Need helping making a term paper about Chinese American Culture

EMPIRICAL RESEARCH

Intergenerational Transmission of Tridimensional Cultural Orientations in Chinese American Families: The Role of Bicultural Socialization

Su Yeong Kim1 • Yang Hou1

Received: 2 October 2015 / Accepted: 11 January 2016 / Published online: 18 January 2016

� Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Abstract It is important to understand the acculturation

process of ethnic minority youth: To which cultures do

they orient, and how do their cultural orientations develop?

The present study tests a tridimensional acculturation

model in Chinese American families and examines a

potential mechanism through which parental cultural ori-

entations may relate to adolescent cultural orientations.

Participants were 350 Chinese American adolescents

(Mage = 17.04, 58 % female) and their parents in Northern

California. Results support the tridimensional acculturation

model by demonstrating moderate associations among

Chinese American orientation, Chinese orientation, and

American orientation; our findings also point to a unique

effect of parental Chinese American orientation on parental

bicultural socialization beliefs. Most importantly, we

identified an indirect pathway from parental to adolescents’

Chinese American orientation through adolescents’ inter-

nalization of parental bicultural socialization beliefs.

Keywords Tridimensional acculturation � Chinese American � Intergenerational transmission � Bicultural socialization � Adolescents

Introduction

It is important to understand the acculturation process of

ethnic minority youth: To which cultures do they orient,

and how do their cultural orientations develop? For the first

question, recently, researchers have proposed a tridimen-

sional model of acculturation (Ferguson et al. 2014; Flan-

nery et al. 2001). It suggests that, in addition to the ethnic

culture and the mainstream culture present in the bidi-

mensional model, ethnic minorities can orient to a third

culture, one that integrates features of, but is distinct from,

both the ethnic culture and the mainstream culture. While

extant studies on Chinese Americans’ acculturation have

relied on the bidimensional model of acculturation to study

participants’ Chinese orientation and American orientation

(Chen et al. 2014; Kim et al. 2014b), it is important to

consider their Chinese American orientation also, so as to

capture the essence of what it is like to live in the U.S. as

an ethnic minority. For the second question, in the devel-

opment of cultural orientations among adolescents, inter-

generational transmission of cultural orientations through

bicultural socialization may play an important role.

A few prior studies have demonstrated intergenerational

transmission of ethnic cultures from parents to adolescents

through ethnic socialization (Knight et al. 2011; Umaña-

Taylor et al. 2009). Recent studies have indicated that

ethnic minority parents in the U.S. (e.g., Chinese American

parents) socialize their children not only toward the ethnic

culture but also toward the mainstream American culture;

they hold bicultural socialization beliefs, believing that it is

important for their children to adopt both cultures, ethnic

and American. For example, Chinese American parents

may want their children to be ‘‘American’’ but still retain

parts of Chinese culture (Cheah et al. 2013; John and

Montgomery 2012; Lieber et al. 2004; Uttal 2011).

& Su Yeong Kim [email protected]

Yang Hou

[email protected]

1 Department of Human Development and Family Sciences,

University of Texas at Austin, 108 East Dean Keeton Street,

Stop A2702, Austin, TX 78712, USA

123

J Youth Adolescence (2016) 45:1452–1465

DOI 10.1007/s10964-016-0423-4

Parents’ beliefs about the importance of adopting both

cultures may be internalized to form adolescents’ own

bicultural socialization beliefs, thus linking parents’ and

adolescents’ cultural orientations. Therefore, by examining

parents’ and adolescents’ orientations toward Chinese,

American, and Chinese American cultures simultaneously,

the current study aims to test the tridimensional accultur-

ation model and examine one potential mechanism through

which adolescents develop their cultural orientations:

intergenerational transmission of cultural orientations

through bicultural socialization beliefs.

Intergenerational Transmission of Cultural

Orientations

Few studies have investigated the antecedents of adoles-

cent cultural orientations. It is important to do so because

cultural orientations (e.g., Chinese orientation and

American orientation) have often been associated with

adolescent outcomes, such as socioemotional well-being

and academic performance (Chen et al. 2014; Kim et al.

2014a, b; Lim et al. 2008). As adolescence is a key

developmental period for identity and ethnic identity

formation (Erikson 1968; Umaña-Taylor et al. 2014), it is

important to study how cultural orientations are formed

during adolescence. Parents may play a significant role in

developing adolescents’ cultural orientations. Previous

studies have revealed that adolescents’ values and cultural

orientations are similar to their parents’ (Barni et al.

2014; Costigan and Dokis 2006; Roest et al. 2010;

Vollebergh et al. 2001). Parents’ cultural socialization

may partly explain the link between parental and ado-

lescent cultural orientations.

Previous studies have demonstrated the influence of

parental ethnic socialization on the development of ethnic

minority adolescents’ ethnic identity or orientation (Her-

nández et al. 2014; Knight et al. 2011; Umaña-Taylor et al.

2009, 2013). For example, Knight et al. (2011) found that

parents’, especially mothers’, Mexican–American values

related to their ethnic socialization, which in turn related to

their adolescents’ ethnic identity and Mexican–American

values. To date, the role that parents may play in the

development of cultural orientations other than ethnic

orientation has been understudied. This is an important

issue that requires more investigation, because (a) ethnic

minorities in the United States can develop multiple cul-

tural orientations (Ferguson et al. 2012; Kim et al. 2006)

and (b) in addition to ethnic socialization, parents may also

adopt other cultural socialization beliefs, such as bicultural

socialization beliefs (John and Montgomery 2012; Lieber

et al. 2004), which may relate not only to adolescents’

ethnic orientation but also to other cultural orientations.

These two points are discussed in more detail below.

Tridimensional Model of Acculturation

Acculturation is generally defined as a process of change in

cultural identity, values, and behaviors following intercul-

tural contact (Schwartz et al. 2010). In the field of accul-

turation studies, the bidimensional model (Berry 1980) is

currently the dominant theoretical model of acculturation

(Flannery et al. 2001; Ryder et al. 2000). It proposes that

acculturation involves two independent processes: main-

taining the ethnic culture and adapting to the mainstream

culture (Flannery et al. 2001; Ryder et al. 2000). Despite

the plethora of acculturation studies using the bidimen-

sional model (Chen et al. 2014; Kim et al. 2009; Lim et al.

2008; Ryder et al. 2000), researchers have recently begun

to realize the limitations of this model. The bidimensional

model regards the European American mainstream culture

as the sole destination culture for immigrants, thus

implying that the United States has a homogeneous culture

(Ferguson et al. 2012). However, the United States is a

multicultural society, in which the European American

mainstream culture coexists with numerous ethnic minority

cultures: for example, African American culture, Mexican–

American culture, and Chinese American culture. Besides

European American culture, U.S. immigrants may also

refer to these ethnic minority cultures, which also exist in

the new host country (Ferguson et al. 2012).

Therefore, researchers are now proposing a tridimen-

sional model, suggesting that immigrants can orient toward a

subculture in the host country that may capture character-

istics of both the ethnic culture and the mainstream culture

and accommodate exposure and orientation to multiple

ethnic, non-mainstream cultures (Ferguson et al. 2014;

Flannery et al. 2001). A few empirical studies have uncov-

ered initial evidence for the efficacy of adopting this tridi-

mensional model. For example, Ferguson et al. (2012) found

that Jamaican immigrants in the U.S. oriented toward

Jamaican, African American, and European American cul-

tures. Moreover, they found that Jamaican and other Black

U.S. immigrants were more oriented toward African

American culture than European American culture. Another

study of Asian American families proposed that Asian,

Anglo, and Asian American orientations have distinct

meanings for Asian Americans (Kim et al. 2006); they also

found that marginalization of Asian American orientation

had a unique effect on individuals’ depressive symptoms

even when controlling for marginalization of Anglo orien-

tation and Asian orientation.

