600 words essay and fill the form in 15 hrs

Acculturation and Language Use in Intimate and Sexual Relationships Among Chinese Bilinguals

Tianyi Xie and Renee V. Galliher Utah State University

This study explored ethnic identity and acculturation experiences of bilingual individuals of Chinese descent living in the United States, along with their engagement with English and Chinese languages in sexual and romantic relationships. Chinese bilingual young adults in the United States (n � 190) completed an online survey assessing acculturation levels and sexual attitudes and behaviors. After controlling for covariates and other acculturation factors, mainstream U.S. acculturation (�), bicultural identity conflict (�), and preference for heritage language (�) were all associated with sexual commu- nication. Mainstream acculturation (�) and preference for heritage language (�) were associated with sexual assertiveness. Approximately half of the sample also provided open-ended descriptions of their use of Chinese and English, clarifying the ways they use different languages to accomplish different relationship goals. Language proficiency was the best predictor of language preference, regardless of the context or the topic of conversation. However, an association between language and cultural values was observed, such that participants tended to be more comfortable with English for sexual communication, stating that Chinese lacks sexual vocabulary. In addition, when expressing negative feelings, Chinese appeared to convey more intense emotion than English for many participants. The current study has implications for culturally adapting sexuality education for Chinese bilinguals in the United States.

What is the public significance of this article? The study suggests that cultural identity, acculturation experiences, and language proficiency all relate to Chinese bilinguals’ sexual and romantic attitudes and behaviors. Cultural adaptations for sexual education based on these factors may be relevant for Chinese bilinguals in the United States.

Keywords: ethnic identity, acculturation, Chinese American, bilingual, sexual relationships

Chinese and Chinese American young adults in the United States may experience conflict, as they navigate contradictory cultural norms about sexual and romantic interactions. The extent to which young adults of Chinese descent are embedded in Chi- nese and mainstream American cultures is expected to have im- plications for their attitudes and expectations about romantic and sexual relationships. Previous research also suggests that the use of heritage and English language might influence bilingual individ- uals’ values, self-perception, and emotional expression by eliciting heritage and mainstream cultural mind-sets, respectively (Benet- Martínez, Leu, Lee, & Morris, 2002; Boucher & O’Dowd, 2011; Chen & Bond, 2010; Chen, Lam, Buchtel, & Bond, 2014). Lan- guage may be linked to a cultural mind-set for sexual attitudes and values; communication skills and sexual knowledge learned in English in a mainstream American setting may not be transferrable to Chinese bilinguals’ interaction with partners in Chinese. This study used survey methodology to evaluate relationships among

heritage culture and mainstream American culture identification and sexual attitudes and behaviors among Chinese bilinguals in the United States. In addition, analysis of open-ended descriptions of the use of Chinese and English in romantic interactions assessed the beliefs that Chinese heritage young adults hold about language use with their romantic partners, exploring bilingual partners’ perceptions of the utility of different languages for different rela- tionship goals.

Cultural Context

Ancient Chinese philosophies held a positive attitude toward sex and egalitarian views on gender. Pre-Qin (before 211 BC) canonic texts from both Confucianism and Daoism invoked the concept of yin–yang to conceptualize sex and gender roles (Wang, 2016). Yin–Yang is a dichotomous concept used to depict any pair of concepts that are considered to be equal opposites. However, over the past 2,000 years, a number of major philosophies and religious transitions contributed to the gradual endorsement of more sub- missive female roles (Woo, 2016). In Han Dynasty (202 BC–220 AD), early Confucianist work implied women’s inferiority to men, as Yin was often associated with negative qualities and Yang with positive ones. The rise of Buddhism profoundly impacted the role of women during the post-Han wartime (220 –581 AD) and Tang Dynasty (618 –907 AD), leading to widespread fear of feminine

This article was published Online First April 26, 2018. Tianyi Xie and Renee V. Galliher, Department of Psychology, Utah

State University. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Tianyi

Xie, Department of Psychology, Utah State University, 2810 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322. E-mail: [email protected]

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

Asian American Journal of Psychology © 2018 American Psychological Association 2018, Vol. 9, No. 3, 227–236 1948-1985/18/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/aap0000116

227

seduction and perception of women as “pollution” that interferes with enlightenment, which was soon adopted by Confucian and religious Daoism. In Song Dynasty (960 –1127 AD), under the influence of neo-Confucianism, the asceticism and puritanism were increasingly merged with a political agenda of social stability and national security. The trend peaked in the Ming Dynasty (1368 –1644 AD) and resulted in the devaluation of sexual plea- sure for both men and women and increasing fear of feminine seduction in the mainstream culture. The imperial government developed systematic repressive policies, which continued throughout Ming and Qing Dynasties (1644 –1912 AD) and exert great influence in the modern day (Ruan, 1991).

Like many Confucianism-based collective cultures in East Asia, Confucianism and neo-Confucianism still influence the current Chinese society. Marriage is viewed as a union of families instead of individuals; thus, parents’ permission and even arrangement for marriage are important (Kim, Edwards, Sweeney, & Wetchler, 2012; Lee & Mock, 2005). Discussing sexual topics is taboo and parents usually use indirect ways to convey sexual values and expectations to their children (Cheng, 1997; Kim & Ward, 2007). Conservative values and communication styles toward sex may decrease Chinese bilingual youth’s exposure to sexuality education and lower their ability to talk about sex-related topics. Compared with White Americans in several studies, Eastern Asian immi- grants reported later sexual initiation (Grunbaum, Lowry, Kann, & Pateman, 2000), more conservative sexual attitudes, and less va- riety of sexual activities (Meston, Trapnell, & Gorzalka, 1998).

Compared with Asian cultures, American culture holds a more open and liberal view on sexuality. However, historically Western societies such as Europe and England still considered sex outside marriage as illegal and immoral, and these behaviors (by women) were punished (Dabhoiwala, 2012). American social norms on sexuality started to shift in the 1960s from more conservative sexual values to increasing acceptance of sexual behaviors outside heterosexual wedlock (Robinson, Ziss, Ganza, & Katz, 1991). Today, sex has become increasingly central to mainstream Cana- dian and U.S. popular culture, due to the proliferation of mass media and the Internet (Garlick, 2011; McNair, 2002). Various media forms, including advertising, TV shows, movies and art, contain sexual elements, which reflects the increasing openness to sexuality in the Canadian and the U.S. society.

