How Discrimination Shapes Social Identification Processes and Well-Being Among Arab Americans

Abstract

The increasingly xenophobic U.S. climate warrants a close investigation of Arab American responses to discrimination. We conducted secondary analyses of two large data sets to examine social identity processes and their relationship to well-being. In a representative sample of Muslim Arab Americans (Study 1, n = 228), discrimination was related to decreased American identification, which in turn predicted lower well-being. Another large sample of Arab Americans (Study 2, n = 1,001) revealed how social identity processes differ by religious group. For Christian Arab Americans, discrimination predicted an indirect negative effect on well-being through decreased American identification. Muslim Arab Americans showed the same pattern, but also stronger religious and ethnic identification the more they experienced discrimination, which partially buffered the harmful effects on well-being. These data present a social cohesion challenge where the maintenance of national identity necessitates less discrimination and injustice against minorities.

How positive and negative contact experiences relate to identification and acculturation of persons with a migration background: Differentiating between majority, minority, and religious group identity

“…Badea et al (2011) found evidence for negative associations between PMB's negative contact experiences with the majority group and identification with the majority group as well as between negative contact experiences with the minority group and identification with the minority group. There is further empirical support for this mechanism in the immigration context regarding the negative association between negative majority group contact (i.e., rejection or discrimination) and identification with the majority group (e.g., Bobowik, Martinovic, Basabe, Barsties, & Wachter, 2017;Hakim, Molina, & Branscombe, 2018;Jasinskaja-Lahti et al, 2009;Verkuyten & Yildiz, 2007;Wiley, Lawrence, Figueroa, & Percontino, 2013). Also, Wiley (2013) found support for this mechanism regarding negative contact experiences (i.e., rejection) with the minority group and minority group identification.…”

“…Accordingly, our results would imply a stronger focus on effects of specific aspects of positive contact on majority group identification and cultural adoption as few existing studies already do, for example perceived acceptance of PMB by the majority society (Te Lindert et al, 2008) or intergroup friendships (de Vroome et al, 2011;Sabatier, 2008). Previous acculturation research focused mostly on the negative effects of negative majority group contact on identification with the majority group and acculturation (e.g., Badea et al, 2011;Berry & Hou, 2017;Bobowik et al, 2017;Hakim et al, 2018;Jasinskaja-Lahti et al, 2009;Ramos, Cassidy, Reicher, & Haslam, 2016;Verkuyten & Yildiz, 2007).…”

“…Jasinskaja-Lahti et al (2009) outlined this mechanism in their rejection-disidentification model. There is further empirical support for this mechanism in the immigration context regarding the negative association between negative majority group contact (i.e., rejection or discrimination) and identification with the majority group (e.g., Bobowik, Martinovic, Basabe, Barsties, & Wachter, 2017;Hakim, Molina, & Branscombe, 2018;Jasinskaja-Lahti et al, 2009;Verkuyten & Yildiz, 2007;Wiley, Lawrence, Figueroa, & Percontino, 2013). There is further empirical support for this mechanism in the immigration context regarding the negative association between negative majority group contact (i.e., rejection or discrimination) and identification with the majority group (e.g., Bobowik, Martinovic, Basabe, Barsties, & Wachter, 2017;Hakim, Molina, & Branscombe, 2018;Jasinskaja-Lahti et al, 2009;Verkuyten & Yildiz, 2007;Wiley, Lawrence, Figueroa, & Percontino, 2013).…”

“…Religious affiliation and identification are important for many individuals. Consequently, religious group identification, especially given a (mis-)match between the majority and minority religion, might be relevant with regard to PMB 's acculturation (e.g., Awad, 2010;Hakim et al, 2018;Yitmen & Verkuyten, 2017). Consequently, religious group identification, especially given a (mis-)match between the majority and minority religion, might be relevant with regard to PMB 's acculturation (e.g., Awad, 2010;Hakim et al, 2018;Yitmen & Verkuyten, 2017).…”

“…Religions frequently supply the members of religious groups with "cosmologies, moral frameworks, institutions, rituals, traditions, and other identity-supporting content", and therefore can contribute strongly to the construction and maintenance of individual and group identities (Seul, 1999, p. 553). Consequently, religious group identification, especially given a (mis-)match between the majority and minority religion, might be relevant with regard to PMB 's acculturation (e.g., Awad, 2010;Hakim et al, 2018;Yitmen & Verkuyten, 2017). We therefore advocate to go beyond the Badea et al (2011) model in this respect and additionally incorporate identification with respective religious groups as a mediator in the extended model.…”