Similarly, Chinese Americans may orient to Chinese

American culture, in addition to Chinese and American

cultures. Chinese American culture, as a hybrid of Chinese

and American cultures, integrates components of both

cultures, but is more than the sum of those two cultures

(Flannery et al. 2001). For example, ‘‘tiger parenting,’’

J Youth Adolescence (2016) 45:1452–1465 1453

123

which was first brought to wide public attention as a

‘‘typical’’ Chinese American parenting style by a Chinese

American mother (Chua 2011), is neither a traditional

Chinese parenting style nor a typical American parenting

style. Characterized by high levels of both positive par-

enting (e.g., democratic parenting) and negative parenting

(e.g., shaming), tiger parenting is related to the Chinese

cultural emphasis on academic achievement and family

obligation as well as to the American cultural emphasis on

granting children autonomy (Kim et al. 2013). Thus, ‘‘tiger

parenting’’ exemplifies new cultural values and behaviors

that originated in, but are distinct from, Chinese and

American cultural values and behaviors.

According to tridimensional acculturation theory, Chi-

nese American orientation may be correlated to Chinese

and American orientations, but should nonetheless be

considered distinct from them; this theory is also different

from the traditional concept of biculturalism, which is

characterized by high orientation to both ethnic and

mainstream cultures (Flannery et al. 2001; Nguyen and

Benet-Martı́nez 2013). While Chinese American orienta-

tion may be a form of biculturalism, not all bicultural

individuals necessarily endorse Chinese American orien-

tation, because bicultural individuals may vary in their

degree of bicultural identity integration (i.e., how much the

dual cultural identities intersect or overlap), ranging from

discrete and conflicting dual cultural identities to integrated

and harmonious cultural identities (Benet-Martı́nez and

Haritatos 2005; Huynh et al. 2011). Benet-Martı́nez and

her colleagues have revealed that individuals who score

high on measures of bicultural identity integration also

experience low conflict and high harmony between ethnic

and American cultures, and tend to see themselves as part

of a combined, third, emerging culture. These studies imply

that an orientation toward an integrated culture (e.g., Chi-

nese American culture) may represent a blended form of

biculturalism, one that indicates a high degree of bicultural

identity integration. However, by focusing on the relation

between ethnic and American orientations, these bicultural

identity integration studies are still adopting the bidimen-

sional framework of acculturation, without explicitly

measuring orientation toward a third culture (e.g., Chinese

American). To test the theoretical assumptions of the

tridimensional acculturation model, we directly assess

Chinese American orientation and its relation with bicul-

tural socialization beliefs.

Parental Cultural Orientations and Bicultural

Socialization

A small yet growing body of research suggests that ethnic

minority parents in the U.S. (e.g., Chinese immigrants and

Indian immigrants) hold bicultural socialization beliefs

(Cheah et al. 2013; John and Montgomery 2012; Lieber

et al. 2004; Uttal 2011). These parents believe that it is

important for their children to adopt both their ethnic

culture and the U.S. culture. For example, some Chinese

American parents reported that, even though they want

their children to follow the Chinese way of doing things,

they know that children should follow some American

ways to ensure a good future in the United States (Lieber

et al. 2004).

Parents’ cultural orientations may relate to their cultural

socialization beliefs (Cheah et al. 2013; Roche et al. 2013).

Because bicultural socialization beliefs emphasize the

importance of both cultures, ethnic and mainstream, both

Chinese and American orientations may be positively

associated with parents’ bicultural socialization beliefs.

The interaction effect of Chinese and American orienta-

tions on bicultural socialization beliefs may also be sig-

nificant, as bicultural parents who are oriented toward both

Chinese and American cultures may be more likely to hold

bicultural socialization beliefs (Berry 1980). Most impor-

tantly, parents’ Chinese American orientation should

uniquely predict parents’ bicultural socialization beliefs,

above and beyond Chinese orientation, American orienta-

tion, and the interaction of Chinese and American orien-

tations, given that Chinese American orientation is

theoretically distinct from the other two constructs. Fur-

thermore, parents’ Chinese American orientation may be

the most robust predictor of parents’ bicultural socializa-

tion beliefs if Chinese American orientation represents a

blended form of biculturalism.

Parental Bicultural Socialization and Adolescent

Cultural Orientations

Parental bicultural socialization beliefs may influence

children’s cultural orientations through at least two path-

ways. First, parents with bicultural socialization beliefs

may be more likely to expose their children to bicultural

environments, and promote chances for their children to

learn both cultures (Uttal 2011). Second, parents’ bicultural

socialization beliefs may be internalized by their children

(Bisin and Verdier 2001; Vollebergh et al. 2001). In other

words, children whose parents believe in the importance of

bicultural socialization are more likely to believe they

should learn from both the ethnic and the U.S. cultures

(e.g., ‘‘I want to be American but still retain parts of Chi-

nese culture’’). And children’s own bicultural socialization

beliefs may in turn influence their cultural orientations, as

their beliefs guide their choice of activities (Fazio 1990).

Although parents can influence the environments of both

children and adolescents, the pathway through parental

socialization practices (e.g., exposing children to bicultural

environments) may be more relevant to young children, as

1454 J Youth Adolescence (2016) 45:1452–1465

123

parents often have greater control over their young chil-

dren’s environments; for example, parents could decide to

put their child in a childcare center with diverse cultures

(Uttal 2011). The other pathway, through children’s inter-

nalization of parental bicultural socialization beliefs, may

be especially important for adolescents, given that ado-

lescents have more autonomy in selecting their own

activities and are exposed to wider social contexts in which

parents have less control (Barber et al. 1994; Smetana et al.

2004). Thus, because the current study examines adoles-

cents in high school, we focused on the second pathway:

intergenerational transmission of cultural orientations

through adolescents’ internalization of parental bicultural

socialization beliefs.

Parent and Adolescent Gender

Prior studies on cultural socialization have tended to focus

more on the role of mothers, suggesting that mothers may

play a more significant role in transmitting cultural values

to their children (Knight et al. 2011; Schönpflug 2001; Su

and Costigan 2009). For example, Su and Costigan (2009)

found that in immigrant Chinese families in Canada,

mothers’ (but not fathers’) expectations of family obliga-

tion related to children’s feelings of ethnic identity. How-

ever, fathers may play an important role in cultural

socialization as well (Kim et al. 2006; Paquette 2004;

Zeiders et al. 2015). Prior studies have demonstrated that

fathers tend to be more involved in American culture than

mothers (Kim et al. 2006) and are generally more

responsible for socializing children into the outside world

(Paquette 2004). Thus, it is important to include both

fathers and mothers and examine their potentially different

roles in the cultural socialization of their children.

Including both fathers and mothers also allows

researchers to take into account the interdependence

between mothers and fathers (Cox and Paley 2003). Mothers

and fathers can mutually influence each other (Cox and

Paley 2003), which means that parents’ cultural orientations

may relate not only to their own bicultural socialization

beliefs (i.e., actor effects), but also to their spouse’s bicul-

tural socialization beliefs (i.e., partner effects). It is impor-

tant to consider such mutual influence to provide a more

nuanced and accurate picture regarding the roles of both

parents in cultural socialization. Therefore, the current study

included both parents and simultaneously examined both

actor and partner effects (Kenny et al. 2006).

Besides potential parent gender differences, there may also

be adolescent gender differences in intergenerational cultural

transmission.Accordingtothe sex rolemodelofsocialization,

fathers transmit their values mostly to their sons and mothers

mostly to their daughters (Roest et al. 2010; Vollebergh et al.

1999). Hence, there may be more similarities in cultural

orientations and bicultural socialization beliefs for same-sex

(vs. opposite-sex) parent–child dyads.

The Current Study

The present study has three goals. The conceptual model is

presented in Fig. 1. The first aim is to test the tridimen-

sional model by assessing three cultural orientations in

Chinese American families: Chinese American orientation,

Chinese orientation, and American orientation. We propose

that Chinese American orientation is correlated to, yet

distinct from, Chinese orientation, American orientation,

and the traditional conception of biculturalism. Specifi-

cally, we propose that Chinese American orientation will

have a unique effect on bicultural socialization beliefs,

above and beyond Chinese and American orientations,

including the interaction between them. The second and

primary aim is to examine a potential mechanism through

which parental cultural orientations may relate to adoles-

cents’ cultural orientations. We propose that parents’ cul-

tural orientations will significantly relate to parents’ own

(A paths) and their partners’ (P paths) bicultural social-

ization beliefs. Further, parents’ bicultural socialization

beliefs will be internalized by adolescents as their own

bicultural socialization beliefs (C3 & C4 paths), which in

turn will relate to adolescents’ cultural orientations (D

path). In addition, we aim to examine whether the inter-

generational links for bicultural socialization beliefs and

cultural orientations differ across parent and adolescent

gender (M path). We expect that the intergenerational

association will be stronger in same-sex (vs. opposite-sex)

parent–child dyads.

