Culture conflict in Australia : reactions to intergeneration disparity in second-generation immigrant and Australian adolescents

425  Download (0)

Full text

(1)

REACTIONS TO INTERGENERATION DISPARITY IN SECOND-GENERATION IMMIGRANT

AND AUSTRALIAN ADOLESCENTS

M i c h a e l D. H i l l s

T h i s t h e s i s was s u b m i t t e d i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r t h e d e g r e e o f D o c t o r o f P h i l o s o p h y i n

The A u s t r a l i a n N a t i o n a l U n i v e r s i t y

(2)

out by the author in the Department of Psychology of

the Australian national University from

(3)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Social psychological research o f the type described in th is re p o rt is only possible w ith the a ssista n ce , encouragement and advice o f members o f the s o c ie ty which is being s tu d ie d . The author is th e re ­ fo re indebted to a great many in d iv id u a ls and o rg a n isa tio n s fo r t h e ir assistance in making th is study a r e a lit y .

Indebtedness to my su p e rv is o r, Dr. D. G. Beswick, o f the Aus­ t r a lia n National U n iv e rs ity , is beyond recompense. His in te r e s t, en­ couragement, and te ch n ica l e x p e rtis e have been u n fa ilin g ly a v a ila b le over s ix years. S u ffic ie n t a p p re cia tio n cannot be expressed.

(4)

F a irb a irn , New South Wales Secretary o f the Good Neighbour C ouncil. My thanks are extended to him.

The Melbourne fie ld w o rk was c a rrie d out from a base a t the F aculty o f Education, Monash U n iv e rs ity , and thanks are o ffe re d to it s s t a f f , both academic and c le r ic a l, f o r making th is p o ssib le . Especial g ra titu d e is expressed to Professor T a ft, Professor in Psychology, and to Mr. McCulloch, Senior L e ctu re r in Education, fo r assistance in making contact w ith the Melbourne community.

Primary contact w ith the o rg an isation s involved w ith immigrants in Melbourne was through the Good Neighbour Council o f V ic to r ia . Its se cre ta ry a t th a t tim e , Miss Thelma J a r r e t t , and two o f it s council members, Fr. Murphy and Fr. Boyazoglu, were extremely h e lp fu l and f u l l g ra titu d e is extended to them.

(5)

Sr. Mary Thomas and Sr. Concepta, S. Euphrasia School, Abbotsford; Mr. N ic k ly n , Mr. Horswel1 and Mr. C ra ckn e ll, Fibremakers L td .; Mrs. Huebner, Robert Bosch Co.; Mrs. lln iko w ski, P o litic a l Science Department, Mel­ bourne U n iv e rs ity ; Mrs. L ie r , H o lla n d -A u s tra lia Club, Northern Suburbs Branch; Mrs. Ih le , A u s tra lia n German Welfare S o cie ty; Dr. Benyei, Aus­ tr a lia n Council o f Churches; and F r. Morakis, Greek Community Church, Praharan.

Moreover, the readiness w ith which the fa m ilie s involved in the study opened t h e ir doors made fie ld w o rk a pleasure ra th e r than a ta s k , and th is was deeply appreciated.

The author was extrem ely fo rtu n a te in the unusually accurate and devoted e xp e rtise applied by two ty p is ts to th is re p o rt. Mrs.

(6)

ABSTRACT

The adolescent born into the host society of his immigrant

parents has to adapt to the cultures of both his parents and his peers,

yet has full recourse to neither. Culture conflict appears probable.

Conversely research on the contemporary Western adolescent describes

him as maturing into a rapidly changing society so different from that

in which his parents grew up that he too is in a state essentially of

culture conflict. Literature on the adolescent and Australian immigra­

tion predicted greater conflict for immigrants' children, although some

writers expected less than that found in the United States.

Questionnaires were administered in the Melbourne homes of

107 second generation 14-lö-year-olds and th eir parents from the United

Kingdom, Holland, Germany, Italy and Greece, plus 39 Australian children

and their parents, matched on the child's age, sex, scholastic achieve­

ment, religion, and socioeconomic status of parents.

Absolute differences on items of two value scales indicated

degree of disparity between the social norms of the child and those

of his parents. Australianism Disparity measured disagreement on broad

social issues, and Intergeneration Disparity on familial norms. Cate­

gories of predicted adolescent reactions to conflict derived from con­

sistency theory were rejection of parents, rejection of peers, rejec­

tion of social mores, and alienation.

Instruments designed to measure

these variables were satisfactory, excepting indices of Australianism

Disparity and identification with parents.

(7)

did not dif fe r as all children reported some disagreement, but did not

realise how great i t was and all groups thought, their peers were less

conforming than they were themselves. Northwest European children

identified more closely with th eir parents than Australian or United

Kingdom children. Peer-group identification was highest in United King­

dom children and lowest in Northwest European children. Rejection of

social mores by Northwest Europeans was less than by Australian and

United Kingdom children. European children evinced less alienation

than Australian or United Kingdom adolescents, although the means for

all groups were above the third quartile of Hughes' adult standardisa­

tion sample. Children of all groups scored higher than their parents

on Australianism, when scored following Taft's original specifications,

but the difference was greater for European than for Australian or

United Kingdom children.

Australianism Disparity correlated with rejection of social

mores, especially for Southern European children, but did not predict

other reactions for any group. Greater I-G Disparity predicted stronger

rejection of parents, particularly in European children, although

Southern European adolescents in conflict at the same time gave evidence

of attempting to identify with both parents and peers. It correlated

with identification with peers, but most strongly for United Kingdom

and Southern European children. Both rejection of social mores and

alienation were predicted by I-G Disparity for all groups.

(8)
(9)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i i i

ABSTRACT v i

L IS T OF APPENDICES x v i i i

LIS T OF TABLES xx

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1

O u t lin e o f t h i s R e p o rt 6

CHAPTER 2 A CONTEMPORARY DEFINITION OF CULTURE CONFLICT 7

C u ltu r e C o n f l i c t and th e G e n e ra tio n Gap 12

Changes in C o n te m p o ra ry S o c ie ty 14

F a m ily Changes 14

Changes in th e A d o le s c e n t S e l f 15

Changes i n E d u c a tio n 16

S o c ie t a l Changes 17

E f f e c t s o f S o c ia l Change on A d o le s c e n t

R e la tio n s h ip s 20

C o n te m p o ra ry P a r e n t- A d o le s c e n t R e la tio n s h ip s 20 C o n te m p o ra ry P e e r-g ro u p R e la t io n s h ip s 22 The S o c i a l i z a t i o n F u n c tio n o f th e

C o n te m p o ra ry School 24

A d o le s c e n t and A d u lt in C o n te m p o ra ry S o c ie ty 26

CHAPTER 3 PSYCHOLOGICAL STUDIES OF ADOLESCENT CULTURE

(10)

page

I n f l u e n t i a l A m e rica n S tu d ie s 31

O verseas and A u s t r a li a n S tu d ie s - A L in k 43 Two A u s t r a li a n S tu d ie s o f th e Second

