Acculturation refers to complex processes in which both individuals and groups’ psychological and cultural change results from contact between at least two different cultural groups (Berry, 2019). While it was first understood as individual and agent strategies (assimilation, integration, separation, marginalization) with a binary differentiation between “heritage” and “host” cultures (Berry, 1980, 1997, 2019), this perspective was challenged for its Eurocentric normative assumptions and its neglect of historical and continuing societal power asymmetries (Schinkel, 2018). Acculturation is nowadays more framed as a dynamic process that intersects with class, race, gender, legal status, ongoing colonial legacies, institutional and structural violence, and sociopolitical exclusion (Fanon, 1952, 2008; Crenshaw, 1990; Hall, 1990). The following text explores these dynamics in depth, including sensitive discussions on colonial legacies, structural violence, and cultural erasure. It also addresses the impacts of racial discrimination, forced migration, and intergenerational trauma.
Framing & Perspectives
In 1980, Berry was one of the first to describe acculturation from a psychological perspective. In his first model, acculturation processes were described along two dimensions: the desire to maintain one’s original culture and the level of interaction with the dominant culture. From this tension to either preserve one’s own culture or assimilate with a new cultural context, different strategies can emerge, shaped by individual choices and social contexts. Possible strategies include:
- Integration (understood as the best possible outcome)
- Assimilation (prioritizing interaction with the dominant culture, often at the expense of heritage culture),
- Separation (preserving one’s original culture while minimizing interaction with the dominant group, often in response to discrimination),
- Marginalization (disengaging from both heritage and dominant cultures, leading to social isolation and discrimination)
Over time, cultural/social psychology critiqued and revised this understanding of acculturation processes to acknowledge the mutual influence of intercultural context, stressing on the lack of structural and power analysis, ethnocentrism and normativity, as well as the assumption of full individual agency to choose intercultural contact or its acculturation strategy (e.g., Ahmed, 2007; Fanon, 1952, 2008). Acculturation is now understood as a dynamic process of cultural exchange that influences all groups through intercultural contact (Berry, 2019; see intersectional theorists Crenshaw & Hill Collins). Within this dynamic process, multicultural policies, social support systems, and prevailing attitudes toward diversity and migration impact individual and societal acculturation processes. Moving to a more holistic understanding, it is important to consider how colonial legacies and power relations have and still shape migration patterns, cultural dominance, and hierarchical power dynamics in intercultural contact in societies (e.g., Schinkel, 2018; Anthias, 2013). Therefore, the concept of “integration” as the best possible outcome for acculturation is not neutral, since it reflects normative pressure of conformity to dominant cultural norms and national ideologies (Ahmed, 2007; Anthias, 2013). This pressure, often put on migrants from former colonies to assimilate into the culture of their colonizers in the Global North, maintains power hierarchies (Said, 1978; Fanon, 1952, 2008). Cultures that do not fit in the “universal” or normative cultural norms are actively marginalized, and cultural uniformity is perpetuated (Young, 2001). Migrants from the Global South may face pressure to assimilate, risking cultural erasure, and economic inequalities that limit migrants’ acculturation opportunities (Bilge, 2019). In addition, framing culture as something binary, “heritage” and “host/mainstream” cultures, oversees cultural hybridity and local forms of belonging (Bhabha, 1994; Benkirane & Doucerain, 2022). For instance, a Black Haitian woman migrates to Canada. The various intersecting identities, being Black, a woman, and a migrant, might lead to an inaccessibility to the mainstream Canadian identity. In the long run, this person might find peace with the reality of being a Haitian immigrant in Canada without a strong sense of belonging to the mainstream culture; she might struggle with the fact that most likely she will never be considered a ‘true’ Canadian by the dominant group (Benkirane & Doucerain, 2022).
Relevance
It is crucial to understand the asymmetries of power when discussing acculturation. Systemic economic inequality is perpetuated because migrants from the Global South are often employed in low-wage sectors (Wallerstein, 2004). Intercultural contact, migration experiences, and acculturation processes can demand additional challenges on different identities and unique contexts that emerge from different identities (e.g., gender, religious, and racial identities), social categories (e.g., socioeconomic status and ethnicity), and exclusions (e.g., social rejection experience because of one’s marginalized identities) (Crenshaw, 1989; Yuval-Davis, 2011; Benkirane & Doucerain, 2022). For instance, migrant women of color often face multiple layers of oppression, where gender expectations from their heritage culture intersect with racial discrimination in the host society (Crenshaw, 1989). LGBTQ individuals might navigate acculturation differently when heritage or host societies may or may not accept sexual and gender diversity (Luibhéid, 2008). By focusing on collective adaptation and engaging with Indigenous, Global South, and the Global Majority perspectives, a more inclusive and just understanding of cultural exchange can be fostered (Smith, 1999).
Keywords:Cultural Adaption, Colonial Histories, Cultural Exchange, Identity Politics, Integration, Assimilation, Separation, Marginalization, Intercultural Relations, Migration
Connected terms: Ethnocentrism, Microaggressions, Microinterventions, Linguistic Imperialism, Racialized Beauty Standards, Representation, Stereotype Threat, Tone Policing (also Tone Argument), Xenophobia
References
Ahmed, S. (2007). The cultural politics of emotion (2nd ed.). Edinburgh University Press.
Anthias, F. (2013). Intersectional what? Social divisions, intersectionality and levels of analysis. Ethnicities, 13(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468796812463547
Benkirane, S. & Doucerain, M. M. (2022). Considering intersectionality in acculturation: Bringing theory to practice. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, Volume 91, p. 150-157, ISSN 0147-1767, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2022.10.002.
Berry, J. W. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaptation. Acculturation: Theory, models and some new findings. Westview Press.
Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 46(1), 5–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/026999497378467
Berry, John. (2019). Acculturation: A Personal Journey across Cultures. 10.1017/9781108589666.
Bhabha, H.K. (1994). The Location of Culture (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203820551
Bilge, S. (2019). Mapping anti-intersectionality. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 21(4), 573–594.
Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 139–167.
Fanon, F. (1952, 2008). Black skin, white masks. Grove Press.
Hall, S. (1990). Cultural Identity and Diaspora. In J. Rutherford (Ed.), Identity: Community, Culture, Difference (pp. 222-237). London: Lawrence & Wishart.
Luibhéid, E. (2008). Queer/migration: An unruly body of scholarship. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies, 14(2-3), 169–190.
Redfield, R., Linton, R., & Herskovits, M. J. (1936). Memorandum for the study of acculturation. American Anthropologist, 38(1), 149–152.
Said, E. W. (1978). Orientalism. Pantheon Books.
Schinkel, W. Against ‘immigrant integration’: for an end to neocolonial knowledge production. CMS 6, 31 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-018-0095-1
Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples. Zed Books.
Thurnwald, R. C. (1932). Die menschliche Gesellschaft in ihren ethno-soziologischen Grundlagen. De Gruyter.
Wallerstein, I. (2004). World-systems analysis: An introduction. Duke University Press.
Young, R. J. C. (2001). Postcolonialism: An historical introduction. Blackwell.
Yuval-Davis, N. (2011). The politics of belonging: Intersectional contestations. Sage Publications.