Method

Participants

Participants of the current study included 350 adolescents

and their fathers and mothers in Chinese American families.

Adolescents were in eleventh or twelfth grade, with ages

ranging from 16 to 19 years old (M = 17.04, SD = 0.73).

Females comprise 58 % of the adolescent sample. The

majority of fathers (87 %) and mothers (90 %) were born

outside the U.S., whereas most of the adolescents (75 %)

were born in the United States. Specifically, among adoles-

cents, 25 % are first-generation immigrants, 67 % are sec-

ond-generation, and 8 % are third-generation. The majority

of foreign-born parents migrated from southern provinces of

China or Hong Kong, with fewer than 10 families hailing

from Taiwan. Parents’ occupations ranged from low-skill

(e.g., construction work) to professional work (e.g., banking

J Youth Adolescence (2016) 45:1452–1465 1455

123

or computer programming). The median (and average)

family income was in the range of $45,001–$60,000. The

median (and average) parental education level was finished

high school, for both fathers and mothers. Most of these

families speak Cantonese, with less than 10 % speaking

Mandarin as their home language. The majority of adoles-

cents (89 %) were living with their biological mothers and

fathers; 8 % of adolescents were living with a single parent;

others were living with a biological parent and a step parent

or did not report their living situation.

Procedure

The data for the current study are from a three-wave longi-

tudinal study, with the first wave of data collected when the

target adolescents were in 7th or 8th grade, and later waves of

databeingcollectedevery 4 years.Thecurrent studyusesdata

from the second wave, because we focus on adolescence and

also because key concepts such as Chinese American orien-

tationandbiculturalsocializationbeliefswerenotmeasuredat

Wave 1. Participants in the longitudinal study (n = 444) were

initially recruited from seven middle schools in two school

districts in major metropolitan areas of Northern California.

At these schools, Asian Americans comprised at least 20 % of

the student body. With the aid of school administrators, stu-

dents who self-identified as being of Chinese origin were

targeted. All of these families were eligible to participate and

were sent a letter describing the research project in both

English and Chinese (traditional and simplified). The 47 % of

these families that returned parent consent(s) and adolescent

assent received a packet of questionnaires for the mother,

father, and target adolescent in the household. Participants

were instructed to complete the questionnaires alone and not

to discuss their answers with others. They were also instructed

to seal their questionnaires in the provided envelopes imme-

diately after completion. Within approximately 2–3 weeks

after sending the questionnaire packet, research assistants

visited each school to collect the completed questionnaires

during the students’ lunch periods. Among the families who

agreed to participate, 76 % returned surveys. Four years after

the initial wave, families were asked to participate in the

second wave. Families who returned questionnaires were

compensated a nominal amount of money ($30 at Wave 1 and

$50 at Wave 2) for their participation. Questionnaires were

prepared in English and Chinese (traditional and simplified).

The questionnaires were first translated to Chinese and then

back-translated to English. The majority of parents (over

70 %) used the Chinese language version of the questionnaire

and the majority (over 80 %) of adolescents used the English

version.

The attrition rate from Wave 1 to Wave 2 was 21 %.

Attrition analyses were conducted at Wave 2 to compare

families who participated with those who had dropped out

on demographic characteristics (i.e., adolescent age, gen-

der, nativity, and parent age, nativity, education level, and

family income). Only two significant differences emerged:

boys were less likely than girls to have continued partici-

pating (v2(1) = 12.66, p \ .001), and foreign-born fathers were less likely than U.S.-born fathers to have continued

participating (v2(1) = 4.16, p \ .05).

Measures

Cultural Orientations

Chinese and American orientations were measured by the

Vancouver Index of Acculturation (Ryder et al. 2000),

which consists of 10 items on Chinese orientation and 10

A2

P1

A1

P2 D

Maternal bicultural socialization beliefs Adolescent

bicultural socialization beliefs Paternal

bicultural socialization beliefs

C3

C4

Adolescent gender

Maternal cultural orientation: Chinese American, American, Chinese, Chinese × American

Adolescent cultural orientation: Chinese American, American, Chinese Paternal cultural

orientation: Chinese American, American, Chinese, Chinese × American

C1

C2

M

Fig. 1 Conceptual model of cultural transmission from parents to adolescents. A paths are actor effects, P paths are partner effects,

C paths are effects from parents to their children, and the D path is the

association between adolescents’ own bicultural socialization beliefs

and cultural orientations

1456 J Youth Adolescence (2016) 45:1452–1465

123

corresponding items on American orientation regarding

values, behaviors, traditions, and social interactions. Chi-

nese American orientation was also assessed using the

same 10 items, except that the word ‘‘Chinese’’ or

‘‘American’’ was changed to ‘‘Chinese American.’’ A

sample item is, ‘‘I often follow Chinese/American/Chinese

American cultural traditions.’’ Using a scale of 1 (strongly

disagree), 2 (disagree), 3 (neutral/depends), 4 (agree), and

5 (strongly agree), mothers, fathers, and adolescents sep-

arately responded to each of the items with regard to each

of the three cultural orientations. An average score of the

10 items was computed for each cultural orientation and

each informant, with a higher score representing a stronger

orientation (Chinese orientation, a = .86–.89 across informants; American orientation, a = .79 to .88 across informants; Chinese American orientation, a = .89–.91 across informants). As the Chinese American orientation

scale was used for the first time in the current study, we

also applied one-factor confirmatory factor analysis to

assess its psychometric properties simultaneously for

mothers, fathers, and adolescents. Model fit was good,

v2(365) = 640.07, p \ .001, CFI = .95, RMSEA = .05 [.04, .05], SRMR = .06. All of the items loaded signifi-

cantly on the latent factor across informants, ks = .38–.79, p \ .001.

Bicultural Socialization Beliefs

Parental bicultural socialization beliefs were measured by

three items created based on qualitative research by Lieber

et al. (2004): ‘‘To be successful in America, my child needs

to pick up some American values and behaviors’’; ‘‘I want

my child to be American but still retain parts of his or her

Chinese culture’’; and, ‘‘Even though I would like my child

to follow the Chinese way of doing things, I know she or he

should follow some American ways to ensure a good future

in America.’’ Adolescents’ own beliefs about bicultural

socialization were assessed by three corresponding items

(i.e., ‘‘To be successful in America, I need to pick up some

American values and behaviors’’; ‘‘I want to be American

but still retain parts of my Chinese culture’’; and ‘‘Even

though I would like to follow the Chinese way of doing

things, I know I should follow some American ways to

ensure a good future in America’’). Fathers, mothers, and

adolescents self-reported on a scale ranging from 1

(strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), with higher mean

scores reflecting a higher degree of belief in the importance

of bicultural socialization (a = .77 to .88 across infor- mants). We applied one-factor confirmatory factor analysis

to assess the psychometric properties of this measure

simultaneously for mothers, fathers, and adolescents.

Model fit was good, v2(23) = 32.42, p = .09, CFI = .99, RMSEA = .03 [.00, .06], SRMR = .03. All of the items

loaded significantly on the latent factor across informants,

ks = .62 to .90, p \ .001.

Covariates

The present study controlled for several covariates. As

previous studies have indicated that intergenerational

similarities in cultural orientation may be partly explained

by family members’ shared social status (Barni et al. 2014;

Vollebergh et al. 2001), the current study includes family

income and parental educational level as covariates to

address this possibility. In addition, we also controlled for

adolescents’ age and generational status, given that these

may relate to adolescents’ cultural orientations (Flannery

et al. 2001; Vollebergh et al. 2001). Using a scale of 1 (no

formal schooling) to 9 (finished graduate degree), parents

reported on their highest education level. Parents reported

on their family income before taxes during the past year,

using a scale divided into $15,000 increments, ranging

from 1 ($15,000 or under) to 12 ($165,001 or more). In this

study, family income was indexed by the average of the

father’s and mother’s reports in each household. Adoles-

cents’ generational status was identified from their own and

their parents’ nativity (0 = U.S. born, 1 = foreign born).

