Upload
buihuong
View
218
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Running head: ROMA ADOLESCENTS 1
Ethnic, Familial, and Religious Identity of Roma Adolescents in Bulgaria, Czech Republic,
Kosovo, and Romania in Relation to Their Level of Well-Being
Radosveta Dimitrova, [email protected]
Stockholm University, Sweden
Fons J. R. van de Vijver
Tilburg University, the Netherlands, North-West University, South Africa, and University of
Queensland, Australia
Jitka Taušová
Palacký University, Czech Republic
Athanasios Chasiotis
Michael Bender
Tilburg University, the Netherlands
Carmen Buzea
Transylvania University of Brasov, Romania
Fitim Uka
European Center for Vocational Education, Kosovo
Ergyul Tair
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Bulgaria
AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to acknowledge the support by a COFAS FORTE (The Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare) Marie Curie Grant (Forte Projekt 2013-2669) to the first author. We are also extremely grateful to several people and organizations for their help in carrying out the study in Bulgaria (Eva Jecheva and the National Agency for Child Protection, Neli Filipova, Ivanina Noncheva, Stoyka Jekova, Svetla Atanasova, Neli Kiuchukova, Zvetan Terziev, Elena Ianeva, Venizslav Chobanov, Kamelia Mateva, Petko Petkov, Gospova, Velianova, Elena Chergova, Antoaneta Hristova, Venzislav Jordanov, Deyan Stamatov, Veselina Kukusheva, and Margarita Ahrianova), Romania (Dorel Agache, Stefan Aranyosi and Dorel Dima), the Czech Republic (Jarmila Višňovcová, Martin Kaftan, Monika Kynclová, Rostislav Halaš, Radka Jedličková, Marcela Hanáková, Jana Foltýnová, and Soňa Tarhoviská) and Kosovo (Genc Rexhepi, Argjend Abazi, Kastriot Hasaj, Enteela Kamberi, Erduana Dermaku, Miran Xhelili, Alma Sherifi, Hillari Alidema, Elina Morina and Blerton Jakupi).
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 2
Abstract
This study examines ethnic, national, familial, and religious identity and well-being of 632 Roma
minority and 589 majority adolescents (age: M = 15.98 years, SD = 1.34) in Bulgaria, the Czech
Republic, Kosovo, and Romania. Results indicated that Roma showed lower endorsement of
national identity but stronger religious identity than their majority counterparts. Path models
showed positive associations of familial and religious identities with well-being, whereas Roma
identity was negatively associated with well-being, particularly for Roma in Bulgaria and Kosovo
(countries with a less active policy toward improving conditions of Roma). In the latter countries,
Roma ethnic identity is less relevant and weakly associated with psychological well-being of youth.
Keywords: ethnic, national, familial, religious identity, Roma adolescents, well-being, Bulgaria, the
Czech Republic, Kosovo, Romania
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 3
Roma are Europe’s largest and most vulnerable minority, currently making up nearly 12
million people, a figure that is projected to grow in the coming years because of their relatively high
birth rates (Council of Europe, 2010). Roma youth in particular are vulnerable to discrimination,
social exclusion, marginalization, and poor well-being (European Union Agency for Fundamental
Rights, 2010). This study investigates ethnic, national, familial, and religious identity resources
underlying well-being in Roma youth in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Kosovo, and Romania. In all
four countries, Roma are the largest national minority groups characterized by severe
marginalization and discrimination. Roma youth are recognized within the European Union to be in
strong need of support; therefore, improving Roma well-being is one of the foremost policy issues
in the European Union Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020 (European
Commission, 2011). These four countries are currently introducing more inclusive and pluralistic
policies toward Roma. We are interested in differences in the current contextual conditions across
the four countries and in ramifications of these differences for identity and well-being of Roma
youth.