G e n e ra tio n 45

CHAPTER 4 CONFLICT BETWEEN CULTURES AND THE GENERATIONS EXPERIENCED 3Y AUSTRAL IAN-BORN ADOLESCENT

CHILDREN OF AUSTRALIAN AND IMMIGRANT PARENTS 53

Advanced A c c u l t u r a t io n o f th e Second

G e n e ra tio n 58

P r e ju d ic e in A u s t r a lia n s 70

T e n s io n betw een P a re n ts 74

A d o le s c e n t Independence S2

S p e c i f i c C la sh es 88

The F a m ily 100

Causes o f C u ltu r e C o n f l i c t S p e c if ic t o

C u lt u r a l Groups 120

U n ite d Kingdom 121

N o rth w e s t Europeans 123

S o u th e rn E uropeans 124

C o n c lu s io n 127

CHAPTER 5 A MODEL FOR THE STUDY OF CULTURE CONFLICT 130

The M easurem ent o f C u lt u r e C o n f l i c t and

(11)

page

CHAPTER 6 SUBJECTS, SAMPLE CONTROLS AND PROCEDURE 142

PILOT STUDY 142

SUBJECTS 142

S e l e c t i o n o f S u b j e c t s - Immigr ant 146 S e l e c t i o n o f S u b j e c t s - A u s t r a l i a n 148

SAMPLE CONTROLS 150

F a m i l i a l C o n t r o l s 150

B i r t h p l a c e o f P a r e n t s 150

S oc ioe c on omi c S t a t u s 152

C o n t a c t w i t h Both P a r e n t s 155

Year s s i n c e I m m i g r a t i o n 157

Age o f P a r e n t s 159

S u b j e c t C o n t r o l s 160

Age o f S u b j e c t s 160

B i r t h p l a c e o f C h i l d 162

Age o f S u b j e c t a t Date o f P a r e n t s '

I m m i g r a t i o n 164

Years o f S ec o n d a r y E d u c a t i o n o f S u b j e c t s 166 P r o p o r t i o n o f C h i l d r e n Working 168

Sex D i s t r i b u t i o n 168

P r o p o r t i o n o f S u b j e c t s i n S t a t e S ch o o l s 171

R e l i g i o n 173

INTERVIEWING PROCEDURE 175

(12)

page

Australianism D is p ar i ty 186

I nte rgener ati on D is p ar i ty 191

Combined S e l f - P a r e n t s Di spar it y 192

Combined Peers-Parents D is par i ty 196

Combination o f the S e l f - P a r e n t s and

Peers-Parents Di s pa r it y Scales 200

CHAPTER 8 MEASURES OF ADOLESCENT REACTION TO

INTERGENERATIONAL VALUE DISPARITY 209

(1) Measurement o f I d e n t i f i c a t i o n with

Parents 209

(a) Parental Compliance 209

(b) Parental Deference 212

(2) Measurement o f I d e n t i f i c a t i o n with

Peer Group 215

Peer-Group Importance I n di c e s 217

(a) Number o f Friends L is t ed 217

(b) R e l a t i v e Age o f Friends 217

( c) Distance o f Friends' Homes from

t h a t o f Respondent 218

(d) Proportion o f Friends in a D i f f e r e n t

School or Occupation 218

(e) Number o f A c t i v i t i e s Engaged in

with Friends 219

Combination o f Measures to form the

(13)

page (3) Measurement o f R e j e c t i o n o f Soc ia l

Mores 222

( a ) The Wrongdoing Rat ing S c a l e 223

(b) S o c i a l l y U na cc ept ab le Behaviour

Q u e s t i o n n a i r e 224

C o r r e l a t i o n between Measures o f

R e j e c t i o n o f Soc i al Mores 227

(4) R e j e c t i o n o f S o c i e t y as a Whole 227

A l i e n a t i o n 228

CHAPTER 9 COMPARISON OF MEAN SCORES ACROSS NATIONAL

AND CULTURAL GROUPS 236

A n a l y s i s o f R e s u l t s 236

Comparison wi th A u s t r a l i a n Control

Group 236

D i f f e r e n c e s among Immigrant Sample

Mean Scores 240

Comparison o f Mean Scores a c r o s s

N at i o n a l and C u l t u r a l Groups 240

A. PARENT-CHILD VALUE DISPARITY 242

(1) A u s t r a l i a n i s m D i s p a r i t y 242 (2) I n t e r g e n e r a t i o n D i s p a r i t y 244 B. SCORES ON MEASURES OF REACTION

TO DISPARITY 246

(1) I d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i th P a r e n t s 246

(14)

Parental Deference (b) Parental Deference

(2) Id e n tific a tio n w ith Peers (3) R ejection o f Social Mores

(a) S o c ia lly Unacceptable Behaviour (b) Wrongdoing Rating Scale

(4) R ejection o f Both Reference Groups A lie n a tio n

CHAPTER 10 PREDICTION OF REACTION MEASURE SCORES FROM DISPARITY MEASURE SCORES

A nalysis o f Results

Comparison w ith A u s tra lia n Control Group

D ifferences among Immigrant Sample C o rre la tio n s

M u ltip le C o rre la tio n

A. IDENTIFICATION WITH PARENTS (1) Parental Id e n tific a tio n and

A u stra lia n ism D is p a rity (a) Parental Compliance and

A u s tra lia n is m D is p a rity (b) Parental Deference and

A u s tra lia n is m D is p a rity

(c) M u ltip le C o rre la tio n : Parental Id e n tific a tio n Measures as

P re d icto rs o f A u s tra lia n is m D is p a rity

(15)

page

(2) Parental I d e n tific a tio n and In te r

-generation D is p a rity 273

(a) Parental Compliance and I-G

D is p a rity 273

(b) Parental Deference and I-G

D is p a rity 280

(c) M u ltip le C o rre la tio n : Parental Id e n tific a tio n and I-G

D is p a rity 280

(3) M u ltip le C o rre la tio n : D is p a rity Measures as P re d icto rs o f

Id e n tific a tio n w ith Parents 283

(a) D is p a rity Measures and Parental

Compliance 283

(b) D is p a rity Measures and Parental

Deference 283

B. IDENTIFICATION WITH THE PEER GROUP 286

( l ) A u stra lia n ism D is p a rity 286 (a) Peer-Group Importance and

A u stra lia n ism D is p a rity 286 (2) In te rg e n e ra tio n D is p a rity 288 (a) Peer-Group Importance and I-G

D is p a rity 288

(3) M u ltip le C o rre la tio n : D is p a rity Measures as P re d ic to rs o f

(16)

page

c .