First-generation immigrants are those born outside of the

U.S., second-generation are those born in the U.S. with at

least one foreign-born parent, and third-generation are

those born in the U.S. with U.S.-born parents.

Results

Plan of Analyses

Data analyses proceeded in three steps. First, we conducted

descriptive and correlational analyses for key study vari-

ables. Second, to test our conceptual model (see Fig. 1), we

conducted path analysis using Mplus 7.31 (Muthén and

Muthén 1998–2015). Mplus uses the full information

maximum likelihood (FIML) estimation method to handle

missing data.

The path model tested the direct and indirect pathways

linking parental and adolescent cultural orientations and

bicultural socialization beliefs. Inferences for the indirect

effects were estimated using the delta method (Muthén and

Muthén 1998–2015). Interaction products for continuous

variables were included in the path model to test interac-

tion effects. Before creating interaction terms by multi-

plying the predictor and the moderator, we first centered

predictors and moderators (i.e., parental cultural orienta-

tions and bicultural socialization beliefs). Third, to test

whether the links between parents’ and adolescents’ vari-

ables varied across parent and adolescent gender, we used

J Youth Adolescence (2016) 45:1452–1465 1457

123

Wald tests of parameter constraints and multi-group

comparison. Parental educational level, family income, and

adolescent generational status, age, and gender (except

when it was tested as a moderator) were included in all

models as covariates.

Descriptive Statistics

Table 1 displays means, standard deviations, and bivariate

correlations of the key study variables. First, we found that,

on average, participants, including fathers (M = 3.54,

SD = .53), mothers (M = 3.58, SD = .57), and adoles-

cents (M = 3.73, SD = .60), reported a mean score

between ‘‘neutral/depends’’ to ‘‘agree’’ on Chinese Amer-

ican orientation, suggesting that they agreed to a certain

extent that they endorsed Chinese American values,

behaviors, traditions, and social interactions. One-way

ANOVA demonstrated that adolescents’ Chinese Ameri-

can orientation varied across generational status,

F(2,339) = 6.22, p \ .01, with the second generation (M = 3.80, SD = .60) being higher than the first

(M = 3.61, SD = .53) and third (M = 3.44, SD = .69).

Thus, two dummy variables (labeled ‘‘first generation’’ and

‘‘third generation’’) were created to represent adolescent

generational status, with the second generation being the

reference group. These two dummy variables were inclu-

ded as covariates in the analyses of path models.

Second, correlation analyses demonstrated that Chinese

American orientation was moderately associated with

Chinese orientation (rs range from .40 to .63 across

informants) and American orientation (rs range from .33 to

.42 across informants). These moderate correlations sug-

gest that Chinese American orientation is correlated to, yet

probably distinct from, Chinese orientation and American

orientation.

Moreover, as shown in Table 1, there were positive

associations between parental and adolescent cultural ori-

entations (rs range from .12 to .35). We also found positive

associations between parental and adolescent bicultural

socialization beliefs (r = .23 for mother-adolescent dyads,

r = .12 for father-adolescent dyads). Finally, there were

positive associations between cultural orientations and

bicultural socialization beliefs for both parents (rs range

from .13 to .35) and adolescents (rs range from .17 to .24).

Analysis of Path Model

We first tested the conceptual model with all path param-

eters freely estimated. Model fit for this basic model was

good, v2(38) = 53.75, p = .05; CFI = .99; RMSEA = .03 [.00, .05]; SRMR = .03. Then, we tested

whether the links between parental orientations and par-

ental bicultural socialization beliefs differed across T a b le

1 M e a n s, st a n d a rd

d e v ia ti o n s, a n d z e ro -o rd e r c o rr e la ti o n s a m o n g st u d y v a ri a b le s

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 1 0

1 1

1 2

M S D

1 . A

C h in e se

A m e ri c a n o ri e n ta ti o n

– 3 .7 3

0 .6 0

2 . A

C h in e se

o ri e n ta ti o n

.6 3 * * *

– 3 .7 9

0 .5 6

3 . A

A m e ri c a n o ri e n ta ti o n

.4 2 * * *

.4 5 * * *

– 3 .8 0

0 .4 4

4 . A

B ic u lt u ra l so c ia li z a ti o n b e li e fs

.2 4 * * *

.1 8 * * *

.1 7 * * *

– 3 .3 1

0 .7 3

5 . M

C h in e se

A m e ri c a n o ri e n ta ti o n

.2 5 * * *

.1 7 * *

.1 7 * *

.1 4 *

– 3 .5 8

0 .5 7

6 . M

C h in e se

o ri e n ta ti o n

.2 6 * * *

.3 2 * * *

.1 1 *

.1 6 * *

.4 0 * * *

– 3 .8 6

0 .5 0

7 . M

A m e ri c a n o ri e n ta ti o n

.0 3

- .0 5

.2 1 * * *

.0 6

.4 0 * * *

.1 8 * * *

– 3 .3 7

0 .4 9

8 . M

B ic u lt u ra l so c ia li z a ti o n b e li e fs

.1 9 * * *

.1 9 * * *

.1 6 * *

.2 3 * * *

.3 5 * * *

.3 3 * * *

.1 3 *

– 3 .7 8

0 .6 9

9 . F C h in e se

A m e ri c a n o ri e n ta ti o n

.1 8 * *

.2 1 * * *

.2 7 * * *

.1 5 *

.4 4 * * *

.3 0 * * *

.3 1 * * *

.2 6 * * *

– 3 .5 4

0 .5 3

1 0 . F C h in e se

o ri e n ta ti o n

.2 7 * * *

.3 5 * * *

.2 0 * * *

.1 8 * *

.2 7 * * *

.5 4 * * *

.0 4

.3 0 * * *

.4 5 * * *

– 3 .8 4

0 .5 1

1 1 . F A m e ri c a n o ri e n ta ti o n

.0 2

- .0 9

.1 7 * *

- .0 1

.2 0 * * *

- .0 3

.4 0 * * *

.0 2

.3 3 * * *

.0 5

– 3 .3 9

0 .5 0

1 2 . F B ic u lt u ra l so c ia li z a ti o n b e li e fs

.2 0 * * *

.2 0 * * *

.0 8

.1 2 *

.1 6 *

.1 5 *

- .0 3

.3 8 * * *

.2 7 * * *

.2 8 * * *

.1 3 *

– 3 .8 5

0 .7 0

A a d o le sc e n t, M

m o th e r, F fa th e r (N

= 3 5 0 )

* p \

.0 5 ; * * p \

.0 1 ; * * * p \

.0 0 1

1458 J Youth Adolescence (2016) 45:1452–1465

123

parental gender. Wald tests of parameter constraints

demonstrated that the associations between parental cul-

tural orientations and parental bicultural socialization

beliefs were similar for mothers and for fathers,

W(8) = 8.72, p = .37. As there is little, if any, theoretical

basis for believing that these associations should be dif-

ferent between mothers and fathers, and because we did not

find any empirical evidence for gender difference, these

associations were constrained to be equal across parental

gender (i.e., A1 paths = A2 paths, P1 paths = P2 paths) to

obtain a more parsimonious model. Model fit for the final

model was good, v2(46) = 62.36, p = .05; CFI = .99; RMSEA = .03 [.00, .05]; SRMR = .03. Standardized

parameter estimates for all paths are presented in Table 2,

and significant paths are presented in Fig. 2.

The results were generally consistent with our

hypotheses. First, for the relationship between parental

cultural orientations and parental bicultural socialization

beliefs, parents’ Chinese, American, and Chinese Ameri-

can orientations were all positively associated with their

own bicultural socialization beliefs. The interaction

between Chinese orientation and American orientation was

also significant. As shown in Fig. 3, when parental Chinese

orientation was lower, parental American orientation was

more strongly associated with parental bicultural social-

ization beliefs. It is worth pointing out that Chinese

American orientation uniquely predicted bicultural social-

ization beliefs, above and beyond Chinese and American

orientations, as well as the interaction between the two.

