The Psychology of Acculturation and Globalization: Implications

For global Security

Agatha E. Carroo, Ph.D., J.D.

Associate Professor

North Carolina Central University

acarroo@nccu.edu

(919) 846-2080

2

The Psychology of Acculturation and Globalization: Implications

for Global Security

Abstract

The application of psychological theories and research to

global security is slowly developing. Jeffrey Arnett (2002)

argues that the central psychological consequence of

globalization is in the transformations in identity or how people

think about themselves in relation to the social environment.

Arnett applies the concept of bicultural identity to

globalization consisting of a local identity, used in daily

interactions, and a global identity that relates to a sense of

belonging to a worldwide culture stimulated by fast-paced

3

technology. The relevancy of identity to global security is the

subject of the present paper.

Psychology, sociology and other disciplines have long been

interested in the relationship and role of identity among

immigrants and ethnic minorities in self esteem, psychological

well being and social competence. Models of second culture

acquisition will be discussed as well as political models of

ethnic management. An attempt to merge significant variables

from psychology and political science will be made to understand

the effects of identity incongruence which endanger global

security throughout the world.

The Psychology of Acculturation and Globalization: Implications

for Global Security

4

Introduction

Globalization comprises a set of processes leading to the

integration and interdependence of economic, culture, political

and social systems of different places around the world.

Although cultures have influenced one another for centuries, the

technological advances (e.g. internet, satellite media) have

intensified interconnections across geographical boundaries and

increased the speed of the diffusion of ideas, goods,

information, capital and people. Thus, distant events can have a

highly significant impact with diverse populations.

The effects of globalization are multifaceted and largely

depend on the demographics of the affected country or region.

For example, people in urban areas tend to experience

globalization with greater intensity than those in rural areas.

In existing pluralistic societies, globalization may be the

impetus for an additional identity which has its roots in

cyberspace. Immigrants or citizens who do not identify with

their native culture or the majority culture, and have no

5

compelling worldview may more easily fall prey to a global

culture. This culture is dynamic and ever changing and may

consist of fundamentalism and consumerism which do not reinforce

the morals, values, art or customs of the host country or the

individual’s native culture.

The challenge for western and non-western, developing and

developed countries is to strike a balance between traditional

values, institutions and cultural norms and a global culture and

identity. The globalizing world is creating economic prosperity,

development and opportunities for most countries while

simultaneously re-igniting local and sometimes ancient enmities

which are being redefined as global conflicts based on global

identities (Muslim vs Non-Muslim).

The security and welfare of nations transcends national

boundaries, but requires the integration of a web of networks to

ensure protection of populations throughout the world. Global

security issues, policies and strategies have stretched

traditional law enforcement and intelligence agencies to the

breaking point. This paper addresses one aspect of this complex

6

issue—the psychology of identity and the process of acculturation

and their role in global security, or more specifically conflict.

Globalization, Identity Demographics and Conflict

Almost no country is homogeneous. The world’s nearly 200

countries include some 5,000 ethnic groups. Two thirds of

countries have more than one ethnic or religious group making up

at least 10% of the population. Tambiah (1989) has produced a

summary list depicting a number of ethnic/cultural groups and

their demographic proportions in various countries throughout the

world: countries with 90-100 percent of its population

ethnically the same ( Japan, Korea, Bangladesh); countries with

an ethnic majority of 75- 89 percent of the population ( Burma,

Cambodia, Taiwan, Vietnam, Turkey); countries with a majority

ethnic group of 50-75 percent of the population and several

minority groups (Thailand, Sri Lanka, Laos, Iran, Afghanistan,

Pakistan, Singapore and Nepal); countries with two large

dominant groups of roughly the same size (Malaysia, Guyana, Fiji,

and Guatemala); and pluralistic countries with many ethnic groups

none of whom are dominant; (Nigeria, Indonesia, the Philippines,

7

and India). The superimposition of a global identity on each of

these groupings could have a significant impact in each country

represented.

