Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T14:13:22.956Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Commentary on Furnham's Culture Shock, Berry's Acculturation Theory, and Marsella and Yamada's Indigenous Psychopathology: Being a Call to Action for Pacific Rim Psychology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 February 2012

James H. Liu
James H. Liu*
Affiliation:
Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand
*
Address for correspondence: James H. Liu, President-Elect, Asian Association of Social Psychology, Centre for Applied Cross-Cultural Research, School of Psychology, PO Box 600, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand. E-mail: James.Liu@vuw.ac.nz

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The three articles in this special edition of the Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology encompass a range of approaches within cross-cultural psychology. Adrian Furnham's (2011) culture shock shows how academic psychology can be applied to, and helps to inform a popular concept. John Berry's (2011) acculturation theory demonstrates how focused theory and empirical data can align with a national agenda. Anthony J. Marsella and Ann Marie Yamada's (2011) socioconstructionist critique of mainstream clinical psychology and psychiatric practices illustrate how epistemology and indigenous psychology can challenge institutional practices. They are united in rejecting a culture-blind psychology of the mainstream. They differ by referencing largely separate but nonetheless complementary literatures on cultures of relevance to the Pacific Rim region. Taken together, these three articles combine meaningfully to illustrate how Pacific Rim psychology might benefit from having (1) a definition of itself with Hawaii and the Pacific Island Nations as the centre and hub for the broader Pacific Rim that includes East Asia and the Western American seaboard; (2) a focus on action, particularly action research and its cyclical communication process of planning, action, evaluation and feedback; and (3) an interdisciplinary orientation where interconnectedness with such institutions as mass media, government, and clinical and psychiatric practices, as well as within psychology itself, underpin and inform research practice and policy.

Keywords

culture shockacculturationpsycho-pathologyculturepacific rim psychologyaction researchindigenous psychology
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , December 2011 , pp. 75 - 80
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

References

Berry, J. (2011). Intercultural relations and acculturation in the Pacific region. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 4(2), 95–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berry, J., Phinney, J.S., Sam, D.L., & Vedder, P. (2006). Immigrant youth in cultural transition: Acculturation, identity, and adaptation across national contexts. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durie, M. (1997). Identity, nationhood and implications for practice in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 26(2), 32–38.Google Scholar
Durie, M. (2001). Mauri Ora. Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Furnham, A. (2011). Culture shock: Literature review, personal statement and relevance for the South Pacific, Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 4(2), 87–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgetts, D. (in press). A M ori homeless woman. Ethnography, doi: 10.1177/1466138110393794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, M. (2003). The Penguin History of New Zealand. Auckland: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Liu, J.H., Ng, S.H., Gastardo-Conaco, C., & Wong, D.S.W.(2008). Action research: A missing component in the emergence of social and cross-cultural psychology as a fully inter-connected global enterprise. Social & Personality Psychology Compass, Culture & Diversity Section. Retrieved from http://www.blackwell-compass.com/subject/socialpsychology/Google Scholar
Liu, J.H., & Sibley, C.G. (2004). Attitudes and behavior in social space: Public good interventions based on shared representations and environmental influences. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(3), 373–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsella, A.J., & Yamada, A.M. (2011). Culture and psychopathology: Foundations, issues, directions. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 4(2), 103–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oberg, K. 1960. Culture shock: adjustment to new cultural environments. Practical Anthropology 7, 177–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rata, A., Liu, J.H., & Hanke, K. (2008). Te ara hohou rongo (the path to peace): Maori conceptualisations of intergroup forgiveness. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 37(2), 18–30.Google Scholar
Sibley, C.S., & Liu, J.H. (2007). New Zealand = bicultural? Implicit and explicit associations between ethnicity and nationhood in the New Zealand context. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37(6), 1222–1243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, L.T.H (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
Tuffin, K. (2008). Racist discourse in New Zealand and Australia: Reviewing the last 20 years. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10, 591–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudmin, F.W. (2006). Debate in science: The case of acculturation. AnthroGlobe Journal. Retrieved November 4, 2011, from http://www.anthroglobe.ca/docs/rudminf_acculturation_061204.pdfGoogle Scholar
Walker, R. (1990). Ka Whawhai Tonu Matou: Struggle without end. Auckland: Penguin.Google Scholar
Ward, C. (2001). The A, B, Cs of acculturation. In Masumoto, D. (Ed.), The Handbook of Culture and Psychology (pp. 411–445). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar