Acculturation and Adaptation Index Revisited

Abstract

The Acculturation and Adaptation index Revisited (AAIR) is a widely utilized psychometric instrument developed by Colleen Ward and Arzu Rana-Deuba in 1999. It is designed to measure an individual’s behavioral and psychological orientation toward both their culture of origin (co-national) and the receiving or host culture. The scale moves beyond simple unidimensional measures by utilizing a bidimensional framework, consistent with Berry’s model of Acculturation, enabling researchers to categorize respondents into the four acculturation strategies: Integration, Assimilation, Separation, and Marginalization. The instrument assesses similarity across 21 specific domains of life, ranging from superficial aspects like clothing and food to deeper psychological constructs such as values and self-identity.

Keywords

Acculturation, Adaptation, Cross-Cultural Psychology, Migration, Ethnic Identity, Biculturalism, Integration, Assimilation, Separation, Marginalization, Psychological Measurement, Ward and Rana-Deuba.

Authors

Colleen Ward, Arzu Rana-Deuba

Purpose

The primary purpose of the AAIR is to provide a detailed, quantitative measure of the degree to which immigrants, sojourners, or ethnic minorities adopt the behavioral patterns and psychological characteristics of the host society while simultaneously maintaining their heritage culture. By asking respondents to rate their similarity to both co-nationals and host nationals across 21 specific domains, the scale facilitates the empirical assessment of acculturative stress and the prediction of sociocultural and psychological adaptation outcomes. This dual assessment allows for a nuanced understanding of the acculturation process, highlighting the multidimensional nature of cultural change in migrant populations.

Construct

The scale measures the psychological construct of Acculturation Strategy, based on the bidimensional model proposed by Berry (1990). This model posits that acculturation outcomes are determined by an individual’s responses to two independent questions: 1) Is it considered important to maintain relationships and cultural identity with the group of origin? 2) Is it considered important to seek involvement and relationships with the larger society? The interaction of these two dimensions yields four distinct acculturation strategies:

• Integration: High identification with both host and heritage cultures.
• Assimilation: High identification with the host culture and low identification with the heritage culture.
• Separation: Low identification with the host culture and high identification with the heritage culture.
• Marginalization: Low identification with both host and heritage cultures.

The AAIR operationalizes these strategies by measuring perceived similarity across various life domains, providing empirical support for the theoretical framework of Cross-Cultural Psychology.

Validity

Research utilizing the AAIR, particularly the original 1999 study, provides strong evidence for its construct validity. Factor analytic studies typically confirm the existence of two relatively independent dimensions: the maintenance of the heritage culture (co-national identification) and the adoption of the host culture (host-national identification). Furthermore, the scale demonstrates predictive validity, consistently showing that the Integration strategy is generally associated with the most positive psychological and sociocultural adaptation outcomes, while Marginalization is often linked to the most negative outcomes, such as higher levels of psychological distress and difficulties in navigating the host society.

The 21 items cover a comprehensive range of cultural domains, ensuring high content validity. The inclusion of both manifest cultural behaviors (e.g., Food, Clothing) and latent psychological orientations (e.g., Values, Worldview) ensures that the scale captures the breadth of the acculturation experience.

Reliability

The AAIR exhibits good to excellent internal consistency reliability. Studies generally report high Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the derived subscales, specifically the Host-National Identification and Co-National Identification indices. These reliability scores confirm that the items within each dimension are highly intercorrelated and consistently measure the intended construct. The robust reliability supports the use of the AAIR in both research settings and applied psychological assessments of acculturating individuals.

Factor Analysis

The foundational research by Ward and Rana-Deuba (1999) employed factor analysis to establish the underlying structure of the scale. The results generally support a two-factor structure corresponding to the two core dimensions of acculturation: Co-national Identification and Host-national Identification. This structure is critical because the bidimensional model requires that these two factors be statistically independent or orthogonal, allowing individuals to score high or low on both dimensions simultaneously. Subsequent Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) studies across diverse samples have largely reaffirmed this orthogonal or oblique two-factor model, solidifying the AAIR’s utility as a measure of Berry’s acculturation framework.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report psychometric scale

Format: 21 items rated on a 7-point Likert scale.

Language Available: English (Original), translations likely exist based on widespread international use in Cross-Cultural Psychology research.

Population Group: Migrants, sojourners, expatriates, refugees, and ethnic minority groups.

Age Group: Adolescents and Adults (typically 16+).

Population Details: Originally validated using a sample of expatriates residing in Nepal, the scale has since been used globally with diverse populations experiencing acculturation.

Test Methodology: Respondents are presented with 21 domains of life and asked to answer two questions for each domain: 1) “Are your experiences and behaviors similar to those of people from your country of origin (co-nationals)?” and 2) “Are your experiences and behaviors similar to those of the host nationals?” Similarity is rated on a 7-point Likert scale, where 1 indicates not at all similar and 7 indicates extremely similar. Scores are aggregated across the 21 items to form the two critical dimensions of Acculturation: Co-national Identification and Host-national Identification.

Keywords

Psychological adaptation, Sociocultural adaptation, Expatriates, Nepal study, Bidimensional model, Acculturation measurement, Psychological assessment, Likert scale.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source, requires external lookup.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source.

Correspondence Address: Not provided in source.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The scale was published in 1999. The core instrument is often used freely for academic research purposes, provided the original source is properly cited. Commercial use may require permission from the authors or the journal publisher (Sage Publications). The instrument was originally published in the Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology.

Reference’s

Ward, Colleen. Rana-Deuba, Arzu. 1999. Acculturation and Adaptation Revisited. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30, 422-442. The abstract for this instrument can be found at: http://jcc.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/30/4/422

Items of the Acculturation and Adaptation index Revisited

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. Clothing
2. Pace of life
3. General knowledge
4. Food
5. Religious beliefs
6. Material comfort
7. Recreational activities
8. Self-identity
9. Family life
10. Accommodation/residence
11. Values
12. Friendships
13. Communication styles
14. Cultural activities
15. Language
16. Employment activities
17. Perceptions of co-nationals
18. Perceptions of Nepalese/host nationals
19. Political ideology
20. Worldview
21. Social customs

The scale also assesses four related concepts used for classification:

• Co-national identification
• Host- national
• Separation
• Integration
• Assimilation
• Marginalization