Concomitant with this overview of ethnic distribution, the

dispersal of ethnic groups over several nations is becoming

extremely significant in considering global ethnic diversity.

For example, only 16 percent of all Jews live in Israel. They

are dispersed over thirty nine other countries with the largest

percentage residing in the United States (44%). Similarly, Arabs

are found in over thirty seven states. (Jalali et. al 1992).

Globalization empowers these groups to galvanize culturally

similar groups around the world. The Kurdish movement provides

an interesting example of this global phenomenon. Sub-

populations in Iraq, Turkey, Iran and Syria comprise an imaginary

land space which is largely sustained through globalization. A

global identity is being forged through the use of cyberspace

technologies including a satellite broadcast out of London, an

English language web site in Belgium and The American Kurdistan

Information Network in Washington, D.C. Kurdishmedia.com lists

over 692 websites pertaining to the Kurds including political

8

parties, academic and research links, information and resources,

Kurdish news online, communities and groups and art and culture.

The Turkish government has been woefully unsuccessful in its

attempts to block the transmissions that are received throughout

the world.

Globalization adds other interesting complexities to

managing ethnic diversity throughout the world. For example, the

World Wide Web allows immigrants to maintain close contact with

their family and home countries. Ethnic groups that are widely

dispersed are able to communicate events and information to each

other within seconds. Thus, nations are challenged with the task

of expanding the cultural choices of their citizens and

developing strategies for celebrating diversity while maintaining

cultural unity and stability in the face of increasing

globalization.

One major concern with globalization is the overwhelming

influence of western products, ideas and lifestyles depicted in

film, products and corporations. In fact, there are anti-

globalization movements which paradoxically use the internet to

recruit converts and transmit their own propaganda. Some believe

9

that western influence threatens local cultures—their music, art,

drama and commercial films. The fears may be genuine, but the

lure of western investments and commerce is causing countries to

accept the challenges presented by a globalizing world. Rather

than view globalization as another case of hegemony, hi-tech

colonialism or cultural imperialism, others see a great

opportunity for increased multiculturalism and a renewed

appreciation of cultural differences.

There is resurgence in scholarly works investigating the

relationship between cultural identity and conflict. The end of

the Cold War, the explosion of ethnic conflicts following the

fall of the Soviet Union, and the 2001 attacks on the World Trade

Center have all been given as rationales for the renewed

interest. Anecdotal evidence has been mainly used to support

this link. However, in a recent empirical study, Gartzke et. al

(2006) employed a more comprehensive research design with three

independent variables (linguistic, religious and ethnic

similarities) and several control variables to examine conflict

and identity. While many of the results were as expected, there

were some notable findings. Dyads (two countries) that possess

10

one of the following criteria are less likely to be involved in a

conflict: the same religion, are farther apart, are more

democratic, and have greater bilateral trade. On the other hand,

dyads are more likely to experience conflict if they share the

same language or the same dominant ethnic group, are major

powers, are wealthier or are both Islamic states. In addition,

the results suggest that dyads where a majority in one state is

the second largest group in the other state are generally more

conflict prone. The authors concluded that less conflict may

occur with cultural similarity where members of dyads develop a

sense of community or integration.

Gartzke et. al (2006) leave the reader to grapple with the

more significant question of why some nations are able to develop

a sense of community through shared ties while other culturally

similar clusters of countries fail to generate cultural bonds.

The answer is no doubt complex and perhaps lies in the level of

analysis being used by the researcher. Political scientists seek

to describe ethnic mobilizations in countries throughout the

world and predict outcomes in terms of unity, development and

conflict. Psychologists and other social scientists, on the

11

other hand, define identity and the process of acculturation on

the individual and group levels among varied ethnic and cultural

groups. In the remainder of this paper, there is an attempt to

incorporate both approaches and suggest policy implications to

avoid conflict. Multiculturalism in countries is obviously

nothing new. However, incorporating a global identity resulting

from globalization is a recent phenomenon that acculturation

paradigms and policies must consider.