REJECTION OF SOCIAL MORES 292

(1) A u s tr a lia n is m D is p a r it y 292 (a) Wrongdoing Rating and A u s tr a lia n is m

D is p a r it y 292

(b) S o c i a l l y Unacceptable Behaviour

and A u s tra lia n is m D is p a r i t y 292

(c) M u lt ip l e C o r r e l a t i o n : Measures o f R eje ctio n o f S ocial Mores as P re d ic to rs o f A u s tr a lia n is m

D is p a r it y 296

(2) In te r g e n e r a tio n a l D i s p a r i t y 298

(a) Wrongdoing Rating and I-G

D is p a r it y 298

(b) S o c i a l l y Unacceptable Behaviour

and I-G D is p a r it y 300

(c) M u lt ip l e C o r r e la t io n : Measures o f R eje ctio n o f S ocial Mores

as P re d ic to rs o f I-G D i s p a r i t y 300 (3) M u lt ip l e C o r r e la t io n : D i s p a r i t y

Measures as P re d ic to rs o f

R eje ctio n o f Social Mores 304 (a) D is p a r i t y Measures and Wrongdoing

Rating 304

(b) D is p a r it y Measures and S o c i a l l y

(17)

p a g e

D. ALIENATION 303

( 1 ) A l i e n a t i o n and A u s t r a l i a n i s m

D i s p a r i t y 308

( 2 ) A l i e n a t i o n a nd I-G D i s p a r i t y 309 ( 3 ) M u l t i p l e C o r r e l a t i o n : D i s p a r i t y

M e as u r e s a s P r e d i c t o r s o f

A 1 i e n a t i o n 312

CHAPTER 11 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 317

THE SIZE OF THE GAP 320

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN GROUPS IN INTER-

GENERATIONAL DISPARITY 324

A u s t r a l i a n i s m D i s p a r i t y 32G I n t e r g e n e r a t i o n D i s p a r i t y 33? REACTIONS TO INTERGENERATION

CULTURE CONFLICT 333

T o t a l Sample 333

I n s t r u m e n t s 337

D i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n C u l t u r a l Groups i n R e a c t i o n t o I n t e r g e n e r a t i o n a l

C o n f l i c t 344

I d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h P a r e n t s 345

P e e r - G r o u p I m p o r t a n c e 347

R e j e c t i o n o f S o c i a l Mores 351

A l i e n a t i o n 353

BIBLIOGRAPHY 357

(18)

Demographic Data S h e e t s - P a r e n t s and C h i l d r e n APPENDIX I P a r e n t s

APPENDIX I I C h i l d r e n

Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s

APPENDIX I I I I-G Q u e s t i o n n a i r e - P a r e n t s APPENDIX IV O p in io n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e

APPENDIX V I-G Q u e s t i o n n a i r e - T e e n a g e r s I APPENDIX VI I-G Q u e s t i o n n a i r e - T e e n a g e r s I I APPENDIX VII I-G Q u e s t i o n n a i r e - T e e n a g e r s I I I

APPENDIX VI I I You and Your F r i e n d s Q u e s t i o n n a i r e , P t . APPENDIX IX You and Your F r i e n d s Q u e s t i o n n a i r e , P t . 2a APPENDIX X You and Your F r i e n d s Q u e s t i o n n a i r e , P t . 2b APPENDIX XI You and Your F r i e n d s Q u e s t i o n n a i r e , P t . 2c APPENDIX XII A t t i t u d e s Q u e s t i o n n a i r e

APPENDIX XIII S o c i a l I m p o r t a n c e Q u e s t i o n n a i r e APPENDIX XIV B e h a v i o u r Q u e s t i o n n a i r e

APPENDIX XV ( a ) A - S c a l e Answer S h e e t APPENDIX XV ( b) A - S c a l e

S t a t i s t i c a l C o r r e c t i o n s us ed i n making M u l t i p l e Comparisons APPENDIX XVI C a l c u l a t i o n o f C r i t i c a l t Values f o r t h e

(19)

APPENDIX XVII Cal culati on o f F Ratios required f o r S i g n i f ­ i c a n t D i f f e r e n c e s between pairs o f Immigrant Samples

Demographic Data Sheet - Aus tralian Control Group S e l e c t i o n

(20)

LIST OF TABLES

page

6.1 B irth p la ce s o f Immigrant Parents 151

6.2 Mean Scores on Broom-Jones Scale o f Socio­

economic Status by Fathe r's Occupation 154 6.3 Mean Scores on Lancaster-Jones Rating Scale

o f Melbourne Suburbs 156

6.4 Number o f Children fo r whom Both Parents were Contacted, One Parent was Unavailable or

One Parent was dead 158

6.5 Age, Years since Im m igration, and Age a t

In m ig ra tio n o f Parents 161

6.6 Mean Age in Years o f A ll C hildren 163

6.7 B irth p la c e o f Immigrant Children 165

6.8 Mean Age in Years o f Immigrant C hildren a t Date o f Parents' Im m igration. A u s tra lia n

-born Subjects Scored N egatively 167

6.9 Mean Years o f Secondary Education fo r

A ll Children 169

6.10 Number o f C hildren Working and Number o f

C hildren a t School 170

6.11 Sex D is trib u tio n Among C hildren 172

6.12 Number o f C hildren at Church Schools 174 6.13 Methods by which Questionnaires were

(21)

page C o rre la tio n between A u stra lia n ism Scores o f

C hild and Parents 189

Comparison o f S e lf vs Actual Parents Mean Score

w ith S e lf vs Perceived Parents Mean Score 195 Comparison o f Peers vs Actual Parents Mean Score

w ith Peers vs Perceived Parents Mean Score 19S Comparison o f Combined Peers-Parents Mean Score

w ith Combined S elf-P arents Mean Score 201 C o rre la tio n o f Combined Peers-Parents Mean Score

and Combined S e lf-P arents Mean Score 203

Social Importance Mean Scores 205

C o rre la tio n M a trix o f P .6.1 . Measures 221 V a ria b le s, Measures and Q uestionnaire T it le s 231

A u stra lia n ism D is p a rity Mean T-Scores 243 Mean In te rg e n e ra tio n D is p a rity T-Scores 245

Parental Compliance Mean T-Scores 248

Parental Deference Mean T-Scores 250

Peer Group Importance Mean T-Scores 253

Mean Raw Scores on Components o f Peer Group

Importance Measure 254

S o c ia lly Unacceptable Behaviour Mean T-Scores 257 Comparison o f Immigrant C u ltu ra l Group Mean

Scores on S o c ia lly Unacceptable Behaviour

(22)

page

9.9

Wrongdoing Rating Scale Mean T-Scores

260

9.10

Alienation Scale Mean T-Scores

263

9.11

Series of F -tests of Differences between Pairs

of Means on Alienation Scale

265

9.12

Comparison of Immigrant Cultural Groups on

Alienation

264

9.13

Mean T-Scores on Disparity and Reaction Measures

for National and Cultural Groups

267

10.1

Correlation between Australianism Disparity

and Parental Compliance T-Scores

274

10.2

Correlation between Australianism Disparity

and Parental Deference T-Scores

275

10.3

Multiple Correlation between Parental

Id en tification Predictors and Australianism

Disparity Criterion

276

10.4

Correlation between Intergenerational Disparity

(Actual) and Parental Compliance T-Scores

279

10.5

Correlation between Intergenerational Disparity

and Parental Deference T-Scores

281

10.6

Multiple Correlation between Parental

Id en tification Predictors and Intergenerational

Disparity Criterion

282

10.7

Multiple Correlation between Disparity Measures

and Parental Compliance

284

10.8

Multiple Correlation between Disparity Measures

(23)

