biculturalism and how to create multiple Identities

A number of studies have been done in recent years to explore the unique effects of a bicultural identity, how a bicultural identity is formed, and what forms a bicultural identity will take. Research integrates assimilation theories as well as social constructionism. The reasons for the emerging literature include improving psychological health and well-being, improving social and cultural health, and also reducing or eliminating racism and negative stereotyping. Elashi, Mills & Grant (2009) point out "83% of Muslim individuals reported an increase in implicit racism and discrimination following September 11th," making the Muslim-American cultural, ethnic, and religious cohort one of the most important populations in America to understand through sociological data (Elashi, Mills & Grant, 2009, p. 379). Discrimination may be related to the dominant or white culture's fear of non-integration of existing or new immigrants and perceived threats to an imaginary cohesiveness of the dominant culture -- something that is ironic given the heterogeneous nature of the United States. Given that 69% of Muslim children in USA attend a public school, it is also important to understand how schools and educators are responding to issues related to multiculturalism versus assimilation and how educators can help children mitigate problems personally as well as promote a more educated and culturally aware society in general (Al-Romi, 2000). The main themes that emerge in a review of literature on biculturalism in general and on Muslim-American biculturalism in specific include the nature of biculturalism, how Muslim-Americans navigate biculturalism, how problems like discrimination are dealt with personally and within communities, and how biculturalism serves as an adaptive feature.

There is no consensus in the literature on whether bicultural identities versus assimilation into the dominant culture leads to better psychological or social outcomes. In fact, the research seems to show that current generations of Muslim-Americans, even first-generation young people, experience relatively little identity conflict. In a survey of 97 Muslim Americans aged 18 to 25 years old, Sirin, Bikmen, Mir et al. (2008) found that very few of them had experienced any identity conflict, and had found creative ways to merge their multiple identities or to move between their different social circles seamlessly. The only predictor of a stronger Muslim versus American identity was strong religiosity, which is understandable given the role of religion in shaping identity in general (Sirin, Bikmen, Mir, et al., 2008). Similarly, given the tendency for many American communities to promote secular values, a strong religious identity within a secular community might lead to the individual forming a stronger connection with their religion than with a secular American culture.

In another survey of Muslim-Americans aged 18 to 25 years old, Elashi, Mills & Grant (2009) found that "although some integrate their Muslim and American identities, about 40% of Muslim-Americans aged 18 to 25 years feel that their identities are separate or in conflict," (Elashi, Mills & Grant, 2009, p. 379). These results conflict with the Sirin, Bikmen, Mir, et al. (2008) research, and yet the majority (60%) still reported no conflict in the Elashi, Mills, & Grant (20009) study. The differences in data do reveal some of the tremendous diversity in the findings in general. Overall, most of the research does seem to show minimal identity conflicts for young Muslim-Americans cultivating a bicultural identity. In a survey of 15 Muslim Turkish-American in elementary and middle schools, Isik-Ercan (2015) also found no identity conflict, instead showing how the young Muslim-Americans used innovative ways to negotiate identities. In fact, no children in the survey rejected any one of their identities -- Muslim, Turkish, or American -- and integrated their tripartite identities well. It is worth noting also that none of the subjects in the Isik-Ercan (2015) research perceived being American as conflicting with being either Muslim or Turkish, and in fact, did not view being American as being Christian. At the same time, all of the subjects did experience sense of "otherness" in school and were aware of discrimination (Isik-Ercan, 2015). The results show how biculturalism may become a strong mitigating factor against discrimination and that biculturalism can be a buffer that can build resilience either by improving psychological strength or creating community cohesion.

The research shows different patterns of conflict. For example, Lambert & Taylor (1988) found that generally in urban areas in the United States, the members of dominant cultural groups including both white and African-American strongly supported the preservation of heritage or cultural traditions for new or existing immigrants, and that bilingualism was also supported. However, middle class whites tended to be the most negative in their attitudes towards multiculturalism and towards other ethnic and racial groups (Lambert & Taylor, 1988). The negative attitudes towards different religions, cultures, and languages is felt as discrimination, either covert or overt, and can have a strong effect on how a person navigates their multiple identities, whether or not they choose to "pass" as white/American if they can, and on their rejection or total embrace of their heritage culture.

Stigma can be a pervasive problem for minority groups and particularly for Muslim-Americans in a post-9/11 setting. The same is true for Muslims living in Europe. Kunst, Tajamal, Sam & Ulleberg (2012) measured both direct and indirect effects of different forms of religious stigma on the national affiliation of 210 Norwegian-Pakistani and 216 German- Turkish Muslims and found great differences between the Norwegian and German samples. The researchers conclude "stigma affects Muslims' identity formation, but its effects may not be consistent across different cultural groups and nations," ( Kunst, Tajamal, Sam & Ulleberg p. 528). For example, "identifying oneself as a Muslim seems to be more of an obstacle to identifying with Germany than with Norway as a nation," (p. 529). This could be related the German attitudes towards assimilation as being a desirable process for immigrants as opposed to multiculturalism. Public and open stigma and Islamophobia in the country ended up either strengthening religious identity and weakening national affiliation as a response to the ill treatment and stigma (ie. creating an oppositional identity), or weakening religious/cultural identity in order to successfully integrate into German society (ie. assimilation theory). The Kunst, Tajamal, Sam & Ullebergh (2012) research stresses the importance of contextual variables.