Psychologists and other social scientists have begun to

discuss the impact of globalization on people and their

identities. Arnett (2002) states that the central psychological

consequence of globalization is the transformation in identity.

Ethnic identity, as a social psychological concept, derives from

membership in an ethnic group and provides individuals a sense of

belonging and to the community a sense of oneness and historical

meaning. The process of identity development and formation in a

social context consisting of different cultures is called

acculturation. Models of acculturation characterize the process

and delineate the factors that affect the interactions between

12

and among peoples of different ethnic backgrounds or cultures in

a particular social environment or country. A research design

considering the effect of ethnic diversity on conflict should

include the psychological variables that relate to acculturation

which help us understand its effects on individuals and groups

which in turn affect the community and nation. Thus, in

Tambiah’s (1989) list of countries with varied proportions of

different ethnic groups the process of acculturation would be

significant and allow for greater predictability of conflict.

The next section of this paper will provide a discussion of

acculturation and variables which affect the process in a

positive or deleterious manner.

The Psychology of Acculturation

The concept of acculturation has occupied the thinking of

many scholars in diverse disciplines and fields of study over an

extended period of time. A number of definitions and theories of

acculturation have been proposed. Redfield, Linton, and

Herskovits (1936), defined acculturation as the phenomena which

results when groups of individuals having different cultures come

13

into continuous first-hand contact with subsequent changes in the

original patterns of behavior of either or both groups. At the

group or cultural level, Berry, Trimble, and Olmedo (1986) termed

acculturation as the process by which the collective culture of a

group is changed through contact with another culture.

From a historical perspective, research on acculturation

addressed the impact of modernization on traditional societies

and indigenous people. More recently the focus has shifted to the

experience of immigrants and ethnic minority groups. Most

research on acculturation has been anthropological in nature and

has focused on the acculturation of non-industrialized nations to

industrialized western societies. Within the United States, most

of the earlier studies, which were conducted by anthropologists,

have dealt with the acculturation of American Indians to European

culture (Olmedo 1979). Thus, psychologists are generally

newcomers to the field of acculturation and the theories have not

yet incorporated the effects of globalization.

Berry, et al. (1989) have added to the study of

acculturation five general categories of behaviors experienced by

individuals undergoing the acculturation process. First,

14

individuals participating in this process will experience

physical changes such as a new place to live, a new form of

housing, increased population density and more pollution. The

second category of this process is biological changes, consisting

of new nutritional statuses, new diseases, and the beginning of

interracial/ ethnic marriages. Cultural change is the third

category of acculturation. According to Landrine and Klonoff

(1994) this category encompasses the definition of acculturation,

since the group experiencing this process has to alter its

politics, economic resources, language, customs, religious

beliefs, social rituals and values. The fourth category is the

development of new sets of social relationships. Finally,

individuals undergoing the acculturation process may experience

psychological or behavioral changes due to adapting to new

environments. In this theory of acculturation, Berry et.al.

(1989) address the ways in which acculturating individuals

respond behaviorally to pressure to give up their unique culture

and assimilate to the culture of the larger society.

15

As the definitions and theories of acculturation have

evolved over time to reflect a more empirical approach it

maintains a core concept that has been shared among researchers.

Ultimately, the core of the term acculturation refers to the

extent to, and the process through which ethnic-cultural

minorities participate in the cultural traditions, values,

beliefs, assumptions and practices of the dominant culture;