page

10.9

Correlation between Australianism Disparity

and Peer-Group Importance T-Scores

287

10.1C Correlation between Mean Intergenerational

Disparity and Peer-Group Importance T-Scores

289

10.11 Multiple Correlation between Disparity Measures

and Peer-Group Importance Index

291

10.12

Correlation between Australianism Disparity

and Wrongdoing Rating T-Scores

293

10.13 Correlation between Australianism Disparity

and Socially Unacceptable Behaviour T-Scores

295

10.14 Multiple Correlation between Social Mores

Rejection Measures and Australianism

Disparity

297

10.15 Correlation between Intergenerational

Disparity and Wrongdoing Rating T-Scores

299

10.16 Correlation between Intergenerational

Disparity and Socially Unacceptable

Behaviour T-Scores

301

10.17 Multiple Correlation between Social Mores

Rejection Measures and Intergenerational

Disparity Index

303

10.18 Multiple Correlation between Disparity

Measures and Wrongdoing Rating

305

10.19 Multiple Correlation between Disparity

Measures and Socially Unacceptable

(24)

page

10.20 Correlation between Australianism Disparity

and Alienation T-Scores

310

10.21 Correlation between Intergenerational

Disparity and Alienation T-Scores

311

10.22 Multiple Correlation between Disparity

Measures and Alienation

313

10.23 Prediction of Reactions to Conflict by Australianism

Disparity

315

10.24 Prediction of Reactions to Conflict by I-G

Disparity

316

XVI. 1

Error rat es adjusted by Bonferroni ;t method

398

XVI. 2 C r i ti c al values of t required for

Australian vs Immigrant comparisons

399

XVII. 1 Values of F_! for 3-group and 5-group

(25)

"Most young m igrants - about 97 per c e n t - s e t t l e down w ell

t o l i f e in A u s t r a l i a ; " (Commonwealth Immigration A dvisory C o u n c il, 1960,

p . 3 ) . T h is s t a t e m e n t , somewhat s u r p r i s i n g in both i t s s e r e n i t y and

s p e c i f i c i t y , was made in a Report by a S p e c ia l Committee o f th e Common­

w ea lth Immigration A dvisory Council c h a ir e d by t h e Honourable Mr. J u s t i c e

Dovey, in Feburary, 1960.

A u s t r a l i a had been a b so rb in g immigrants and t h e i r f a m i l i e s in t o

i t s s o c i e t y a t an a v erage r a t e e q u i v a l e n t t o a p p ro x im a tely one per c e n t

o f i t s p o p u la tio n per annum f o r 13 y e a r s ( 1 9 4 7 - 1 9 6 0 ) . Two major reasons

behind t h e encouragement o f t h i s immigrant i n f l u x were development and

d e f e n c e . However a t h i r d r e a s o n , and e q u a l l y im p o r ta n t, was sim p ly t o

p o p u la te A u s t r a l i a in o r d e r t o co u n te r th e c l a im t h a t i t was n o t doing

i t s sh a re in f e e d in g and h o u sin g th e w o r ld 's r a p i d l y growing p o p u l a t io n ,

but to do s o w ith Europeans r a t h e r than A sia n s ( P r i c e , 1 9 7 1 ). C h ild ren ,

t h e r e f o r e , were very im p o rta n t. Many had a r r i v e d w ith t h e i r f a m i l i e s

and o t h e r s had been born o f immigrant p a r e n ts in A u s t r a l i a . ConsequeittTy

A u s t r a l ia n s o c i e t y , p a r t i c u l a r l y I t s s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s and o f f i c i a l s ,

wanted t o know how th e c h il d r e n o f Immigrant f a m i l i e s were coping w ith

l i f e i n A u s t r a l i a . An answer provided t o t h e i r e n q u i r i e s was t h e Dovey

R eport.

I t was based on a su rvey o f th e o p in io n s o f a sample o f 1,0 0 0

t e a c h e r s , who were s e n t a q u e s t i o n n a i r e a s k in g how immigrant c h ild r e n

were f a r i n g in t h e i r c l a s s e s . A number o f s t a t e m e n t s in a d d it io n t o

th e one c i t e d above were made in th e Report c la im in g t h a t immigrant

(26)

reported as frie n d ly and accepting, and the scholastic achievement o f

immigrant children in the schools was described as e x c e lle n t. Leader­

ship by immigrant children was asserted to be b e tte r than average by

41 per cent o f teachers. L i t t l e d iffe re n c e between immigrant children

and th e ir A ustralian peers in school social a c t iv it ie s was found. And

so the Report continued. Problems were recognised, but the o verall

tone was o p tim is tic and reassuring.

Serious doubts concerning methods o f sampling, questionnaire

design and ad m in is tra tio n , and in te rp re ta tio n o f findings have been

expressed about the Report (Brennan, 1960; C aldw ell, 1960). Neverthe­

less i t was important in the questions i t raised . Are children o f

immigrants in A u s tra lia a s sim ila tin g more successfully than t h e ir parents?

Are they as happy as, or perhaps happier than t h e ir A ustralian peers?

Are children o f immigrant parents from d iffe r e n t c u ltu ra l backgrounds

a s s im ila tin g with equal ease? Do children bom in A u s tra lia o f immigrants

experience the same problems and cope w ith them in the same ways as

do children who immigrate with t h e ir parents? Are immigrant children

accepted by t h e ir A ustralian peers as equals? F in a lly , what is the

q u a lity and size o f the "generation gap" between immigrant children

and t h e ir parents? Is i t g reater or sm aller than th a t experienced by

t h e ir A u stralian peers?

Many authors (see the two extensive b ibliographies on A ustralian

immigration edited by P ric e , 1966a, 1971) have discussed these questions

and suggested answers to them. However the great m ajo rity have w ritte n

from a demographic or sociological view point, and much o f the work sur­

(27)

psycho-lo g ic a l in vestig atio n s in to the processes o f assim ilatio n and adjustment

in the immigrant c h ild have been reported. Some notable exceptions

include Oeser & Hammond, 1954; the work of T a ft and his colleagues ( T a f t ,

1965); A d ler, 1966; Heiss, 1966; Kern, 1966; Richardson, 1967; Doczy,

1969; and Johnston, 1969. However the m ajority o f these were concerned

with the immigrant fam ily as a whole, ra th e r than with the psychology

o f the c h ild . Moreover they concentrated p rim a rily on children who

had immigrated w ith t h e ir parents, often not discrim in atin g between

them and second-generation children o f immigrants.

The study reported here th erefo re sets out to in v e s tig a te some

o f these questions w ith in a social psychological frame o f reference.

Previous work ( H i l l s , 1966; Vaughan, 1964), in New Zealand, had found

th a t a popularly held image o f lack o f p reju d ic e , ethnic e q u a lity , and

strong id e n tific a tio n by children o f a m inority group with the m ajority

society was not in accord with the fa c ts . More im p o rtan tly, i t had been

able to make some p o s itiv e suggestions of ways o f dealing with a problem

which, although unrecognised by many a d u lts , was causing perso n ality

c o n flic t fo r a large number o f eth n ic-m in o rity ch ild re n . The present

study attempted to shed some lig h t on whether or not the w idely-held

opinion epitomised by the Report c ite d above was soundly based. I f

i t were, and children o f immigrants were experiencing l i t t l e d i f f i c u l t y

in a s s im ila tin g , the in te re s tin g question would be raised o f why th is

was so in A u s tra lia when studies in the United States (C h ild , 1943;

S h e rif & S h e rif, 1964; Singer & Singer, 1969) had found the stress

undergone by immigrant c h ild re n , and e s p e cia lly second-generation immi­

(28)

such children were experiencing excessive c o n f l i c t , i t was hoped to

suggest a t l e a s t areas and ways in which t h e i r problems could be examined,

and perhaps to put forward means of coping with them.

