Intercultural relations in plural societies implications for living together in vietnam

Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 4, No (2018) 181-194 RESEARCH ARTICLES Intercultural Relations in Plural Societies: Implications for Living Together in Vietnam John W Berry* Abstract: There is probably no more serious challenge to social stability and cohesion in the contemporary world than the management of intercultural relations within culturally plural societies Successful management depends on many factors including a researchbased understanding of the historical, political, economic, religious and psychological features of the groups that are in contact The core question is “How shall we all live together?” In the project reported in this paper, we seek to provide such research by examining three core psychological hypotheses of intercultural relations (multiculturalism, contact and integration) in 17 culturally plural societies The main goal of the project is to evaluate these three hypotheses across societies in order to identify some basic psychological principles that may underlie intercultural relations The eventual goal is to employ the findings to propose some policies and programmes that may improve the quality of intercultural relationship globally The empirical findings in these 17 societies generally support the validity of the three hypotheses Implications for the development of policies and programmes to enhance the quality of intercultural relations are discussed Keywords: Acculturation; Acculturation strategies; Assimilation; Integration; Separation; Marginalization; Contact; Security; Intercultural relations; Multiculturalism; Policy; Universals Received 30 March 2018; Revised 20 April 2018; Accepted 28 April 2018 Introduction* Thai peoples And given the long history of interaction between Vietnam and the adjacent countries of China and Kampuchea, understanding this historical legacy, as well as the contemporary cultural diversity within Vietnam, is essential for social cohesion and harmony in the country and the region (Leong & Berry 2009) This paper reports some findings from an international project called “Mutual Intercultural Relations in Plural Societies” or MIRIPS in which we carried out research that may assist in attaining these goals We this by empirically examining three core psychological hypotheses of intercultural Around the world, social cohesion and mutual acceptance among cultural groups are goals that citizens and policy-makers in most culturally diverse societies are now seeking (Berry & Sam 2013) In Vietnam, these issues are relevant because of the cultural and ethnic composition of the society Although 86 % of the population is Vietnamese, the other portion is made up of cultural groups, such as Khmer, Hmong and * Queen‟s University, Kingston, Canada, and Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russian Federation; email: elderberrys@gmail.com 181 182 John W Berry / Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 4, No (2018) 181-194 relations: multiculturalism; contact; and integration The theoretical rationale for these hypotheses will be developed in the next section This research is carried out across 17 culturally plural societies: Australia, Azerbaijan, Canada, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, India, Italy, Latvia, Malta, Norway, Portugal, Russia, Spain and Switzerland The project repeatedly examines these principles using a common conceptual and empirical framework The first goal of the project is to evaluate these three hypotheses of intercultural relations across these 17 societies The second goal is to examine the findings to see whether they constitute „universal‟ principles of intercultural relations If they do, it may be possible to achieve a third goal: to propose some policies and programmes to improve the quality of intercultural relationship globally Many of the ideas, concepts and research instruments used in this project are derived from two earlier studies: The International Study of Attitudes towards Immigrants and Settlement (Berry 2006), and the International Comparative Study of Ethnocultural Youth (Berry et al 2006a, b) These earlier studies were limited to samples of students and youth; the present study extends the samples to adults belonging to both non-dominant (minority) and dominant (majority) groups in each society The three principles that are evaluated in the MIRIPS project are: i Multiculturalism hypothesis: When individuals feel secure in their place in a society, they will be able to better accept those who are different from themselves; conversely when individuals feel threatened, they will reject those who are different ii Contact hypothesis: When individuals have contact with, and engage with those who are culturally different from themselves, under certain conditions, they will achieve mutual acceptance iii Integration hypothesis: When individuals identify with, and are socially connected to, both their heritage culture and to the larger society in which they live, they will achieve higher levels of wellbeing than if they relate to only one or the other culture, or to neither Psychological Approaches Intercultural Relations to The MIRIPS project focuses on the psychological aspects of intercultural relations, but it takes into account some of the social and political contextual features of the larger societies and of the interacting groups within them The study is situated within the broad field of cross-cultural psychology, which addresses the question: “How can we account for similarities and differences in human behavior across cultural contexts?” This field has two core principles (Berry et al 2011) First, individual behaviours should be understood within the cultural contexts in which they