Roma are an important group to study because of their socio-political context and long
history of marginalization, accompanied by lack of formal education, high official unemployment,
and little to no access to health care and social services. Roma are often viewed as a threat by
mainstreamers (Ljujic, Vedder, & Dekker, 2012). They are the most prominent indigenous ethnic
minority in Europe that has lived there for centuries and, unlike other ethnic minority groups, does
not have a homeland or country to identify with. This unique constellation of characteristics
presumably has significant implications for their identity. Although frequent discussions of Roma in
the media give the impression that the Roma are well understood, there is a lack of empirical studies
of this group. Roma are an understudied population, mainly due to the fact that they are extremely
hard to reach. Roma are not well researched compared to other minorities and this holds a fortiori
for positive aspects of their functioning and positive youth development. The comparison of Roma
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 4
across four countries enables a comparison of the association of these various contexts with Roma
identity and well-being. As explained in more detail in the following sections, policies toward
Roma differ among these countries, with the Czech Republic being most active in implementing
actions toward improvement of Roma conditions, followed by Romania, Kosovo, and Bulgaria.
Finally, our study adds to the scarce literature on the joint influence of social identity components in
ethnic minority groups on adolescent well-being, in line with a growing recognition of the need to
examine multiple identities simultaneously and to conduct research on the psychological
consequences of additive or complex social identities (Sagiv, Roccas, & Hazan, 2012).
In all four countries, albeit to a different degree and following different policies, Roma have
traditionally suffered from severe discrimination and adverse policies carried out by the (former)
communist rule, which led to the extinction of many cultural traditions, including their nomadic
lifestyle. After the fall of the communist rule in the late ‘80s, Roma gained the status of national
minority with representatives in public and political life, although this status varies somewhat
across countries. Kosovo is an exception in that the country separated from Serbia in 1999 after the
civil war, and declared its independence in 2008. Many Roma lived in the part of Serbia that
became Kosovo; we also recruited participants from that area. Across all countries we investigated
here, Roma communities still face geographic isolation, segregation, impoverishment, and low
social standing. The Roma are a prime example of an ethnic group in which consequences of
extreme oppression can be studied. We are particularly interested in how Roma derive well-being
from their ethnic, national, familial, and religious identity because identifying resources for well-
being may reveal important intervention tools. This study extends a prior line of research
(Dimitrova, Chasiotis, Bender, & van de Vijver, 2013, 2014; Dimitrova, Ferrer-Wreder, & Trost,
2015) by examining multiple identity resources for well-being of Roma to outline new intervention
avenues to enhance well-being in Roma youth. In the following, we provide a brief overview of
major approaches to the study of identity before presenting our study.
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 5
Identity is Multifaceted
A core developmental task for ethnic minority youth is to develop multiple social identities
in a variety of contexts. We briefly review developmental, social, and cross-cultural perspectives
that have investigated social identity and its relevance in young people’s lives. All these
perspectives identify contextual, environmental, and cultural factors that explain changes and
differences in social identification. Developmental perspectives focus on identity formation
(Phinney, 1989). The establishment of a coherent sense of identity is a primary
developmental milestone, with identity achievement (firm commitment after identity
exploration) and identity diffusion (neither engagement in exploration nor commitment),
proposed as the possible polar outcomes of this development (Erikson, 1968;
Marcia, 1980).
When adolescents live in a multicultural environment involving many social reference
groups, they will develop multiple social identities. Social identity (Tajfel & Turner, 2001) and self-
categorization theories (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987) acknowledge the
importance of societal context for identity formation, particularly for ethnic minority groups. For
example, work on social identity in the United States has investigated ethnicity and gender as two
significant social categories of identification (Fuligni, 2007). Identification with ethnic
group and gender has also been associated with a range of developmental
outcomes in terms of well-being, behavioral and academic adjustment
(Ashmore, Deaux, & McLaughlin-Volpe, 2004).
Cross-cultural psychologists have identified dimensions along which cultures of the world
might be distinguished, such as individualism–collectivism (Hofstede, 1980). Although there is
discussion as to the dimensionality of these concepts, there is some agreement that the principal
distinction between individualism and collectivism is related to identity (Triandis, Bontempo, Asai,
& Luca, 1988). The central theme of individualism is the conception of individuals as primarily
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 6
autonomous beings who are separate from groups, whereas collectivism sees individuals primarily
as linked to groups or collectives (Triandis, McCusker, & Hui, 1990).
