Research Paper Summaries

Acculturation and Well-Being Among College Students From Immigrant Families

Authors: Seth J. Schwartz, Alan S. Waterman, Adriana J. Umaña-Taylor, Richard M. Lee, Su Yeong Kim, Alexander T. Vazsonyi, Que-Lam Huynh, Susan Krauss Whitbourne, Irene J. K. Park, Monika Hudson, Byron L. Zamboanga, Melina M. Bersamin, and Michelle K. Williams

Summary:

Seth J. Schwartz, Alan S. Waterman, Adriana J. Umaña-Taylor, Richard M. Lee, Su Yeong Kim, Alexander T. Vazsonyi, Que-Lam Huynh, Susan Krauss Whitbourne, Irene J. K. Park, Monika Hudson, Byron L. Zamboanga, Melina M. Bersamin, and Michelle K. Williams (2013) investigated how multidimensional acculturation relates to well-being in first- and second-generation immigrant college students. The study builds on prior work by treating both acculturation and well-being as multidimensional constructs, thus providing a more nuanced understanding than studies relying on unidimensional proxies such as language use.

Participants included 2,774 students from 30 U.S. universities, representing six ethnic groups: White, Black, Hispanic, East/Southeast Asian, South Asian, and Middle Eastern. Roughly 40% were first-generation immigrants, and 60% were second-generation. Acculturation was assessed across three domains: cultural practices (heritage and American), cultural values (individualism and collectivism), and cultural identifications (heritage and American). Well-being was measured with three indicators: subjective (life satisfaction, positive affect), psychological (autonomy, mastery, purpose, positive relations), and eudaimonic (self-realization, personal growth). Structural equation modeling was used to analyze associations across groups.

Findings revealed that individualistic values were the strongest positive predictor of psychological and eudaimonic well-being, and to a lesser degree subjective well-being. Both American and heritage identifications were modestly associated with higher psychological and eudaimonic well-being, supporting social identity theory’s claim that group belonging promotes flourishing. By contrast, cultural practices (both heritage and American) showed little to no multivariate association with well-being, although heritage practices were modestly linked with subjective well-being. Collectivist values correlated positively with well-being at the bivariate level but lost significance when individualism was accounted for, suggesting bicultural overlap.

Importantly, results were consistent across gender, immigrant generation, and ethnicity, indicating that the patterns generalized broadly across immigrant subgroups. However, some differences emerged by university setting: psychological well-being contributed more strongly to overall well-being among students in college-town campuses compared to those in urban/suburban settings, likely reflecting the greater autonomy required in residential environments.

The study highlights that well-being for immigrant college students is shaped more by cultural values and identifications than by surface-level practices. Endorsing individualistic values and identifying with both American and heritage cultures appears especially beneficial. Schwartz and colleagues argue that counseling interventions should balance fostering agency and self-direction with respecting cultural traditions, and that maintaining bicultural identities can enhance immigrant students’ psychological functioning.

In conclusion, this study advances understanding of acculturation and immigrant well-being by integrating multiple domains of culture and multiple forms of well-being. It demonstrates that identity and values matter more than daily practices in predicting immigrant students’ flourishing.

Download PDF