Big five personality and cultural relocation factors in Vietnamese Australian students’ intercultural social self-efficacy

International Journal of Intercultural Relations

25 (2001) 181–201

Big five personality and cultural relocationfactors in Vietnamese Australian students’

intercultural social self-efficacy

Anita S. Mak*, Catherine Tran

Centre for Applied Psychology, University of Canberra, P.O. Box 1, ACT 2601, Australia

Abstract

The aim of this study was to test an integrative model of intercultural social self-efficacyusing a sample of 124 Vietnamese migrant university students in Australia. According to themodel, Asians’ intercultural social self-efficacy in western societies would be predicted by three

of the five Big Five personality factors (higher levels of extraversion and openness, and a lowerlevel of neuroticism), three cultural relocation variables (a weaker ethnic identification, ahigher level of fluency in the host language, and a longer period of residence in the host

country), and their co-ethnic social self-efficacy. As well, the model tested if co-ethnic socialself-efficacy would mediate the effects of the personality variables on intercultural social self-efficacy. Subsequent path analysis results partially supported the model tested. There were

significant total effects of co-ethnic social self-efficacy, weak Vietnamese ethnic identification,English fluency, extraversion, and openness on intercultural social self-efficacy. The effect ofextraversion was mediated by co-ethnic social self-efficacy. The results highlight the relevanceof not only cultural relocation factors, but also the possession of relatively stable personal

resources (in the form of characteristic social efficacy, extraversion, and openness), toacculturating Asians’ social efficacy in interacting with host nationals. Methodologicallimitations of the present study and implications of the findings for both the sociocultural

adjustment literature and training for migrant students are discussed. # 2001 ElsevierScience Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Big five personality factors; Cross-cultural adaptation; Ethnic identity; Immigration; Social

self-efficacy; Sociocultural factors

*Corresponding author. Tel.: +612-6201-2704; fax: +612-6201-5753.

E-mail address: [email protected] (A. S. Mak).

0147-1767/01/$ - see front matter # 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

PII: S 0 1 4 7 - 1 7 6 7 ( 0 0 ) 0 0 0 5 0 - X

1. Introduction

The demands of cultural relocation on refugees, migrants, expatriate workers, andinternaional students are well-documented (Furnham & Bochner, 1986; Nesdale,Rooney, & Smith, 1997; Stening, 1979; Taft, 1977), and can be classified into thebroad categories of psychological and sociocultural adjustments (Ward & Chang,1997). The present paper is focussed on the joint contributions of personality andcultural relocation factors in intercultural social self-efficacy, an importantdimension of sociocultural adjustment, among migrant students from a sociallydisadvantaged ethnic community background.

Migrant students from a minority racial group may find social interactions to beparticularly challenging owing to their non-English speaking background (NESB),their newcomer immigrant status, in some cases the prejudice of the people aroundthem, and possibly their personality dispositions (Smither & Rodriguez-Giegling,1982; Ward, 1996). However, effective interactions with peers, academic facultymembers, and general staff members constitute an important determinant of tertiarystudents’ mastery of academic work and their social integration and well-being in theeducational setting (Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, & Pastorelli, 1996; Tinto,1990). Recent Australian research suggests that overseas-born NESB universitystudents are more likely to report social difficulties in both academic and everydaysocial encounters (Barker, Child, Gallois, Jones, & Callan, 1991; Edmond, 1996; Pe-Pua, 1994), and a lower level of social self-efficacy (Fan & Mak, 1998), than theAustralia-born.

Fan and Mak (1998) have adapted Bandura’s (1977) concept of self-efficacy toinvestigate migrant students’ belief that they can successfully perform or completetarget behaviors in academic or everyday situations involving social interactions.The relevant self-efficacy expectancy enables individuals to produce the desiredoutcome through their own actions. It is a powerful factor in behavior changebecause it determines the initial decision to perform a behavior, the effort spent, andpersistence in the face of difficulties (Bandura, 1977, 1986, 1997). Moreover, self-efficacy has been found to buffer the experience of stress; those with low self-efficacyare at risk for a dramatic increase in threat and loss appraisals, and are more likely toreport acculturative stress (Jerusalem & Schwarzer, 1992; Zheng & Berry, 1991).Bandura (1977) has pointed out that people’s belief in their own ability can havemore to do with their performance in a given situation than their actual ability toperform. Perceptions of social self-efficacy in situations such as cross-culturalencounters will thus have an effect not only on individuals’ social performance, butalso on their decisions as to whether to become involved in particular types of socialevents.

According to Bandura (1977, 1986, 1997), there are four sources of self-efficacythat can be targeted for intervention to achieve positive changes. They are masteryexperiences, vicarious experiences, social persuasion, and physiological arousal.Translated into the domain of social self-efficacy in a cross-cultural context,migrants and sojourners can seek to increase this aspect of self-efficacy throughmastering intercultural social interactions, watching similar models’ successful social

A. S. Mak, C. Tran/International Journal of Intercultural Relations 25 (2001) 181–201182

performance, obtaining encouragement and positive feedback for their ownperformance, and managing to focus on action instead of being frozen by emotionalarousal in intercultural situations. We feel that Bandura’s conceptual framework onself-efficacy and its implications for achieving positive behavioral changes wouldsupport the utility of assessing intercultural social self-efficacy as a useful indicator ofsociocultural adjustment.

Fan and Mak’s (1998) research has further revealed considerable variation inmigrant students’ social self-efficacy in interacting with local Australians. Yet, it isunclear if low social self-efficacy scores among students from a culturally differentbackground are primarily the manifestation of a relatively stable disposition of beingdiffident in social encounters (regardless of whether they involve co-ethnics or hostnationals), or largely represent social difficulties due to cultural relocation, or both.In the case of the first scenario, the disposition may reflect a general lack of socialefficacy beliefs, which may in turn be determined by some basic personality factors.

The present study began with the proposal that individual migrants’ superordinatepersonality dimensions (such as the comprehensive and parsimonious Big Fivepersonality framework provided by Costa and McCrae (1985)) and their culturalrelocation situation (including ethnic versus host identification, fluency in the hostlanguage, and length of residence in the host country), may both contribute to themigrants’ intercultural social efficacy. To date, there has been no other research in thefield of cross-cultural adaptation on either the predictors of migrants’ interculturalsocial self-efficacy, or the utility of applying the otherwise widely researched Big Fivepersonality factors to understanding variation in sociocultural adjustment.