The Kunst, Tajamal, Sam & Ullebergh (2012) results also support what Elashi, Mills & Grant (2009) found, in that "balancing one's identity becomes especially difficult when an individual living in a host country is targeted for being a member of an out-group. In such cases, the individual must decide whether to accept the host country's practices at the cost of isolating his or her own cultural practices or to integrate both identities without hurting either one. Many young Muslim-Americans face difficulties with their Muslim identities because of their out-group membership and unfair victimization," (p. 379). Prior literature shows that children are strongly susceptible to negative stereotyping at a young age, to the point where it influences their behavior and who they choose as friends, making it important to minimize stigma and stereotyping.

Yet the research is also inconclusive on how children deal with stigma and pressures to conform to the dominant culture. In an examination of 65 Muslim children Elashi, Mills & Grant (2009) found that of the Muslim children in America attending a Islamic school, the 5 to 8-year-olds made more positive attributions for Muslims than non-Muslims, with young children providing more negative evaluations of non-Muslims than older children," (p. 379). "Children also preferred Muslims as potential teachers, neighbors, and friends," (Elashi, Mills & Grant, 2009, p. 379) The implications of the Elashi, Mills & Grant (2009) research highlight the difference between generating an oppositional identity with the in-group and opposing the out-group versus assimilating with the out-group.

An important trend in the literature is clarifying what is meant by biculturalism. Biculturalism is "navigating between worlds" and also "comfort and proficiency with both one's heritage culture and the culture of the country or region in which one has settled," ((Schwartz & Unger, 2010, p. 26). Biculturalism can both be a "reactive response to discrimination" and "a sense of pride in one's heritage and desire to hold onto that heritage," (Schwartz & Unger, 2010, p. 26). There are two types or patterns of biculturalism: the parallel and the integrated. Parallel biculturalism means that the person may be Muslim at home or mosque, but American at school or with non-Muslim friends. Schwartz & Unger (2010) call parallel identities "alternating" identities. LaFromboise, Coleman, & Gerton (1993): found parallelism or alternations is better for adaptive, psychological, social functioning. However, other researchers found that integration is better for outcomes. Schwartz & Unger (2010) call integrated identities "blended" identities and Sirin, Bikmen, Mir et al. (2008) found that there is a greater tendency for Muslim-Americans to be integrated and to create a "hyphenated self" (p. 274). Parents can be mediators of the two cultures for some kids (Isik-Ercan 2015).

There are some gender differences in bicultural negotiation with women more likely to have integrated identities and men were more likely to have parallel identities (Sirin, Bikmen, Mir et al., 2008, p. 274). Biculturalism is most likely to emerge when "comfort with both cultures is essential for day-to-day living" and can then morph into a distinct identity in itself (called ethnogenesis) (Sirin, Bikmen, Mir et al., 2008, p. 274) However the family is the most salient variable because a person can be monocultural even in a bicultural community.

As diverse as it is, the research does show that biculturalism is adaptive and promotes psychological and social functioning. Schwartz & Unger (2010) found that it is all about context; if in a bicultural or heterogeneous place like major city then biculturalism is adaptive and strengthening; if in a monocultural place like the Midwest, then can be a detriment whether a blended identity or minority. However, Sirin, Bikmen, Mir et al. (2008) found either no effect or the opposite -- whereby discrimination led to less identification with the dominant cult and more alliance with a Muslim identity. There is a possible difference between the first and second generation immigrants, as the "first generation's eagerness to belong, to fit in, which the second generation, as native born Americans, may not see as crucial," ( Sirin, Bikmen, Mir et al. (2008)p. 274)

Nguyen, A. & Benet-Martinez, V. (2013) performed a meta-analysis that included 83 studies, 322 rs, and 23,197 participants and found "a significant, strong, and positive association between biculturalism and adjustment (both psychological and sociocultural (p. 122). Based on a 2005 study of 25 mosques in America, Bagby's (2009) survey investigated Islamic conservatism, women, political involvement and pluralism, finding that American mosque participants are "well integrated and acculturated into American society, but that they are resisting a full assimilation of intrinsic religious values and customs," (p. 472). The Bagby (2009) findings support multiculturalism over assimilation models for creating a strong personal and community identity. Radical tendencies were not observed, which is also why Bagby (2009) concludes the American mosque "should be viewed as a partner for American law enforcement in preventing the emergence of Muslim radicalism and home-grown terrorist groups.