What is common to all theoretical perspectives presented above is that they view identity as
a multifaceted construct. By drawing on this view of identity, we investigate multiple identifications
relevant to the study of identity of Roma minority youth across four different cultural contexts. Our
work is related to the notion of collective identity involving multiple identifications and the
relevance of identification with specific social categories (Ashmore et al., 2004). We focus on three
identities: familial, religious, and ethnic identity. These identities are relevant to ethnic minority
youth (Dimitrova et al., 2013, 2014) as they represent significant others (the familial group) and
larger social groups (ethnic and religious). There is quite some literature suggesting that ethnic
belonging, religion, and family provide important sources of identification (e.g., Kiang, Yip, &
Fuligni, 2008), that are positively related to individual well-being, specifically in ethnic minority
groups (Lopez, Huynh, & Fuligni, 2011; Smith & Silva, 2011).
Identity of Roma Youth
Ethnic and national identity. Ethnic identity is defined as the potential process of
maintaining positive/negative attitudes and feelings of ethnic group belonging (Erikson, 1968;
Phinney, 1989; Phinney & Ong, 2007). Research has consistently found that ethnic identity is
positively related to psychological well-being and psychosocial adjustment in various groups
(Rivas-Drake et al., 2014; Smith & Silva, 2011). Importantly, ethnic identity can refer to the
heritage immigrant or ethnic minority group culture as well as to the dominant mainstream culture.
We distinguish between ethnic heritage and national identity. The latter reflects the degree of
identification with the (host) culture of settlement, including feelings of belonging and commitment
to the host society (Phinney & Devich-Navarro, 1997). Similarly, the most widely applied model of
acculturation refers to a two-dimensional process in which ethnic heritage culture maintenance and
national host culture adoption are negotiated (Berry, 1997). Whereas in the identity literature there
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 7
has been emphasis on the role of ethnic identity for well-being, the prevailing view in the
acculturation literature is that the combination of both preserving one’s ethnic heritage culture and
adopting the national culture (labeled integration) is the most beneficial for ethnic minority groups
(Berry, 1997). We set out to assess both ethnic and national identity as correlates of psychological
adjustment in Roma minority groups.
The scarce literature on identity of Roma reveals mixed findings. In many Central and
Eastern European states, Roma tend to identify with the national mainstream culture (Prieto-Flores,
2009), which could represent a consequence of extreme oppression of their Roma identity. This
tendency has been observed among Roma in Western Europe and in other parts of the world
(Marushiakova & Popov, 2010). However, Roma in Eastern Europe have also been reported to
show low national and ethnic identities. The low level of endorsement of both identities, in the
acculturation literature known as marginalization, is presumably a coping strategy to deal with
much adversity in Eastern Europe, which is further amplified by ethnic tensions and assimilation
policies (Dimitrova et al., 2014). Alternatively, such marginalization could imply an emphasis on
more individualistic strategies of social mobility in light of the rapidly changing political and
economic landscape of Eastern Europe as suggested by socio-psychological conceptualizations of
acculturation (Bourhis, Moïse, Perreault, & Senécal, 1997). In recent years, some European
countries have adopted more tolerant multicultural policies towards the Roma. It has been suggested
that countries with multicultural policies for ethnic cultures allow for a stronger endorsement of
ethnic identities (Bourhis et al., 1997). Roma living in countries with active policies aimed at
improving the conditions of their group may thus show higher levels of Roma ethnic identity
(Walsh & Krieg, 2007).