This suggests that Chinese American orientation is distinct

Table 2 Cultural transmission pathways from parents to their

children

Pathway/variable b SE p

PR Chinese American orie. ? PR socialization beliefs (actor effect) .21 .05 .00

PR Chinese orie. ? PR socialization beliefs (actor effect) .12 .05 .01

PR American orie. ? PR socialization beliefs (actor effect) .12 .05 .01

PR Chinese 9 PR American orie. ? PR socialization beliefs (actor effect) 2.08 .04 .04

PR Chinese American orie. ? PR socialization beliefs (partner effect) .10 .05 .04

PR Chinese orie. ? PR socialization beliefs (partner effect) .07 .06 .24

PR American orie. ? PR socialization beliefs (partner effect) 2.11 .05 .04

PR Chinese 9 PR American orie. ? PR socialization beliefs (partner effect) .07 .05 .16

MR socialization beliefs ? AR socialization beliefs .21 .06 .00

FR socialization beliefs ? AR socialization beliefs .04 .07 .61

AR socialization beliefs ? AR Chinese American orie. .19 .05 .00

AR socialization beliefs ? AR Chinese orie. .11 .05 .04

AR socialization beliefs ? AR American orie. .15 .05 .01

MR Chinese American orie. ? AR Chinese American orie. .17 .06 .01

MR Chinese American orie. ? AR Chinese orie. .06 .07 .37

MR Chinese American orie. ? AR American orie. .02 .07 .83

MR Chinese orie. ? AR Chinese American orie. .14 .07 .05

MR Chinese orie. ? AR Chinese orie. .12 .07 .09

MR Chinese orie. ? AR American orie. .00 .07 1.00

MR American orie. ? AR Chinese American orie. -.09 .06 .17

MR American orie. ? AR Chinese orie. -.06 .06 .39

MR American orie. ? AR American orie. .06 .07 .38

FR Chinese American orie. ? AR Chinese American orie. .02 .07 .80

FR Chinese American orie. ? AR Chinese orie. .10 .07 .16

FR Chinese American orie. ? AR American orie. .16 .07 .03

FR Chinese orie. ? AR Chinese American orie. .10 .08 .18

FR Chinese orie. ? AR Chinese orie. .15 .07 .04

FR Chinese orie. ? AR American orie. .09 .08 .24

FR American orie. ? AR Chinese American orie. .03 .07 .66

FR American orie. ? AR Chinese orie. -.07 .06 .27

FR American orie. ? AR American orie. .05 .06 .42

Bold represents significant pathway

PR parental report, MR mother report, FR father report, AR adolescent report, and orie. orientation

J Youth Adolescence (2016) 45:1452–1465 1459

123

from Chinese and American orientations, and may not be

fully captured by the traditional conceptualization of

biculturalism. Moreover, we found some evidence for

partner effects: (a) parents’ Chinese American orientation

was positively associated with their spouses’ bicultural

socialization beliefs, and (b) parents’ American orientation

was negatively associated with their spouses’ bicultural

socialization beliefs.

Second, maternal (but not paternal) bicultural socialization

beliefs were positively associated with adolescent bicultural

socialization beliefs. Third, adolescents’ bicultural socializa-

tion beliefs positively related to adolescent Chinese American

orientation, Chinese orientation, and American orientation.

There were also somesignificant direct links between parental

andadolescentculturalorientations.Testingofindirecteffects

from parental to adolescent cultural orientation demonstrated

one significant indirect effect, which was from maternal

Chinese American orientation to maternal bicultural social-

ization beliefs to adolescent bicultural socialization beliefs to

adolescent Chinese American orientation (b = .01, SE =

.004, p = .03).

Gender Differences

The associations between parental and adolescent variables

(bicultural socialization beliefs and cultural orientations)

were not significantly different for mother-adolescent and

father-adolescent dyads, W(10) = 13.12, p = .22, nor did

they differ significantly across adolescent gender,

W(20) = 13.76, p = .84.

Discussion

Is there an intergenerational transmission of cultural ori-

entation from parents to adolescents in Chinese American

families? If so, what are the mechanisms through which

.17**

A Bicultural socialization beliefs

A Chinese

A Chinese American

A American

M Bicultural socialization beliefs

F Bicultural socialization beliefs

M Chinese

M Chinese × American

M American

M Chinese

F American

F Chinese American

F Chinese

F Chinese × American

.19***

.14*

.15**

.16*

.11*

.15*

.21***

.21***

.12*

-.08*

-.11*

.12*

-.11*

.21***

.10*

-.08*

.12*

.12*

.10*

R2=.22 ***

R 2 =.21

***

R 2 =.08

**

R 2 =.19

***

R 2 =.20

***

R 2 =.13

***

American

Fig. 2 Path model testing associations among parental and adoles- cent cultural orientations and bicultural socialization beliefs. Note

model fit statistics: v2(46) = 62.36, p = .05; CFI = .99; RMSEA = .03 [.00, .05]; SRMR = .03. Standardized coefficients

are reported. Only significant paths are presented for simplicity. The

model controlled for family income, parental education, and adoles-

cent gender, age, and generational status. M mother; F father;

A adolescent. *p \ .05, **p \ .01, ***p \ .001

1.25

1.3

1.35

1.4

1.45

1.5

1.55

1.6

1.65

Low American Orientation High American Orientation

B ic

ul tu

ra l S

oc ia

liz at

io n

B el

ie fs

Low Chinese Orientation High Chinese Orientation

Fig. 3 Interaction effect of Chinese orientation and American orientation on maternal bicultural socialization beliefs. The positive

association between American orientation and bicultural socialization

beliefs is stronger when Chinese orientation is lower (vs. higher)

1460 J Youth Adolescence (2016) 45:1452–1465

123

these cultural orientations are transmitted? While previous

studies have documented intergenerational transmission of

ethnic cultural orientation from parents to adolescents

through parental ethnic socialization, few studies have

explored potential mechanisms that may link parents’ and

adolescents’ other cultural orientations. Adopting a tridi-

mensional model of acculturation (Ferguson et al. 2014;

Flannery et al. 2001), the present study examined Chinese

American parents’ and adolescents’ cultural orientations

toward Chinese, American, and Chinese American cul-

tures. We provided empirical evidence for the tridimen-

sional acculturation model and identified an indirect

pathway from maternal to adolescent Chinese American

orientation through adolescents’ internalization of mothers’

bicultural socialization beliefs.

Evidence for Tridimensional Acculturation Model

The present study has provided some evidence for the

tridimensional acculturation model. First, we found that the

average scores for mothers’, fathers, and adolescents’

Chinese American orientation were above three (neutral/

depends) on a five-point scale ranging from one (strongly

disagree) to five (strongly agree), indicating that they

endorsed Chinese American values, behaviors, traditions,

and social interactions to a degree higher than ‘‘neutral/

depends.’’ Second, we found that Chinese American ori-

entation was moderately associated with Chinese and

American orientations, suggesting that Chinese American

orientation was related to, yet likely distinct from, Chinese

and American orientations. Third, we demonstrated the

predictive validity of Chinese American orientation by

showing its association with parental bicultural socializa-

tion beliefs. Moreover, our finding of a unique effect of

Chinese American orientation on parental bicultural

socialization beliefs—controlling for Chinese orientation,

American orientation, and the interaction between the

two—further indicates that this third orientation is distinct

from Chinese and American orientations, in a way that

goes beyond the traditional conceptualization of bicultur-

alism. Our results are consistent with Ferguson and her

colleagues’ work on Black immigrants, which has

demonstrated that Black immigrants orient to their ethnic

culture, the mainstream U.S. culture, and also the African

American culture (Ferguson 2013; Ferguson et al. 2012,

2014). These prior studies and our findings indicate that a

tridimensional or multidimensional model may be more

appropriate for use in multicultural contexts.

When new Chinese immigrants arrive in the United

States, they often join existing Chinese American com-

munities (e.g., Chinatown or Chinese American churches)

and are eager to know the stories of Chinese Americans

who came to the U.S. earlier (Cao 2005). This is

particularly true in places with a long history of Chinese

immigration and a dense population of Chinese Americans,

such as in New York and California (where our research

took place) (Zhou 2010). It may be more important for

Chinese immigrants residing in such places to adapt to the

Chinese American culture, rather than to the mainstream

American culture, because Chinese Americans are the

people with whom they are most likely to interact on a

daily basis. Fuligni et al. (2008) found that a substantial

proportion of adolescents from Chinese immigrant families

in California labeled themselves as Chinese American,

rather than as Chinese or American. Therefore, the extent

to which Chinese immigrants endorse Chinese American

orientation, compared to other orientations, may be more

strongly linked to their adjustment (Kim et al. 2006). For

this reason, assessing Chinese American orientation is

important for acculturation studies focusing on Chinese

Americans.