1.1. Big Five personality factors and sociocultural adjustment

Among the Big Five personality factors, namely, neuroticism, extraversion,openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness (Costa and McCrae, 1985),extraversion is the only variable that has been used fairly extensively by variousresearchers to attempt to predict cross-cultural adaptation (Ward, 1996). Ward’sreview suggests that while there is no conclusive evidence suggesting that the moreextraverted will adapt more easily to a new society, extraversion among Asia-bornstudents studying in western countries was consistently related to fewer socialdifficulties (e.g., Searle & Ward, 1990; Ward & Kennedy, 1993b). Ward and herassociates (Searle & Ward, 1990; Ward, 1996; Ward & Chang, 1997) explained thispattern of findings in terms of the notion of ‘‘cultural fit’’. That is, individuals whosepersonality traits resemble more closely the social norms of the host culture willadapt more easily to the new culture. Given that western societies tend to valuebehaviors consistent with extraversion (Searle & Ward, 1990), migrants andsojourners who demonstrate extraversion behaviors in a western host society canbe expected to fit in more easily.

Along the lines of the notion of cultural fit, we surmise that openness is anotherbehavioral characteristic valued in western societies, and that greater opennessamong Asian migrants may be predictive of more successful sociocultural adaptationin western countries. Compared to those born in western societies, the Asia-born are

A. S. Mak, C. Tran/International Journal of Intercultural Relations 25 (2001) 181–201 183

raised in a relatively collectivistic culture that values a more subtle and implicit, andhigher-context communication style (Gudykunst & Ting-Toomey, 1988). Kim (1988)has suggested that the characteristics of open-mindedness, tolerance for ambiguity,gregariousness, and extraversion could facilitate communication competence. Alsorelated to openness is the finding by Cui and Awa (1992) that personality flexibility isa major factor in intercultural effectiveness.

In contrast, individuals high on dispositional neuroticism or trait anxiety may findthe challenges of intercultural social interactions to be anxiety-provoking and opt forthe coping response of social avoidance instead of honing their skills in socioculturaladjustment. Furukawa and Shibayama (1993, 1994) found that neuroticism was asignificant predictor of maladjustment in Japanese students studying in the UnitedStates. Chataway and Berry (1989) also found that higher levels of neuroticism wereassociated with greater social avoidance among Chinese sojourners in Canada.

Putting aside the benefits from cultural fit, personality dispositions may beconsidered enduring individual resources (or in some cases, liabilities) important forhelping (or sometimes making it difficult for) migrants and sojourners cope with thewide-ranging challenges of cross-cultural adaptation (Chataway & Berry, 1989;Pedersen, 1995; Zheng & Berry, 1991). Smither and Rodriguez-Giegling (1982)found that Vietnamese refugees in Americans high on the personality characteristicsof likeability (which can result from the individuals’ expression of agreeableness) andconscientiousness were more acculturated to the host country, and that refugees’personality factors were more useful than demographic background in predictingtheir acculturation. However, there is a lack of research investigating the directrelationships between agreeableness and conscientiousness on the one hand, andsocial efficacy and skills in a cross-cultural context on the other.

The present study tested the hypotheses that higher intercultural social self-efficacyamong Vietnamese Australians would be predicted by greater extraversion andopenness (along the lines of the notion of cultural fit), and lower neuroticism (on thebasis of previous research). The research also provided an opportunity to explore thepossible contributions of agreeableness and conscientiousness to intercultural socialself-efficacy.

1.2. Cultural relocation and sociocultural adjustment

Recent research suggests that sociocultural adjustment is influenced by variouscross-cultural variables, such as amount of contact with host nationals, length ofresidence in a new culture, cultural identity, cultural distance, and host languageability (Ward, 1996; Ward & Kennedy, 1993a; Ward & Kennedy, 1993b), more sothan by extraversion (see Ward & Chang, 1997). We will refer to this constellation ofvariables as cultural relocation factors. The pattern of results obtained by Ward andher associates is consistent with applying the work by Argyle and his associates(Argyle, 1969; Trower, Bryant, & Argyle, 1978) on learning of social skills to thedomain of acculturation. They have highlighted the significance of experience andthe effectiveness of training, modelling, and social interaction in social skillsacquisition. Furnham and Bochner (1986) have further indicated that with increased


time in the host country, individuals tend to be more interested in interacting withand befriending people from the host culture, and have more opportunities foracquiring its characteristic social skills.

Among migrants from a linguistic and cultural background very differentfrom that of the host society, sociocultural adjustment demands are substantial.However, having a strong host identification, possessing greater fluency in the hostlanguage, and being in the host country for a longer period of time, can lead to bothincreased opportunities for contact with host nationals and better socioculturaladjustment.

Various recent studies (Ward & Searle, 1991; Ward & Kennedy, 1993b; Ward &Kennedy, 1994) have shown that strong host identification was associated with fewerintercultural social difficulties. Rotheram-Borus and Phinney’s (1990) study foundthat black and Mexican–American children with a strong ethnic identificationtended to report less positive attitudes towards cross-cultural contact, report greaterethnic pride, engage in less cross-ethnic contact out of the educational setting, andspeak English less, than those with weaker ethnic identification.

Anderson’s (1994) review of the cross-cultural adaptation literature highlights theimportance of host language competence in social adjustment. Not surprisingly, hostlanguage fluency was found to be associated with increased interaction withmembers of the host culture (Gullahorn & Gullahorn, 1966) and reduced socio-cultural adjustment problems (Sano, 1990; Ward & Kennedy, 1993a).

Longer settlement in the host country allows newcomers to acquire the social skillsand knowledge of the new culture and thus reduce feelings of incompetence felt inthe initial stage of cross-cultural contacts (Moghaddam, Taylor, & Wright, 1993). Alonger period of residence in the host society was generally found to be associatedwith more participation in the new country and higher sociocultural competence(Daly & Carpenter, 1985; Ranieri, Klimidis, & Rosenthal, 1994; Ward & Kennedy,1994; Yum, 1988). Ward (1996) presented evidence from her longitudinalinvestigations on sojourner adjustment that showed that sociocultural difficultiespeaked during the initial stages of transition, and dropped as the period of residenceincreased.

1.3. Viet Nam-born in Australia

Issues of social acceptance and integration are of particular concern to Vietnamesemigrants in Australia. According to Coughlan (1997), by early 1997 the Viet Nam-born were the fifth largest overseas-born birthplace group in Australia, comprisingabout 155,000 individuals, most of whom had arrived after the fall of the South VietNam government in 1975 as refugees to Australia. Until 1991, almost 80% of thearrivals were from refugee camps (Viviani, Coughlan, & Rowlands, 1993), and manyhad begun their lives in Australia in migrant hostels (Bureau of Immigration andPopulation Research, 1994). Nguyen and Ho (1995) observed that the Vietnamesecommunity sees itself as possessing all the characteristics of a refugee rather than animmigrant community. Moreover, the 1991 Australian census data clearlydemonstrated that the Viet Nam-born represented a socially disadvantaged group


in terms of their remarkably low levels of proficiency in spoken English and income,relatively poor educational attainment, high concentration in blue-collar occupa-tions among the employed, and a high level of unemployment of around 30%(Bureau of Immigration and Population Research, 1994).