Familial identity. Familial identity represents the degree of identification with the familial
group, the sense of familial group membership. The family is a core identification domain for youth
that provides a sense of obligation, relatedness, and commitment (Lopez et al., 2011). Strong family
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 8
ties and family attachment are particularly salient for ethnic minority groups and influence the way
they live their lives (Spilimbergo & Ubeda, 2004). Similarly to ethnic and religious identity, a
strong familial identity among ethnic minority groups and family attachment are associated with
positive adjustment and health-protective behaviors that buffer against negative effects of stress
(Fuligni & Flook, 2005; Maimon, Browning, & Brooks-Gunn, 2010). Historically, the family has
been the core component of the Roma community and main vehicle for preservation of Roma
traditions and values. Strong identification with the family acts as a resource for Roma to buffer
severe discrimination and oppression. In an earlier study it was confirmed that familial identity, a
component of social identity that is not challenged in a hostile mainstream context, is strong among
both Bulgarian Roma youth and their mothers (Dimitrova et al., 2014).
Religious identity. Religious identity concerns the sense of group membership to a religion
or set of religious convictions, and their importance for individual identity (Nesbitt & Arweck,
2010). It has been suggested that religious identity is salient among ethnic minority adolescents,
regardless of their specific religious affiliation (Lopez et al., 2011; Wallace, Forman, Caldwell, &
Willis, 2003). In line with social identity theory, it has been proposed that ethnic minorities tend to
emphasize other social identities in order to preserve their positive sense of self (Tajfel & Turner,
2001). Findings on the religious identity of Roma are mixed. A weak religious identification among
Roma in Eastern and Central Europe has been observed as a reaction to anti-religion policies during
the communism era (Tomova, 2000). Yet, compared to mainstreamers, Roma have been found to
demonstrate higher religiosity and an overall stronger religious identity as important sources of
identification and well-being (Dimitrova et al., 2013, 2014).
Age and gender effects on multiple identities. Prior work suggests age and gender effects
on the social identities we are interested in. Linear stage models describe a general increase in
ethnic identity, with an initial period of unawareness of ethnicity issues, followed by a process of
exploration and an increasing sense of ethnic group belonging (Phinney, 1989). In line with these
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 9
models, older adolescents have a clearer and more firmly defined sense of their ethnicity than
younger adolescents (French, Seidman, Allen, & Aber, 2006), although findings are mixed for
religion. Evidence has been found for a linear decrease in religious behaviors (Arnett & Jensen,
2002), for stability in the centrality of religious beliefs (Stoppa & Lefkowitz, 2010), and for an
increase in intrinsic religious commitment (Lee, 2003). Findings regarding gender effects indicate
that ethnic group identification is more important for girls (Yip & Fuligni, 2002), and that girls are
more involved with their family and religious community and exhibit a stronger religious
commitment than boys (Stoppa & Lefkowitz, 2010). However, lack of gender differences with
regard to salience and strength of ethnic or national identity are also documented (Liebkind, 1997).
Since most previous work was US based, it is not clear yet whether these age and gender
differences would also emerge in Roma minority groups across the Eastern European countries of
our study. Only one study we are aware of examined age and gender effects in multiple identities of
Roma youth, finding that ethnic, familial, and religious identity was stronger in older than younger
Roma participants, whereas no gender differences in these identities emerged (Dimitrova et al.,
2013). We build on this work by examining differences across multiple identities in Roma minority
and mainstream youth comparing age groups and genders.
Consequences of multiple identities. Finally, prior research has documented strong,
positive correlations between ethnic, familial, and religious identity among ethnic minority youth
(Dimitrova et al., 2014; Kiang, Yip, & Fuligni, 2002). How these identities come together may have
important implications for well-being and adjustment: From the social psychological perspective on
identity, positive feelings toward one's group are known to enhance overall well-being (Tajfel &
Turner, 2001). Ethnic minority groups may develop a strong ethnic and a weak national identity;
this combination may optimally enhance their well-being in the face of perceived group threat and
discrimination (Branscombe, Schmitt, & Harvey, 1999). Research on acculturation has shown that
ethnic minority groups who feel connected with both their ethnic and national culture (labelled
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 10
integration) typically exhibit positive acculturation outcomes, including well-being (Berry, Phinney,
Sam, & Vedder, 2006). It is clear that the strength of group identification is a central issue for
adolescents and the degree to which they have a sense of belonging to one or more cultural groups
is dependent on their family and extended community or social contexts (Liebkind, 2006). We
follow this line of research by examining how ethnic, national, familial, and religious identity
endorsement is associated with positive outcomes among Roma youths. In so doing, we extend the
literature by investigating samples of understudied Roma groups in four European countries which
local context is briefly presented below.