have developed and are now being displayed And second, individual behaviours should be examined and compared across a number of cultural contexts in order to distinguish those that are specific to particular groups from those that might have more general validity Without these commonalities, there could be no intercultural relations: we would simply have no basis for interacting or understanding each other across cultural boundaries Hence, the search for of these common and variable features of human behaviour is essential if we are to understand intercultural relations as a set of pan-human, but culturally-situated, John W Berry / Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 4, No (2018) 181-194 phenomena If there are some general principles to be found, then broadlyapplicable policies may be possible to develop on the basis of these general principles More generally, it may eventually be possible to achieve a global or universal psychology (Berry 2013) in which basic psychological processes are found to be present in all cultural groups, but which are shaped, developed and expressed in culturally variable ways The project is also situated in the field of intercultural psychology (Sam & Berry 2016) This field deals with the question: “If individual behaviours are shaped in particular cultural contexts, what happens when individuals who have developed in different cultural contexts meet and interact within another society?” There are two domains of psychological interest here: (i) ethnocultural group relations and (ii) acculturation The study of ethnocultural group relations has usually examined the views and behaviours of the dominant group(s) toward the non-dominant ones, using concepts such as ethnic stereotypes, attitudes, prejudice, and discrimination These views are often assessed with regard to a number of non-dominant groups, such as specific ethnocultural groups, immigrants, indigenous peoples, or the perceived value of cultural diversity for a society This „one-way‟ view of examining ethnocultural relations misses understanding the important reciprocal or mutual views held by non-dominant groups towards dominant group(s) However, in some research, this need to include the perspectives of both kinds of groups and to consider their mutual relationships has been highlighted and taken into account (Berry, 1980, 1997; Bourhis et al.1997; Horenczyk et al 2013) The present study has examined the intercultural views of both groups in 183 contact, using the same concepts and measures with both dominant and nondominant groups The second domain of psychological interest in intercultural psychology is that of acculturation, defined as “the process of cultural and psychological change that takes place as a result of contact between cultural groups and their individual members” (Berry 2005) The concept was first used in the discipline of anthropology (Redfield et al 1936) as a way of comprehending the cultural changes that result from contact between distinct cultural groups Graves (1967) later introduced the concept of psychological acculturation, which refers to psychological changes among individuals who are participants in a culture-contact situation As in the case of research on ethnocultural group relations, research on acculturation has also typically used a “oneway” approach When examining the changes, strategies and adaptations of nondominant peoples, research has usually missed examining the attitudes of members of the dominant group(s) regarding what acculturation strategies they believe should be adopted by non-dominant groups and individuals; that is, their views about how they should acculturate and live interculturally These views of dominant groups (public attitudes) and of the larger society in general (public policies) have come to be known as acculturation expectations (Berry 2003) General Framework for the MIRIPS Project The MIRIPS project is guided by a framework that identifies the main concepts and variables, and suggests their inter- 184 John W Berry / Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 4, No (2018) 181-194 relationships In this project we attempt a comprehensive examination of many acculturation and intercultural relations phenomena: (i) the characteristics of the two or more cultural groups prior to contact; (ii) the nature of the contact between them; (iii) the cultural changes that are taking place in both groups (iv) the psychological changes experienced by individuals in both groups in contact, and (v) the longer-term adaptations that may be achieved, especially their wellbeing At the cultural group level, we seek to understand key features of the two (or more) original cultural groups prior to their major contact, the nature of their initial and continuing contact relationships, and the resulting dynamic cultural changes in the groups as they emerge as ethnocultural groups during the process of acculturation These cultural changes can range from being rather easily accomplished (such as evolving a new economic base), through to being a source of major cultural disruption (such as becoming colonized or enslaved) At the individual level, we consider the psychological acculturation that individuals in all groups in contact undergo, and their eventual adaptation to their new situations Identifying these changes requires sampling a population and studying individuals who are variably involved in the process of acculturation There are three kinds of changes due to acculturation that have been identified: behavioural; stress; and strategies First, behavioural changes can be a set of rather easily accomplished behavioral changes (e.g., in ways of speaking, dressing, and eating habits) or they can be more difficult to accomplish (e.g., changes in identities, self-concept and