The Structure of Ethnic Identity of Young Adolescents from Diverse Ethnocultural Groups

Abstract

The purpose for this study was to examine the structure and construct validity of a measure of ethnic identity among young adolescents from diverse ethnic groups. Students in sixth, seventh, and eighth grades (N = 5,423) from diverse ethnic groups completed the Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM), measures of psychological well-being and a measure of salience of ethnicity. Factor analyses of data for the three largest ethnic groups (European American, African American, Mexican American) yielded a two-factor structure that corresponded to two theoretical approaches to ethnic identity, as hypothesized. Similar patterns in magnitude of loadings were observed across groups, indicating that the MEIM could be used as a global composite index of ethnic identity. Ethnic identity was related positively to measures of psychological well-being such as coping ability, mastery, self-esteem and optimism, and negatively to measures of loneliness and depression. MEIM scores also were moderately strong and positive with salience (the importance of a person’s own ethnic background in his or her life), across ethnic groups.

Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM) Expansion: Measuring Racial, Religious, and National Aspects of Sense of Ethnic Identity Within the United Kingdom

“…Phinney and Ong (2007) noted that national identity is distinct from other types of ethnic identity. Indeed, Schwartz and colleagues (e.g., Schwartz et al, 2012) have adapted Phinney's MEIM (R. Roberts et al, 1999) (Howard, 2000).…”

“…In Study 1, we tested the following hypotheses concerning an expanded, 36-item version of the MEIM (R. Roberts et al, 1999) classified themselves as members of the religious majority (i.e., Christian); 7.0% classified themselves as "Other"; and 31.6% did not indicate their religious group membership (note that due to a clerical error, the Sikh religious minority group was not included as an option for Study 1 participants). Finally, with regard to national group membership (i.e., citizenship status) among participants in Sample 1,12.9% classified themselves as members of national minority groups (i.e., non-citizens of the U.K.); 86.4% classified themselves as members of the national majority (i.e., citizens of the U.K.); and 0.8% did not indicate their national group membership.…”

“…Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM; see R. Roberts et al, 1999). The original version of the MEIM contained 12 items, each of which referred to individuals' thoughts, feelings, and/or behavior regarding the ethnic or cultural groups to which they belong.…”

“…Phinney (1990) contended that Marcia's distinction between exploration and commitment not only is relevant to understanding identity development in general but is especially relevant to understanding ethnic identity development in particular. Although Phinney (1992) initially argued that the 14-item version of the MEIM measured ethnic identity as a unitary construct, Phinney and colleagues subsequently contended that 12-item (R. Roberts et al, 1999) and 6-item (Phinney & Ong, 2007) versions of the MEIM measured exploration and commitment as separate yet related aspects of ethnic identity (e.g., Ong, Fuller-Rowell, & Phinney, 2010). Notwithstanding evidence that the 14-and 12-item versions of the MEIM may be understood more accurately as measures of cognitive, affective, and behavioural aspects of ethnic identity (e.g., Gaines et al, 2010; R. M. Lee & Yoo, 2004;Juang & Nguyen, 2010), the consensus view is that exploration and commitment underlie individuals' sense of ethnic identity (Umana-Taylor, 2011).…”

“…Results of exploratory factor analyses in Study 1 (n = 272) revealed that a three-factor model specifying racial, religious, and national identities yielded optimal fit to correlational data from an expanded, 36-item version of the Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM; Roberts et al, 1999), although results left room for improvement in model fit. Subsequently, results of confirmatory factor analyses in Study 2 (n = 291) revealed that, after taking covariance among the items into account, a six-factor model specifying exploration and commitment dimensions within each of the racial, religious, and national identity constructs provided optimal fit.…”