The Roma Minority
Although precise estimates are difficult to establish, the Roma number from seven to twelve
million people (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2010). Discrepancies in estimates
of the size of their population are primarily due to the absence of census information on ethnic
origin in the majority of the European Union and ethnic mimicry, which refers to the refusal to
disclose one’s ethnic identity to secure access to better opportunities, and to avoid stigmatization
and prejudice (Prieto-Flores, 2009). Roma are Europe’s largest minority, living mainly in Central
and Eastern Europe and having a long history of marginalization (Vermeersch & Ram, 2009). We
use Roma as a term for diverse Roma populations, while acknowledging the variety of identity
distinctions within this ethnic group (see Park, 2008). Our study goals specify differences among
Roma in different countries and their specific local characteristics. Although the main focus of this
study is on a marginalized social group, the Roma, scholars have also acknowledged the need for
including mainstream or dominant group comparisons (Yuval-Davis, 2006). This study
acknowledges this argument by taking into account a reference group of mainstream youth. The
target groups are early to middle adolescent Roma in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Kosovo, and
Romania. Early to middle adolescence is a relevant developmental period for making valid
distinctions in identity statuses and for ethnic minority youth - to develop their own identity, while
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 11
evaluating the collective values of their cultural heritage and the values of the dominant society
(Crocetti, Rubini, Luyckx, & Meeus, 2008). Early to middle adolescence is a crucial stage of future
orientation: youth have to plan their further education or occupation by leaving the “protected”
school environment, making essential vocational choices, and are therefore more likely to
experience multiple identity negotiations and explorations.
The Czech Republic. Although recent official census data report approximately 5,000
Roma in the Czech Republic (Czech Statistical Office, 2013), their actual numbers are estimated to
be between 150,000 and 400,000 people (European Commission, 2013). Improving conditions of
Roma in a variety of settings is an official government strategy with social policy measures and
activities aimed at supporting the Roma language, culture, and identity (Civil Society Monitoring
Report Czech Republic, 2013). The development of this strategy is the responsibility of the
Department for the Protection of Minorities, in which the Council for Roma Community Affairs is
the most important, being composed by Roma delegates only who contribute to decision making
and formulating new policies for Roma. The Czech government financially supports the education
of Roma children at primary and secondary level, the research into Roma language, cultural
activities, music and theatre festivals, and issues information about the Roma in mainstream media
(European Commission, 2013).
Romania. The Roma group comprises 619,007 people out of the 23,000,000 national
population in Romania (Romania census, 2011), although some reports estimate higher numbers
ranging from 1,800,000 to 2,500,000 (European Commission, 2003). Roma gained the status of a
national minority with visible representatives in Romanian public and political life; yet, they are
still the socially and economically most disadvantaged group in the country. There are generally
two types of attitudes toward the Roma among the mainstream Romanians. On the one hand,
Romanians disapprove of the xenophobic discourse and expulsion of Romanian Roma migrants
from Western Europe. On the other hand, they are concerned about the confusion between
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 12
Romanian and Roma ethnicity. For instance, in 2010 a bill was proposed to the parliament to
replace the word "Roma" with the pejorative "Tzigane", which was ultimately rejected (Wolfe-
Murray, 2010). However, Romania was among the first to sign the Decade of Roma Inclusion
(2005-2015) in line with the political commitment by European governments to eliminate
discrimination against Roma and promote the Strategy of Inclusion of Romanian Citizens
Belonging to the Roma Minority for the period 2012-2020. The National Agency for Roma (NAR),
a central public administration body, is responsible for applying and monitoring intervention
measures for the improvement of Roma conditions.