Intergenerational Transmission of Cultural

Orientations

In the present study, we found that there were significant

correlations between parents’ and adolescents’ cultural

orientations; parents’ and adolescents’ bicultural social-

ization beliefs partly explained these intergenerational

associations. Specifically, there is intergenerational trans-

mission of Chinese American orientation from mothers to

adolescents through maternal and adolescent bicultural

socialization beliefs. This finding is consistent with prior

studies demonstrating the role of ethnic socialization in

developing ethnic cultural orientation (Hernández et al.

2014; Knight et al. 2011; Umaña-Taylor et al. 2009, 2013);

all emphasize the role of parental cultural socialization in

shaping children’s cultural orientations. The intergenera-

tional transmission of cultural orientations through bicul-

tural socialization beliefs was found only for Chinese

American orientation, and not for other cultural orienta-

tions, despite the fact that bicultural socialization beliefs

were associated with all three cultural orientations. This is

probably because, among the three cultural orientations

assessed, Chinese American orientation had the most

robust relation with bicultural socialization beliefs.

Because an orientation toward Chinese American culture

may represent a more integrated form of biculturalism

(Benet-Martı́nez and Haritatos 2005; Huynh et al. 2011),

parents who demonstrate a stronger Chinese American

orientation may have more positive bicultural experiences

(e.g., less culture conflict). Therefore, they may be most

likely to socialize their children toward both Chinese and

American cultures. When adolescents internalize their

parents’ bicultural socialization beliefs, they want to

endorse both Chinese and American cultures. Given their

J Youth Adolescence (2016) 45:1452–1465 1461

123

beliefs, they may be more likely to participate in activities

held in Chinese American communities and orient to

Chinese American culture, which integrates Chinese and

American cultures.

While bicultural socialization has been demonstrated in

prior qualitative studies on ethnic minority parents (Cheah

et al. 2013; John and Montgomery 2012; Lieber et al. 2004;

Uttal 2011), this study is among the first to assess this

approach to cultural socialization and to identify its role in

developing adolescent cultural orientations. Compared to

ethnic socialization, bicultural socialization may better

capture ethnic minority parents’ approach to cultural

socialization, as it recognizes parents’ role in shaping

children’s cultural orientations more generally, rather than

implying that their influence is limited to passing on their

heritage culture. However, the present study examined only

beliefs about the importance of adopting both the Chinese

and American cultures. Future studies should also investi-

gate parents’ actual socialization practices, and how these

correspond to their bicultural socialization beliefs. For

example, do they require their children to speak both

Chinese and English, encourage their children to have both

Chinese and American friends, and create opportunities for

their children to develop bicultural skills? Examination of

parental bicultural socialization practices, along with

beliefs, may provide us with further insights regarding the

development of children’s cultural orientations.

The current study has moved beyond prior cultural

socialization studies by demonstrating initial evidence for

the role of bicultural socialization in developing multiple

cultural orientations. However, more sophisticated cultural

socialization theories should be developed to reflect better

the advances of the tridimensional acculturation model.

Since ethnic minorities in the United States may orient to

multiple cultures—including their ethnic culture, the

mainstream American culture, and a third culture (e.g.,

Chinese American culture, African American culture)—it

is likely that ethnic minority parents socialize their children

toward each of these cultures. Scholars need to develop a

cultural socialization theory that captures the complexity of

cultural socialization in the context of multiple cultural

orientations.

Parent and Adolescent Gender

Overall, we found no significant gender difference, sug-

gesting that the intergenerational associations of cultural

orientations and socialization beliefs are generally similar

across parent and adolescent gender. However, we did find

that adolescents’ bicultural socialization beliefs were

associated with their mothers’, but not fathers’, bicultural

socialization beliefs. Even though this particular finding did

not reach the level of statistical significance, it seems to

provide some support for prior studies suggesting that in the

realm of cultural socialization, it is mothers who play the

more significant role (Knight et al. 2011; Schönpflug 2001;

Su and Costigan 2009). Taking a holistic view, our study

indicates that mothers and fathers both play important roles

in forming adolescents’ cultural orientations. Although

there was no significant indirect effect of paternal cultural

orientations on adolescent cultural orientations through

paternal and adolescent bicultural socialization beliefs,

paternal cultural orientations had some unique direct effects

on adolescent cultural orientations (i.e., paternal Chinese

American orientation ? adolescent American orientation; paternal Chinese orientation ? adolescent Chinese orien- tation). This suggests that fathers may affect adolescents’

cultural orientations in direct ways, or through other

mechanisms (e.g., actual socialization practices), rather

than through transmission of bicultural socialization beliefs;

this is a topic worthy of future investigation. It is also

important to note that parents’ cultural orientations (in the

case of Chinese American orientation and American ori-

entation) related to not only their own but also their spou-

ses’ bicultural socialization beliefs. Therefore, even if

paternal cultural socialization did not have a unique effect

on adolescent cultural orientations, paternal cultural orien-

tations may relate to maternal cultural socialization, which

may in turn relate to adolescent cultural orientations. Nev-

ertheless, in the current study, the indirect pathways through

spouses’ bicultural socialization beliefs did not reach sta-

tistical significance. Future studies should investigate the

possibility of partner effects by examining the potential

indirect pathway through spouses’ cultural socialization.

The significant actor and partner effects identified in the

current study are in line with family systems theory, which

emphasizes that a family is an interdependent, dynamic

system in which family members’ experiences are interre-

lated and can mutually influence each other (Cox and Paley

2003). Therefore, it is important to involve both mothers

and fathers in studies on family acculturation, to take into

account their mutual influence on each other.

Limitations and Future Directions

Several limitations and caveats should be kept in mind.

First, this is a cross-sectional correlational study, which

means that it cannot indicate causal relationships. Our

inferences regarding the direction of the relations among

study variables are based on the existing literature.

Including multiple informants in the current study reduced

the problem of common-method variance to some degree,

thus possibly strengthening our conclusions. However, any

causal implications taken from our results should be

applied with caution. Although experimental studies are

required to determine the direction of causal relationships,

1462 J Youth Adolescence (2016) 45:1452–1465

123

future studies using a longitudinal, rather than cross-sec-

tional design, may provide better information about the

direction of the observed relationships. Second, intergen-

erational transmission of cultural orientations may be

moderated by parents’ and adolescents’ immigration status.

However, the present study was not able to test this pos-

sibility, because the samples for U.S.-born parents and

foreign-born adolescents were too small to conduct multi-

group comparisons.

A third limitation relates to the measure of bicultural

socialization. We assessed a relatively narrow set of indi-

cators of bicultural socialization by asking parents their

beliefs regarding what cultures their children should adopt.

Future studies should include other bicultural socialization

indicators, such as actual socialization practices, to provide

additional insights on the development of adolescent cul-

tural orientations. Moreover, one item (‘‘To be successful

in America, I need to pick up some American values and

behaviors’’) assumes that Chinese Americans have been

socialized toward some Chinese values and behaviors by

default. It may be better to adjust this item to capture

bicultural beliefs more explicitly, by changing it as fol-

lows: ‘‘To be successful in America, I need to pick up both

Chinese and American values and behaviors’’.

Fourth, besides the three cultural orientations measured

in the present study, Chinese Americans may also orient to

a more pan-ethnic, broader hybrid culture, such as Asian

American culture (Kim et al. 2006). Future studies are

necessary to compare Chinese American orientation and

Asian American orientation, so as to determine whether

they are distinct from each other, and if so, which one

better predicts individual outcomes. Given the hetero-

geneity of Asian American culture (Xia et al. 2013),

however, we believe that Chinese American culture is more

relevant to the study of Chinese immigrants in the United

States. Scholars on Asian Americans argue that the pan-

ethnic label (‘‘Asian American’’) is a more political iden-

tity, which individuals and groups can choose to join or

ignore (Espiritu 1993). At least one study has demonstrated

that Chinese Americans, particularly those in the second

and third generation, tend to choose a hyphenated label

(‘‘Chinese-American’’) to describe themselves, rather than

a national label (‘‘Chinese’’), a pan-ethnic label (‘‘Asian

American’’), or an American label (‘‘American’’) (Fuligni

et al. 2008).