value) Second are changes that are due to acculturation experiences that are challenging, even problematic, in which acculturative stress becomes manifest (Sirin et al.2013) Third, individuals also develop and engage in acculturation strategies and expectations (Berry 1980, 2003) as their preferred way to acculturate and relate to each other Following from these three kinds of changes are some longer-term outcomes, referred to as adaptation Three kinds of adaptation have been discerned Two of these were identified by Ward (1996) who distinguished between psychological adaptation and sociocultural adaptation The first refers to adaptations that are primarily internal or psychological (e.g., sense of personal well-being and selfesteem; it is sometimes referred to as „feeling well‟) The second are sociocultural, and are sometimes called „doing well‟ This form of adaptation is manifested by competence in carrying out the activities of daily intercultural living (such as in the community, at work and in school) A third form of adaptation has been proposed by Berry (2015) This is the concept of intercultural adaptation, which refers to the extent to which individuals are able to establish harmonious intercultural relations, with low levels of prejudice and discrimination Intercultural Expectations Strategies and One concept that is central to, and underlies all aspects of acculturation and intercultural relations phenomena, is the way in which people seek to relate to each other in culturally-plural societies As noted above, these are the strategies and expectations that all groups and their individual members have, whether acknowledged explicitly or just implicitly, when they engage in intercultural relations John W Berry / Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 4, No (2018) 181-194 These strategies and expectations are relevant to both the domains (of intercultural relations and acculturation), and can be held by both the dominant and non-dominant individuals and groups that are in contact For example, national policies may be seen as a public strategy for dealing with relationships among the diverse cultural groups in a plural society Whether it is the colonizer or the colonized, immigrants or those already settled, it is clear that individuals and groups hold preferences with respect to the particular ways in which they wish to engage their own and the other groups with whom they are interacting There are large variations in how people seek to relate to each other; not all groups and individuals seek to engage in intercultural relations in the same way These consist of both attitudes and behaviors (that is, they include both the preferences and the actual outcomes) that are exhibited in day-to-day intercultural encounters These intercultural strategies and expectations are based on the same three underlying issues: (i) the degree to which there is a desire to maintain the group‟s culture and identity; (ii) the degree to which there is a desire to engage in daily interactions with other ethnocultural groups in the larger society, including the dominant one(s); and (iii) the relative power of the groups in contact to choose their preferred way of engaging each other (Berry 1980) Four strategies have been derived from the first two issues facing all acculturating peoples These issues are independent of (i.e., orthogonal to) each other That is, preferences for cultural maintenance and for intercultural contact are not necessarily related to each other Their independence has been empirically demonstrated in a number of studies (Ben-Shalom & Horenczyk, 2013; Berry & Sabatier 2011; 185 Dona & Berry 1994; Ryder et al 2000) There are two sets of concepts; one is for the strategies of non-dominant groups and their individual members concerning how they wish to live interculturally? The other concepts are the expectations of dominant groups in the larger society and of their individual members about how they think that non-dominant groups and individuals should live interculturally The differential power between these two sectors of the population in a plural society are present in the relationships between these strategies and expectations Typically, the dominant group has more power than the nondominant group to decide on the policies and practices that are operating in the plural society This difference in power creates an „asymmetric field‟ (Horenczyk et al 2013) These three issues can be responded to on attitudinal dimensions, on which generally positive or negative orientations to these issues intersect to define four ways of acculturating Preferences for these ways carry different names, depending on which groups (the non-dominant or dominant) are being considered From the point of view of non-dominant ethnocultural groups, when individuals not wish to maintain their cultural identity and seek daily interaction with other cultures, the Assimilation strategy is defined In contrast, when individuals place a value on holding on to their original culture, and at the same time wish to avoid interaction with others, then the Separation alternative is defined When there is an interest in both maintaining ones original culture, while in daily interactions with other groups, Integration is the option In this case, there is some degree of cultural integrity maintained, while at the same time seeking, as a member of an ethnocultural group, to participate as an integral part of the larger society Finally, when there is 186 John W Berry / Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 4, No (2018) 181-194 little possibility for cultural maintenance (often because of enforced cultural loss), and little interest in having relations with others (often for reasons of exclusion or discrimination) then Marginalization is defined The