This thesis focused on international students (Germany, Belgium, Cuba, USA, Ecuador
and the Bermudas) residing in the Netherlands for the period of their studies and Dutch
host students studying at the faculty of Economics and Business Administration University
Maastricht, the Netherlands. The aim of this study was to examine whether the relationship
between international students (n=10) and host students (n=5) is concordant (consensual)
or discordant (conflictual or problematic). The acculturation orientations of both groups
have been assessed using Berry’s (1992, 1997) four acculturation strategies as there are:
integration, assimilation, separation and marginalisation. Bourhis´ et al. (1997) Interactive
Acculturation Model has been applied to explore the relational outcomes between the
groups.
In this study it was shown that integration is the strategy most preferred by host students.
However, international students reflect separation (n=5), integration (n=3) and a mixture
of integration and assimilation features (n=2). Accordingly, the acculturation profiles of
host and nationally diverse students are concordant (consensual) between host- (n=5) and
international students (n=5) and discordant (conflictual or problematic) between host-
(n=5) and international students (n=5).
The findings suggest that Dutch language skills, a Dutch partner, multinational living
arrangements and interest in- and openness towards the Dutch society enhance integration
and assimilation orientations. On the contrary, the geographical closeness to the home
country, a close relationship to family and friends from the home city, the multilingual skills
of the Dutch society, a high percentage of friends with the same nationality and linguistic
background support separation orientations among international students. In addition, the
large (numerical) size and homogeneity (in terms of nationality and language) of the group
of German students represented at the faculty influence the acculturation orientations of
international students and enhance separation orientations.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
1.1 Short overview of diversity research
1.2 Aim and Contribution of the final thesis
1.3 Structure
2 Intergroup behaviour
2.1 Social identity
2.2 Social categorisation
2.2.1 The concept of familiarity and social discrimination
2.3 Social comparison
2.3.1 In-group favouritism
2.3.2 In-group bias
2.4 Conclusion
3 The Acculturation
3.1 Multicultural ideology
3.2 Acculturation attitudes
3.3 The uni- and bidimensional model
3.4 Acculturation strategies
3.5 The Interactive Acculturation Model (IAM)
3.5.1 Host community acculturation orientations
3.5.2 Relational outcomes of host and foreign acculturation orientations
3.6 Conclusion
4 Research on immigrant- and international student populations
4.1 Overview of empirical studies
4.2 Applied social psychology theories
4.2.1 Social categorisation: minority group formation
4.2.2 Social identity: minority group identification
4.2.3 Social comparison: from national to international
4.3 Conclusion
5 Research design
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Aim of the research
5.2.1 Short outline of the Interactive Acculturation Model and its application
5.3 Participants and procedure
5.3.1 The interviews
5.3.2 The questionnaires
6 Findings
6.1 The group of German students
6.1.1 Applied acculturation strategies
6.2 The group of foreign students
6.2.1 Applied acculturation strategies
6.3 The group of Dutch students
6.3.1 Expected acculturation strategies
6.4 Relational outcomes
6.4.1 University life
6.4.2 Social life
7 Conclusion
7.1 Summary of results
7.2 Discussion
7.3 Limitations
7.4 Future research
7.5 Practical implications
7.6 Concluding remarks
Research Objectives and Themes
This thesis examines the relationship between international and host students at the Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University Maastricht, to determine if their acculturation orientations are concordant or discordant, and to identify the underlying motives for their behaviors.
- Application of the Interactive Acculturation Model (IAM) to academic settings.
- Analysis of integration, assimilation, separation, and marginalization strategies.
- Identification of factors influencing acculturation (e.g., language skills, social networks, group size).
- Assessment of concordance/discordance between host and foreign student groups.
Excerpt from the Book
The concept of familiarity and social discrimination
Tajfel and Billig (1974) claim that in most experimental studies on intergroup behaviour the importance of competition and co-operation has been stressed. In nearly all studies, it has been found that after an artificial conflict between groups was created, the experimenters discovered intergroup stereotyping. The in-group experienced positive and the out-group negative stereotyping. However, Tajfel and Billig (1974) doubt that in-group favouritism is solely based on previous hostility or competition between the groups. Instead, they are convinced that intergroup discrimination can arise due to the mere existence of social categories. Hence, in their view social categorisation is the primary cause for in-group favouritism and stereotyping.
The authors argue further and say that insecurity or security of individuals in a certain situation plays an important role in the context of social categorisation (Tajfel & Billig, 1974). A group that feels secure in its social position is assumed to intensify social discrimination whereas an insecure group will lessen this effect. The two conditions of security and insecurity can be compared with a group that is familiar and another that is unfamiliar with a certain situation. According to the results of Tajfel and Billig (1974), groups that are familiar with a situation tend to discriminate more against the out-group than do less familiar groups. Individuals whose environment is familiar to them, concentrate more on their social environment and thus, on social norms.
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: Provides an overview of national diversity research, establishes the research aim concerning student integration, and outlines the thesis structure.
2 Intergroup behaviour: Explains fundamental social psychology theories including social identity, social categorization, and social comparison to understand group interactions.
3 The Acculturation: Defines core concepts of multiculturalism and presents the Interactive Acculturation Model (IAM) as the framework for analyzing student relationships.
4 Research on immigrant- and international student populations: Connects social psychology theories to specific literature on international student populations and cross-cultural interaction.
5 Research design: Details the methodology, including qualitative interviews with German, Dutch, and foreign students at the University Maastricht.
6 Findings: Presents results on the acculturation strategies applied by different student groups and their relational outcomes in university versus social life.
7 Conclusion: Summarizes research findings, discusses theoretical implications, acknowledges study limitations, and proposes directions for future research.
Keywords
National Diversity, International Students, Acculturation, Social Identity, Social Categorization, Interactive Acculturation Model, IAM, Integration, Assimilation, Separation, Social Discrimination, University Maastricht, Intergroup Behaviour, Cross-cultural Contact.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research?
The study investigates the level of integration and the fit of acculturation orientations between international and Dutch host students within the specific environment of the Faculty of Economics and Business Administration at Maastricht University.
What are the primary theoretical frameworks used?
The research relies on social psychology theories, specifically Social Identity, Social Categorization, and Social Comparison, as well as Berry’s Acculturation Model and the Interactive Acculturation Model (IAM) by Bourhis et al.
What is the main objective of the thesis?
The primary aim is to determine if the relationship between international students and host students is concordant (consensual) or discordant (conflictual), while uncovering the reasons and emotions driving their specific acculturation behaviors.
Which methodology was chosen for this study?
The author employed qualitative research methods, utilizing semi-structured, face-to-face interviews with 15 first-year students to gain deep insights into motives that quantitative questionnaires might miss.
What does the main body of the work cover?
The main body covers a literature review on intergroup behavior and acculturation, the research design involving student interviews, and a detailed analysis of findings categorized by student groups (German, Foreign, and Dutch) and setting (University vs. Social life).
Which keywords characterize this academic work?
Key terms include national diversity, acculturation, international students, social identity, social categorization, and the Interactive Acculturation Model.
How does the large number of German students affect the findings?
The thesis finds that the large numerical size and homogeneity of the German student group leads to national separation, as they create their own social clusters, which in turn hinders their integration into the wider Dutch society.
Why are relational outcomes assessed separately for University and social life?
The findings indicate that acculturation behavior changes significantly between these two settings: while the University acts as an "artificial" international environment promoting integration, social life is heavily influenced by national associations and language barriers, leading to different relational outcomes.
- Quote paper
- Antje Artmann (Author), 2003, National Diversity in Organisations: A study about integration between host and international students, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/16806