Globalism and modernization have spread Western values to Asian countries, including the Greater China region, via mass media, but the differences in sexual norms between the United States and Greater China region likely remain significant. Al- though the influence of mass media is consistently associated with Greater Chinese adolescents’ sexual attitudes and behaviors, the exposure to the Western media differs among Greater Chinese individuals such that adolescents from mainland China showed a preference for Asian movies and videos, whereas those from Taiwan preferred Western ones (Lou et al., 2012). Furthermore, the increasingly strict censorship in mainland China in recent years has hindered individuals’ accessibility to Western media, espe- cially those containing sexual content, further dividing the cultural norms on sexuality between mainland China and America. How- ever, in regions not impacted by governmental censorship, such as Taiwan and Vietnam, the influence of Western mass media on sexual attitudes also showed gender difference (Lou et al., 2012). Even for Asian American adolescents who are constantly exposed

to Western mass media, they are under strong influence from their parents because of the interdependent and patriarchal structure of traditional Asian families (Kim, 2009). For example, it is common for Asian parents to enforce rules to limit daughters’ social lives or exposure to media programs with sexual content. It is in this complex cultural context that Chinese bilinguals in the United States negotiate romantic and sexual relationships. Given the po- tential for conflicting values and variable socialization experi- ences, it is important to understand the subjective experiences of Chinese bilinguals as they navigate the developmental task of intimacy.

Acculturation and Sexual Attitudes/Behaviors Among Asian American Young Adults

Models of acculturation articulate the changes and challenges individuals face when they come into prolonged contact with a new cultural context. The acculturation process is influenced by the attitudes of the host or dominant culture toward the accultur- ating group, as well as the intensity of difference in terms of language, values, and traditions. Bidimensional models of accul- turation independently assess endorsement of both mainstream and heritage cultures (Brotto, Chik, Ryder, Gorzalka, & Seal, 2005; Woo & Brotto, 2008; Woo, Brotto, & Gorzalka, 2011). A core tenet of bidimensional models is that identification with main- stream and heritage cultures is independent or orthogonal. Those who exist in the space between two cultures must navigate some sort of bicultural adaptation, as they strive to integrate a heritage culture with a dominant or host culture. The construct of bicultural identity integration (BII; Benet-Martínez & Haritatos, 2005) ad- dresses the extent to which individuals experience culture distance (the degree of dissociation vs. fusion between two cultural iden- tities) and culture conflict (the degree of opposition vs. compati- bleness of the two cultures).

In research stemming from bidimensional models of accultura- tion, East Asians’ conservative sexual beliefs have consistently been positively associated with endorsement of heritage culture and liberal sexual beliefs with mainstream cultural orientation. For Asian individuals in the United States, lower endorsement of mainstream culture was associated with increases in sexual prob- lems, sexual noncommunication, sexual avoidance, and nonsexu- ality (Woo & Brotto, 2008). Lower mainstream orientation was associated with more sex guilt in Asian women (Woo et al., 2011). Sex guilt mediated the effect of mainstream acculturation on sexual desire. Furthermore, higher endorsement of heritage culture was linked to more sexual avoidance. These studies indicate that the bidimensional model has great utility in studying Asian sexual behaviors and attitudes because it provides a more comprehensive framework for understanding cultural identity correlates.

Language Priming and Cultural Mind-Set

Language use has long been considered a core aspect of the acculturation process, with many studies using language profi- ciency or preference as a primary measure of level of accultura- tion. However, for bilingual individuals, language preference may be a more intentional and calculated decision-making process, as they decide which language best conveys the messages they are trying to send in the moment. Cultural mind-set is a mental

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

228 XIE AND GALLIHER

representation involving culture-congruent content, procedures, and goals (Oyserman & Lee, 2008). Lee, Oyserman, and Bond (2010) suggested that the collective cultural mind-set is distinct from that of individualistic cultures on cultural perceptive. As part of culturally bound values, sexual attitudes and gender roles are derived from, and thus influenced by, the cultural mind-set.

Language is frequently used to prime the cultural mind-set for Chinese bilinguals in experiments. Chen et al. (2014) observed the effect of language priming on expressed personality, as well as self-perceived adherence to the presumed social norm of the primed culture. Hong Kong bilinguals reported higher self-ratings on competence and conscientiousness in English than in Chinese, which is consistent with the norms of self-perception in Western culture and Chinese culture. In a review of language and bicultural identity among bilinguals, Chen (2015) suggested that the cultural mind-set underlies the language effect and bilingual individuals change the language they use according to the linguistic context. Languages activate the cultural mind-set that drives individuals to assimilate to the corresponding social norm in their particular context. Because sexual and gender norms are somewhat opposing in traditional Chinese and mainstream American value systems, bilingual individuals may behave differently when different cul- tural mind-sets are activated by Chinese and English. Moreover, memories encoded in one cultural context are more likely to be triggered by the culturally corresponding language (Marian & Neisser, 2000). It is possible that receiving sex education in English may increase bilinguals’ ability to interact effectively with partners in English contexts, but not Chinese ones.

Summary and Research Questions

Chinese bilingual individuals experience complex cultural con- texts, as they are exposed to potentially conflicting sets of values from U.S. mainstream and Chinese cultures. Acculturation expe- riences are likely associated with attitudes toward sexual and intimate relationships, as well as interactions with partners. We hypothesized that heritage ethnicity orientation would be associ- ated with conservative sexual beliefs and actions, whereas U.S. mainstream orientation would be associated with liberal sexual attitudes and behaviors in Chinese bilinguals in the United States. Because U.S. and Chinese cultural contexts socialize men and women very differently regarding their roles in sexual and roman- tic relationships, we included biological sex as a moderating vari- able. Moreover, Chinese and English languages may represent different cultural values and contextual expectations for bilingual young adults. We also investigated how Chinese/Chinese Ameri- can young adults use their heritage language and English in inter- personal communication about sexuality or romance.

Method

Participants

Participants were 18 –30-year-old young adults who reported ethnic heritage from the Greater China region (mainland China, Hong Kong, Macau, or Taiwan). Eligibility requirements included speaking both English and Chinese and having at least one roman- tic/sexual relationship experience. A priori power analysis was conducted to determine the sample size for the study using

G�Power. Assuming medium effect size and � of .05, the study required 68 men and 68 women to obtain power of .80. The sample consisted of 190 participants (M � 97, F � 93) who met eligibility criteria. The average age of the participants was 24.99 (SD � 3.97); 52.60% of the participants reported heritage from mainland China, 34.20% from Hong Kong, 12.60% from Taiwan, and 0.50% from Macau; 25.3% of the participants were multiracial. Time spent in the heritage country ranged from 0 to 31 years (M � 7.60, SD � 7.59) and time spent in the United States ranged from 0.25 to 31 years (M � 14.11, SD � 8.73). Participants reported 30 different current states of residence, with the most common states of residence being California (17.4%), Illinois (10.5%), New York (13.1%), and Texas (9.5%). Demographic information, including age, time in the United States, and relationship status by gender, is presented in Table 1. Compared with female participants, male participants had been in the United States for shorter period and were more likely to have partners within their heritage culture.