Vietnamese Australians are also a frequent target of racial prejudice in Australia.The increased presence of Asian immigrants, including the Vietnamese and otherIndo-Chinese refugees, has sparked the so-called Asian immigration debate since1980 (Ip, Kawakami, Duivenvoorden, & Tye, 1992). In a 1989, national survey,one-third of the respondents expressed negative feelings towards the Vietnamesewhile under 9% felt similarly towards either the Italians or the Greeks (Holton,1990). In a more recent study conducted by Ip et al., over half of the Australianadults surveyed felt that Vietnamese Australians did not integrate with the widerAustralian society.

Nguyen and Ho (1995), however, asserted that Vietnamese in Australia aregenerally moving towards becoming ‘‘bicultural’’. Many have adapted to theeconomic, social, and cultural conditions of life in Australia and want to be part ofthe host society, while at the same time maintaining to some extent their originalculture and cultural identity. Like other immigrant groups, the Vietnamesecommunity pins its hope for accelerated social mobility on the academic andsubsequent occupational success of its members who do well in high schools or havegained places in universities. In the 1991 census, the Viet Nam-born were found tohave a relatively high level of school retention rate beyond 17 years (Bureau ofImmigration and Population Research, 1994). Yet there has been no research on thefactors in social efficacy among an essentially bilingual and bicultural population ofVietnamese Australian students. This is despite the fact that social efficacy is animportant aspect of sociocultural adaptation that can affect their academicperformance, well-being, and career development.

1.4. The present study

Based on the literature reviewed above, we formulated and tested an individualdifferences model of sociocultural adjustment using a sample of VietnameseAustralian university students. While recognising the importance of culturalrelocation factors in enhancing immigrants’ intercultural social skills, we feel thatsome researchers (e.g., Bochner, 1994) may have been unduly dismissive of thepossible role of the migrants’ characteristic social efficacy and their relatively stablepersonality structure (cf. Kim, 1988). The recently advanced notions of thesuperordinate Big Five personality factors and cultural fit could provide a usefulframework for investigating the contributions of personality, in conjunction with themore well-established cultural relocation variables, to variation in socioculturaladjustment.

We proposed that a useful framework for predicting Asian migrants’ interculturalsocial self-efficacy in western societies would include (a) the Big Five superordinatepersonality dimensions (especially lower neuroticism, greater extraversion, andgreater openness), (b) the cultural relocation variables of lower ethnic identification,


greater fluency in English, and a longer period of residence in the host country, and(c) the migrants’ co-ethnic social self-efficacy.

Moreover, we tested if the effects of the personality factors on intercultural socialself-efficacy were mediated by the migrants’ co-ethnic social self-efficacy. UsingBaron and Kenny’s (1986) criteria, co-ethnic social self-efficacy would qualify as amediator should three conditions be fulfilled: (a) variation in the personality variablewould significantly account for variation in co-ethnic social self-efficacy, (b)variation in co-ethnic social self-efficacy would significantly account for variationin intercultural social self-efficacy, and (c) with the above two paths controlled, apreviously significant relation between the personality variable and interculturalsocial self-efficacy would no longer be significant.

2. Method

2.1. Subjects

The total sample consisted of 124 Vietnamese migrant students (78 males and 46females) from six universities in Melbourne and Canberra. Their age ranged from 18to 44 years (M=22.7, SD=4.74). They had spent between 2 and 20 years inAustralia (M=11.71, SD=4.34). One hundred and twenty-one respondents wereborn in Viet Nam and 3 born in other non-English-speaking countries. All had oneor both parents born in Vietnam. In terms of their home language, 67 spokeVietnamese, 41 spoke a combination of Vietnamese and English, 9 spoke English, 6spoke a combination of Vietnamese and Chinese, and 1 spoke Chinese.

One hundred and seventeen respondents were undergraduates; four werecompleting courses in graduate diploma, one was a Master’s student, and two werePh. D. students. The courses undertaken included engineering, business, computing,law, science, health science, and arts.

2.2. Measures

The survey questionnaire used in the present study consisted of an adaptation ofFan and Mak’s (1998) Social self-efficacy scale for students (SSESS), Costa andMcCrae’s (1992) NEO five-factor inventory (NEOFFI), and single-item measures ofthe cultural relocation variables of ethnic identification, fluency in the Englishlanguage, length of residence, and other items on socio-demographic background.

The original SSESS measures students’ perceived social confidence in interactingwith locals in a range of academic and general social contexts. It contains four inter-related subscales on absence of social difficulties, social confidence, sharing interestswith others, and willingness to take initiative in friendships. In the present study, theinstructions and layout of the SSESS were adapted to assess migrant students’perceived self-efficacy in two social contexts } interacting with (a) VietnameseAustralians (providing a measure of co-ethnic social self-efficacy), and (b) otherAustralians (a measure of intercultural or cross-ethnic social self-efficacy). The


20-item SSESS contains seven-point Likert-type scales, where 1=strongly disagreeand 7=strongly agree. Nine of the items are negatively worded and thus requirereverse scoring. Possible scores on the scale range from 20 to 140, with a high totalscore indicative of a high level of perceived self-efficacy in social interactions. Fanand Mak (1998) reported a high internal consistency reliability for the SSESS, with aCronbach a of 0.85 for a culturally diverse university student sample (consisting ofAnglo-Australians, Australia-born students with NESB parents, and NESBimmigrant students). For the last sub-sample alone, the a was 0.81. Fan and Makalso reported the scale’s satisfactory construct and concurrent validity.

In the present study, the adapted SSESS yielded two total scores. As can be seenfrom Table 1, the a coefficients for the co-ethnic and the intercultural social self-efficacy scores were 0.79 and 0.83 respectively, suggesting satisfactory internalconsistency reliabilities.

The survey questionnaire further contained Costa and McCrae’s (1992) NEO-FFI.It consists of 60 five-point Likert-type items, where 0=strongly disagree and4=strongly agree. It provides a comprehensive measure of the five-factor domains ofpersonality } Neuroticism (N), Extraversion (E), Openness (O), Agreeableness (A),and Conscientiousness (C). According to Costa and McCrae, a high N scoresuggests a tendency to worry excessively about others’ opinions, to be defensive andguarded, and to crave care and sympathy. People scoring high on E have particularlystrong needs for social contact, attention, and fun. Open individuals appreciatevariety, intellectual stimulation, and aesthetic experiences, and are adventurous andunconventional. Individuals who score highly on A are not domineering orargumentative; instead, they enjoy helping people. Finally, those who are high onC value organisation and accomplishments, and are persistent, careful, anddeliberate. Scores for each domain are obtained by summing across all items thatrepresent that particular domain after reversing negatively worded items. Costaand McCrae reported high internal consistency reliabilities for all five factors,ranging from 0.86 for A to 0.92 for N. Convergent and discriminant validity wasalso reported.