inclusion of the larger society and their expectations in the framework (Berry 1980) is rooted in the original anthropological definition of acculturation, which clearly established that both groups in contact would become acculturated (Redfield et al 1936) Different (but parallel terms) are used to refer to the four expectations Assimilation when sought by the non-dominant acculturating group is termed the Melting Pot When separation is forced by the dominant group it is Segregation Marginalization, when imposed by the dominant group it is Exclusion Finally, for integration, when cultural diversity is a feature of the society as a whole, including all the various ethnocultural groups, it is called Multiculturalism With the use of this framework, comparisons can be made between individuals and their ethnocultural groups, and between non-dominant peoples and the larger society within which they are acculturating This discussion of the strategies of nondominant individuals and groups should not be taken to imply that they have the freedom to choose how they want to live interculturally When the dominant group enforces certain forms of acculturation or intercultural relations, or constrains the choices of non-dominant groups or individuals, then the third element of the framework becomes salient: the power of the dominant group to influence the strategies available to, and used by, the nondominant groups (Berry 1980; Bourhis et al 1997) As a result, there is a mutual, reciprocal process through which both groups arrive at strategies that will work in a particular society, and in a particular setting For example, integration can only be chosen and successfully pursued by non-dominant groups when the dominant society is open and inclusive in its orientation towards cultural diversity (i.e., a form of multiculturalism) Thus a mutual accommodation is required for integration to be attained, involving the acceptance by both groups of the right of all groups to live together as culturally different peoples This strategy requires non-dominant groups to adopt the basic values of the larger society, while at the same time the dominant group must be prepared to adapt national institutions (e.g., education, health, labor) to better meet the needs of all groups now living together in the plural society Hypotheses Three hypotheses are evaluated in this project: the multiculturalism hypothesis; the contact hypothesis; and the integration hypothesis These hypotheses have been derived from the multiculturalism policy advanced by the Federal Government of Canada (1971) A framework for examining this policy was proposed by Berry (1984) The fundamental goal of the policy is to enhance mutual acceptance and to improve the quality of intercultural relations among all cultural groups in the society This goal is to be approached through two main programme components: the promotion of the acceptance of cultural diversity; and the encouragement of intercultural contact among all groups There are three links among the components that give rise to the three hypotheses These links are the source of the main hypotheses examined in the MIRIPS project: the multiculturalism John W Berry / Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 4, No (2018) 181-194 hypothesis; the contact hypothesis; and the integration hypothesis, The multiculturalism hypothesis is expressed in the policy statement that confidence in one‟s identity will lead to cultural sharing, respect for others, and to the reduction of discriminatory attitudes That is, confidence that is rooted in support for cultural maintenance will lead to the mutual acceptance goal We have considered this confidence to involve a sense of security (or conversely a sense of threat to) one‟s person or ethnocultural group The multiculturalism hypothesis is that such a sense of security in one‟s identity is a psychological precondition for the acceptance of those who are culturally different Conversely, when one‟s identity is threatened, people will reject others Three kinds of security have been conceptualized by Berry and colleagues (1977): cultural; economic; and personal Cultural security refers to a sense that aspects of one‟s culture (such as identity and language) have a secure status in the society Economic security refers to the sense that one‟s economic status (such as job security and house prices) are not going to be diminished in culturally diverse settings Personal security refers to the sense that one is free to move around without being accosted or attacked The MIRIPS project assesses all three forms of security From a sampling of extant empirical studies (reviewed by Berry 2006), it is possible to conclude that security in one‟s own identity and place in society underlies the possibility of accepting cultural “others” This acceptance includes being tolerant, accepting cultural diversity in society, and accepting immigrants to, and ethnocultural groups in, that society (Musso et al.2016) Since the introduction of the multiculturalism hypothesis in 1977, such a 187 relationship has been proposed in an inverse way (called the ‟integrated threat hypothesis‟; Stephan et al 2005) The threat hypothesis argues that a sense of threat to a person‟s identity will lead to rejection of the group that is the source of threat, and, in some cases, to an enhanced ethnic identity (called „reactive identity‟; Branscombeet al 1999) A meta-analysis of the threat hypothesis (Riek et al 2006) found substantial empirical support for the hypothesis We consider that this concept of perceived threat is parallel to the work on the role of security, but is phrased in the reverse direction to that of security In sum, the multiculturalism hypothesis proposes that a high sense of security will predict a higher level of