Procedure

This study was reviewed and approved by the university insti- tutional review board. Participants were recruited through a Qual- trics participant panel. Eligibility criteria were provided to Qual- trics and their system recruited and compensated participants. Data collection took place on their secure system, and data were deliv- ered to researchers in an anonymous form. Potential participants received a form e-mail notifying them that a survey was available for which they might be eligible. A link from the e-mail sent potential participants to the online survey. The survey started with a screening tool to screen out ineligible participants (i.e., have no heritage from the Greater China region, no romantic history, not bilingual, and not 18�30 years old). After the screening page, a letter of information explained the purpose of the study, the struc- ture of the survey, and the terms of informed consent. Participants were forwarded to the survey if they met inclusion criteria and agreed to the informed consent.

Table 1 Demographic Information for Participants by Gender

Variables Women M (SD)

Men M (SD) t(df)

Age 24.16 (4.07) 25.79 (3.73) 2.88 (188)��

Time in the United States 16.80 (8.35) 11.81 (8.43) �3.80 (163)���

Partners within their heritage ethnicity 5.69 (3.15) 7.34 (2.18) 4.27 (188)���

Women Men N (%) N (%) —

Relationship status Single not dating 14 (15.1) 16 (16.5) — Dating 53 (57.0) 22 (22.7) — Cohabiting or married 26 (27.9) 59 (60.8) —

Number of partners 1–2 sexual partners 53 (57.0) 44 (45.4) — 3–4 sexual partners 14 (15.1) 18 (18.5) — 5� sexual partners 26 (27.9) 35 (36.1) —

�� p � .01. ��� p � .001.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

229ACCULTURATION AND SEXUAL ATTITUDES

Measures

Acculturation. The Vancouver Index of Acculturation (Ry- der, Alden, & Paulhus, 2000) measures acculturation with 10 mainstream and 10 heritage items (e.g., participation in cultural traditions, choice of marital partner, enjoyment of entertainment, and endorsement of cultural practices). Sample items from the heritage subscale and mainstream subscale include “I often partic- ipate in my heritage cultural tradition” and “I would be willing to marry a White American person.” Participants report agreement with each statement on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 9 (strongly agree). Scores are averaged for each subscale (Heritage subscale and Mainstream subscale), and a high score on each subscale indicates high endorsement of the relevant culture. Multiple studies have used the Vancouver Index of Acculturation to measure acculturation for Asian American samples to predict sexual function, sexual desires, and sexual experiences (Brotto et al., 2005; Woo & Brotto, 2008; Woo et al., 2011). It was highly internally consistent (Cronbach �s � .91–.92) in the norm sample of individuals from Chinese, non-Chinese East Asian, and non-English-speaking non-East Asian descent (Ryder et al., 2000). Concurrent validity has been demonstrated by sig- nificant relationships with percentage of time lived in the West, percentage of time educated in the West, generational status, anticipation of remaining in the West, using English as the first language, self-identification as a Westerner, and the mean score of the Suinn–Lew Asian Self-Identity Acculturation Scale. For this study, the Cronbach’s � for Heritage and Mainstream acculturation subscales was .85 and .83, respectively.

Bicultural identity integration. The Bicultural Identity Inte- gration Scale—Version 1 (as cited in Benet-Martínez et al., 2002) is an eight-item self-report measure that assesses cultural conflict and cultural distance. Each item is a statement about the respon- dent’s engagement or attitudes toward mainstream and heritage culture. Participants report agreement with each statement on a scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 9 (strongly agree). The scores (cultural conflict and cultural distance) are calculated by averaging the items within the subscales. A high score on each subscale suggests high endorsement of BII distance/conflict. Sam- ple items include “I am simply a Chinese who lives in North America” (distance) and “I am conflicted between the American and Chinese ways of doing things” (conflict). The BII was used with bilingual Chinese/Chinese Americans with acceptable inter- nal consistency (�conflict � .74 and �distance � .69; Benet-Martínez & Haritato, 2005). The Cronbach’s � for the Distance and Conflict subscales in these data was .52 and .62, respectively. Evaluation of interitem correlations and scale statistics indicated that deleting the last item in the Conflict subscale (“I don’t feel trapped between the Asian and American cultures”—reverse scored) increased the re- liability of BII conflict to .86. Therefore, the Conflict subscale was recalculated with Items 5 through 7. No item modifications im- proved reliability for the Distance subscale, and thus, the Distance subscale was not included in the analyses.

Sexual variables. The Hurlbert Index of Sexual Assertiveness (Hurlbert, 1991) is a 25-item self-report instrument that measures the degree of sexual assertiveness of respondents in a relationship with a partner. A sample item is “I feel uncomfortable talking during sex.” Participants rate how often they experience the feel- ings or situations described in the statements on a scale from 0 (all

of the time) to 4 (never). Positively worded items are reverse scored. The scale was normed with a nonclinical sample of 18 – 31-year-old women. A total scale score is calculated by summing all items, and a high score on the scale indicates high level of sexual assertiveness. Because the original sample included only women, reliability was calculated separately for men and women in this sample. Cronbach’s � was .820 for men and .913 for women in the current sample.

The Double Standard Scale (Caron, Davis, Halteman, & Stickle, 1993) consists of 10 self-report items that assess respondents’ degree of acceptance of traditional sexual double standards. Par- ticipants reported their agreement for each item on a 5-point Likert scale (1 � strongly agree, 5 � strongly disagree), such that higher scores indicate more egalitarian attitudes or less endorsement of sexual double standards. A sample item is “It is expected that a woman be less sexually experienced than her partner.” A total score is obtained by summing all items, and a high score indicates high endorsement of sexual double standards. It demonstrated acceptable Cronbach’s � (.72) in a norm sample of 330 college male and female students (Caron et al., 1993). All items were reverse scored to be consistent with the face value of the scale (high score represents high double standard). Face validity and convergent validity tests showed that scale scores are consistent with expectations on the double standards of men and women’s use of condoms. The Cronbach’s � in the current sample was .92.