Fifth, the similarities between the cultural orientations

of parents and their children may be due, at least in part,

to their shared environment and social status. Although

our study has adjusted for socioeconomic variables and

generational status, there may be other potentially con-

founding factors, such as the overlapping social networks

of parents and children and the social dynamics of the

communities in which they live, which should be taken

into account in future studies. Finally, our participants

were from an area with a high percentage of Chinese

Americans and a long history of Chinese immigration. As

community characteristics–such as migration history,

ethnic concentration, and neighborhood disadvantages—

may influence the acculturation process (Kiang et al.

2011; Liu et al. 2009; White et al. 2014), future studies

should test whether our results can be replicated in other

Chinese American samples.

Conclusion

The present study is among the first to apply the tridimen-

sional acculturation model to study Chinese Americans’

cultural orientations. Our results provided empirical evi-

dence for the tridimensional model, suggesting that a tridi-

mensional model may better capture Chinese Americans’

(and maybe other ethnic minority groups’) acculturation

experiences in the United States. Most importantly, by

revealing an indirect pathway of intergenerational trans-

mission of Chinese American orientation through adoles-

cents’ internalization of parental bicultural socialization

beliefs, we highlight the role bicultural socialization may

play in intergenerational transmission of cultural orienta-

tions. Investigating these issues of tridimensional accultur-

ation and the intergenerational transmission of cultural

orientation via parental bicultural socialization is critical,

given the large immigrant population in the United States, a

country that is becoming increasingly multicultural.

Funding Support for this research was provided through awards to Su Yeong Kim from (1) Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of

Child Health and Human Development 5R03HD051629-02 (2) Office

of the Vice President for Research Grant/Special Research Grant from

the University of Texas at Austin (3) Jacobs Foundation Young

Investigator Grant (4) American Psychological Association Office of

Ethnic Minority Affairs, Promoting Psychological Research and

Training on Health Disparities Issues at Ethnic Minority Serving

Institutions Grant (5) American Psychological Foundation/Council of

Graduate Departments of Psychology, Ruth G. and Joseph D.

Matarazzo Grant (6) California Association of Family and Consumer

Sciences, Extended Education Fund (7) American Association of

Family and Consumer Sciences, Massachusetts Avenue Building

Assets Fund, and (8) Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of

Child Health and Human Development 5R24HD042849-14 Grant

awarded to the Population Research Center at the University of Texas

at Austin.

Author Contributions SYK created the design of the study, con- ceived of the study and drafted portions of the manuscript; YH per-

formed the statistical analysis and drafted portions of the manuscript.

All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.

J Youth Adolescence (2016) 45:1452–1465 1463

123

Ethical Approval All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of

the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964

Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical

standards.

Informed Consent Informed consent was obtained from all indi- vidual participants included in the study.

References

Barber, B. K., Olsen, J. E., & Shagle, S. C. (1994). Associations

between parental psychological and behavioral control and youth

internalized and externalized behaviors. Child Development, 65,

1120–1136. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1994.tb00807.x.

Barni, D., Knafo, A., Ben-Arieh, A., & Haj-Yahia, M. M. (2014).

Parent–child value similarity across and within cultures. Journal

of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45, 853–867. doi:10.1177/

0022022114530494.

Benet-Martı́nez, V., & Haritatos, J. (2005). Bicultural identity

integration (BII): Components and psychosocial antecedents.

Journal of Personality, 73, 1015–1050. doi:10.1111/j.1467-

6494.2005.00337.x.

Berry, J. W. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaptation. In A.

M. Padilla (Ed.), Acculturation: Theory, models and some new

findings (pp. 9–25). Boulder, CO: Westview.

Bisin, A., & Verdier, T. (2001). The economics of cultural

transmission and the dynamics of preferences. Journal of

Economic Theory, 97, 298–319. doi:10.1006/jeth.2000.2678.

Cao, N. (2005). The church as a surrogate family for working class

immigrant Chinese youth: An ethnography of segmented assim-

ilation. Sociology of Religion, 66, 183–200. doi:10.2307/4153085.

Cheah, C. S., Leung, C. Y., & Zhou, N. (2013). Understanding ‘‘tiger

parenting’’ through the perceptions of Chinese immigrant

mothers: Can Chinese and US parenting coexist? Asian Amer-

ican Journal of Psychology, 4, 30–40. doi:10.1037/a0031217.

Chen, S. H., Hua, M., Zhou, Q., Tao, A., Lee, E. H., Ly, J., & Main,

A. (2014). Parent–child cultural orientations and child adjust-

ment in Chinese American immigrant families. Developmental

Psychology, 50, 189–201. doi:10.1037/a0032473.

Chua, A. (2011). Battle hymn of the tiger mother. New York:

Bloomsbury.

Costigan, C. L., & Dokis, D. P. (2006). Relations between parent–

child acculturation differences and adjustment within immigrant

Chinese families. Child Development, 77, 1252–1267. doi:10.

1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00932.x.

Cox, M. J., & Paley, B. (2003). Understanding families as systems.

Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 193–196.

doi:10.1111/1467-8721.01259.

Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: W.W.

Norton.

Espiritu, Y. (1993). Asian American panethnicity: Bridging institu-

tions and identities. Philadephia, PA: Temple University Press.

Fazio, R. H. (1990). Multiple processes by which attitudes guide

behavior: The mode model as an integrative framework. In M.

P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology

(Vol. 23, pp. 75–109). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Ferguson, G. M. (2013). The big difference a small island can make:

How Jamaican adolescents are advancing acculturation science.

Child Development Perspectives, 7, 248–254. doi:10.1111/cdep.

12051.

Ferguson, G. M., Bornstein, M. H., & Pottinger, A. M. (2012).

Tridimensional acculturation and adaptation among Jamaican

adolescent–mother dyads in the United States. Child Develop-

ment, 83, 1486–1493. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01787.x.

Ferguson, G. M., Iturbide, M. I., & Gordon, B. P. (2014). Tridimen-

sional (3D) acculturation: Ethnic identity and psychological

functioning of tricultural Jamaican immigrants. International

Perspectives in Psychology: Research, Practice, Consultation, 3,

238–251. doi:10.1037/ipp0000019.

Flannery, W. P., Reise, S. P., & Yu, J. (2001). An empirical

comparison of acculturation models. Personality and Social

Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1035–1045. doi:10.1177/0146167201

278010.

Fuligni, A. J., Kiang, L., Witkow, M. R., & Baldelomar, O. (2008).

Stability and change in ethnic labeling among adolescents from

Asian and Latin American immigrant families. Child Develop-

ment, 79, 944–956. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01169.x.

Hernández, M. M., Conger, R. D., Robins, R. W., Bacher, K. B., &

Widaman, K. F. (2014). Cultural socialization and ethnic pride

among Mexican-origin adolescents during the transition to

middle school. Child Development, 85, 695–708. doi:10.1111/

cdev.12167.

Huynh, Q.-L., Nguyen, A.-M. D., & Benet-Martı́nez, V. (2011).

Bicultural identity integration. In S. J. Schwartz, K. Luyckx, &

V. L. Vignoles (Eds.), Handbook of identity theory and research

(Vol. 2, pp. 827–842). New York: Springer.

John, A., & Montgomery, D. (2012). Socialization goals of first-

generation immigrant Indian parents: A Q-methodological study.

Asian American Journal of Psychology, 3, 299–312. doi:10.

1037/a0025556.

Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). The measurement

of nonindependence. In D. A. Kenny, D. A. Kashy, & W.

L. Cook (Eds.), Dyadic data analysis (pp. 25–52). New York:

Guilford.

Kiang, L., Perreira, K., & Fuligni, A. (2011). Ethnic label use in

adolescents from traditional and non-traditional immigrant

communities. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40, 719–729.

doi:10.1007/s10964-010-9597-3.