remain immersed in their own culture; or participate in the

traditions of their own culture and of the dominant culture as

well (Landrine and Klonoff 1994). In light of the experience of

acculturation, ways of measuring a person’s level of

acculturation are essential to understanding cultural diversity

in human behavior. Acculturation scales have been developed for

most major ethnic groups. From this perspective, acculturation

can be viewed as a continuum from traditional to acculturated

individuals. On one end of the continuum are those immersed in

their own cultural beliefs, practices and values and who are

called traditional people. Individuals at the other end of the

continuum are highly acculturated. They often reject the beliefs,

practices, and values of their culture of origin in exchange for

16

those of the dominant culture. Identifying an individual’s level

of immersion in their own culture or that of the more dominant

culture may be helpful with understanding aspects of

psychological functioning. Berry, et al. (1989) state that an

individual’s level of immersion may be accompanied by a great

deal of confusion and anxiety among the community and

individuals. This may be evidenced by striking out against the

larger society and by feelings of alienation, loss of identity,

and what has been termed acculturative stress. There are numerous

behaviors, which may result from acculturation, that are related

to an individual’s cognitive processes and perceptual

interpretations of their experiences during the acculturation

process. The terms cognitive and perceptual give clues that these

behaviors are subsumed under the sentiment of mental health.

Berry and Kim (1988) have concluded that mental health problems

often arise in the acculturation process.

Acculturation and Mental Health

According to Berry and Kim (1988), as a process that takes

place over time, acculturation may be considered a series of

phases: pre-contact, contact, conflict, crisis, and adaptation.

17

In the pre-contact phase, there are two independent cultural

groups with sets of characteristic customs, each composed of

individuals with a variety of psychological characteristics. In

this phase there may be varying mental health statuses in the two

groups; the very motive of contact may itself be the result of

stressors (e.g., overpopulation, warfare, famine) in one of the

groups. In the contact phase, the groups meet, interact, and new

stressors appear. Cultural and behavioral exchange and change

also begin, placing more and more stressors on the group with the

least amount of cultural dominance. Mental health at this phase

is related to the purpose or goal of the contact. For example, if

the intent is to take over, either territorially (by warfare),

spiritually (by conversion), or intellectually (by schooling),

then the consequences for mental health are different from those

situations where the goals are relatively more benign (e.g.,

trade, tourism).

Usually, but not inevitably, a conflict phase appears, in

which tension builds up and pressures are experienced by the non-

dominant group to change their way of life; stress is induced

here, particularly when there is less than complete willingness

18

to change, or when there are discrepancies between the goals of

an individual and those of his or her group. At the conflict

phase both inter-group and psychological conflicts occur and both

imply a decrease in mental health status. Inter-group conflict

creates threats to person and property, while psychological

conflict creates uncertainty and confusion among individuals in

the conflict stage. The uncertainty and confusion during

psychological conflict for example, may be marked by decreased

awareness of self, causing an individual to loose the ability to

function within their own goals and limits. An inability to

function in-turn causes one to perhaps fall behind in society

(e.g., financially) giving way to feelings of helplessness or

anger. If conflict and tension do appear, a highly stressful

crisis phase may then occur, in which the conflict comes to a

head, and a resolution is required. The crisis point is the

culmination of the difficulty for the non-dominant culture to

change. Finally, an adaptation phase may take place, in which the

group relations are stabilized in one form or another. The

varieties of adaptation may or may not bring about an adequate

solution to the conflict and crisis or a reduction in stress. The

19

kind of adaptation achieved also has consequences for mental

health status; those that do not resolve the conflict and crisis

in one form or another are likely to be associated with lower

mental health status than those that relieve it or manage it in

some way.

Berry and Kim (1988) make note of psychological

characteristics of acculturating individuals. Some of the

characteristics are prior to contact and others are developed

during acculturation. In the pre-contact phase certain

experiences may play a part in the development of psychological

characteristics. Experiences that may predispose one to function

more effectively under acculturative pressures are: prior

knowledge of the new language and culture, prior intercultural

encounters of any kind, motives for the contact, and attitudes

toward acculturation (positive or negative). Other prior

attributes are an individual’s level of education and employment

value, self-esteem, identity confusion, achievement motivation,

and cognitive style. An individual’s perception of the contact

experience accounts for variations in mental health, stress, and

the development of character traits. The nature of contact

20

experience is determined by: whether one has a lot of contacts

with the larger society or just a few members of the larger

society, whether the contacts are pleasant or unpleasant, whether

the individual believes his needs are being met, and whether the

first encounters are considered positive or negative.