The Dyadic Sexual Communication Scale (Catania, 1998) is a 13-item self-report scale that measures respondents’ perceptions about discussing sexual topics with a romantic partner on a Likert- type scale ranging from 1 (strongly agree) to 6 (strongly disagree). A sample item is “My partner rarely responds when I want to talk about our sex life.” A total score is obtained by summing all items, and a higher score suggests better perceived abilities to talk about sex with partners. The DSC demonstrated moderate Cronbach’s � (.81) and good test–retest reliability (.89) in a pilot sample of 144 college students (Catania, 1998). A single scale score is calculated by summing all items. The Cronbach’s � in the current sample was .89.

Heritage language preferences. Nineteen items measured participants’ language use in different situations, with different topics, and to serve different purposes on a 9-point Likert-type scale (1 � English only, 9 � heritage language only). Examples of language use topics and contexts include reading, speaking, with family, with friends, at school, relationship topics, or negotiating differences. Principal components factor analysis of the 19 items assessing language preferences yielded one factor with an eigen- value of 14.09, which accounted for 74.18% of the variance among the language use items. Thus, all items were strongly intercorre- lated, and participants reported consistency across contexts, con- versation partners, and topics in their preferred language of com- munication. The scores of all items were averaged to calculate a total score. A high total score represents preference for heritage language, whereas a low score represents preference for English. The Cronbach’s � for the scale was high (� � .98).

Finally, open-ended questions asked participants to write spe- cific examples of language use during their interactions with their sexual/romantic partners (e.g., “Describe any differences in how and when you use English vs. Chinese to discuss decision-making with your partner.”). Specific items addressed language preference when (a) expressing positive and negative emotions, (b) making

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

230 XIE AND GALLIHER

decisions as a couple, and (c) discussing sexual topics. Of the 190 total participants, the number of valid responses for the open- ended items ranged from 71 to 86. Many participants left the open-ended items blank, whereas some left nonsense responses (e.g., random letters or nonsense words). The open-ended re- sponses about decisions to use Chinese or English in different relational and task settings were reviewed to determine patterns of language use. Participant responses were brief—a few words to one sentence indicating reasons for language choice. The first author reviewed every response, organizing similar responses to create preliminary categories. Preliminary categories were dis- cussed with the second author, and codes were refined and clari- fied. Upon agreement of primary categories of response, the first author returned to the data and assigned codes to each response. Categories were straightforward, given the brief and concise nature of the responses, and included categories such as “use English only,” “English (or Chinese) is more emotional,” or “English (or Chinese) is more effective.”

Demographic and relationship history information. Partici- pants reported ethnicity, age, gender, length in America/heritage country, current and past relationship status, length of longest relationship, length of current relationship, ethnicity of current or most recent partner, the heritage culture of the current or most recent partner, sexual orientation, number of romantic relation- ships, current and past total sexual partners, and the ethnicity of the partners.

Results

Preliminary Analyses

Table 2 presents means, standard deviations, and independent samples t tests assessing differences between men and women for all cultural and sexual variables. Men endorsed more mainstream cultural orientation, as well as more conflict between cultural identities, than women. Women reported higher sexual assertive- ness, lower sexual double standards, and better sexual communi- cation than men. Women also reported preference for English, on average, and almost equal percentage of partners within and out of their heritage culture, whereas men preferred both languages equally and had more partners within their own heritage ethnicity than out of their heritage ethnicity.

Table 2 also presents bivariate correlations among all study variables for both men and women. Statistically significant corre- lations are noted in the table, but interpretation focuses on corre-

lations that attained a medium effect size or larger (r � .30). For women, heritage cultural orientation was associated with more sexual double standard, mainstream cultural orientation was associated with more sexual assertiveness, BII—Conflict was associated with less sexual communication, and heritage lan- guage preference was associated with less sexual assertiveness and communication but higher sexual double standard. For men, both heritage and mainstream cultural orientation were associ- ated with higher double standards and lower sexual communi- cation, and BII—Conflict and heritage language preference were both associated with less assertiveness and communica- tion but higher double standards.

Primary Analyses

Table 3 presents the results of three multiple regression models conducted to examine effects of covariates, acculturation, and preference for heritage language and the moderating effects of gender. The dependent variables for the three models were scores for sexual assertiveness, sexual double standard, and sexual com- munication. The covariates, time in the United States and ethnicity of partners (higher scores indicate that partners were more likely to be of the same ethnicity), were significant in the first step in all three models. More time in the United States was associated with higher sexual assertiveness and better communication but lower sexual double standard. Having a higher proportion of partners of the same ethnicity was associated with lower sexual assertiveness and sexual communication but higher sexual double standard. In the second step of the model, main effects for gender and all of the cultural variables were assessed. Mainstream acculturation was associated with more sexual assertiveness and less sexual commu- nication. BII—Conflict was associated with less sexual communi- cation, and preference for heritage language was associated with less sexual assertiveness and sexual communication. Although there was a trend of gender moderating sexual communication and heritage acculturation, no significant interaction effect was found for gender.

Review of Open-Ended Descriptions of Language Use

Table 4 summarizes the coding categories, and illustrative ex- amples are provided in text. Of those who provided valid responses to the open-ended items, approximately half reported using mainly English with their romantic partner regardless of the topic, either because they were more fluent in English or because their partner

Table 2 Descriptive Statistics and Bivariate Correlations for Cultural and Sexual Variables

Variables Women M (SD) Men M (SD) t(df) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. Heritage acculturation 6.87 (1.18) 7.01 (1.09) 0.90 (188) — .303�� .174 .402�� .087 .280� �.140 2. Mainstream acculturation 6.95 (1.04) 7.31 (0.97) 2.45 (188)� .690�� — .065 �.030 .320�� .042 �.168 3. BII conflict 5.53 (2.06) 6.45 (1.85) 3.21 (186)�� .566�� .330�� — .339� �.160 .217� �.300��

4. Heritage language preference 3.59 (2.39) 5.19 (2.39) 4.81 (179)��� .362�� .105 .580�� — �.349�� .489�� �.492��

5. Assertiveness 90.23 (15.48) 75.52 (11.27) 7.00 (166)��� .031 .156 �.298�� �.437�� — �.520�� .298��

6. Double sexual standards 25.88 (9.39) 37.30 (7.99) 8.95 (187)��� .483�� .444�� .556�� .507�� �.460�� — �.563��

7. Sexual communication 45.87 (9.99) 32.47 (13.40) 7.79 (188)��� �.470�� �.506�� �.552�� �.469�� .393�� �.812�� —

Note. BII � bicultural identity integration. Correlations for men below the diagonal, correlations for women above the diagonal. � p � .05. �� p � .01. ��� p � .001.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

231ACCULTURATION AND SEXUAL ATTITUDES

only spoke English. It is consistent with the result of factor analysis that language proficiency is the best predictor for heritage language preferences across all topics, and English appeared to be the dominant language for the majority of the sample. Among those who reported using Chinese to express positive emotions, Chinese was described as more expressive, intimate, and explicit. However, the same reasons were listed by participants who pre- ferred English to express positive emotions, suggesting again that language proficiency drives decisions about language use.