Kim, S. Y., Chen, Q., Li, J., Huang, X., & Moon, U. J. (2009). Parent–

child acculturation, parenting, and adolescent depressive symp-

toms in Chinese immigrant families. Journal of Family Psy-

chology, 23, 426–437. doi:10.1037/a0016019.

Kim, S. Y., Gonzales, N. A., Stroh, K., & Wang, J. J. L. (2006).

Parent–child cultural marginalization and depressive symptoms

in Asian American family members. Journal of Community

Psychology, 34, 167–182. doi:10.1002/jcop.20089.

Kim, S. Y., Shen, Y., Huang, X., Wang, Y., & Orozco-Lapray, D.

(2014a). Chinese American parents’ acculturation and encultur-

ation, bicultural management difficulty, depressive symptoms,

and parenting. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 5,

298–306. doi:10.1037/a0035929.

Kim, S. Y., Wang, Y., Chen, Q., Shen, Y., & Hou, Y. (2014b).

Parent–child acculturation profiles as predictors of Chinese

American adolescents’ academic trajectories. Journal of Youth

and Adolescence, 44, 1–12. doi:10.1007/s10964-014-0131-x.

Kim, S. Y., Wang, Y., Orozco-Lapray, D., Shen, Y., & Murtuza, M.

(2013). Does ‘‘tiger parenting’’ exist? Parenting profiles of

Chinese Americans and adolescent developmental outcomes.

Asian American Journal of Psychology, 4, 7–18. doi:10.1037/

a0030612.

Knight, G. P., Berkel, C., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Gonzales, N. A.,

Ettekal, I., Jaconis, M., & Boyd, B. M. (2011). The familial

socialization of culturally related values in Mexican American

families. Journal of Marriage and Family, 73, 913–925. doi:10.

1111/j.1741-3737.2011.00856.x.

Lieber, E., Nihira, K., & Mink, I. T. (2004). Filial piety, modern-

ization, and the challenges of raising children for Chinese

1464 J Youth Adolescence (2016) 45:1452–1465

123

immigrants: Quantitative and qualitative evidence. Ethos, 32,

324–347. doi:10.1525/eth.2004.32.3.324.

Lim, S.-L., Yeh, M., Liang, J., Lau, A. S., & McCabe, K. (2008).

Acculturation gap, intergenerational conflict, parenting style, and

youth distress in immigrant Chinese American families. Mar-

riage & Family Review, 45, 84–106. doi:10.1080/0149492

0802537530.

Liu, L. L., Lau, A. S., Chen, A. C.-C., Dinh, K. T., & Kim, S. Y.

(2009). The influence of maternal acculturation, neighborhood

disadvantage, and parenting on Chinese American adolescents’

conduct problems: Testing the segmented assimilation hypoth-

esis. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38, 691–702.

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2015). Mplus user’s guide

(7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

Nguyen, A.-M. D., & Benet-Martı́nez, V. (2013). Biculturalism and

adjustment: A meta-analysis. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psy-

chology, 44, 122–159. doi:10.1177/0022022111435097.

Paquette, D. (2004). Theorizing the father–child relationship: Mech-

anisms and developmental outcomes. Human Development, 47,

193–219. doi:10.1159/000078723.

Roche, K. M., Caughy, M. O., Schuster, M. A., Bogart, L. M., Dittus,

P. J., & Franzini, L. (2013). Cultural orientations, parental

beliefs and practices, and Latino Adolescents’ autonomy and

independence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43,

1389–1403. doi:10.1007/s10964-013-9977-6.

Roest, A., Dubas, J. S., & Gerris, J. R. (2010). Value transmissions

between parents and children: Gender and developmental phase

as transmission belts. Journal of Adolescence, 33, 21–31. doi:10.

1016/j.adolescence.2009.05.017.

Ryder, A. G., Alden, L. E., & Paulhus, D. L. (2000). Is acculturation

unidimensional or bidimensional? A head-to-head comparison in

the prediction of personality, self-identity, and adjustment.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 49–65.

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.1.49.

Schönpflug, U. (2001). Intergenerational transmission of values: The

role of transmission belts. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,

32, 174–185. doi:10.1177/0022022101032002005.

Schwartz, S. J., Unger, J. B., Zamboanga, B. L., & Szapocznik, J.

(2010). Rethinking the concept of acculturation: Implications for

theory and research. American Psychologist, 65, 237–251.

doi:10.1037/a0019330.

Smetana, J. G., Campione-Barr, N., & Daddis, C. (2004). Longitu-

dinal development of family decision making: Defining healthy

behavioral autonomy for middle-class African American ado-

lescents. Child Development, 75, 1418–1434. doi:10.1111/j.

1467-8624.2004.00749.x.

Su, T. F., & Costigan, C. L. (2009). The development of children’s

ethnic identity in immigrant Chinese families in Canada: The

role of parenting practices and children’s perceptions of parental

family obligation expectations. The Journal of Early Adoles-

cence, 29, 638–663. doi:10.1177/0272431608325418.

Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Alfaro, E. C., Bámaca, M. Y., & Guimond, A.

B. (2009). The central role of familial ethnic socialization in

Latino adolescents’ cultural orientation. Journal of Marriage

and Family, 71, 46–60. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00579.x.

Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Quintana, S. M., Lee, R. M., Cross, W. E.,

Rivas-Drake, D., Schwartz, S. J., & Seaton, E. (2014). Ethnic

and racial identity during adolescence and into young adulthood:

An integrated conceptualization. Child Development, 85, 21–39.

doi:10.1111/cdev.12196.

Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Zeiders, K. H., & Updegraff, K. A. (2013).

Family ethnic socialization and ethnic identity: A family-driven,

youth-driven, or reciprocal process? Journal of Family Psychol-

ogy, 27, 137–146. doi:10.1037/a0031105.

Uttal, L. (2011). Taiwanese immigrant mothers’ childcare prefer-

ences: Socialization for bicultural competency. Cultural Diver-

sity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 17, 437–443. doi:10.1037/

a0025435.

Vollebergh, W., Iedema, J., & Meuss, W. (1999). The emerging

gender gap: Cultural and economic conservatism in the Nether-

lands 1970–1992. Political Psychology, 20, 291–321. doi:10.

1111/0162-895X.00146.

Vollebergh, W. A., Iedema, J., & Raaijmakers, Q. A. (2001).

Intergenerational transmission and the formation of cultural

orientations in adolescence and young adulthood. Journal of

Marriage and Family, 63, 1185–1198. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.

2001.01185.x.

White, R. B., Zeiders, K., Knight, G., Roosa, M., & Tein, J.-Y.

(2014). Mexican origin youths’ trajectories of perceived peer

discrimination from middle childhood to adolescence: Variation

by neighborhood ethnic concentration. Journal of Youth and

Adolescence, 43, 1700–1714. doi:10.1007/s10964-014-0098-7.

Xia, Y. R., Do, K. A., & Xie, X. (2013). The adjustment of Asian

American families to the US context: The ecology of strengths

and stress. In G. W. Peterson & K. R. Bush (Eds.), Handbook of

marriage and the family (3rd ed., pp. 705–722). New York:

Springer.

Zeiders, K. H., Updegraff, K. A., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., McHale, S.

M., & Padilla, J. (2015). Familism values, family time, and

Mexican-origin young adults’ depressive symptoms. Journal of

Marriage and Family, early view online. doi:10.1111/jomf.

12248

Zhou, M. (2010). Chinatown: The socioeconomic potential of an

urban enclave. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Su Yeong Kim is an Associate Professor in the Department of Human Development and Family Sciences at the University of Texas at

Austin. She received her Ph.D. in Human Development from the

University of California, Davis. Her research interests include the role

of cultural and family contexts that shape the development of

adolescents in immigrant and minority families in the U.S.

Yang Hou is a doctoral student in the Department of Human Development and Family Sciences at the University of Texas at

Austin. Her research interests focus on how factors in family, school,

and socio-cultural contexts relate to adolescents’ socio-emotional,

behavioral, and academic development.

J Youth Adolescence (2016) 45:1452–1465 1465

123

Journal of Youth & Adolescence is a copyright of Springer, 2016. All Rights Reserved.