The reason for recognizing these psychological

characteristic observations as they relate to mental health is

that there are likely to be individual differences in how a

person actually engages in the acculturation process, how he or

she perceives them, how he or she values them, and whether they

satisfy him or her. These perceptions are all likely to be

factors in mental health status and stress level of the

individual, which are of particular interest to the present

author. Ultimately, individuals during the acculturation process

may simultaneously be affected by anxiety, stress, confusion, and

rejection that consolidate the relationship between acculturation

and acculturative stress. A basic proposal of recent work on the

relationship between mental health and culture is that persons

and groups undergoing cultural and social change will experience

a certain amount of psychological discomfort that is evidenced by

21

acculturative stress. The concept of acculturative stress refers

to the psychological discomforts which result from cultural

conflict.

A second way of determining the effect of acculturation on

the individual and group is to compare the models of

acculturation that explain the process of change that occurs

between and among cultures: assimilation, acculturation,

alternation, multiculturalism and fusion

( LaFromboise 1993). Each model identifies sets of assumptions,

outcomes and competencies required for biculturalism. The

assimilation model assumes the absorption of one culture into

another, usually the dominant culture. The sub-processes may

include cultural, marital, attitudinal and civic assimilation.

The underlying assumption of all assimilation models is that a

member of one culture loses his or her original cultural identity

in a second culture. There are three major dangers associated

with assimilation models:

(a) rejection of the new cultural group; (b) rejection of the

original cultural group; (c) excessive stress resulting from

learning the new culture while shedding the incongruent behaviors

22

associated with the culture of origin. This model may work only

in countries that are nearly homogeneous. However, the

assimilationist approach may also enliven small marginalized

groups to become violent. Government policies that support

assimilation as the alternative may include centralization of

political power, construction of a unified legal and judicial

system and a nationalized system of compulsory education,

adoption of official language laws, and adoption of policies that

favor immigrants that share the culture of the dominant group.

Today, the transmission of ideas and human rights discussions

through globalization make policies that support assimilation

without choice unacceptable.

The acculturation model is similar to the assimilation

model, except the individual or group will always be identified

as a member of the minority culture. In addition, the minority

groups members are forced to learn the new culture in order to

survive economically and often become second-class citizens in

the majority culture. This phenomenon is demonstrated in several

countries including Blacks in the United States, Finns in Sweden,

Turks in Germany and Koreans in Japan. This model may result in

23

a host of negative psychological effects including acculturative

stress, alienation, depression and negative economic results.

There is a positive correlation with ethnic mobilization and

hostility among secondary groups and political, economic and

cultural inequality in countries which use this model.

The alternation model assumes the possibility of maintaining

a positive relationship with both cultures without having to

choose between them. Within this model it is possible for the

individual or group to assign equal status to both cultures, even

if he or she does not value or prefer them equally. However,

affected parties are required to understand both cultures in

order to adapt behavior to fit a particular social context. This

model makes it possible to study the impact that individuals from

both cultures have on each other. The concept of bicultural

competency among ethnic groups, which will be discussed below, is

particularly important in nations which encourage this model

among its citizens.

The multiculturalism model promotes a pluralistic approach

to understanding the relationship between two or more cultures.

Berry et. al (1986) state that a multicultural society

24

encourages groups to (a) maintain and develop their group

identities; (b) develop acceptance and tolerance of other

cultural groups; (c) engage in inter-group contact and sharing;

and (d) learn each other’s language. The multicultural model

assumes that an individual can maintain a positive identity in

his or her cultural group while sharing with the larger political

entity comprised of other cultural groups. It is well agreed

that countries who have multiculturalism as a model of

acculturation must balance respect for diversity and pluralism

and national unity. Australia attempted this balance through its

“United in Diversity” policy developed in the 1990’s. The

emphasis was not only on the freedom of individuals to express

and share their cultural values but also their obligation to

abide by mutual civic obligations. India, one of the most

pluralistic countries in the world, incorporates cultural

diversity and responsibility in its constitution. However, the

rise of groups seeking to impose a singular Hindu identification

in the country has created tensions and conflict.