However, among those who described different patterns of use of Chinese and English with their partners, interesting patterns did emerge. Across topics, participants reported that they tend to use Chinese when it is culturally relevant, such as talking about Chinese-related topics and “words in Chinese that have no English equivalent” (Female, 27 years old). Participants reported using Chinese in culturally dependent contexts such as talking about “Chinese culture or food” (Male, 22 years old), “shared experience or background in China” (Female, 24 years old), family topics involving parents or relatives from China, “political issues related to Chinese government or society” (Female, 22 years old), “jokes or puns that rely on the Chinese language” (Female, 19 years old), or when “Chinese-speaking relatives are around” (Female, 20 years old). Interestingly, seven participants reported that they use Chinese with their partner so that they can have a private conver- sation in public without other people overhearing it, especially for “topics that may not be appropriate in public” (Female, 23 years old).

In contrast, English preference had more to do with its precision and effectiveness for communication—“can explain more of the nuances” (Female, 24 years old), and is “emotional wise” (male, 28 years old). English was considered more issue-focused and often used when “trying to work out an issue with my partner” (Female, 24 years old) to express negative emotion, because, “[using] English is more willing to talk about it [the problem] and [using] Chinese is kind of a blame game what went wrong” (Male, 29 years old). Similarly, with regard to decision-making discus-

sions, English is considered as more effective and concise than Chinese because English “is better for convincing” (Female, 27 years old) and “more specific” (Male, 18 years old).

The belief that English is more effective was especially notable in conversations about sexual topics. For example, participants reported that they use English because it is “more comfortable” (Female, 18 years old), “more vocal and expressive” (Male, 19 years old), or more concise than Chinese because there is no vocabulary for sex in Chinese, “[I] don’t know how to say any- thing sexually related in Chinese” (Female, 25 years old). Partic- ipants also noted that it is “more embarrassing” (Female, 30 years old) and awkward to talk about sex in Chinese such that “It’s harder to talk about sexual activities in Chinese because Chinese people view talking about sex as taboo” (Female, 18 years old).

In general, participants tended also to focus on the tone and intensity of each language in their descriptions of language choice. For example, in the expression of negative emotion, “Chinese [has a] more aggressive tone [than English]” (Male 19 years old), “Chinese words are stronger” (Female, 25 years old), and “more negativity with Chinese” (Female, 25 years old). Specifically with regard to sexual communication, participants described Chinese as more “authoritative” (Male, 26 years old) and “aggressive and loud” (Female, 29 years old), whereas English is more “submis- sive” (Male, 26 years old) and “calmer” (Female, 29 years old).

Discussion

The study aimed to understand Chinese bilingual individuals’ acculturation and heritage language preference with partners in romantic relationships, in the hope to highlight links to sexual attitudes and interactions with romantic partners. In addition, we explored bilingual young adults’ use of heritage and English language in various relational contexts. Chinese and American cultures on sexuality and gender roles are mostly in contrast (Brotto et al., 2005; Dabhoiwala, 2012; Garlick, 2011; Kim et al.,

Table 3 Predicting Sexual Variables From Covariates, Acculturation, and Heritage Language Preference

Variables

Sexual assertiveness Sexual double standard Sexual communication

� t � t � t

Block 1 Covariates R2 � .20��� R2 � 20��� R2 � .14���

Time in the United States .33 4.07��� �.29 �3.77��� .28 3.59���

Ethnicity of partners �.22 �2.71�� .27 3.53��� �.18 �2.24�

Block 2 Main effects R2 change � .22��� R2 change � 34��� R2 change � .39���

Heritage acculturation .11 1.13 .14 1.81^ �.01 �0.13^ Mainstream acculturation .20 2.34� .05 0.78 �.22 �3.16��

BII—Conflict .08 �1.01 .15 2.18� �.22 �3.13��

Heritage language �.32 �3.21�� .33 3.99��� �.39 �4.57���

Gender .35 4.56��� �.40 �6.29��� .32 4.94���

Block 3 Interactions R2 change � .02 R2 change � .01 R2 change � .02

Heritage Acculturation Gender �.03 �.04 �.14 �0.26 .23 0.43 Mainstream Acculturation Gender .75 1.17 �.86 �1.62 .99 1.87^ BII—Conflict Gender .30 1.28 �.07 �0.34 .09 0.46 Heritage Language Gender �.27 �1.08 .27 1.25 �.19 �0.88

Note. BII � bicultural identity integration. ^ p � .10. � p � .05. �� p � .01. ��� p � .001.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

232 XIE AND GALLIHER

2012; McNair, 2002; Robinson et al., 1991); thus, navigating through the two cultures to develop sexual beliefs and a style of romantic interactions is a unique challenge for Chinese young adults in the United States. In addition, previous cognitive studies suggested that linguistic contexts activate the cultural mind-set, which impacts individual’s cognitive and emotional responses (Boucher & O’Dowd, 2011; Chen et al., 2014; Hong, Morris, Chiu, & Benet-Martínez, 2000; Oyserman & Lee, 2008) and potentially influences bilingual individuals’ interactions with their romantic/sexual partners. The current study builds on previous literature by examining associations among acculturation, BII, and sexual/romantic attitudes, as well as the heritage language prefer- ence of bilingual individuals in these topics.

Acculturation, Gender, and Sexual Relationship

Our evidence supports the hypothesis that heritage and main- stream acculturation and BII—Conflict are all significantly asso- ciated with sexual attitudes. In particular, Chinese bilinguals who endorse Western values are more likely to describe themselves as sexually assertive with partners, and those who perceive Western and Chinese cultures as oppositional may communicate less effec- tively with partners on sex-related topics. The result fits the overall pattern in the literature that mainstream acculturation is consis- tently positively associated with egalitarian sexual values and sexual permissiveness among Asian Americans (Brotto et al., 2005; Woo & Brotto, 2008).