Table 1

Descriptive statistics for the variables

Variable No. of items M SD Range a

Intercultural social self-efficacy 20 91.29 16.45 45–134 0.83

Co-ethnic social self-efficacy 20 96.99 14.67 57–135 0.79

Neuroticism 12 21.90 6.34 5–36 0.70

Extraversion 9 22.61 4.92 7–35 0.65

Openness 8 18.28 3.90 5–30 0.50

Agreeableness 11 26.80 5.29 14–39 0.60

Conscientiousness 12 29.34 7.08 9–44 0.79

Ethnic identity 1 2.69 0.82 1–4

Fluency in English 1 1.31 0.66 1–3

Length of residence 1 11.71 4.34 2–20


In the present study, a coefficients based on the 12-item measures of O, A, and Cwere low (0.41, 0.56 and 0.61, respectively). An examination of item-totalcorrelations of each of the three scales revealed that, four O items (items ondaydreaming, sticking to way of doing things, poetry, and foreign food), one A item(being taken advantage of ), three E items (light-hearted, fast-paced, and going ownway) were found to have very low item-total correlations (all less than 0.14). Theywere then deleted from further analysis to increase the scale reliabilities. Subsequentanalyses and discussion of O, A, and E refer to these shortened scales. Table 1 liststhe a coefficients of the final NEOFFI measures included in the present study. Theyranged from relatively low internal consistency reliabilities for O and A (0.50 and0.60, respectively) to a satisfactory reliability for C (0.79). The degree of Vietnameseversus Australian identification was measured using a single item adapted fromFan’s (1996) measure of Degree of Chinese Identification. The item used includedfour options, where 1=Australian; 2=mostly Australian, a little Vietnamese; 3=mostly Vietnamese, a little Australian; and 4=Vietnamese. Fluency in the Englishlanguage was measured by a three-point self-reported single item, where 1=not well,2=well, and 3=very well.

The questionnaire also surveyed the respondents’ socio-demographic background,including their age, sex, number of years of residence in Australia, residential status,country of birth, parents’ country of birth, and language spoken at home. As well,subjects were asked to indicate, on a four-point scale, their number of close friendsfrom (a) the Vietnamese background, (b) an Anglo and European background, and(c) other ethnic groups. The choices were 1=none, 2=one to a few, 3=several, and4=many.

2.3. Procedure

Vietnamese students who satisfied the study’s criteria (overseas-born with parentsborn in Vietnam, and were permanent residents in Australia) were recruited throughVietnamese student associations in six universities in Melbourne and Canberra. Theywere invited to complete an anonymous survey questionnaire on a voluntary basis.The study was presented as a survey of Vietnamese Australian students’ attitudestowards and patterns of social interactions, which also included items on individualdifferences and friendship patterns. Prospective participants were given the under-standing that there was no existing research in the area, and so their participationwould be greatly appreciated. They were assured that the information collectedwould only be used for research purposes in the form of group results, and that theycould choose to not to respond to any item or withdraw from the survey. It wasemphasized that their personal opinions were sought, and that there was no right orwrong answer.

The questionnaires were distributed in small groups or individually. Participantscould either complete the questionnaires on the spot or choose to return thecompleted survey within a week’s time. They were encouraged to seek clarification ofthe questions where necessary.


3. Results

3.1. Descriptive statistics

Table 1 presents the means, standard deviations, and minimum and maximumvalues of the variables in the model tested in the study. a coefficients are alsoincluded for multi-item measures.

On examining modal responses, the typical respondent would have an ethnicidentification of ‘‘mostly Vietnamese and a little Australian’’ (45.2% endorsed thisresponse) and rate his or her own fluency of English language as ‘‘well’’ (46.8%).The modal respondent would have many close friends from the Vietnamesebackground (50%), have one to a few close friends from an Anglo-Europeanbackground (41.9%), and have one to a few close friends from other ethnicbackgrounds (44.3%).

A multivariate analysis of variance procedure found no significant genderdifferences in mean levels of intercultural social self-efficacy, co-ethnic social self-efficacy, each of the five personality domains, ethnic identification, English fluency,and length of residence in Australia.

3.2. Bivariate results

The Vietnamese students’ co-ethnic social self-efficacy (M=97.17, SD=14.71)scores were found to be significantly higher than their intercultural social self-efficacyscores (M=91.20, SD=16.27), t (112)=4.03, p50.001.

Table 2 presents the intercorrelations among the social self-efficacy, Big Fivepersonality, and cultural relocation variables. The significant correlates of

Table 2

Intercorrelations of the variables

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1. Intercultural social

self-efficacy

} ÿ0.49b ÿ0.16 0.29b 0.33b 0.16 0.27b ÿ0.35b 0.50b 0.35b

2. Co-ethnic social

self-efficacy

} ÿ0.12 0.25b 0.15 ÿ0.11 0.39b 0.04 0.19c 0.08

3. Neuroticism } ÿ0.11 0.10 ÿ0.21c ÿ0.22c ÿ0.02 0.06 0.01

4. Extraversion } 0.02 0.33b 0.14 ÿ0.01 0.25b 0.15

5. Openness } 0.17 0.20c ÿ0.21c 0.32b 0.32b

6. Agreeableness } 0.22c ÿ0.06 0.19c 0.16

7. Conscientiousness } 0.01 0.15 0.08

8. Ethnic identitya } ÿ0.32b ÿ0.39b9. Fluency in English } 0.57b

10. Length of residence }

aHigh scores indicate greater Vietnamese identification.bp50.01.cp50.05.


intercultural social self-efficacy were co-ethnic social self-efficacy, extraversion,openness, conscientiousness, lower Vietnamese ethnic identification, and fluency inEnglish, p 50.05, two-tailed tests, with all the results in the expected direction. Thebivariate relationships between intercultural social self-efficacy and (a) neuroticism,and (b) agreeableness were also in the expected directions, and would have achievedstatistical significance if one-tailed tests of significance were used.

Table 2 further shows that there were only two significant personality correlatesfor co-ethnic social self-efficacy, namely, extraversion and conscientiousness. The inter-correlations among the Big Five personality variables were generally nonsignificantto small, with the exception of a low moderate association between extraversion andagreeableness. But there were moderately high intercorrelations among the culturalrelocation variables of (lower) ethnic identification, fluency in English, and length ofresidence in Australia. There were also significant, low to moderate associationsbetween fluency in English and the personality characteristics of extraversion,openness, and agreeableness. Openness was noted to maintain significant correla-tions with ethnic identification and length of residence.

3.3. Regression of co-ethnic social self-efficacy

Table 3 provides a summary of the regression analysis of co-ethnic socialself-efficacy against the Big Five personality variables. The latter altogetheraccounted for 19.7% of the variation in co-ethnic social self-efficacy. The only twosignificant predictors identified were conscientiousness and extraversion.