intercultural adaptation, including higher scores on Multicultural Ideology and Tolerance The hypothesis also predicts that a preference for the strategies that engage in contact and participation in the larger society: integration and assimilation The converse relationship is also predicted: when individuals are threatened, especially by acts of discrimination, they will exhibit low levels on the Multicultural Ideology and Tolerance scales, and prefer the separation and marginalization strategies The contact hypothesis is the second link in the policy framework This hypothesis proposes that intercultural contact and sharing will promote mutual acceptance under certain conditions The contact hypothesis asserts that “Prejudice may be reduced by equal status contact between majority and minority groups in the pursuit of common goals.” (Allport, 1954) Allport proposed that the hypothesis is more likely to be supported when certain conditions are present in the intercultural encounter The effect of contact is predicted to be stronger when there is contact between groups of 188 John W Berry / Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 4, No (2018) 181-194 roughly equal social and economic status; however, in most intercultural situations, equal status is rare A second condition is that the contact should be voluntary (sought by both groups, rather than imposed) A third condition is that contact should be supported by society, through norms and policies promoting contact and laws prohibiting discrimination A good deal of research has been carried out to test this hypothesis (Hewstone & Swart 2011; Tropp et al.2016) In a large meta-analysis Pettigrew and Tropp (2011) examined hundreds of studies of the contact hypothesis, which came from many countries and many diverse settings (in schools, at work, and in experiments) Their findings provide general support for the contact hypothesis: intergroup contact does generally relate negatively to prejudice in both dominant and non-dominant samples: Overall, the results from the meta-analysis reveal that greater levels of intergroup contact are typically associated with lower level of prejudice This effect was stronger where there were structured programs that incorporated the conditions outlined by Allport than when these conditions were not present In sum, the contact hypothesis proposes that under certain conditions, more intercultural contact will be associated with more mutual acceptance Specifically, more contact will predict higher intercultural adaptation (both Multicultural Ideology and Tolerance), and should also predict a preference for the two strategies of integration and assimilation The integration hypothesis proposes that when individuals and groups seek integration, by being doubly or multiply engaged (in both their heritage cultures and with other groups in the larger society) they will be more successful in achieving a higher level of wellbeing (in both psychological and social domains) than if they engage with only one or the other of the cultural groups Much research has demonstrated that the integration strategy is usually associated with better psychological wellbeing (Berry et.al 2006) This relationship has been confirmed by Abu Raaya and Sam (2017) Based on a review of numerous studies, Berry (1997) made the generalization that integration was the most successful strategy for both psychological wellbeing and sociocultural adaptation This generalization has been examined in a metaanalysis by Nguyen and Benet-Martinez (2013) who concluded that integration („biculturalism‟ in their terms) was associated with the most positive outcomes for migrants‟ wellbeing This hypothesis can be seen as part of the larger domain of research that has shown that individuals with numerous identities (of many kinds) have higher levels of wellbeing (Jetten et al 2015) A possible explanation is that those who are doubly (or multiply) engaged with both cultures receive support and resources from both, and are competent in dealing with both cultures This double „social capital‟ (Putnam 2007) is derived from bonding to one‟s own cultural community, and bridging to others in the larger society These associations afforded by multiple social and cultural engagements may well offer the route to success in plural societies In sum, the integration hypothesis proposes that when individuals prefer the integration strategy, or have the multiculturalism expectation (that is, when they are doubly or multiply engaged), they will achieve higher scores on psychological, sociocultural and intercultural adaptation than when they prefer any of the other three strategies Conversely, when individuals are John W Berry / Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 4, No (2018) 181-194 marginalized (when they have no, or few engagements), they will achieve lower scores Because one or the other form of social capital is present in the assimilation and separation strategies, mid-levels of adaptation are expected for the assimilation and separation strategies Method 6.1 Samples The project sought to include a wide range of culturally-plural societies These included: those known as „settler societies‟, having both new migrants and settled ethnocultural groups; those that are experiencing immigration relatively recently; those with return migrant flows of „co-nationals‟; and those that have residual populations of non-dominant groups following political realignment The seventeen societies represent a large range of contexts for examining these three hypotheses However, they are not representative of world-wide variations in contexts, nor does the selection of societies have any theoretical basis Rather, they were selected on the basis of the locations and interests of colleagues who agreed to participate