It is surprising that higher mainstream acculturation was asso- ciated with lower reports of sexual communication in current study, which was not consistent with our hypothesis and previous findings that mainstream acculturation is positively associated with sexual communication (Woo & Brotto, 2008). It is important to note that the DSC (Catania, 1998) used in the current study is designed to capture an individual’s perception on how well the couple is able to communicate with each other (e.g., items like “My partner rarely responds when I want to talk about our sex life.”), whereas Woo and Brotto (2008) used the noncommunica- tion subscale of Golombok Rust Inventory of Sexual Satisfaction (Rust & Golombok, 1986), which focuses on whether individuals are able to communicate with their partners about their sexual experience. It is possible that mainstream acculturation is associ- ated with increased individual ability to express sexual prefer- ences, but it may not necessarily improve the couple’s ability to communicate, negotiate, and carry out a plan together. Sense of distress, discouragement, and frustration from disagreements may increase conflict in relationships (Papp, Goeke-Morey, & Cum- mings, 2007), further hindering their ability to effectively commu- nicate.

This explanation appeared to be supported by further examina- tion of the interactions, which suggested that there was a trend of gender moderating the relationship between mainstream accultur- ation and sexual communication such that the negative association was particularly strong for male participants in the sample. Inde- pendent t tests suggested that although men, on average, showed significantly more endorsement of mainstream acculturation than women, and they also reported significant lower ability in sexual communication than women. The gender difference might be associated with the fact that the male participants in the current study had more partners from within Chinese culture than women, which is consistent with the general pattern of partner preference in Asian Americans (Mok, 1999). Compared with women, men were more likely to have Chinese partners who endorse heritage values; thus for men, increased mainstream acculturation may contribute to increased cultural conflicts with partners on the aspect of sexual communication. This association between accul- turation mismatch and couple’s negativity is consistent with pre- vious findings on Mexican American adolescents (Williams & Rueda, 2016). Therefore, addressing the cultural conflicts that arise from acculturation mismatch may be particularly important for Chinese men. However, future research is needed to further examine the finding by assessing a sample with both partners and reexamining gender as a moderator to parse out the relationships among these variables.

Table 4 Open-Ended Responses Regarding Language Use

Language difference in . . . N (%)

Expressing positive emotions (valid responses N � 85) Partner only speaks English/participant is more fluent in

English 38 (44.7) English is more expressive/intimate/explicit 11 (12.9) Chinese is more expressive/intimate/explicit 5 (5.8) Context-dependent/cultural difference 9 (10.6) Other difference (tone, expression, etc.) 5 (5.8) No/little difference 11 (12.9)

Expressing negative emotions (valid responses N � 81) Partner only speaks English/participant is more fluent in

English 40 (49.4) English has clearer labels for emotion/is issue focused 10 (12.3) Chinese expresses stronger emotion/is emotion focused 15 (18.5) Context-dependent/cultural difference 3 (3.7) Other difference (tone, emotional distance, etc.) 12 (14.8) No/little difference 7 (8.6)

Making decisions (valid responses N � 79) Partner only speaks English/participant is more fluent in

English 40 (50.6) English is more compromising/effective communication 10 (12.7) Chinese is more compromising/effective communication 3 (3.8) Context-dependent/cultural difference 7 (8.9) Other difference (tone, expression, etc.) 8 (10.1) No/little difference 11 (13.9)

Sexual topics (valid responses N � 75) Partner only speaks English/participant is more fluent in

English 40 (53.3) English is more comfortable/concise/clam 8 (10.7) Chinese is more implicit/authoritarian/aggressive 6 (8.0) There is no language for sex in Chinese 8 (10.7) Other difference (tone, cultural difference, etc.) 10 (13.3) No/little difference 9 (12.0)

English topics (valid responses N � 65) Mostly/all English/daily communication 58 (67.4) Sex/relationship 7 (8.1) Complex topics/school/work/finance 8 (9.3) Other (context-dependent, in public, cultural topics, etc.) 13 (15.1)

Chinese topics (valid responses N � 71) Mostly/all Chinese/daily communication 9 (12.7) Sex/relationship/emotion related 12 (16.9) Context-dependent (family-related, private conversation,

etc.) 28 (39.4) Other (simple phrases, making plans, etc.) 10 (14.1) All English (N/A) 27 (38.0)

Note. Codes do not add up to 100% because some responses have multiple code.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

233ACCULTURATION AND SEXUAL ATTITUDES

Language Use

Higher preference for heritage language was associated with lower sexual assertiveness and lower ability in sexual communi- cation after controlling for acculturation and BII, which is consis- tent with our hypothesis. Asserting desires and/or boundaries and communicating effectively on sex-related topics with a partner are linguistic tasks; thus, language proficiency is an important factor driving language preference (supported by the factor analysis of the heritage language preference scale). In addition, literature on language and memory suggests that memories encoded in one cultural context could be retrieved faster and more accurately by the language correspondent to the culture (French & Jacquet, 2004; Marian & Neisser, 2000). This argues for practicing sexual com- munication and assertive skills in the language Chinese bilinguals commonly use for relationship interaction when receiving sexual education.

Inconsistent with our hypothesis and literature on priming and cultural mind-set (Benet-Martínez et al., 2002; Chen, 2015; Chen et al., 2014; Lee et al., 2010; Oyserman & Lee, 2008), no pattern of language use emerged that was consistent with cultural cues across context and topics in the quantitative analysis. One possible reason is that many participants were English language dominant, and those responses might have influenced the overall pattern substantially. Although it was unclear how many participants in total speak only English with partners, among participants who answered open-ended questions (86 out of 190), approximately half of them reported that they only speak English with their partners. Our bilingual sample was likely skewed toward high English proficiency, with a smaller number of individuals who were either dominant in Chinese or who spoke both languages equally fluently. Furthermore, the cross-sectional design of the current study might not able to detect the nuances of culturally based language decision-making. Previous studies on priming and cultural mind-set were all conducted in the laboratory with exper- imental designs. Our data collection relied on participants’ ability to observe and recognize their language use patterns and choices in daily life. Because the effect of the cultural mind-set is often automatic and takes place outside conscious awareness (Oyserman & Lee, 2008), participants might not able to report effects of cultural context.

