of ntercul-tural Relations, 15, 209-225.Westwood, M . & Barker. M. (1990). Academic achievement and social adaptation amonginternation al students: A comparison gro ups study of the peer-pairing program. Inter-national Journal of Intercultural Relations, 14 , 251-263.Zheng, X . & Be rry , J. W. (1991). Psychological adaptatio n of Chinese sojourn ers in Cana da.International Journal of Psychology, 26. 4 5 1 4 7 0 .

Downloa


ary2010

2 - adjustment

Documents