in the project At the core of the 17 societies are the many Russian samples, and those from Europe, where intercultural relations are currently being contested 6.2 Variables Scales and items are provided on the project website: http://www.victoria.ac.nz/cacr/researc h/mirips Most variables were the same as those developed and for and used in the ISATIS 189 (Berry 2006) and ICSEY (Berry et al 2006) studies There are four categories of variables assessed in the study: 6.2.1 Socio - demographic variables: Age, Gender, Education, Religion, Socioeconomic Status, Languages, and Ethnic Origin 6.2.2 Intercultural variables: Social contacts - How many close friends you have? Close [co-ethnic] /friends,/ [national] friends Cultural identities: How you think of yourself? Ethnic - I think of myself as [ethnic]; National - I think of myself as [national] Security; Cultural (5 items): We have to take steps to protect our cultural traditions from outside influences Economic (4 items): This country is prosperous and wealthy enough for everyone to feel secure Personal (4 items): People‟s chances of being robbed, assaulted, and even murdered are getting higher and higher Acculturation Strategies/ Expectations (4 items each): Integration/Multiculturalism: I feel that [ethnic group] should maintain our/their own cultural traditions but also adopt those of [national]; Assimilation/Melting Pot: I feel that [ethnic group] should adopt the [national] cultural traditions and not maintain those of our/their own; Separation/Segregation: I feel that [ethnic group] should maintain our/their own cultural traditions and not adapt to those of [national], 190 John W Berry / Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 4, No (2018) 181-194 Marginalisation/Exclusion: I feel that it is not important for [ethnic group] either to maintain their own cultural traditions or to adopt those of [national] 6.2.3 Adaptation variables: Psychological Adaptation: Self-esteem (10 items): I feel that I have a number of good qualities (Rosenberg 1965) Life satisfaction (5 items): In most ways my life is close to my ideal (Diener et al 1985) Psychological problems (15 items): I feel nervous and shaky inside Sociocultural Adaptation (20 items): Please indicate how much difficulty you experience living here: Communicating with people of a different ethnic group Intercultural Adaptation: Multicultural Ideology (10 items): We should recognize that cultural and Racial diversity is a fundamental characteristic of [national] society Tolerance (11 items): We should promote equality among all groups, regardless of racial or ethnic origin Attitudes towards immigrants (2 items): Overall, there is too much immigration in [country/region]: 6.3 Data Collection Each country research team employed the MIRIPS instrument in a way that met their research needs and their social conditions In some cases, on-line surveys were use, and in other cases community groups and schools were sampled Thus, the findings are not strictly comparable across countries While the three principles operationalized somewhat differently in the 17 countries, nevertheless the core concepts and the three hypotheses remain common Because of these variations, the goal of the MIRIPS project was not to place all the data collected in all the societies into one data base, and thereby to carry out pan-cultural analyses (as was done, for example, in the study of immigrant youth (Berry et.al., 2006) 6.4 Data Analyses Each MIRIPS team chose to analyse their data in a way that met their particular requirements, taking into account their selecting and operationalizing the variables, their local research issues, and the requirements of their funding sources In some cases, simple mean differences, and bi-variate correlations were used In other cases, multivariate statistics, such as factor analysis, profile analysis and path analyses were carried out And in some cases, a combination of these methods was used to gain multiple perspectives on the validity of the three hypotheses The approach was to determine if the statistical criterion of p< 05 was met; if it was, the decision was to accept the hypothesis The approach was not to determine the strength of a relationship or difference if this criterion was met Results and Discussion The 17 country studies included samples of both dominant national and non-dominant ethnic groups in most of the countries (total number of samples is 44) In some countries, there was more than one study, and more than one dominant and non-dominant sample In some studies, not all hypotheses were evaluated These variations across the 17 societies yielded a total of 111 evaluations of the three hypotheses John W Berry / Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 4, No (2018) 181-194 The distribution of evaluations of the hypotheses is provided in Table The + sign indicates that there is some statisticallysignificant support for the hypothesis in that sample, a O sign means that there were no significant relationships, a - sign indicates a finding that is contrary to the hypothesis, 191 and an N means that the hypothesis was not examined in that sample The decision whether or not there is support is based on the statistic used reaching significance Since there is much variation in the statistical methods used, there is no overall attempt to estimate effect sizes Table 1: Summary of evaluations of the three hypotheses by Sample Type SAMPLES Multiculturalism HYPOTHESES Contact Integration NATIONAL + N 19 1 14 12 ETHNIC + N 18 15 3 20 1 Note: + Supported O No Significant Relationship - Contrary result N Not assessed Despite the lack of strict comparability in the operationalization of the variables across the 17 societies, when examining the findings across the three hypotheses, a fairly clear pattern