The ‘mixed bag’ of segregation—On positive and negative associations with migrants’ acculturation

Abstract

Many researchers and practitioners consider ethnic segregation in neighbourhoods or schools detrimental to migrants' acculturation in host societies. Empirically, however, segregation is a 'mixed bag' and its effects depend crucially on the investigated acculturation domain (e.g., negative for language skills, positive for well-being). As most prior studies have focused on a restricted spectrum of acculturation, a comprehensive assessment within one single study is needed to establish comparability across different acculturation domains. Among over 8000 immigrant-background students from four countries, we investigated the association of classroom segregation, defined as opportunities for contact with natives and other migrants, with a broad spectrum of acculturation (academic, attitude-related, identity-related, social, health-related, and psychological criteria). Some findings were consistent (e.g., academic acculturation), some were contrary to prior research (e.g., social acculturation). In sum, our results shed light on the 'mixed bag' of segregation and contribute to the understanding of a crucial social issue.

Needs for Aging in Place: Views of Older Moroccan Adults in the Netherlands

“…Participants with Viewpoint 3 might prefer to connect with other Moroccans (like those with Viewpoint 1), but these three viewpoints generally reflect older Moroccans’ aspiration to establish diverse networks, which is discrepant from their reality. Previous research has yielded mixed findings; Boileau et al (2022) described segregation as a “mixed bag” with potentially negative and positive outcomes. Bécares et al (2018) observed that segregation can protect against discrimination and enhance social support from people with similar backgrounds (consistent with Viewpoint 1), whereas Gijsberts and Dagevos (2005) demonstrated that segregated neighborhoods force connection only with people with the same ethnic background, reducing mutual acceptance.…”

Socioeconomic-Status Differences in Agentic and Communal Self-Concepts

“…This question has been widely debated (Funder & Ozer, 2019;Götz et al, 2022). In social-personality psychology, the average/median effect size has been estimated at 𝑟̅ ≈ .10 (Boileau et al, 2021;Entringer et al, 2021a). 5 Consequently, we consider effects of zPE ≈ .10 as "medium," effects half that size as "small" (zPE ≈ .05), and effects twice that size as "large" (zPE ≈ .20).…”

“…van Assen et al, 2015). Thus, the "true" medium effect size has been assumed to be r = .19 / 2 ≈ .10 (Boileau et al, 2021;Entringer et al, 2021a).…”