For any of the models to achieve success and to lower the

level of acculturative stress among the affected ethnic groups,

25

the level of bicultural competency should be high. LaFromboise,

et. al identify six dimensions in which an individual or group

may need to develop competence to effectively manage the process

of living in two cultures. Knowledge and awareness of the

history, institutions, rituals and customs of a given culture are

essential bicultural skills. State policies toward public

education and recognition of holidays have a tremendous effect on

this skill. Positive attitudes of own and other cultures

facilitate effective social interactions. This competency

depends on numerous factors including the perception of

political, economic and social inequalities experienced by the

affected groups. Bicultural efficacy promotes the development

and maintenance of effective interpersonal relationships and

networks in both groups. Language competency is a major tenet of

bicultural competence and countries continue to grapple with laws

relating to a national, official language and bilingualism in the

public school system. Possessing a wide range of culturally

appropriate behaviors for any social context increases bicultural

skills. Finally, groundedness or the skill to build networks in

26

both cultures is a competency in the process of bicultural

acculturation.

Some of the competencies can clearly be supported by the

policies of a nation. However, others are individual options

based on the perceptions of the ethnic groups within the context

of the social environment. Recently, there have been deafening

cries for cultural liberty, pluralistic democracies and global

ethics of equity and religious freedom. In the final section of

this paper, a model of acculturation, state policies and conflict

will be discussed. The application of psychological concepts

and paradigms to national and international policies is rarely

undertaken. Interdisciplinary research designs consisting of

political science and psychology are scarce. For empirical

studies to be conducted and yield valuable results some attempt

to place the concepts discussed above in a coherent framework is

needed. The next section of the paper attempts to sketch out in

broad strokes a model based on the concepts discussed above and

propose questions for future research.

27

Conclusion: Toward a Model of Globalization, Acculturation,

State Policy and Conflict

First, three components or independent variables for the

model are proposed: Globalization, acculturation and state

policies. The dependent variables consist of psychological

adaptation and national stability or conflict. Globalization in

the model is an overarching phenomenon filled with complexities

with significant effects on acculturation and state policies.

Yet, few studies have developed criteria for measuring

globalization or its impact on identity, policies or group

behavior. How does it affect the bicultural competencies of

ethnic groups and are its effects different for the various

models of acculturation? The psychological concept of ethnic

identity has been well researched. However, the available

theories and paradigms do not incorporate or define the concept

of global identity. A two part empirical question worthy of

research is how is global identity defined in psychological terms

and what are its effects on the acculturation process.

Globalization also affects state political, economic and

social policies in significant ways. This in itself is an

28

assertion that requires a carefully crafted research design that

specifically addresses operationalizing dimensions of

globalization and determining if there are any relationships

between them and changes in policies of a nation state. For

example, states must consider policies that protect diversity and

balance that with national unity, but they also must be aware of

the international effects among ethnic groups aligned in

cyberspace (e.g. The Kurdish Movement). Policies designed to

affect change within the country may have a ripple effect outside

the country and produce unwanted consequences in the form of

hostilities. With acculturation, psychological research has

discovered the multifaceted nature of this process and there are

measurement scales which attempt to assess this process. Models

of acculturation mentioned above have demonstrated positive and

negative psychological consequences (e.g. acculturative stress)

and behavioral outcomes (e.g. conflict). The development of

bicultural competencies is valuable for the individual, the

community and the nation in the acculturation process and state

policies here again are supremely important in maintaining a

society without hostilities. The empirical question here would

29

focus on the effects of particular state policies on the

bicultural competencies of an ethnic or cultural group.

