The measurement of racial and ethnic identity

In this article, the authors examine the conceptualization and measurement of ethnic identity as a multidimensional, dynamic construct that develops over time through a process of exploration and commitment. The authors discuss the components of ethnic identity that have been studied and the theoretical background for a developmental model of ethnic identity. The authors review research on the measurement of ethnic identity using the Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (J. Phinney, 1992) and present a revised version of the measure. The authors conclude with a consideration of the measurement issues raised by J. E. Helms (2007) and K. Cokley (2007) and suggestions for future research on ethnic identity. Ethnic identity is many faceted. This is made clear in the special issue of which this article is a part. But recognizing that ethnic identity has many facets is merely a start to understanding it. Ethnic identity derives from a sense of peoplehood within a group, a culture, and a particular setting. Yet ethnic identity is not merely knowledge and understanding of one's ingroup affiliations, even as such insights and comprehension are part of it. The achievement of a secure ethnic identity derives from experience, but experience is not sufficient to produce it. Because one's ethnic identity is constructed over time, the actions and choices of individuals are essential to the process. Ethnic identity is distinct in some ways from other group identities, such as racial identity, but it also shares aspects of both personal and group identities. Our purpose in this article was to examine the conceptualization and measurement of ethnic identity from social psychological and developmental perspectives. We first review the various dimensions of ethnic identity that have been proposed in the literature. We then discuss the theoretical and empirical basis for understanding ethnic identity as a developmental process. We review research on the measurement of ethnic identity based on the widely used Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM, Phinney, 1992; Rob-erts et al., 1999), discuss recent measurement research that has led to a revision of the MEIM, and present a revised version of the MEIM. We conclude with a discussion of issues that might be profitably considered in future ethnic identity research, with a consideration of the ideas and recommendations offered by Helms (2007) and Cokley (2007). In keeping with the focus of the special issue, we discuss ethnic identity with reference to ethnic minorities in the United States.

This article takes stock of research methods employed in the study of racial and ethnic identity with ethnic minority populations. The article is presented in three parts. The first section reviews theories, conceptualizations, and measurement of ethnic and racial identity (ERI) development. The second section reviews theories, conceptualizations, and measurement of ERI content. The final section reviews key methodological and analytic principles that are important to consider for both ERI development and content. The article concludes with suggestions for future research addressing key methodological limitations when studying ERI.

Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 2010

Recent years have witnessed a proliferation of research on ethnic identity. To date, this research has been dominated by individual differences methods. Both Gaines, Bunce, Robertson, Wright, Goossens, Heer, et al. (this issue) and Juang and Nguyen's (this issue) examination of the psychometric properties of the Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM; Phinney, 1992) demonstrate the promise of such methods. In this commentary, we briefly consider the measurement issues raised by Gaines et al. (this issue) and Juang and Nguyen (this issue). We then highlight the importance of taking a process approach to understanding ethnic identity. Our goal is to highlight new developments and unanswered questions. In so doing, we hope to detail the ways in which ethnic identity research has evolved over the past two decades and provide an impetus for the empirical investigation of unresolved issues.

What does the term racial and ethnic identity mean? Briefly, when something is an identity, it is a part of a person’s self-concept, meaning that it influences how people make sense of themselves, what their goals are and how they try to achieve them, as well as the interpretations they give to others’ responses to them. Racial and ethnic identity includes three basic components: (a) Membership—knowledge that one is a member of particular racial and ethnic groups; (b) beliefs—beliefs about how the groups one is a member of fit into broader society and how members of these groups act, what they believe in, what their goals and values are, and the strategies they use to attain these goals; and (c) action readiness—readiness to act in ways that are congruent with beliefs about group membership.

Although ethnic and racial identity (ERI) are central to the normative development of youth of color, there have been few efforts to bring scholars together to discuss the theoretical complexities of these constructs and provide a synthesis of existing work. The Ethnic and Racial Identity in the 21st Century Study Group was assembled for this purpose. This article provides an overview of the interface of ERI with developmental and contextual issues across development, with an emphasis on adolescence and young adulthood. It proposes a metaconstruct to capture experiences that reflect both individuals' ethnic background and their racialized experiences in a specific sociohistorical context. Finally, it presents milestones in the development of ERI across developmental periods.

Proceedings of the 1996 Multicultural Marketing Conference, 2015

Ibis paper argues that a self-report model that specifically incorporates the cultural pluralism be adopted. It also presents empirical evidence from Muslim immigrants to the United States that some immigrants do maintain both U.S. and ethnic identities. Moreover, for some, their religious identity may actually replace ethnic or U.S. identity. INTRODUCfiON "My father's mother was white, his father was black. My mother died when I was four. Her mother was fullblooded Indian (Choctaw). Her father was white French," says one Californian (Gigot 1996). This potpourri of ethnic and racial identities reflects the subgroups and intermarriages common in the United States. It also illustrates a point of concern for those interested in ethnic identity as a marketing construct: the importance of allowing for multiple ethnic and racial identities in a single consumer.