Obtaining the r ep re se n tat iv e sample necessary to e s t a b l i s h r e l i a b l e

findings of t h i s type f or a l l immigrant children was impracticable for

an in v es tig at io n of t h i s s i z e .

Consequently a limited age-group was

sought.

Studies overseas (Sherif & S h e r if , 1964) and in A u s tr a l ia (Dunphy,

1969) showed t h a t the adolescent aged between 14 and 16 years i s more

l i k e l y than younger or o ld er children to be in a s i t u a t i o n of having

to choose between his parents and his peers as reference groups.

There­

fore i t was decided to r e s t r i c t the p r oj ec t to subjects of t h i s age range.

Research overseas (Child, 1943) had found interg ene rati on al cu ltu re

c o n f l i c t to be gr eat er in the second-generation child of immigrants

than in e i t h e r children who had immigrated with t h e i r p a re n ts, or c h i l d ­

ren of host society parents.

In vestigations in Australia by Zubrzycki

(1964) and Hay, Arens & Kern (1967) had suggested t h a t t h i s might be the

case in Australia also.

Therefore, i f tension between the c hil d and

e i t h e r his immigrant parents or his Australian peers e x i s t e d , i t was

considered t h a t i t should be most evident in the Australian-born child

of immigrant parents.

(29)

backgrounds (Kunz, 1971; M a rtin , 1965). They were th e re fo re excluded from the sample fo r the study. The la rg e s t Southern European n a tio n a l groups were from I t a ly and Greece, and most Northwest Europeans were e ith e r German o r Dutch. For these reasons the groups selected were from the United Kingdom, I t a ly , Greece, Germany and the Netherlands.

A major f a u lt in one o f the few previous studies o f second-genera­ tio n c h ild re n in A u s tra lia , by Johnston (1969), was the la ck o f an Aus­ t r a lia n c o n tro l group w ith which to compare and c o n tra s t fin d in g s con­ cerning immigrant c h ild re n . A group o f adolescent A u s tra lia n s , comparable in age, sex, s c h o la s tic achievement, r e lig io n , and the socioeconomic

sta tu s o f t h e ir parents, was also included in the sample f o r the present study.

F in a lly , the c it y w ith the la rg e s t concentration o f immigrants in A u s tra lia in 1954 (and in 1970) was Melbourne (A u s tra lia n Year Book, 1954, 1970). Consequently i t was there th a t the sample was sought.

This study is th e re fo re an examination o f the incidence and consequences o f in te rg e n e ra tio n a l c o n f lic t in the adolescent c h ild o f immigrant parents from the United Kingdom, Northwest Europe, and Southern Europe, and o f s im ila r c o n f lic t in a matched group o f A u s tra lia n c h ild ­ ren. I t was c a rrie d out in Melbourne, A u s tra lia , in 1970, using ques­ tio n n a ire s adm inistered in the homes o f a to t a l sample o f 146 c h ild re n and t h e ir parents.

O u tlin e o f th is Report

(30)

some o f the classic work on these concepts reported both from overseas

and from A ustralia.

Chapter 4 reviews the lite ra tu re available in Aus­

t r a lia on the adolescent ch ild of immigrant parents and possible sources

fo r him o f c o n flic t with both his parents and his host society peers.

Chapter 5 offers a model fo r the study o f reactions by the individual

to culture c o n flic t, on which the present study is based. The sample

and procedure of the present study are presented in Chapter 6, and Chapters

7 and 8 describe the measures used of independent and dependent variables.

Results are described in de ta il in Chapters 9 and 10. A summary of

(31)

CHAPTER 2. A CONTEMPORARY DEFINITION OF CULTURE CONFLICT

The phenomenon with which the present study is concerned is

the c o n flic t aroused in the adolescent c h ild as he attempts to in te rn a lis e

the mores and norms o f the cu ltu re in which he is growing up, but finds

these to be a t some degree o f variance with those inculcated in him by

his parents. I t has been found to be p a r tic u la r ly strong in children

born o f immigrant parents in a host society (e g ., C h ild , 1943). Such

an adolescent Is in constant contact with his parents, who have matured

in a cu ltu re other than the one he knows, and who, to some e x te n t, whether

d e lib e ra te ly or u n w ittin g ly , attempt to impart elements o f i t to him.

Concurrently his p erso n ality is being shaped, and he 1s seeking a s e l f

-id e n t it y , in the only c u ltu re he knows, while attempting to as sim ila te

In to i t by follow ing it s tenets o f behaviour and b e lie f . Where these

d i f f e r from the values taught him by his parents, he is in an em otionally

d istu rb ing s itu a tio n . His two most important reference groups are making

c o n flic tin g demands upon him, and he must resolve the c o n flic t o r remain

in a s ta te o f tension. This w i ll be fu rth e r discussed 1n Chapter 5.

The aim at present is to spell out what is meant by "cu ltu re c o n f lic t " .

C o n flic t i t s e l f can be conceived o f in at le a s t two ways. I t

may r e fe r to a d is p a rity between the social norms o f two c u ltu re s , w ith ­

out reference to the in d ivid u als adhering to those c u ltu re s . For in stance,

where cap italism is the norm in one cu ltu re and in another communism

p re v a ils , i t may be said th a t the norms o f the two cultures c o n flic t.

I f the two cultures are in close p ro xim ity, and relevan t norms extremely

(32)

More relevant fo r the present study perhaps is c o n flic t between the cultures o f the Aborigine and White Australian (Stevens, 1972a).

Psychologically, however, c o n flic t is usually conceived of as occurring within the in d ivid u a l. For instance, Chaplin defines i t as involving "the simultaneous occurrence of two or more mutually antagon­ is t ic impulses or motives" (Chaplin, 1968, p.102). I t arises when the person has to choose between two mutually incompatible behaviours, the motives fo r each being approximately equally powerful. For the purposes o f the present study, i t is thought o f as occurring when an individual must choose between two incompatible norms to cope with a s itu a tio n . This may occur w ithin one culture. For instance, on seeing a stranger being menaced, should an Australian follow the precept of "S he'll be rig h t, mate," and look the other way, or "Give a man a f a ir go", and In terfere? He w ill feel some c o n flic t, resulting 1n stress which w ill be relieved only when he makes a decision.