3.4. Regression of intercultural social self-efficacy

Table 4 summarizes the hierarchical regression analyses for variables predictingintercultural social self-efficacy. In Step 1, the block of all the predictor variablesexcept for the intervening variable of co-ethnic social self-efficacy was entered,accounting for 39.0% of the variation in intercultural social self-efficacy. The secondhalf of Table 4 shows Step 2 of the regression results when co-ethnic socialself-efficacy was added to the list of independent variables. The resultant increment

Table 3

Summary of regression analysis for personality variables predicting co-ethnic social self-efficacya

Variable B SEB b

Neuroticism 0.04 0.21 ÿ0.02Extraversion 0.65 0.29 0.21b

Openness 0.39 0.36 0.10

Agreeableness 0.07 0.26 ÿ0.03Conscientiousness 0.71 0.19 0.33c

aR2=0.197 (p50.001).bp50.05.cp50.01.


in the squared multiple correlation coefficient was a significant 10.9%. Thesignificant predictors at Step 2 were, co-ethnic social self-efficacy, ethnic identifica-tion, fluency in English, and openness. An important result here is the nonsignificantdirect effect of extraversion on intercultural social self-efficacy.

The b coefficients in Step 1 of Table 4 provide estimates of the total effects of thepredictors variables except for the intervening variable of co-ethnic social self-efficacy, whereas, those in Step 2 render estimates of the direct effects of all thepredictor variables on intercultural social self-efficacy. Together, the coefficientsprovide the basis for calculating the indirect effects of the personality variables onthe outcome variable of intercultural social self-efficacy (see Alwin & Hauser, 1975).Table 5 lists the subsequent decomposition of causal effects of the personalityvariables (into direct and indirect effects) in the path model predicting interculturalsocial self-efficacy.

As can be seen in Table 5, the complete list of independent variables havingsignificant effects on intercultural social self-efficacy consists of, in descending orderof magnitude of the standardized regression coefficients, co-ethnic social self-efficacy,weak ethnic identification, English fluency, extraversion, and openness. On applyingBaron and Kenny’s (1986) criteria for mediator variables to the results in Tables 3and 5, the effect of extraversion was shown to be mediated by co-ethnic socialself-efficacy.

Table 4

Summary of hierarchical regression analysis for variables predicting intercultural social self-efficacya

Variable B SEB b

Step 1

Neuroticism ÿ0.38 0.21 ÿ0.15Extraversion 0.63 0.29 0.18b

Openness 0.80 0.37 0.18c

Agreeableness 0.06 0.26 ÿ0.02Conscientiousness 0.29 0.19 0.12

Ethnic identity ÿ4.70 1.69 ÿ0.24cFluency in English ÿ7.33 2.39 ÿ0.30cLength of residence ÿ0.01 0.34 ÿ0.00

Step 2

Neuroticism ÿ0.35 0.19 ÿ0.13Extraversion 0.40 0.27 0.12

Openness 0.68 0.34 0.15b

Agreeableness 0.02 0.23 ÿ0.01Conscientiousness 0.01 0.18 0.00

Ethnic identity ÿ5.19 1.54 ÿ0.26cFluency in English 6.03 2.19 0.24c

Length of residence 0.24 0.33 0.01

Co-ethnic social self-efficacy 0.41 0.09 0.37c

aR2=0.390 for Step 1; DR2=0.109 for Step 2 ( p50.001).bp50.05.cp50.01.


4. Discussion

Despite the social disadvantages experienced by refugee and immigrant commu-nities from a linguistically and culturally different background, such as theVietnamese community in Australia, many individual refugees and immigrants havebeen able to attain smooth adjustment in, and make significant contributions to,their adopted country over time (Khoo, Kee, Dang, & Shu, 1994). An indication ofsmooth adjustment is the presence of large numbers of bilingual and bicultural VietNam-born youth studying in Australian universities. The qualifications that they arestudying for will provide them with opportunities for upward social mobility, so thatthey can aspire to professional and managerial positions that have eluded most oftheir parents.

We argue in this paper that intercultural social confidence or self-efficacy isimportant for these bicultural migrant students to be successful in their universitystudies and, further down the track, in gaining entry into the work force andeventually seeking career advancement in their chosen fields. Results obtained in thepresent study have indeed shown that the Vietnamese Australian students generallyreport a significantly higher level of social self-efficacy in co-ethnic interactions,compared with that in intercultural interactions. Furthermore, the study provided anempirical test of an integrated model of intercultural social self-efficacy thatconsiders both individual difference variables and cultural relocation factors.

Present findings indicate the relevance of not only cultural relocation factors butalso some enduring individual resources (in the form of customary social skills andpersonality dimensions) to understanding variation in intercultural social self-efficacy. As predicted, extraversion and openness (the two personality traitsconsidered to be important for Asians to fit into the western culture) were foundto be significant predictors of intercultural social self-efficacy. Moreover, the effect ofextraversion (but not that of openness) was partly mediated by co-ethnic social self-efficacy.

Table 5

Decomposition of causal effects in model predicting intercultural social self-efficacy

Variable Direct effect Indirect effect Total effect

Neuroticism ÿ0.13 ÿ0.02 ÿ0.15Extraversion 0.12 0.06 0.18a

Openness 0.15a 0.03 0.18a

Agreeableness ÿ0.01 0.03 0.02

Conscientiousness 0.00 0.12 0.12

Ethnic identity ÿ0.26bFluency in English 0.24b

Length of residence 0.01

Co-ethnic social self-efficacy 0.37b

ap50.05.bp50.01.


The expected relationships between the cultural relocation variables andintercultural social self-efficacy were partially confirmed in the multivariate analyses.Ethnic identification and fluency in speaking English, but not the length of residence,were predictive of intercultural social self-efficacy in the sample of Vietnamesemigrant students surveyed.

The original model also proposed that intercultural social interactions couldtrigger social anxiety in newcomers high on trait anxiety or dispositionalneuroticism. The subsequent prediction that migrants higher on neuroticism wouldlack perceived intercultural social efficacy was, however, not supported by thepresent findings. A possible explanation for this is that the Vietnamese migrantstudent sample as a whole had a relatively long period of residence in Australia(M=11.71 years, SD=4.34 years). Most of them would have arrived in Australia aschildren and would have gone through the Australian education system, so thatsocial interactions with non-Vietnamese Australians would not be as novel andanxiety-provoking as for recently arrived adolescent and adult migrants.

The under-representation of recent settlers in the sample could also be a reason fora nonsignificant direct effect of length of residence on intercultural social self-efficacyin the multivariate model (despite a moderately high and significant bivariatecorrelation). Table 2 further shows moderately strong bivariate intercorrelationsamong ethnic identification, English fluency, length of residence, and interculturalsocial self-efficacy, with a particularly strong relationship between English fluencyand length of residence. It is thus possible that the effect of length of residence onintercultural social efficacy may be mediated by English fluency and perhaps alsoethnic identification. These mediating possibilities would be worth exploring inmigrant samples with greater percentages of recent settlers.