However, despite the fact that a substantial portion of partici- pants only spoke English with their partners, open-ended descrip- tions from those who spoke both languages with bilingual partners yielded some interesting themes. Descriptions of language use on sexual topics were consistent with the linguistic pattern associated with language priming and cultural mind-set. Sexual topics are long-standing taboos in Chinese culture (Kim & Ward, 2007), which contends that sex is a private matter that should not be a topic of conversation (Kim, 2009). Sexual topics are perceived to cause discomfort and embarrassment; thus, direct discussion of sex is replaced by indirect and subtle methods without verbally refer- ring to sex-related words (Kim, 2009; Zhang, Li, & Shah, 2007). In the open-ended descriptions, multiple participants mentioned their unwillingness to use Chinese to discuss sex and stated that doing so would be “embarrassing” and awkward. One of the participants specifically noted that sexual talk is taboo in Chinese culture, suggesting a connection between Chinese language and the cultural value. The lack of acceptable vocabulary was also

mentioned. Contrary to the conservative sexual values associated with Chinese, participants demonstrated more open and commu- nicative values by stating that English is “vocal” on the sexual topics and they were “comfortable” talking about sex in English. However, language, either English or Chinese, is neutral and does not contain characteristics such as “vocal” or “tabooed.” It is the cultural mind-set associated with the language that influences bilinguals’ perception and use of the language.

However, similar patterns of attributing the effect of the cultural mind-set to linguistic characteristics were not observed in other aspects of communication with partners. Chinese culture values emotional moderation and control, and intense emotion expression in social interactions is generally discouraged (Bond, 1993; Tsai & Levenson, 1997); thus, Chinese should be associated with calmer and less intense emotion expression. But in the themes of open- ended descriptions, Chinese was associated with strong and inten- sified emotion expression. Chinese was considered as “more ag- gressive,” “more negative,” and emotionally “stronger” than English with regard to expressing negative feelings. Literature on bilingualism and emotion suggested that first-obtained language is consistently more emotional than later acquired languages (Harris, Gleason, & Aycicegi, 2006), which may explain why some par- ticipants experienced stronger emotions with Chinese than with English. In the context of expressing negative emotions, the in- creased emotionality associated with the language might eclipse the cognitive schema of the cultural mind-set.

Summary and Limitations

There are several limitations that can be addressed in future studies. First, the current study did not include having a Chinese bilingual partner as an inclusion criterion in the hope to obtain a relatively broad sample of bilinguals and their partners. However, the bilingualism in the current sample was skewed to high English proficiency and many partners were not bilingual, which made it difficult to collect information on their bilingual experience with partners. Future research may wish to recruit a sample of bilingual couples in which both partners speak both languages. Second, the range of sexual behaviors and experiences was broad in the current study. The inclusion criterion for the study was at least one sexual or romantic relationship, which resulted in the fact that the rela- tionship experiences in the sample ranged from married and mo- nogamous to very limited relationship histories. Relatedly, the definition of sexual and romantic partner is relatively broad and nonspecific in the current study. As research on this understudied topic develops, studies with more narrow inclusion criteria may choose to study specific relationship status groups in more depth. In addition, the Hurlbert Index of Sexual Assertiveness used in the study was normed with only women. Although the Cronbach’s � was calculated for men and women separately in this study, and yielded acceptable internal consistency, the suitability of this mea- surement for men is undetermined and future research may wish to norm the scale with men.

The majority of our sample identified as heterosexual, and same-sex relationships were minimally represented. According to 2013 National Health Interview Survey data, 96.6% of adults in the United States identified as heterosexual, 2.3% identified as gay, lesbian, or bisexual, and 1.1% identified as “something else” or did not provide an answer (Ward, Dahlhamer, Galinsky, &

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

234 XIE AND GALLIHER

Joestl, 2014). In the current sample, 90.5% identified as hetero- sexual, 3.2% identified as gay or lesbian, 4.2% identified as bisexual, and 1.6% indicated “other” or “prefer not say.” Thus, representation of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer indi- viduals may have been slightly higher than the general population, but was not large enough to make any meaningful interpretation of results specific for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer population. Future research may wish to address relationship ex- periences of sexual minorities specifically, through an intersec- tional lens.

Last but not least, this study focused on only Chinese ethnicity; it is unclear if these conclusions can be extended to other Asian bilinguals. East Asian countries like Korea and Japan traditionally adopted a neo-Confucian doctrine that espoused more conservative values on sexuality and gender roles from China (Brotto et al., 2005; Kim et al., 2012; Woo, 2016; Youn, 2001). It is likely that bilinguals with heritage from Korea and Japan would experience similar conflicting cultural identities and communication patterns. Future research should investigate how other ethnic bilinguals navigate through various relational contexts.

Overall, language proficiency emerged as the best single pre- dictor of heritage language preference regardless of the contexts or the topics. A pattern of language use that was congruent with the cultural mind-set was observed in open-ended description on sex- ual topics, highlighting the importance of language use in sexual relationship. Both women and men’s sexual attitudes and behav- iors were associated with heritage language preference, main- stream and heritage cultural orientations, and conflict in their BII; thus, young bilingual Chinese may benefit from practicing sexual communication skills in the language they commonly use for relationship interaction when receiving sexual education.

References

Benet-Martínez, V., & Haritatos, J. (2005). Bicultural identity integration (BII): Components and psychosocial antecedents. Journal of Personal- ity, 73, 1015–1049. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00337.x

Benet-Martínez, V., Leu, J., Lee, F., & Morris, M. W. (2002). Negotiating biculturalism cultural frame switching in biculturals with oppositional versus compatible cultural identities. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychol- ogy, 33, 492–516. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022102033005005

Bond, M. H. (1993). Emotions and their expression in Chinese culture. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 17, 245–262. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ BF00987240

Boucher, H. C., & O’Dowd, M. C. (2011). Language and the bicultural dialectical self. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 17, 211–216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0023686

Brotto, L. A., Chik, H. M., Ryder, A. G., Gorzalka, B. B., & Seal, B. N. (2005). Acculturation and sexual function in Asian women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 34, 613– 626. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10508-005- 7909-6

Caron, S. L., Davis, C. M., Halteman, W. A., & Stickle, M. (1993). Double Standard Scale. In T. D. Fisher, C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of sexuality-related measures (pp. 182–183). New York, NY: Routledge.

Catania, J. A. (1998). Dyadic Sexual Communication Scale. In T. D. Fisher, C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of sexuality-related measures (pp. 129 –131). New York, NY: Routledge.

