Antecedents and consequences of acculturation preferences of non‐indigenous Chileans in relation to an indigenous minority: longitudinal survey evidence

Abstract

Two longitudinal survey studies were conducted with non-indigenous majority Chilean participants (Ns ¼ 755 crosssectional, 198 longitudinal in study 1; 390 cross-sectional, 333 longitudinal in study 2). In contrast to most previous research, the longitudinal design allowed to test directly the hypothesised causal direction of effects. There were two broad research questions. Firstly, what is the relationship between acculturation preferences of non-indigenous majority members and negative affect towards the indigenous Mapuche? More specifically, does a preference for integration lead to less negative affect than a preference for assimilation, separation or marginalisation? Related to this, do the dimensions of culture maintenance and contact taken singly predict negative affect and/or vice versa? Secondly, does knowledge about the Mapuche causally and indirectly influence acculturation preferences, partially mediated by sympathy with the Mapuche? Results confirmed that knowledge influenced acculturation preferences, and that sympathy was a partial mediator. Acculturation preferences, in turn, influenced negative affect. The contact dimension underlying the categorical acculturation strategies was a predictor of outcomes, while the culture maintenance dimension was not. Implications of the findings are discussed. Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.The question which role ethnic minorities should have within a broader society often causes fierce debate and conflict. In fact, few political issues seem to be as contested as the question which liberties ethnic minority groups should be granted, how much their rights of celebrating their difference from mainstream society should be restricted and-more broadlyhow the relations between minority and majority groups should be defined. Of course, these questions are not only applicable to new ethnic minorities-i.e. relatively recent immigrant groups-but also to indigenous peoples, who historically were once (but in many cases are no longer) in the majority in a given territory. This paper investigates majority members' attitudes towards one such indigenous minority group: It explores the attitudes of non-indigenous majority Chileans towards the indigenous Mapuche (see e.g. Cornejo & Morales, 1999). 1 The goal of the present work was to find causal antecedents and consequences of acculturation preferences of non-indigenous Chileans in relation to the indigenous Mapuche. Expressed broadly, we were interested in how non-indigenous Chileans conceive of the Mapuche within larger society: Under which conditions are they interested in protecting the indigenous culture, and when are they more in favour of an assimilationist model? Consequences of different acculturation preferences were also examined.European Journal of Social Psychology Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 39, 558-575 (2009) In this case, majority status is defined by both group size and power; these two features coincide for the groups investigated by the present research. By non-indigenous Chileans, we mean t...

Social Identities and Conflict in Chile: The Role of Historical and Political Processes

“…But members of the majority group also have preferences about how they would like immigrants to live (e.g. Piontkowski, Florack, Hoelker, & Obdrzalek, 2000 ;Zagefka et al, 2009 ). Therefore, in order to understand and introduce policies aimed at fostering positive intergroup relations and preserving social identities, we need to consider the perspective of both immigrants and members of the host society in such a way that the needs to belong and distinctiveness desired by both groups are psychologically well satisfi ed (Brewer, 1991, Brown & Hewstone, 2005Brown & Zagefka, 2011 ).…”

“…First of all, even though 44 % of the genetic contribution in Chile is indigenous (Fuentes et al, 2014 ), only 8 % of people selfidentify as indigenous (Ministerio de Desarrollo Social, 2013 ). To blur the distinction even further, a great proportion of Mapuche people live in cities and have assimilated into the majority's culture, while many non-indigenous Chileans support the Mapuche struggle Terwindt, 2009 ;Zagefka, Brown, & González, 2009 ). It is thus not surprising to fi nd a number of people in Chile identifying with indigenous minority groups as well as with the non-indigenous majority group.…”

“…Intergroup relations are also affected by this ongoing confl ict. Zagefka et al ( 2009 ) showed that Mapuche people are frequently stereotyped as brave warriors (Saiz, 1986 ), but also as being confl ictive, rude, violent and lazy (Saiz, Rapimán, & Mladinic, 2008 ).…”

“…Second, cultural distance between indigenous and non-indigenous people in Chile is also relevant. Mapuche people-mainly those living in rural areas-have kept their own culture alive, still speak their own language (Mapudungun) and maintain their own health system and religion (Zagefka et al, 2009 ). Intergroup relations are also affected by this ongoing confl ict.…”

“…However, the majority of Mapuche people have opted for integration, that is, they value both maintaining their group identity and keeping contact with nonindigenous members. Others have adopted strategies of social change by actively resisting conforming to the national culture, emphasising their ethnic background, mobilising around a collective identity and demanding offi cial recognition (Zagefka et al, 2009 ). Among different possible strategies for social change, violent means have been chosen by some radical Mapuche groups as a result of the perceived cultural distance and discrimination inherent in the Chilean legal system, as well as due to a high ethnic identifi cation (Gerber, Carvacho, & González, 2015 ).…”