The process of assessing these variables is an overwhelming

quantitative task. However, the steadfast work of social

scientists, including psychologists and anthropologists, has

yielded measures of acculturation for most ethnic/cultural

groups. In addition there are numerous measures of acculturative

stress and positive and negative psychological consequences of

acculturation.

Gartzke et. Al (2006) have provided measures of conflict

among nations which is based on the Militarized Interstate

Dispute (MID) data, version 3.0 adapted from other researchers

(Gochman and Maoz 1984). Gartzke and his colleagues limit their

analyses to MIDs that involve casualities and the Uppsala Armed

Conflict data (Gleditsch et. al 2002) In addition, there are

validated measures for democracy, trade interdependence and GDP

per capita.

Applying measures of acculturation could well uncover the

unanswered question presented by Gartzke et al. (2006) which is

why some diverse nations are able to develop a sense of community

30

through cultural ties while similar dyads of countries create

conflict. The answer could lie in the conflict management style

of the affected nation as they suggest, perceived social,

political and economic inequalities among culturally similar

states or the level or the level of acculturative stress

experienced during the pre-contact phase of the acculturation

process through famine, warfare or poverty or all three.

The final component of the proposed framework presented here

must include a new wave of policies that reflect what some call

cultural liberty or respect for diversity worldwide. Culturally

similar or dissimilar groups exposed to the internet and global

media are impacted by the way other peoples throughout the world

are living. Countries with higher standards of living are

asymmetrically represented in the global culture and cause the

mobilization of other ethnic groups to desire more enriched

lifestyles for themselves, their ethnic group and their nation

that paradoxically feel the pressure to fulfill these new

expectations. The empirical questions raised in this paper are

begging to be addressed in a globalized world that is reeling

from globally defined wars.

31

References

Arnett, Jeffrey J. 2002. The Psychology of Globalization.

American Psychologist 57(10):

32

774-783.

Berry, J.W. and Kim, U. 1988. Acculturation and Mental Health.

Health and Cross Cultural

Psychology: Towards Applications 10: 207-385.

Berry, J.W., Kim, U., Young, M. and Bujaki, M. 1989.

Acculturation attitudes in plural

societies. Applied Psychology: International Review 38: 185-

206.

Berry, J.W., Trimble, J., and Olmedo, E. 1986. Assessment of

education of acculturation.

W.J. Lonner and J.W. Berry, eds. Field methods in

cross-cultural psychology. Newbury

Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Garttzke, Erik and Gleditsch, Kristian S. 2006. Identity and

Conflict: Ties that Bind and

Differences that Divide. European Journal of International

Relations 12(1): 53-87.

Gleditsch, Nils Petter et. al 2002. ‘Armed Conflict, 1945-99: A

New Dataset’. Journal of Peace

Research 39(5): 615-37.

33

Gochman, Charles S. and Zeev Moaz. 1984. ‘Militarized Interstate

Disputes, 1816-1976:

Procedures, Patterns and Insights’. Journal of

Conflict Resolution 28(4): 585-615.

Jalali, Rita and Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1992-93. Racial and

Ethnic conflicts: A global

Perspective. Political Science Quarterly 107(4): 585-606.

LaFromboise, Teresa, Coleman, Hardin L.K. and Gerton, Jennifer.

1993. Psychological Impact

of Biculturalism: Evidence and Theory. Psychological

Bulletin 114(3): 395-412.

Landrine, H., and Klonoff, E.A. 1992. Culture and health-related

schema: A review and

proposal for interdisciplinary integration. Health

Psychology 114: 267-276.

Olmedo, E.L. 1979. Acculturation: A psychometric perspective.

American Psychologist 34:

1061-1070.

Redfield, R. Linton, R., & Herkovits, M.J. 1936. Memorandum on

the study of acculturation.

34

American Anthropologist 38: 149-152.

.Tambiah, Stanley J. 1989. Ethnic Conflict in the World Today.

American Ethnologist 16(2):

335-349.

United Nations Development Programme (2004). Human Development

Report. New York:

Oxford University Press.

35

36