Kosovo. In 1991, before the civil war, the number of Roma individuals was between
100,000 and 150,000. Current estimates point to 40,000 Roma among the national population of
two million (Tcherenkov & Laderich, 2004). Roma are Muslims, the dominant religion in Kosovo,
contrary to the Christian religious affiliation of Roma in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, and
Romania. Roma are the most vulnerable group that after the armed conflict in Kosovo either
remained marginalized or emigrated. After becoming independent from Serbia, the government of
Kosovo developed an institutional action plan for the Roma, which covers education, employment,
health, and social affairs, as well as returns and reintegration. While Albanian and Serbian are the
official languages, the Romani language, alongside with Turkish and Bosnian, is an official
language at the municipal level. There are several TV and radio stations broadcasting in the Romani
language, including a weekly programme supported by a website in Romani. However, very few
plans targeting the improvement of the situation of Roma have been implemented, due to the lack or
non-provision of financial resources and the devastating postwar reality. Some reports state that
local policies and laws primarily address the needs of other ethnic groups in the country, rather than
those of Roma (European Roma Rights Centre, 2011).
Bulgaria. Roma estimates in Bulgaria range between 325,343 and 800,000 people out of the
national population of nearly 7 million (National Statistics Institute, 2011). They are exposed to
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 13
geographic isolation and segregation, along with a lack of access to adequate social and educational
services (Amnesty International, 2007). Bulgaria has a historical record of ethnic tensions with its
ethnic minorities that experienced severe assimilation campaigns during the communist rule. In
contrast to other countries, Bulgaria adopted a policy of strict repression of ethnic identity of Roma,
involving their sedentarization, closing down Roma theaters and newspapers, and banning the use
of their language (Csepeli & Simon, 2004). Official policies targeting the improvement of Roma
conditions are scarce. In fact, the latest monitoring report in Bulgaria concluded that regardless of
the large number of strategic documents and operational programs that have been adopted, a
political will was lacking to factually improve the situation of Roma (Civil Society Monitoring
Report Bulgaria, 2013).
It can be concluded that policies toward Roma differ among the countries investigated here,
with the Czech Republic being most effective in Roma integration, followed by Romania, Kosovo,
and Bulgaria. Although it is not easy to directly assess implications of these different contexts for
identity of youth, we set out to explore whether there might be differences in Roma youth’s
multiple identities and well-being across countries.
Hypotheses
The present study investigated ethnic, national, familial, and religious identity and well-
being in Roma adolescents across four Eastern European countries by testing five hypotheses. First,
we expected group differences in identities and well-being such that compared to their mainstream
peers, Roma adolescents would have a weaker national identity (Hypothesis 1a), stronger religious
identity (Hypothesis 1b), and lower levels of well-being (Hypothesis 1c). Second, we expected
mean level differences in ethnic and national identity within the Roma samples, such that Roma
ethnic identity would be more endorsed by Roma youth in countries with more explicit policies
toward improving conditions of Roma (Hypothesis 2a) and that national identity would be more
endorsed by Roma youth in countries with less active Roma policies (Hypothesis 2b). Third, we
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 14
explored age effects in line with prior work (French et al., 2006; Phinney, 1989; Stoppa &
Lefkowitz, 2010), suggesting that older compared to younger adolescents would report more
pronounced ethnic, national, familial, and religious identities (Hypothesis 3). We did not advance
predictions about specific gender effects on salience of identity domains due to inconsistencies in
findings of previous studies. We also expected specific associations among Roma ethnic and
national identities across countries. We hypothesized a positive association between Roma ethnic
and national identity for Roma youth in countries with more pronounced integration policies
(Hypothesis 4a) and a negative association for countries with more pronounced assimilation
practices and high levels of discrimination (Hypothesis 4b). Lastly, we expected positive
associations between specific identity domains and well-being. Specifically, and in concordance
with previous findings (Dimitrova et al., 2014), we expected that familial identity would have the
strongest and most consistent relations with well-being in the Roma group (Hypothesis 5). We
regard familial identity as the most salient identity domain, specifically for Roma youth, as this
domain is not challenged by the social context they live in. Therefore, particularly in the Roma
minority context, family ties and attachment to close family members will have the strongest
contribution to well-being.