Interpretations of the present findings should take into account that interculturalsocial self-efficacy is an important precursor to, as well as a result of, successfulcross-cultural social interactions. Recent research has indicated a strong negativeassociation between intercultural social self-efficacy and social avoidance amongnon-English speaking background migrant students (Fan & Mak, 1998) as well asamong international students (Lamberts & Mak, 1997) in Australian universities.Further investigations can examine the relationships among personal resources,cultural relocation factors, and actual behaviors during cross-cultural encounters.The possible mediating role of intercultural social self-efficacy in effecting observedintercultural competence can also be examined.

4.1. Contributions to the sociocultural adjustment literature

The present findings have augmented the existing literature in a number of ways.First, the results on migrants’ perceived social efficacy in two cultural contexts(measured using an adapted format of Fan and Mak’s SSESS) extend those reportedby Fan and Mak (1998), which are only concerned with culturally diverse students’social self-efficacy in interacting with people in the Australian society. The meanSSESS scores reported in Fan and Mak were 95.2 for an Anglo-Australian sample,97.2 for an NESB Australia-born sample, and 89.1 for an NESB immigrant sample


(see Table 4 in Fan and Mak (1998)). Present results show that Vietnamese migrantstudents had a significantly higher level of social self-efficacy in interacting with co-ethnics (M=97.0), than in interacting with non-Vietnamese Australians (M=91.3).This is despite the present subjects’ rather lengthy mean period of settlement(M=11.71 years) in Australia. This finding is consistent with another observationmade in the present study } that the migrant students reported having more closefriends from a Vietnamese background on a four-point scale (M=3.25), comparedwith (a) close friends from an Anglo-European background (M=2.48), pairedsamples t(121)=7.28, p50.001, and (b) other ethnic backgrounds (M=2.52),t(121)=8.45, p50.001.

Second, despite some academics’ view that personality would not really have auseful place in understanding sociocultural difficulties (see recent reviews by Bochner(1994) and Ward (1996)), present findings indicate that extraversion and opennessand possibly conscientiousness were significant predictors of the students’ perceivedsocial efficacy in a range of intercultural academic and general situations.Interestingly, in Lamberts and Mak’s (1997) Australian study with 83 Asia-borninternational students, intercultural social self-efficacy also maintained significantpositive associations with extraversion, openness, and conscientiousness (and to alesser extent negatively with neuroticism), but was not related to agreeableness.

Findings from these two Australian studies are consistent with Kim’s (1988) viewthat the characteristics of open mindedness, tolerance for ambiguity, gregariousness,and extraversion would facilitate intercultural communication. As well, presentresults concur with Searle and Ward’s (1990) notion of ‘‘cultural fit’’ and theirfinding that highly extraverted Chinese students integrated better than those scoringlower on extraversion in New Zealand universities. Taken together, these resultsraise the possibility that the dispositions of extraversion and openness, and perhapsconscientiousness and low neuroticism, are generally predictive of social self-efficacyin a western society; this will be worthy of investigation in future research.

Third, the relevance of cultural relocation factors in sociocultural adjustmenthas once again been confirmed in the present study. The finding that bothweaker ethnic identification and greater fluency in the host language are useful forexplaining intercultural social self-efficacy, is consistent with the results obtained byRotheram-Borus and Phinney (1990) and Ward and Kennedy (1994).

Fourth, the present pattern of results suggests the existence of a constellation ofcultural adaptation variables that are related to perceptions of social efficacy incross-ethnic, but not co-ethnic, interactions. Bivariate intercorrelations listed inTable 2 show significant associations among intercultural social self-efficacy, thepersonality factor of openness, and the migration variables of ethnic identification,English fluency, and length of residence. In contrast, the latter four variablesmaintained no association (except for a low but significant correlation in the case ofEnglish fluency) with customary social self-efficacy.

Fifth, the present study has confirmed the mediating role of co-ethnic social self-efficacy between extraversion and intercultural social self-efficacy, and shown, notsurprisingly, that customary social confidence would predict social self-efficacy incross-ethnic encounters. That is, extraverted migrants who are socially confident


in interacting with their own ethnic group are also likely to be socially efficacious incross-ethnic interpersonal situations.

4.2. Methodological limitations

The present study should be regarded as exploratory in nature as there are severalinherent methodological limitations. First of all, the sample used was quite small andwas recruited from Vietnamese student associations from a number of universitycampuses. This sampling method could have attracted migrant students with astronger Vietnamese ethnic identification than if a representative sample ofVietnamese Australian students had been surveyed. Despite this possible self-selection bias, 7.3% of the subjects rated their ethnic (versus Australian) identi-fication as ‘‘Australian’’, and 31.5% as ‘‘Mostly Australian, a little Vietnamese’’.

Another methodological limitation is that all the measures were based on self-reports, with their accompanying possible biases. In particular, the common formatof the assessment of co-ethnic and cross-ethnic social self-efficacy may have lead toheightened common method variance, inflating the relationship between the twotypes of social self-efficacy. Results based on self-report measures may also havebeen affected by some respondents’ tendency towards social desirability. Forexample, some individuals may have over-rated their social self-efficacy and fluencyin English. The use of single-item measures for fluency in English and ethnicidentification may have been particularly problematic because of the restrictedranges of responses generated and possibly compromised reliabilities of the resultingmeasures.

Further methodological limitations are posed by the rather low internalconsistency reliabilities of the Openness and Agreeableness scales. Indeed, thereliabilities of all the NEOFFI personality domain scales in the present Vietnamesestudent sample were observed to be somewhat lower than those reported in Costaand McCrae (1992). This casts some doubt over the appropriateness of usingimposed etic personality domain measures among members of an ethnic minoritygroup. We did not anticipate this to be an issue at the design stage of the research,given that the Vietnamese Australians to be sampled would all be studying atuniversity and would have been in Australia for some time. We thought that theywould essentially be bicultural and presumably have adequate fluency in the Englishlanguage, and that using etic personality measures could facilitate comparison withthe results obtained with other populations. Indeed, the completion of thequestionnaire (written in English) had posed little difficulty in the various settings.At any rate, the likely effect of employing scales with compromised reliabilitieswould be the attenuation of the correlations between the personality factors and theother variables, making it less probable to support the research hypotheses.

An additional limitation is that the proposed causal model assumes directionaleffects, whereas in real life some of the paths may be bi-directional feedback loops.For example, the model assumes that migrants with greater fluency in English mayhave the language ability to participate more actively in cross-ethnic socialinteractions and will thus develop appropriate social skills in the host culture,


leading to higher intercultural social self-efficacy. In real life, having a higher level ofintercultural social self-efficacy may in turn promote migrants’ acquisition of Englishas a second language.