(33)

I t is important to distinguish the unique circumstances of culture c o n flic t. I t can be conceived of as occurring only where an individual must choose between two mutually incompatible behaviours, and where the norms, value schema, mores, call them what you w i l l ; of one culture from which he derives his own values, dictate that one a lte rn a tiv e should

be chosen; while the norms of a second culture with which he also id e n tifie s s u ffic ie n tly to consider its values his own, ordain that the opposite

course of action should be followed. The essence of culture c o n flic t is that i t occurs as a resu lt of simultaneous id e n tific a tio n by one

individual with two cultures. As Doczy (1967, 1969) points out, assim ila­ tion d iffic u ltie s experienced by Immigrants are often not the resu lt

of culture c o n flic t, although loosely labelled so. They may arise through a lack of knowledge of the new cu ltu re, so that the immigrant simply

finds himself in a situation with which he has not had to cope before, and has no recourse to acquired norms to guide his behaviour. A newly arrived Southern European in an Australian pub might be an example of th is . Who should buy the drinks? What should be bought? Who should he ta lk to? What should he ta lk about? He is in a state of tension, but not necessarily tension arising from culture c o n flic t.

Conversely c o n flic t experienced by immigrants 1n th e ir host society may not necessarily be culture c o n flic t as they could well have exper­

(34)

out to work there. Sim ilarly, such stre ss may well be experienced by

families of the host society. Culture co n flic t can only be said to have

arisen when the norms of one society d ictate one course of action and

the norms of another ordain its opposite, the individual to at le a st

some extent identifying with both simultaneously.

Thus when the Southern European woman has assimilated fa r enough

into her Australian host society to want to go out to work, as do so

many of her Australian working-class peers, yet s t i l l id e n tifie s strongly

with her homeland culture, where the norm is that a woman’s place is

in the home and not a factory; she is in a sta te of culture co n flict

and likely to experience stress as a re su lt. However the United Kingdom

immigrant wife who experiences apparently sim ilar stress when having

to make the same decision cannot be said to be in a sta te of culture

co n flict. Equally large proportions of her peers go out to work in her

homeland society, and presumably she would have f e lt the same tension

there. I t has arisen, in her case, from causes other than th a t of simple

clash of cultural norms.

(35)

1t th e ir duty to provide sets of values and norms. To a greater or lessen

extent, these parent-inculcated norms will be those acquired by the

parents themselves as they matured 1n th e ir homeland culture. Some

of these will be su fficie n tly sim ilar to those of the host society to

be reasonably appropriate to i t . Other homeland mores the parents will

recognise as inappropriate for the new society and will replace with

host society norms. A further group will be of l i t t l e importance, or

be readily modifiable, so causing l i t t l e tension even where co n flict

does occur. But some will be at variance with those of the host society,

yet be sa lien t enough to be strongly inculcated both by parents and

by social agencies outside the family such as the school and the peer

group. Culture conflict occurs as the child has to cope with situ atio n s

to which such conflicting sets of norms apply and stress is experienced

as a re su lt.

For instance, the Southern European adolescent girl 1s taught

by her parents that she should go out alone only with the young man

she expects to marry - i f at all (Price, 1963a). On the other hand

Australian society, represented especially by her peers and the mass

(36)

young an age, she may go ou t, that c o n flic t is aroused, but over whether

she should go out at a l l .

She is in a situ a tio n of c o n flic t caused by

the divergent mores o f two cultures.

She id e n tifie s to an extent with

both, yet they are prescribing mutually incompatible behaviours.

Johnston (1969) would say that a sta te o f "culture tension"

e x is ts between the girl and her parents, and that she is experiencing

"culture con flict" as a r esu lt.

However Johnston sees culture c o n flic t

as a sta te o f confusion and stress caused within the individual by h is

being unable to s e le c t with which of two fam iliar cultures he should

id en tify .

This is i l l o g i c a l , a s, i f the individual id e n tifie s with

neither, then neither w ill exert pressure on him to conform to i t s norms

and no c o n flic t w ill be experienced.

It is suggested rather that culture

c o n flic t is the situ ation arisin g when an individual id e n tifie s with

two cultures simultaneously, but finds that they have c o n flic tin g mores

in some lifesp a ce areas.

Culture ten sion , or dissension with representa­

tiv e s of those cultures - parents, peers, e t c . , - is symptomatic o f

such c o n flic t, but is not the c o n flic t i t s e l f .

Culture Conflict and the Generation Gap

(37)

behaviour. This experience, commonly known as the "Generation Gap",

is by no means new o f course - a d is p a rity o f b e lie fs between the genera­

tions has been noted by authors since the Greek philosophers - but the

discrepancy between the b e lie f systems o f the old and the young today

may be thought o f as not only g reater in extent and ra te o f increase

than ever p revio u sly, but d iffe r e n t in nature. Modem young people

disagree not only with the means by which society is achieving it s ends,

but with the ends themselves. I f i t is accepted th a t th is is tr u e , then

i t can be said th a t fo r modern Western technological s o c ie ty , o f which

A u s tra lia is an in te g ra l p a r t, the adolescent's parents grew up and

acquired t h e ir norms and values in one c u ltu re , w hile he is maturing

in another. He id e n tifie s w ith , and attempts to re co n c ile , two c u ltu re s ,

as does the immigrants' c h ild .

The follow ing sections w ill th erefo re examine some o f the evidence

a v a ila b le to show ju s t what sorts o f change are occurring. Changes in

the fa m ily , the s e l f , education, and society in general are covered;

and the resu lts o f these on adolescent relatio n sh ip s wfth t h e ir parents,

t h e ir peers, schools and wider ad u lt society discussed.

I t should be noted th a t th is is a summary review on ly. Time

and space preclude d e ta ile d examination o f the survey and experimental

work leading to the conclusions stated . Nonetheless w1deranging sources

of such information are a v a ila b le , and a number are c ite d . The in te re s te d

reader is p a r tic u la r ly re fe rred to such recent publications as Brown

(1973); Clark & Clark (1 972); Ficker & R igterinck (1972); Johnston,

Dokecki & Mowrer (1972); Weisz (1 9 70 ); and Wrenn & Ruiz (1970) fo r g re a ter

(38)

Changes in Contemporary Society

Family Changes. Families are sm aller, and nuclear rather than extended. A number o f causes contribute, but most important are perhaps the steady climb in socioeconomic status combined with urban d r i f t (Hurlock, 1972; Musgrove, 1966). At the same time they are less stable. High s o c ia l, vocational and spatial m obility have resulted from the vast increase in size o f businesses plus the ready a v a ila b ilit y of transport and com­ munication (Hurlock, 1972). The w ife's role is less frequently th at of the mother only, and more often th at of mother plus income earner (Hurlock, 1972; Husgrove, 1966). Consequently material aspects o f the home, such as house, furnishings, etc. have become as important as close relationships (Hurlock, 1972). This is accentuated by the rapid increase fn occurrence of divorce, separation and remarriage. At the same tim e, the fa th e r's role is less c le a rly sex-defined and he takes a greater part in ch ild -re arin g (Hurlock, 1972; Kusgrove, 1966).

This greater social m obility has resulted in high achievement aspirations by many parents fo r th e ir ch ildren , with re la tiv e ly cold relationships being complemented by a greater willingness on the part of parents to "sacrifice" fo r the education o f th e ir children (Hurlock, 1972). A widespread change in a ttitu d e s , including a parental knowledge of Freud (Jencks & Riesman, 1967) has resulted in permissive c h ild -re a rin g , with the typical family being child-centred rather than focussing on

(39)

dependence on the family for the working adolescent (Martin, 1972),

and by the ready av a ila b ility of employment. As a re su lt adolescent

children spend less time in the home - both work and recreation are

typically outside i t (Hurlock, 1972). Even within i t , the major form

of recreation is telev isio n , which does l i t t l e toward cementing family

relationships. The same mass media communication, via te le v isio n , radio,

magazines, e t c ., means th at adolescents are aware of alternatives to

th e ir fam ily's way of l i f e , and Indeed to the family way of l i f e a lto ­

gether. Such awareness, heightened by contact with immigrants, is greater

than has ever previously been the

case (Brown, 1973).

