Acculturation Attitudes: A Comparison of Measurement Methods1

Authors

  • Judit Arends-Tóth,

    Corresponding author
    1. Tilburg University Tilburg, The Netherlands
      Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Judit Arends-Tóth and Fons J. R. van de Vijver, Department of Psychology, Tilburg University, P.O. Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, The Netherlands. E-mail: j.v.arends@uvt.nl and fons.vandevijver@uvt.nl
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Fons J. R. Van de Vijver

    1. Tilburg University Tilburg, The Netherlands and North-West University Potchefstroom, South Africa
    Search for more papers by this author

  • 1

    The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Döndü Acun, Monique Coppens, Margot Eysink, Sandy van Sambeek, and Caroline van Weert in data collection; and we thank Ype H. Poortinga for his helpful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Judit Arends-Tóth and Fons J. R. van de Vijver, Department of Psychology, Tilburg University, P.O. Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, The Netherlands. E-mail: j.v.arends@uvt.nl and fons.vandevijver@uvt.nl

Abstract

Three measurement methods (1, 2, or 4 statements) to assess acculturation attitudes were compared in 2 studies involving Turkish immigrants in The Netherlands. Each measurement method revealed support for differentiation between acculturation in the public and the private domains. The Turkish culture was more valued than the Dutch culture in the private domain, while both cultures were about equally favored in the public domain. A direct comparison of the 3 measurement methods found evidence for a general method factor on which all 3 measurement methods loaded, and an acculturation attitude factor with positive loadings for 2 indicators (private and public domains). The 2-statement measurement method addressing public and private life domains was found to provide a short, though comprehensive instrument.

Ancillary