emerges First for the multiculturalism hypothesis, there were samples where the evaluation was not carried out There was support for the hypothesis in 36 of the 39 possible evaluations; in cases there was no support (in cases there was no relationship between security and acceptance of others, and in the other there was a contrary finding.) Second, for the contact hypothesis, in 28 of the 35 possible evaluations there was support for the hypothesis In the cases of no support, there were cases of no relationship between intercultural contact and the acceptance of others, and case of a contrary finding There were cases where the hypothesis was not evaluated Third, for the integration hypothesis, in 28 of the 36 possible evaluations there was support for the hypothesis; there were cases of no support (6 cases of no relationship between preferring integration/multiculturalism and wellbeing, and cases of contrary findings) There 192 John W Berry / Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 4, No (2018) 181-194 were cases where the hypothesis was not evaluated This general picture shows that these three hypotheses are supported much more often than not: 81%, 80% and 78% of the evaluations are positive for the multiculturalism, contact and integration hypotheses respectively Of particular importance is that there are very few contrary findings; there are only 1, and such negative findings for the three hypotheses respectively Conclusions These three principles of intercultural relations (of providing a secure and nondiscriminatory social and cultural environment, of opportunities for equitable intercultural contact and participation, and of ways to be engaged in and identify with more than one culture) offer a clear basis for moving towards achieving a more harmonious plural society If this goal of attaining more positive intercultural relations is valued by the general population of the larger society, and by leaders and policy makers, then the path forward should be clear to them Despite the obvious difficulties, and contentious debates in many contemporary societies, and even policies and pronouncements that are opposite to them, the three psychological principles of intercultural relations examined in this project would be a strong basis for policy development The MIRIPS project is situated in the disciplines of cross-cultural and intercultural psychology The first main feature of these approaches is that cultural experiences shape the development and expression of human behaviour The second is that these behaviours are brought to the intercultural arena by both (all) groups and individuals who are in contact The third main feature is that in order to discern which features of cultural experience shape behaviours in which way, the comparative method is required And finally, by examining the evidence obtained by empirical research across cultures to identify any general patterns, there is the possibility of discovering some basic pan-cultural (universal or global) psychological principles of intercultural relations In this project, we have followed the steps on this path, using the emic/etic strategy We have sought to articulate these principles, first by conceptually defining some psychological processes that may be theoretically-related to intercultural behaviours, and then by empirically examining them across societies References Abu Raaya, H & Sam, D.L 2017 Is integration the best way to acculturate? A re-examination of the bicultural-adaptation relationship in the ICSEY data set using the bilineal method Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 48: 287293 Ben-Shalom, U & Horenczyk, G 2013 Acculturation orientations: A facet theory perspective on the bidimensional model Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 36: 176 – 188 Berry, J.W 1980 Acculturation as varieties of adaptation In A Padilla (Ed.), Acculturation: Theory, models and some new findings (pp.925) Boulder: Westview Press Berry, J.W 1984 Multicultural policy in Canada: A social psychological analysis Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 16: 353-370 Berry, J.W 1989 Imposed etics, emics, derived etics: The operationalization of a compelling idea International Journal of Psychology 24: 721-735 John W Berry / Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 4, No (2018) 181-194 Berry, J.W 1997 Immigration, acculturation and adaptation Applied Psychology: An International Review 46: 5-68 Berry, J.W 2003 Conceptual approaches to acculturation In K Chun, P Balls-Organista, & G Marin (Eds) Acculturation: Advances in theory, measurement and application (pp 1737) Washington: APA Books Berry, J.W 2005 Acculturation: Living successfully in two cultures International Journal of Intercultural Relations 29: 697-712 Berry, J.W 2006 Attitudes towards immigrants and ethnocultural groups in Canada International Journal of Intercultural Relations 30: 719-734 Berry, J.W Phinney, J.S, Sam, D.L & Vedder, P (Eds.) 2006a Immigrant youth: Acculturation, identity and adaptation Applied Psychology: An International Review 55: 303-332 Berry, J.W Phinney, J.S, Sam, D.L & Vedder, P.