On another cautionary note, present findings may not be generalized to otherethnic communities or other host societies. According to Ward and colleagues’notion of ‘‘cultural fit’’ and findings in support of it (Searle & Ward, 1990; Ward,1996; Ward & Chang, 1997), extraversion may not be a personal resource for peopleadjusting to a non-western society that does not particularly value extravertedbehaviors. It would be really interesting if the present research can be replicatedwith, say, predicting the intercultural social self-efficacy of Australian exchangestudents studying in an Asian country.

4.3. Implications for training

Present findings further render some practical implications for educationalpractice and English language and intercultural training programs. This study hasidentified that migrant students with low customary social confidence (in co-ethnicsituations), who lack openness and extraversion and fluency in the host language,and who have a weak host identification, are more likely to lack confidence ininteracting with host nationals. The lack of intercultural social efficacy could hindermigrant students’ chances for academic and occupational success and will need to beaddressed through early intervention and, in some cases, remedial training.

Two types of group educational programs are appropriate for migrant studentswho need to develop further their intercultural social competencies and confidence.The significant effect of fluency in English on intercultural social self-efficacy in thecurrent study, reinforces some NESB migrants’ need for English as a SecondLanguage education programs. Even migrant students who have settled for arelatively long period of time may require academic support programs especiallydesigned to address their lack of optimal proficiency in speaking and writing inEnglish. These English programs could reduce the language barriers impedingmigrant students’ self-efficacy in English-speaking social situations, and encouragemore interactions with Anglo-Australians in educational and social settings.

Another type of educational intervention, which can be a stand-alone short courseor used in conjunction with a English as a Second Language course, is in theform of a cross-cultural social confidence and skills training program. Deshpandeand Viswesvaran’s (1992) meta-analysis found that cross-cultural trainingamong expatriate managers was effective in enhancing psychological well-being,self-confidence, interpersonal skills with host nationals, better understanding of hostsocial values, and work performance.

A recent advance in intercultural training for migrants and sojourners is theexcellence in cultural experiential learning and leadership (EXCELL) program,developed from an integrated theoretical framework of social cognitive, operant, andclassical learning (Mak, Westwood, Barker, & Ishiyama, 1998; Mak, Westwood,Ishiyama, & Barker, 1999). It is a role- and action-based program designed to helpnewcomers to a culture expand their repertoire of social competencies, in order to be


socially effective in the host culture, while maintaining their original cultural identityand customary social skills (Mak, Westwood, & Ishiyama, 1994). EXCELLrepresents an augmentational model of cultural learning and social self-efficacybuilding that values and reinforces bicultural competency. It utilizes co-ethnic rolemodels (as credible models because of similarity) and host role models (as authenticmodels because of their knowledge and skills in the host cultural code) with differentsocial presentation styles. The important point is to show that people from diverseracial and linguistic backgrounds and with different personal presentation styles(such as a relatively reserved versus a more outgoing style), can all master keysociocultural competencies and be socially effective. The EXCELL program, offeredover four to six 3-h sessions, has recently become available in Australia, Canada, andthe United Kingdom. Evaluations using migrant students in a tertiary college inCanada (Shergill, 1997) and international students from two Australian universities(Mak, Barker, Logan, & Millman, 1999) have shown its effectiveness in enhancingboth observed and self-reported interaction skills, as well as perceptions ofintercultural social self-efficacy.

5. Conclusions

The present study provided general support for the proposed integrative model ofintercultural social self-efficacy using a sample of Vietnamese Australian migrantstudents. The findings highlight the relevance of both cultural relocation factors andthe possession of relatively enduring personal resources (in the form of customarysocial efficacy and personality characteristics that enhance their cultural fit), toindividuals’ social confidence in interacting with host nationals. There are practicalimplications for enhancing migrants’ proficiency in English, and their social efficacyand skills mastery while respecting their ethnic identification and individualvariations in social presentation styles. Future research can test the model withmore refined measures, behavioral outcome measures, and using larger andalternative samples, such as different ethnic groups, samples with greater percentagesof more recent arrivals, migrants who arrive as adults, other acculturating groups,and other host societies. Combined with cultural relocation variables, the five-factorpersonality approach may prove to provide a useful approach to understanding thesubstantial variation in both psychological and sociocultural adjustment asindividuals cross-cultural boundaries.

References

Alwin, D. F., & Hauser, R. M. (1975). The decomposition of effects in path analysis. American

Sociological Review, 40, 37–47.

Anderson, L. E. (1994). A new look at an old construct: Cross-cultural adaptation. International Journal of

Intercultural Relations, 18, 292–328.

Argyle, M. (1969). Social interaction. New York: Methuen.


Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Towards a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review,

84, 191–215.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thoughts and actions: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs,

NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Multifaceted impact of self-efficacy

beliefs on academic functioning. Child Development, 67, 1206–1222.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. D. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social

psychological research: Ceonceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

Barker, M., Child, C., Gallois, C., Jones, E., & Callan, V. J. (1991). Difficulties of overseas students in

social and academic situations. Australian Journal of Psychology, 43, 79–84.

Bochner, S. (1994). Culture shock. In W. J. Lonner, & R. S. Malpass (Eds.), Psychology and culture

(pp. 245–251). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Bureau of Immigration and Population Research. (1994). Community profiles 1991 census: Viet Nam born.

Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.

Chataway, C. J., & Berry, J. W. (1989). Acculturation experiences, appraisal, coping, and adaptation: A

comparison of Hong Kong Chinese, French, and English students in Canada. Canadian Journal of

Behavioral Science, 21, 295–309.

Costa, P. T., & Mc Crae, R. R. (1985). The NEO personality inventory manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological

Assessment Resources.

Costa, P. T., & Mc Crae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO five-

factor inventory (NEO-FFI): Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Coughlan, J. E. (1997). Vietnamese refugees and immigrants in Australia } A socio-demographic and

economic profile from the 1991 census. Paper presented at the Euroviet III bi-annual conference, 2–4 July,

University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.

Cui, G., & Awa, N. E. (1992). Measuring intercultural effectiveness: An integrative approach. International

Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16, 311–328.

Daly, S., & Carpenter, M. D. (1985). Adjustment of Vietnamese refugees youths: A self-report.

Psychological Reports, 56, 971–976.

Deshpande, S. P., & Viswesvaran, C. (1992). Is cross-cultural training of expatriate managers effective? A

meta-analysis. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16, 295–310.

Edmond, M. (1996). Social difficulties of international and Australian students. Paper presented at the fifth

Asia conference on student affairs, 29 September–2 October, University of New South Wales, Sydney.

Fan, C. (1996). Family relationships, stress level, and academic achievement of Chinese immigrant girls in

Australia. The Australian Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 13, 63–73.

Fan, C., & Mak, A. (1998). Measuring social self-efficacy in a culturally diverse student population. Social

Behavior and Personality, 26, 131–144.