Chen, S. X. (2015). Toward a social psychology of bilingualism and biculturalism. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 1–11. http://dx .doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12088

Chen, S. X., & Bond, M. H. (2010). Two languages, two personalities? Examining language effects on the expression of personality in a bilin- gual context. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1514 – 1528. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167210385360

Chen, S. X., Lam, B. C., Buchtel, E. E., & Bond, M. H. (2014). The conscientiousness paradox: Cultural mindset shapes competence percep- tion. European Journal of Personality, 28, 425– 436. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1002/per.1923

Cheng, H. (1997). ‘Holding up half of the sky’? A sociocultural compar- ison of gender-role portrayals in Chinese and U.S. advertising. Interna- tional Journal of Advertising, 16, 295–319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 02650487.1997.11104698

Dabhoiwala, F. (2012). The origins of sex: A history of the first sexual revolution. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

French, R. M., & Jacquet, M. (2004). Understanding bilingual memory: Models and data. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 87–93. http://dx.doi .org/10.1016/j.tics.2003.12.011

Garlick, S. (2011). A new sexual revolution? Critical theory, pornography, and the Internet. Canadian Review of Sociology, 48, 221–239. http://dx .doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-618X.2011.01264.x

Grunbaum, J. A., Lowry, R., Kann, L., & Pateman, B. (2000). Prevalence of health risk behaviors among Asian American/Pacific Islander high school students. Journal of Adolescent Health, 27, 322–330. http://dx .doi.org/10.1016/S1054-139X(00)00093-8

Harris, C. L., Gleason, J. B., & Aycicegi, A. (2006). When is a first language more emotional? Psychophysiological evidence from bilingual speakers. Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 56, 257.

Hong, Y. Y., Morris, M. W., Chiu, C. Y., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2000). Multicultural minds: A dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition. American Psychologist, 55, 709 –720. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1037/0003-066X.55.7.709

Hurlbert, D. F. (1991). The role of assertiveness in female sexuality: A comparative study between sexually assertive and sexually nonassertive women. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 17, 183–190. http://dx.doi .org/10.1080/00926239108404342

Kim, H., Edwards, A. B., Sweeney, K. A., & Wetchler, J. L. (2012). The effects of differentiation and attachment on satisfaction and accultura- tion in Asian-White American international couple relationships: As- sessment with Chinese, South Korean, and Japanese partners in relation- ships with White American partners in the United States. American Journal of Family Therapy, 40, 320 –335. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 01926187.2011.616409

Kim, J. L. (2009). Asian American women’s retrospective reports of their sexual socialization. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 33, 334 –350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/036168430903300308

Kim, J. L., & Ward, L. M. (2007). Silence speaks volumes: Parental sexual communication among Asian American emerging adults. Journal of Adolescent Research, 22, 3–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/074355840 6294916

Lee, E., & Mock, M. R. (2005). Asian families: An overview. In M. McGoldrick, J. Giordano, & N. Garcia-Preto (Eds.), Ethnicity and Fam- ily Therapy (pp. 269 –289). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Lee, S. W., Oyserman, D., & Bond, M. H. (2010). Am I doing better than you? That depends on whether you ask me in English or Chinese: Self-enhancement effects of language as a cultural mindset prime. Jour- nal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 785–791. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.04.005

Lou, C., Cheng, Y., Gao, E., Zuo, X., Emerson, M. R., & Zabin, L. S. (2012). Media’s contribution to sexual knowledge, attitudes, and behav- iors for adolescents and young adults in three Asian cities. Journal of Adolescent Health, 50, S26 –S36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth .2011.12.009

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

235ACCULTURATION AND SEXUAL ATTITUDES

Marian, V., & Neisser, U. (2000). Language-dependent recall of autobio- graphical memories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 361–368. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.129.3.361

McNair, B. (2002). Striptease culture: Sex, media and the democratization of desire. New York, NY: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780 203469378

Meston, C. M., Trapnell, P. D., & Gorzalka, B. B. (1998). Ethnic, gender, and length of residency influences on sexual knowledge and attitudes. Journal of Sex Research, 35, 176 –188. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0022 4499809551931

Mok, T. A. (1999). Asian American dating: Important factors in partner choice. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 5, 103–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1099-9809.5.2.103

Oyserman, D., & Lee, S. W. (2008). Does culture influence what and how we think? Effects of priming individualism and collectivism. Psycho- logical Bulletin, 134, 311–342. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134 .2.311

Papp, L. M., Goeke-Morey, M. C., & Cummings, E. M. (2007). Linkages between spouses’ psychological distress and marital conflict in the home. Journal of Family Psychology, 21, 533–537. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1037/0893-3200.21.3.533

Robinson, I., Ziss, K., Ganza, B., & Katz, S. (1991). Twenty years of the sexual revolution, 1965–1985: An update. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 216 –220. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/353145

Ruan, F. F. (1991). Sex in China: Studies in sexology in Chinese culture. New York, NY: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0609-0

Rust, J., & Golombok, S. (1986). The GRISS: A psychometric instrument for the assessment of sexual dysfunction. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 15, 157–165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01542223

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 Per- sonality and Social Psychology, 79, 49 – 65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ 0022-3514.79.1.49

Tsai, J. L., & Levenson, R. W. (1997). Cultural influences on emotional responding: Chinese American and European American dating couples

during interpersonal conflict. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28, 600 – 625. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022197285006

Wang, E. H. (2016). Moral reasoning: The female way and the Xunzian way. In A. A. Pang-White (Ed.), The Bloomsbury research handbook of Chinese philosophy and gender (pp. 141–156). New York, NY: Blooms- bury Publishing.

Ward, B. W., Dahlhamer, J. M., Galinsky, A. M., & Joestl, S. S. (2014). Sexual orientation and health among U.S. adults: National Health Inter- view Survey, 2013. National Health Statistics Report, 15, 1–10.

Williams, L. R., & Rueda, H. A. (2016). Mexican American adolescent couples’ vulnerability for observed negativity and physical violence: Pregnancy and acculturation mismatch. Journal of Adolescence, 52, 170 –181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.08.001

Woo, J. S., & Brotto, L. A. (2008). Age of first sexual intercourse and acculturation: Effects on adult sexual responding. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 5, 571–582. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007 .00740.x

Woo, J. S., Brotto, L. A., & Gorzalka, B. B. (2011). The role of sex guilt in the relationship between culture and women’s sexual desire. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 385–394. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10508-010- 9609-0

Woo, T. T. (2016). Discourse on women from the classical period to the Song: An integrated approach. In A. A. Pang-White (Ed.), The Blooms- bury research handbook of Chinese philosophy and gender (pp. 37– 68). New York, NY: Bloomsbury Publishing.

Youn, G. (2001). Perceptions of peer sexual activities in Korean adoles- cents. Journal of Sex Research, 38, 352–360. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 00224490109552106

Zhang, L., Li, X., & Shah, I. H. (2007). Where do Chinese adolescents obtain knowledge of sex? Implications for sex education in China. Health Education, 107, 351–363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/096542 80710759269

Received August 29, 2017 Revision received February 26, 2018

Accepted February 26, 2018 �

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

236 XIE AND GALLIHER