(Eds) 2006b Immigrant youth in cultural transition Acculturation, identity and adaptation across national contexts Mahwah: LEA Berry, J W & Sabatier, C 2011 Variations in the assessment of acculturation attitudes: Their relationships with psychological wellbeing International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35: 658-669 Berry, J.W 2013 Achieving a global psychology Canadian Psychology 54: 55 – 61 Berry, J.W., Poortinga, Y.H., Breugelmans, S.M., Chasiotis, A & Sam, D.L 2011 Crosscultural psychology: Research and applications (3rd edition) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Berry, J.W 2015 Intercultural adaptation Paper presented to Canadian Psychological Association Conference, Ottawa Berry, J.W., Sam, D.L 2013 Accommodating cultural diversity and achieving equity: Psychological dimensions of multiculturalism European Psychologist 18 (3): 151 - 157 Bourhis, R., Moise, C., Perrault, S & Senecal, S 1997 Towards an interactive acculturation model International Journal of Psychology, 32, 369-386 193 Branscombe, N R., Schmitt, M T., & Harvey, R D 1999 Perceiving pervasive discrimination among African Americans: Implications for group identification and well-being Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77: 135– 149 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/00223514.77.1.135 Diener, E., Emmons, R., Larsen, R & Griffin, A 1985 The Satisfaction with Life Scale Journal of Personality Assessment 49: 71-75 Dona, G & Berry, J.W 1994 Acculturation attitudes and acculturative stress of Central American refugees in Canada International Journal of Psychology: 29: 57-70 Government of Canada 1971 Multicultural Policy: Statement to House of Commons Ottawa Graves, T D 1967 Psychological acculturation in a tri-ethnic community Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 23: 337–350 Hewstone, M & Swart, H 2011 Fifty-odd years of inter-group contact: From hypothesis to integrated theory British Journal of Social Psychology 50: 374-386 Horenczyk, G., Jasinskaya- Lahti, I, Sam, D.L & Vedder, P 2013 Mutuality in acculturation: Toward integration Zeitschrift fur Psychologie 221: 205–21 Jetten, J., Branscombe, N., Haslam, A., et al 2015 Having a lot of a good thing: Multiple important group memberships as a source of self-esteem PLOS ONE DOI:10.1371/journal.pone May 27, 201 Leong, C-H & Berry, J.W 2009 (Eds) Intercultural relations in Asia: Migrating talents; Globalizing cities Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Musso, P., Inguglia C., Lo Coco A., Albiero, P., Berry, J W 2016 Mediating and moderating processes in the relationship between multicultural ideology and attitudes towards immigrants in emerging adults International Journal of Psychology DOI: 10.1002/ijop.12290 Nguyen, A.-M D., &; Benet-Martinez, V 2013 Biculturalism and adjustment: A meta-analysis Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology 44: 122– 159 194 John W Berry / Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 4, No (2018) 181-194 Pettigrew, T & Tropp, L 2011 When groups meet London: Psychology Press Putnam, R D 2007 Diversity and community in the twenty-first century Scandinavian Political Science, 30, 137-174 Redfield, R., Linton, R., & Herskovits, M.J 1936 Memorandum for the study of acculturation American Anthropologist 38, 149-152 Riek, B., Mania, E & Gaertner, S 2006 Intergroup threat and outgroup attitudes: A meta-analytic review Personality and Social Psychology Review 10: 336 - 353 Rosenberg, M 1965 Society and the Adolescent Self-Image Princeton: Princeton University Press Ryder, A., Alden, L & Paulhus, D 2000 Is acculturation unidimensional or bidimensional? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology: 79: 49-65 Sam, D L & Berry, J.W (Eds) 2016 Cambridge handbook of acculturation psychology (2nd ed) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Sirin, S R., Ryce, P., Gupta, T., & Rogers-Sirin, L 2013 The role of acculturative stress on mental health symptoms for immigrant adolescents: A longitudinal investigation Developmental Psychology, 49(4), 736-748 Stephan, W., Lausanne, R., Esses, V., Stephan, C & Martin, T 2005 The effects of feeling threatened on attitudes towards immigrants International Journal of Intercultural Relations 29, 1-20 Tropp, L R., Mazziotta, A., & Wright, S C 2016 Recent developments in intergroup contact research: Affective processes, group status, and contact valence In C G Sibley & F K Barlow (Eds), Cambridge handbook of the psychology of prejudice (pp 463-481) Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press Ward, C 1996 Acculturation In D Landis & R Bhagat (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (2nd ed., pp 124-147) Newbury Park: Sage Các quan hệ liên văn hóa xã hội đa sắc tộc: Những hàm ý cho việc chung sống Việt Nam John W Berry Tóm tắt: Có lẽ khơng có thách thức ổn định cố kết xã hội giới đương đại hệ trọng việc quản lý quan hệ liên văn hóa xã hội đa sắc tộc Việc quản lý thành công phụ thuộc vào nhiều yếu tố, bao gồm thấu hiểu dựa nghiên cứu đặc điểm tâm lý, tôn giáo, kinh tế, trị, lịch sử nhóm sắc tộc có liên hệ với Câu hỏi là: “Chúng ta sống nào?” Trong đề tài trình bày viết này, cố gắng cung cấp nghiên cứu cách xem xét ba giả thuyết tâm lý học quan hệ liên văn hóa (đa văn hóa, trình tiếp xúc hịa nhập) 17 xã hội đa dạng văn hóa Mục đích đề tài đánh giá ba giả thuyết xuyên xã hội để nhận diện số nguyên lý tâm lý học mà nguyên lý tăng cường quan hệ liên văn hóa Mục đích cuối vận dụng phát để đề xuất số sách chương trình qua cải thiện chất lượng quan hệ liên văn hóa mang tính tồn cầu Những phát 17 xã hội nhìn chung hậu thuẫn tính hiệu lực giả thuyết Từ đó, hàm ý cho việc phát triển sách chương trình để nâng cao chất lượng quan hệ liên văn hóa thảo luận Từ khóa: tiếp biến văn hóa; chiến lược tiếp biến văn hóa; đồng hóa; hội nhập; ngăn cách; quan hệ liên văn hóa  ... interest in both maintaining ones original culture, while in daily interactions with other groups, Integration is the option In this case, there is some degree of cultural integrity maintained,... they want to live interculturally When the dominant group enforces certain forms of acculturation or intercultural relations, or constrains the choices of non-dominant groups or individuals, then... examined the intercultural views of both groups in 183 contact, using the same concepts and measures with both dominant and nondominant groups The second domain of psychological interest in intercultural