The family which has produced the modern adolescent is conse­

quently different in a number of basic respects from that in which his

parents grew up.

Changes in the Adolescent Self. The adolescent produced by the modern

family also d iffe rs from the average adolescent of a generation or two

ago. To s ta r t with, evidence suggests th at actual physical puberty

occurs at an average of two years e a rlie r than i t did two generations

ago (Cole & Hall, 1970).

In 1925 th at average age of puberty for boys

was 14 - 15, compared with 12 - 13 in 1970; and for g irls was 13, compared

with 11 - 12 at present. Similarly maturity and experience develop e a rlie r

and to a greater depth as a resu lt of te lev isio n , film s, magazines,

and books, as well as education (Oencks & Rlesman, 1967). Both physically

and mentally, then, the adolescent matures e a rlie r than did his parents.

(40)

socialisation experiences, not simply maturation. Socialisation d iffe rs

between groups of differing socioeconomic sta tu s. Low socioeconomic

status parents are more authoritarian and teach th e ir children what

ought to be done under pain of punishment for disobedience, while middle-

class parents fo ster in th e ir children the development of s e lf- c r itic a l

responses (Aronfreed, 1968). Thus as the proportion of middle-class

families increases, Western society becoming more middle-class, s e lf-

c ritic a l responses also increase as the basic form of morality. This

is demonstrated 1n the successful English child (Musgrove, 1966), who

is described as withdrawn and s o lita ry , conscientious and s e l f - c r iti c a l ,

rather than other-directed. I t would seem relevant to Australian society

also, where the great majority of the adolescent population are reasonably

well educated, living in middle class suburbs in homes belonging to th e ir

parents. This was less true of th e ir parents, and much less so of the

grandparents who raised th e ir parents through World War I and the Depres­

sion.

Changes in Education. The role of educational in stitu tio n s in the forma­

tion of the typical adolescent personality has also changed. Not only

does the universality of education mean th a t today’s adolescent is more

aware of social problems outside h1s own small world (Brown, 1973; Cole

& Hall, 1970), but a greater proportion of his socialisation takes place

1n educational in s titu tio n s , rather than at home as the responsibility

of his parents (Hurlock, 1972; Jencks & Riesman, 1967). Attending from

(41)

heter-ogeneous in race, sex, socioeconomic status and m orality (Jencks & Riesman,

1967; Musgrove, 1963; P h illip s , 1962). R eligion plays a decreasing ro le

in education, and students are more s e lf - s u f f ic ie n t and respecting o f

knowledge ra th e r than money or a u th o rity (Anderson & Beswick, 1972;

Jencks & Riesman, 1967; Sears, 1969). They see freedom o f speech and

behaviour as a r ig h t , not a p riv ile g e (Brown, 1973). That th is is ap­

p lic a b le in A ustralian schools was demonstrated by a survey o f

high-school opinion 1n which pupils strongly advocated colleges fo r senior

students, involving p u p il-p a rtic ip a n t government and n o n -au th o ritarian

teaching (Anderson & Beswick, 1972). T h eir a ttitu d e toward the school

and it s ro le in t h e ir social development was very d iffe r e n t from th a t

o f t h e ir parents which had produced the system in which they were en­

ro lle d .

Societal Changes. So f a r , then, i t has been suggested th a t the modal

adolescent h im self, his fa m ily , and his educational environment a l l show

evidence o f rapid change over the past generation or two generations.

Both the degree and ra p id ity o f these changes re s u lt in c o n flic t fo r

him as he matures, id e n tify in g with his parents and having le a r n t t h e ir

mores, w hile growing in to an in d ivid u al liv in g 1n a fam ily and attending

an educational In s titu tio n each req u irin g norms which at times c o n flic t

with those o f his parents. However these forms o f c o n flic t can be seen

as elements o f an even wider and all-encompassing s itu a tio n o f change.

Society as a whole is changing ra p id ly , in many areas already re q u irin g

values and behavioural norms d iffe r in g from those s u ita b le fo r the so ciety

(42)

Such change is more ra p id now, over a g reate r p ro p o rtio n o f humanity, than ever before (Brown, 1973; Cole & H a ll, 1970). I t is

o c c u rrin g a t a speed s u f f ic ie n t to leave many o f the mores o f one genera- tio n in a p p lic a b le to s itu a tio n s in which the next fin d s i t s e l f . More­ over modern communication networks, w ith te le v is io n and ra dio v ia s a te l­ l i t e and undersea ca b le , produce contemporaneous change in s o c ie tie s spread across the w o rld , and in the mass populations o f those s o c ie tie s (Brown, 1973). Communication and tra n s p o rt has also produced global interdependence o f nations and s o c ie tie s which a generation ago had not heard o f one a n oth er's existe nce. S im ila rly m igration has re s u lte d in in te rm a rria g e and close in te re th n ic contact causing both less is o la ­ t io n , and the weakening o f tie s between nations p re v io u s ly lin k e d fo r defence a g a in st others once d is ta n t and now neighbours. An example o f t h is is the weakening o f A u s tra lia n -U n ite d Kingdom tie s and the im­ provement o f A u s tra lia n re la tio n s w ith Asian and South-East Asian co u n trie s

(E ncel, 1971).

This combined w ith fe a r o f nuclear war and the knowledge th a t modern war invo lve s the whole p o p u la tio n , not merely armies, has re s u lte d in a widespread p a c if is t value, c o n tra s tin g w ith the fe rv e n t n a t io n a lis t ic , p a t r io t ic p rid e in the size o f fig h tin g forces o f o n ly a generation

ago (Brown, 1973). On the o th e r hand, crime and violence r e s u ltin g from the ready anonymity o f vast megalopolises is widespread (Brown, 1973; Cole ä H a ll, 1970) and experienced by members o f a ll socioeconomic groups, ra th e r than by the lowest alone, as in previous generations. The megalopolis i t s e l f is symptomatic o f the vast population growth

(43)

from the A gricultural Revolutions hastened by the Industrial Revolution,

but given an unprecedented spurt during the past generation by medical

innovation, and in Australia as a re s u lt, immigration.

Consequently the modern adolescent has grown up aware that

enormous numbers of people are liv in g at subsistence le ve l. On the

other hand, tele vision t e lls him that foreign aid and food technology

are improving the food resources of India, China and Indonesia (Encel,

1971). Nevertheless Australia is one o f the few empty lands s t i l l a v a il­

able fo r migration from overcrowded countries, and he has played and

sat in school beside peers o f many n a tio n a litie s (Price, 1971).

Simul­

taneously the size and complexity of the society in which he live s causes

re la tiv e ly severe re s tric tio n on the freedom o f the in d ivid u a l, who has

a resultant greater need fo r recognition and respect from his associates

in order to compensate.