Method
Participants and Procedure
Participants were 1221 adolescents of whom 632 Roma and 589 mainstreamers (age: M =
15.98 years, SD = 1.34). The Roma samples consisted of 194 youth in Bulgaria, 153 in the Czech
Republic, 150 in Kosovo, and 135 in Romania (see Table 1). In addition to the Roma participants,
there were 155 Bulgarian, 142 Czech, 150 Albanian, and 142 Romanian mainstream youth as
reference groups. Twenty-seven percent of the total sample indicated to be Muslim (mainly Roma
and Albanian youth from Kosovo), 38% Christian Orthodox, and 12% Catholic, and 22% did not
report any religious affiliation. Data on family socioeconomic status (SES) were computed by
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 15
creating a composite score of occupation levels (unskilled, semi-professional, and professional job)
of both parents. This score was coded in three levels of low, middle, and high SES. The samples
differed in age, with the Czech mainstreamers having a lower mean age than the other groups [F(7,
1194) = 56.09, p < .001], and gender with more girls in the Roma-Bulgarian group than in the other
samples, χ²(7, N = 1207) = 41.11, p < .001. For further analyses, we dichotomized age in early (11
to 14 years old) and middle (15 to 18 years old) adolescence (see also Verkuyten et al., 2012).
Participants were recruited from January to June 2012 in public schools in major towns with
a large number of Roma in Bulgaria (Sofia, Simeonovgrad, Harmanli, Haskovo), the Czech
Republic (North Bohemia: Lovosice, Most, Krupka, Teplice; Central Bohemia: Prague; South
Moravia: Olomouc, Brno, Prostejov; Czech Silesia: Ostrava), Kosovo (Pristina), and Romania
(Brasov). Prior to the data collection, local school authorities were contacted and informed about
the purpose and methods of the study to acquire their consent. In addition, local community
organizations working with Roma families were informed about the study to obtain their support to
facilitate participation. Upon agreement by schools to take part in the study, parental and student
consent was obtained. All contacted schools agreed to participate and the participants’ response rate
was very high (up to 98%) due to long term collaboration with the research team and incentives
(small gifts) to participants. Participants came from school grades 7 to 11, which were reflecting the
general secondary school population in the respective countries for the target age range. Students
filled out the questionnaire in a group setting during regular school hours. The participating schools
were typical of the ethnically mixed population of Roma and mainstream students in their regions.
Roma and their mainstream peers were enrolled in the same schools.
Measures
Sociodemographic questionnaire. Participants in all countries provided information on
their nationality, ethnicity, age, gender, religion, and occupation of both parents.
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 16
Identity measures. Identity measures for the present study have been developed in previous
studies on Bulgarian samples of Roma youth to comprehensively assess their ethnic, national,
familial, and religious identity (Dimitrova et al., 2013, 2014). The four identity scales were created
by generating items following identity components of self-categorization, attachment, evaluation,
importance, and behavioral involvement (Ashmore et al., 2004). Some items were also adapted
from previously used measures of ethnic (Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure, MEIM; Phinney &
Ong, 2007), familial, and religious identity (Kiang at al., 2008). We used four scales, each
consisting of 21 items. The stems of the items were identical for each of the four scales, with targets
(nation, Roma, family, and religion) varying per scale. Respondents were asked to indicate their
answers on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from completely disagree to completely agree.
The Roma Ethnic Identity Scale contained items, such as “I see myself as Roma” (self-
categorization), “I feel strongly connected to Roma people” (attachment), “I am proud to be a
member of the Roma community” (evaluation), “Being Roma is a significant part of my life”
(importance) and “I spend much time trying to find out more about the Roma culture (e.g., history,
traditions and customs)” (behavioral involvement). The scale had excellent internal consistencies
with values between .92 and .96 across Roma samples.