For many years, scholars have focused on analyzing, interpreting and producing models of identity and identity development. In the 1950s with his book Childhood and Society . Erik Erikson building on Freud's work developed an eight stage model of identity development that covered the entire lifespan. This model became part of the education of mental health practitioners who could use it to augment their understanding of particular diagnoses of the many DSM that we have had to all learn about. His identity development stages describe the poles of each stage that a person will confront at approximate times of life. Thus the infant struggles with the pole of trust versus mistrust and the older adult facing the declining period of life confronts ego integrity or despair. While Erikson attempted to provide a more universalistic understanding of identity by overcoming the sole emphasis on sexuality that Freud's work was centered upon, recent scholars have argued that no comprehensive analysis can be reached without attention to other identity issues. Researchers in the mental health field and in the academic sciences are now aware that identify is not only a "human" issue, that is one that ALL humans cope and deal with, but that identity is influenced by race, gender and sexual orientation. In the following brief summary of work on identity we wish to focus on race, although some of the issues can be applied directly to issues of gender and sexual orientation. The infant's resolution of the trust/mistrust identity issue manifested itself later in life as an adult issue. Since racial identities are learned very early in life, they work as a lens for interpreting, understanding, experiencing and participating in the world as well as a way of connecting with and identifying with others. These identities can change when they are challenged by life experiences. This suggests that any discussion of "universal" identity processes needs to be supplemented by discussions of racial identity. Race dictates how gender, sexual orientation and other aspects of identification are experienced, practiced and processed. We cannot talk about separate gender or sexual orientation models without keeping in mind that White and non-White women, for example, may differ greatly in their development and identification in the same stage of the life cycle. Having a model of racial and gender identity development for our clients allows us to be much attuned to our clients' sense of self and provides us with a more sensitive and perceptive understanding of the way they will view us and their world. We will now summarize some of the major racial identity theorists.

Interpersona: An International Journal on Personal Relationships, 2011

In recent years, according to U. S. Census reports, the number of people who classify themselves as "mixed race" is rapidly increasing. As a consequence, scholars have become increasingly interested in the nature of racial identity. Currently, scholars and laypersons tend to view the concept of race from a biological perspective, from a social-constructivist perspective, or from a mixture of the two. In this paper, we address several questions: How do political, religious, and legal experts classify various people (racially)? How do men and women (especially those of mixed ancestry) decide to what race they belong? Does one's own identity, be it monoracial or multiracial, influence one's perception of race as socially constructed or biologically determined? In order to understand how the concept of race is viewed in the U. S.-especially as the American landscape becomes increasingly complex-we reviewed 40 studies, conducted from 1986-2006, that explored the nature of racial and ethnic identity. 2 This comprehensive review suggested that: 1. Americans often find it difficult to classify people of mixed ancestry. 2. Men and women (of mixed race) generally possess a complex view of race. They generally agree that race is, at least in part, a social construct. Nonethess, they are well aware that (at least in society's eyes) ancestry, appearance, "blood," and genetic make-up also play a part in one's racial classification. 3. Multiracials appear to be more flexible in "choosing" a racial identity than are their peers. How they choose to present themselves depends on their physical appearance, how accepting their family and friends are of their claims, and how profitable they think it will be to identify with various aspects of their racial heritage.

Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2002

Validation work on the Cross Racial Identity Scale (CRIS; B. J. Vandiver et al., 2000) is described in 2 studies using African American college students. In Study 1, an exploratory factor analysis supported the presence of 6 CRIS subscales. In Study 2, confirmatory factor analysis provided support for a 2-factor higher order model of the 6 CRIS subscales and the nigrescence model. Correlational analyses between the CRIS and the Multidimensional Inventory of Black Identity (R. M. Sellers, M. A. Smith, J. N. Shelton, S. A. J. Rowley, & T. M. Chavous, 1998). supported the convergent validity of the CRIS. CRIS subscale scores were not meaningfully linked to social desirability or personality traits but were differentially linked to self-esteem. Identity Orientation and Self-Esteem In the original nigrescence theory (Cross, 1971), racial preference was believed (a) to be a part of a Black person's personal identity and (b) to affect the person's mental health functioning. If Blacks accepted being Black, then they were assumed to be psychologically healthy and to have high self-esteem. In contrast, Blacks who accepted the values of White society were believed to suffer from self-hatred and, as a result, low self-esteem. In the revised nigrescence theory, personal identity and group identity, or reference group orientation, are clearly delineated, as are their hypothesized relationships with self-esteem. On the basis of the review of the racial preference literature, Cross (1991) posited that self-concept is composed of two com

Handbook of race, racism, and the …, 2008