Social psychology and immigration: relations between immigrants and host societies

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511801921.006

This chapter is part of a book that is no longer available to purchase from Cambridge Core

6 - Social psychology and immigration: relations between immigrants and host societies

Jan Pieter Van Oudenhoven ,

Charles Judd and

Colleen Ward

Edited by

Linda Steg ,

Abraham P. Buunk and

Talib Rothengatter

Show author details

Jan Pieter Van Oudenhoven: Affiliation:
University of Groningen, Department of Psychology
Charles Judd: Affiliation:
University of Colorado at Boulder, Department of Psychology
Colleen Ward: Affiliation:
Victoria University of Wellington, School of Psychology
Linda Steg: Affiliation:
Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, The Netherlands
Abraham P. Buunk: Affiliation:
Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, The Netherlands
Talib Rothengatter: Affiliation:
Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, The Netherlands

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

Globalization, migration and increasing cultural diversity within nations have resulted in a growing need to understand and enhance intercultural relations in plural societies. The purpose of this chapter on relations between immigrants and host societies is to highlight current trends and new advances in the study of acculturation and intergroup relations. To accomplish this, the chapter provides an overview of migration and cultural diversity across four major geographical regions; describes the evolution of acculturation theory, models and research; briefly reviews the developments in the application of social-psychological theory to the study of immigration and intergroup relations; discusses the convergence of these two approaches; offers suggestions how applied social psychology may help to solve intercultural problems; and makes recommendations for the course of future research.

Migration and cultural diversity in the twenty-first century

It is now estimated that there are almost 191 million international migrants on a world-wide basis. Europe currently hosts the largest number (64 million), which is about 8% of its population. However, relative to the total population, Oceania (15%) and North America (13%) are world leaders. Brief synopses of their immigration trends and issues are presented in the following sections.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Applied Social Psychology
Understanding and Managing Social Problems
, pp. 141 - 161

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511801921.006 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baumeister, R. F. (2005). The cultural animal. Human nature, meaning, and social life. Oxford University Press.

Matsumoto, D. & Juang, L. (2004). Culture and psychology. Belmont, CA: Thomson/ Wadsworth.

Sam, D. L. & Berry, J. W. (eds.) (2006). The Cambridge handbook on acculturation psychology. Cambridge University Press.

Smith, P. B., Bond, M. H. & Kagitcibasi, C. (2005). Understanding human behaviour across cultures: Living and working in a changing world. London: Sage.

Ward, C., Bochner, S. & Furnham, A. (2001). The psychology of culture shock. London: Routledge.

Abrams, D., Hogg, M. A. & Marques, J. M. (2005). The social psychology of inclusion and exclusion. New York: Psychology Press.

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation and adaptation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 46, 5–34.Google Scholar

Berry, J. W. (2006). Mutual attitudes among immigrants and ethnocultural groups in Canada. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30 (6), 719–734.Google Scholar

Bourhis, R. Y., Moïse, L. C., Perreault, S. & Senécal, S. (1997). Towards an interactive acculturation model: A social psychological approach. International Journal of Psychology, 32, 369–386.Google Scholar

Brewer, M. B. (2000). Reducing prejudice through cross-categorization: Effects of multiple social identities. In Oskamp, S. (ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 165–183). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Byrne, D. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press.

DeRoza, C. & Ward, C. (2008). National identity, ethnic identity and intergroup perceptions in Singapore. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Esses, V. M., Dovidio, J. F., Jackson, L. M. & Armstrong, T. L. (2001). The immigration dilemma: The role of perceived group competition, ethnic prejudice, and national identity. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 389–412.Google Scholar

Esses, V. M., Wagner, U., Wolf, C. & Preiser, M. (2006). Perceptions of national identity and attitudes toward immigrants and immigration in Canada and Germany. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30 (6), 653–669.Google Scholar

Gaertner, S. L. & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. New York: Psychology Press.

Gaertner, S., Dovidio, J. & Bachman, B. A. (1996). Revisiting the contact hypothesis: The induction of a common ingroup identity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20, 271–290.Google Scholar

Ho, R., Niles, S., Penney, R. & Thomas, A. (1994). Migrants and multiculturalism: A survey of attitudes in Darwin. Australian Psychologist, 29, 62–70.Google Scholar

Horenczyk, G. (1996). Migrant identities in conflict: Acculturation attitudes and perceived acculturation ideologies. In Breakwell, G. and Lyons, E. (eds.), Changing European identities: Social psychological analyses of social change (pp. 241–250). Oxford: Butterworth.

Levine, R. A. & Campbell, D. W. (1972). Ethnocentrism: Theories of conflict, ethnic attitudes, and group behavior. New York: Wiley.

Mikulincer, M. & Shaver, P. R. (2001). Attachment theory and intergroup bias: Evidence that priming the secure base schema attenuates negative reactions to out-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 97–115.Google Scholar

Piontkowski, U., Florack, A., Hoelker, P. & Obdrzalek, P. (2000). Predicting acculturation attitudes of dominant and non-dominant groups. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24, 1–26.Google Scholar

Ramirez, M. (1984). Assessing and understanding biculturalism-monoculturalism in Mexican-American adults. In Martinez, J. L. and Mendoza, R. H. (eds.), Chicano psychology (pp. 77–94). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

Ryder, A., Alden, L. & Paulhus, D. (2000). Is acculturation unidimensional or bidimensional? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 49–65.Google Scholar

Tajfel, H. & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In Austin, W. G. & Worchel, S. (eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 23–48). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Coole.

Van Oudenhoven, J. P. (2006). Immigrants. In Sam, D. L. & Berry, J. W. (eds.), The Cambridge handbook on acculturation psychology (pp. 163–180). Cambridge University Press.

Oudenhoven, J. P., Judd, C. M. & Hewstone, M. (2000). Additive and interactive models of crossed-categorisation in correlated social categories. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 3, 285–295.Google Scholar

Oudenhoven, J. P., Prins, K. S. & Buunk, B. P. (1998). Attitudes of minority and majority members towards adaptation of immigrants. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 995–1013.Google Scholar

Zick, A., Wagner, U., Dick, R. & Petzel, T. (2001). Acculturation and prejudice in Germany: Majority and minority perspectives. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 541–557.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.