In some societies th is is achieved by tig h te r

ingroup cohesion and greater prejudice against members of ethnic out­

groups, as in the Southern United States, but in Australia has had the

e ffe c t of reducing prejudice against Aborigines and promoting greater

acceptance of ethnic outsiders (Encel, 1971).

This is promoted by in ­

creased awareness and factual knowledge gained from the te le visio n screen.

The modern adolescent has also developed in an a fflu e n t society.

Food, clothes and housing are readily available and goods considered

luxuries or never known in th e ir youth by his parents (tra n s is to r radios)

are seen as essentials.

Concomitantly he is aware that members o f other

societies, and even his own, are not in such a state. The poverty-wealth

contrast is as great as, i f not greater than, i t was in previous genera­

(44)

Nevertheless the average teenager is a ff lu e n t, and expects money and lodgings from his parents. C oncurrently he has been reared pernris- s iv e ly and sees i t as h is r ig h t to come and go where, when and w ith whom he pleases, in c o n tra s t w ith the more p a re n ta lly dominated fa m ily

in which h is parents grew up (Brown, 1973).

This leads to the fin a l p o in t to be made here, th a t r e lig io n plays an ever decreasing p a rt in his l i f e . He attends church le s s , hears com paratively l i t t l e o f i t a t school, and takes less note o f i t in s iz in g up acquaintances or members o f outgroups such as Aborigines o r Jews (E nce l, 1971).

Thus the s o cie ty in which the Western teenager is growing up, in which he is le a rn in g to l i v e , and from which he is a cq u irin g his values and mores, d if f e r s in many e s s e n tia ls from the one experienced by h is parents and from which they derived t h e ir norms. Results o f these changes are discussed in the fo llo w in g s e ctio n s.

E ffe c ts o f Social Change on Adolescent R elationships

Contemporary Parent-Adolescent R e la tio n s h ip s . Consequently, as a re s u lt o f the changes o u tlin e d above, the modern teenager no longer views h is parents as the prim ary source o f so cia l mores. The m o b ility o f modern s o c ie ty re s u lts in h is a c q u irin g a ttitu d e s which may d if f e r markedly from those held by his parents (H urlock, 1972; Musgrove, 1966). For

instance the A u s tra lia n adolescent is much less prejudiced against Aborigines than are his parents ( T a ft, 1970), and does not have the same a ttitu d e s

(45)

He learns his l i f e - r o l e from school and the peer group, not h is fa m ily (Jencks & Riesman, 1957). This is e s p e c ia lly l i k e l y to be tru e o f A u s tra lia , where overemployment means ready employment and fin a n c ia l independence fo r the adolescent at an e a rly age. At most h is parents are the source o f high need achievement re s u ltin g from ready so cia l m o b ility (Musgrove, 1S66) and are models fo r the develop­ ment o f s e l f - c r i t i c a l responses, ra th e r than o f actual behavioural mores

(Bronfenbrenner, 1SG2; Burton, 1963). Thus Anderson & Beswick (1972) found in t h e ir adolescent respondents a strong desire fo r mutual respect between the generations, in co n tra s t to the respect accorded the aged by the young o f a generation ago.

The working mother e sta blishe s a re la tio n s h ip which, by her c h ild 's adolescence, is r e la t iv e ly cool (Musgrove, 1966). On the o th e r hand, the fa th e r tends to take an ever g re a te r p a rt in chi 1d -re a rin g (H u rlo ck, 1972), although th is may not y e t be as tru e o f A u s tra lia as i t is o f the United States (A d le r, 1966).

I f the parents can cope w ith t h is , and e s ta b lis h mutual re sp e ct, then tension need not be excessive, and doubtless in many fa m ilie s is n o t. However the r a p id ity o f the changes o c c u rrin g causes many parents to fin d i t d i f f i c u l t to understand t h e ir teenagers' experiences, w ith re s u lta n t confusion and in d e c is io n . Such u n c e rta in ty on the p a rt o f t h e ir parents makes them appear weak exemplars in t h e ir c h ild r e n 's eyes, causing d isre spe ct and poor m odelling (H u rlo ck, 1972).

(46)

other mass media have led to an awareness o f other societies and o f

other fam ily patterns which enables adolescents to c r itic is e th e ir own

parents and fam ily l i f e to an extent and depth previously unequalled.

Hurlock suggests (Hurlock, 1972, p.434), and the present author would

agree, that the d isp a rity arising from these circumstances is equivalent

to the culture gap experienced between parents and children o f fam ilies

emigrating to a host society, or from rural society to the urban l i f e

o f the metropolis.

Contemporary Peer-group Relationships. Another type of relationship

which is undergoing rapid change, p a rtly as a re su lt of the fa m ilia l

changes outlined above, is that between the adolescent and his peers.

Finding his parents inadequate as models, he turns from them to his

peers as his other major reference group (Cole & H a ll, 1970), id e n tify in g

with youthful libe ralism as he rejects the conservatism o f older genera­

tions (Sears, 1969). With less emphasis on family chores and recrea­

tio n , and more on schooling, mass entertainment, sport and club member­

ship, the modern adolescent has comparatively l i t t l e to do with his

parents and much more opportunity to establish strong relationships

with his peer group (Hurlock, 1972; Jencks & Riesman, 1967).

This is accentuated by the e a rlie r onset of puberty, which the

average modern adolescent reaches f u lly two years before his grandparents

did, yet is also aggravated by la te r admission in to f u lly adult roles.

Education and vocational tra in in g often continue into the twenties,

with f u ll acceptance as a responsible adult being denied u n til i t is

Figure

Table 6.2.

Table 6.2.

p.178
Table 6.5.

Table 6.5.

p.185
Table 6.10.

Table 6.10.

p.194
Table 7 .1 .

Table 7 .

1 . p.213
Table 7.4.

Table 7.4.

p.225
Table 7.5.

Table 7.5.

p.227
Table 8.1.

Table 8.1.

p.245
Table 8.2.

Table 8.2.

p.255
Table 8.2.

Table 8.2.

p.258
Table 9.1.

Table 9.1.

p.267
Table 9.2.

Table 9.2.

p.269
Table 9.4.

Table 9.4.

p.274
Table 9.5.

Table 9.5.

p.277
Table 9.6.

Table 9.6.

p.278
Table 9.7.

Table 9.7.

p.281
Table 9.8.

Table 9.8.

p.282
Table 9.9.

Table 9.9.

p.284
Table 9.11.

Table 9.11.

p.289
Table 10.2.

Table 10.2.

p.299
Table 10.3.

Table 10.3.

p.300
Table 10.4.

Table 10.4.

p.303
Table 10.8.

Table 10.8.

p.309
Table 10.9.

Table 10.9.

p.311
Table 10.17.

Table 10.17.

p.327
Table 10.19.

Table 10.19.

p.331
Table 10.21.

Table 10.21.

p.335
Table 10.22.

Table 10.22.

p.337
Table 10.23.

Table 10.23.

p.339
Table XVI.1.

Table XVI.1.

p.422
Table XVI.2.

Table XVI.2.

p.423

References

Updating...