Furukawa, T., & Shibayama, T. (1993). Predicting maladjustment of exchange students in different

cultures: A prospective study. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 28, 142–146.

Furukawa, T., & Shibayama, T. (1994). Factors influencing adjustment of high school students in an

inernational exchange program. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 182, 709–714.

Furnham, A., & Bochner, S. (1986). Culture shock: Psychological reactions to unfamiliar environments.

London: Methuen.

Gudykunst, W. B., & Ting-Toomey, S. (1988). Culture and interpersonal communication. Newbury Park,

CA: Sage.

Gullahorn, J. E., & Gullahorn, J. T. (1966). American students abroad: Professional versus personal

development. Annals, 368, 43–59.

Holton, R. (1990). Social aspects of immigration. In M. Wooden, R. Holton, G. Hugo, & J. Sloan (Eds.),

Australian immigration: A survey of the issues (pp. 158–226). Canberra: Australian Government

Publishing Service.

Ip, D., Kawakami, I., Duivenvoorden, K., & Tye, L. C. (1992). Images of Asians in multicultural Australia.

Sydney: Multicultural Centre, University of Sydney.


Jerusalem, M., & Schwarzer, R. (1992). Self-efficacy as a resource factor in stress appraisal process. In R.

Schwarzer (Ed.), Self-efficacy: Thought control of action (pp. 195–213). Washington, DC: Hemisphere

Publishing.

Khoo, S., Kee, P., Dang, T., & Shu, J. (1994). Asian immigrant settlement and adjustment in Australia.

Asian Pacific Migration Journal, 3, 339–371.

Kim, Y. Y. (1988). Communcation and cross-cultural adaptation: An integrative theory. Clevedon, England:

Multicultural Matters.

Lamberts, R. & Mak, A. S. (1997). Personality, perceived social self-efficacy, and cross-cultural adjustment:

A study of Asian international students in Australia. Unpublished paper, Centre for Applied Psychology,

University of Canberra.

Mak, A. S., Barker, M., Logan, G., & Millman, L. (1999). Benefits of cultural diversity for international

and local students: Contributions from an experiential social learning program (The EXCELL

program). In D. Davis, & A. Olsen (Eds.), International education: The professional edge (pp. 63–76).

Sydney: IDP Education Australia.

Mak, A. S., Westwood, M. J., Barker, M. C., & Ishiyama, F. I. (1998). Developing sociocutlural

competencies for success among international students: the ExcelL programme. Journal of International

Education, 9, 33–38.

Mak, A. S., Westwood, M. J., & Ishiyama, F. I. (1994). Developing role-based social competencies for

career search and development in Hong Kong immigrants. Journal of Career Development, 20, 171–183.

Mak, A. S., Westwood, M. J., Ishiyama, F. I., & Barker, M. C. (1999). Optimising conditions for learning

sociocultural competencies for success. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23, 77–90.

Moghaddam, F. M., Taylor, D. M., & Wright, S. C. (1993). Social psychology in cross-cultural perspective.

New York: Freeman.

Nesdale, D., Rooney, R., & Smith, L. (1997). Migrant ethnic identity and psychological distress. Journal of

Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28, 569–588.

Nguyen, V., & Ho, M. (1995). Vietnamese Australian families. In R. Hartley (Ed.), Families and cultural

diversity in Australia (pp. 216–238). St Leonards: Allen & Unwin.

Pedersen, P. (1995). The five stages of culture shock: critical incidents from around the world. Westport, CT:

Greenwood.

Pe-Pua, R. (1994). Being an Asian on campus: A look into the cross-cultural experiences of overseas students

at the University of Wollogong. Wollongong: The Centre for Multicultural Studies, University of

Wollongong.

Ranieri, N. F., Klimidis, S., & Rosenthal, D. A. (1994). Validity of a single-item index of acculturation in

Vietnamese immigrant youth. Psychological Reports, 74, 735–738.

Rotheram-Borus, M. J., & Phinney, J. S. (1990). Patterns of social expectations among black and

Mexican-American children. Child Development, 61, 542–556.

Sano, H. (1990). Research on social difficulties in cross-cultural adjustment: social situational analysis.

Japanese Journal of Behavioral therapy, 16, 37–44.

Searle, W., & Ward, C. (1990). The prediction of psychological and sociocultural adjustment during cross-

cultural transitions. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 14, 449–464.

Shergill, A. (1997). An evaluation of the sociocultural competency for success training programme for the

acquisition of intercultural interpersonal competency skills among health care professionals. Unpublished

doctoral dissertation, Department of Counselling Psychology, University of British Columbia,

Vancouver.

Stening, B. W. (1979). Problems in cross-cultural contact: A literature review. International Journal of


Smither, R., & Rodriguez-Giegling, M. (1982). Personality, demographics, and acculturation of

Vietnamese and Nicaraguan refugees to the United States. International Journal of Psychology, 17,

19–25.

Taft, R. (1977). Coping with unfamiliar cultures. In N. Warren (Ed.), Studies in cross-cultural psychology,

vol. 1 (pp. 121–151). London: Academic Press.

Tinto, V. (1990). Principles of effective retention. Journal of the Freshman Year Experience, 2, 35–48.

Trower, P., Bryant, B., & Argyle, M. (1978). Social skills and mental health. New York: Methuen.


Viviani, N., Coughlan, J. E., & Rowland, T. (1993). Indochinese in Australia: The issues of employment and

residential concentration. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.

Ward, C. (1996). Acculturation. In D. Landis, & R. S. Bhagat (Eds.), Handbook of Intercultural Training

(pp. 124–147). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ward, C., & Chang, W. C. (1997). ‘‘Cultural fit’’: A new perspective on personality and sojourner

adjustment. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 21, 525–533.

Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1993a). Psychological and socio-cultural adjustment during cross-cultural

transitions: A comparison of secondary students overseas and at home. International Journal of


Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1993b). Where’s the ‘‘culture’’ in cross-cultural transition? Comparative studies

of sojourner adjustment. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 24, 221–249.

Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1994). Acculturation strategies, psychological adjustment, and sociocultural

competence during cross-cultural transitions. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 18(3), 329–

343.

Ward, C., & Searle, W. (1991). The impact of value discrepancies and cultural identity on psychological

and socio-cultural adjustment of sojourners. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 15, 209–

225.

Yum, J. O. (1988). Locus of control and communication patterns of immigrants. In Y. Y. Kim, & W. B.

Gudykunst (Eds.), Cross-cultural adaptation: Current approaches (pp. 191–211). Newbury Park, CA:

Sage.

Zheng, X., & Berry, J. W. (1991). Psychological adaptation of Chinese sojourners in Canada. International

Journal of Psychology, 26, 451–470.


Documents

Big five personality and cultural relocation factors in Vietnamese Australian students’ intercultural social self-efficacy