The National Identity Scale included items like “I see myself as
Bulgarian/Czech/Albanian/Romanian” (self-categorization), “I feel strongly connected to
Bulgarian/Czech/Albanian/Romanian people” (attachment), “I am proud to be a member of the
Bulgarian/Czech/Albanian/Romanian community” (evaluation), “Being
Bulgarian/Czech/Albanian/Romanian is a significant part of my life” (importance) and “I spend
much time trying to find out more about the Bulgarian/Czech/Albanian/Romanian culture (e.g.,
history, traditions and customs)” (behavioral involvement). The internal consistencies ranged
from .90 to .95 for Roma and from .86 to .93 for mainstream youth.
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 17
The Familial Identity Scale included statements such as “I see myself as member of my
family”, “I feel strongly connected to my family”, “I am proud to be a member of my family”,
“Being part of my family is a significant part of my life” and “I spend much time with my family”.
The scale showed high internal consistencies ranging from .91 to .97 in the Roma and from .87
to .95 in the mainstream groups.
The Religious Identity Scale comprised statements, such as “I see myself as member of my
religious community”, “I feel strongly connected to my religious community”, “I am proud to be a
member of my religious community”, “Being part of my religious community is a significant part
of my life”, and “I have spent much time exploring my religious community (e.g., its rituals, history
and traditions)”. Internal consistencies ranged from .91 to .95 for the Roma and from .92 to .98 for
the mainstream youth.
Well-Being. We applied a conceptualization of well-being from a positive youth
development perspective; we were interested in specific types of positive evaluations, such as life
satisfaction, interest and engagement, as well as emotional reactions to life events, such as joy,
happiness, excitement. Consequently, well-being was measured by the Satisfaction with Life Scale
(Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985) and the Positive Affect Schedule (Watson, Clark, &
Tellegen, 1988). The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) consists of five items addressing global
life satisfaction. On a 7-point Likert scale, respondents express the extent to which they
agree/disagree with statements such as “The conditions of my life are excellent” and “So far, I have
gotten the important things I want in life.” Internal consistencies were between .71 and .91 (Roma
youth) and .70 and .79 (mainstream youth). The Positive Affect Schedule (PA) consists of 10 items
describing positive mood states (e.g.,” strong, excited, interested”). For the present sample, internal
consistencies ranged from .72 to .96 (Roma youth) and from .65 to .89 (mainstream youth).
Results
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 18
In line with our first set of predictions, we investigated identity and well-being differences
across groups by performing two separate analyses of variance. First, a MANCOVA was carried out
with group (2 levels: Roma and mainstream), age (2 levels: early and middle adolescents), and
gender as independent variables and national, familial, and religious identity, life satisfaction and
positive affect as dependent variables, and SES as covariate. SES was treated as a covariate as the
groups in this study differed in family socioeconomic status, with Roma youth across all countries
having a lower SES than their mainstream counterparts, χ²(8, N = 1101) = 410.59, p < .001. Lower
SES was found to be related to lower levels of mainstream identity [F(2, 1066) = 9.99, p < .001, η2
= .024], familial identity [F(2, 1066) = 30.28, p < .001, η2 = .052], satisfaction with life [F(2, 1066)
= 80.20, p < .001, η2 = .128], and positive affect, F(2, 1066) = 22.56, p < .001, η2 = .040. Second, a
repeated measures ANOVA investigated group differences of Roma ethnic identity among Roma
samples, which included between-group factors (four Roma groups in each country, age, and
gender) and one within-group factor (Roma and national identity). We report Cohen’s d and, in case
more groups are involved, (partial) η2 values as effect sizes. Finally, we examined and tested
associations between identity and psychological well-being in the Roma group by employing a
Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes (MIMIC) model (Jöreskog & Goldberger, 1975) by means of
structural equations modeling in AMOS (Arbuckle, 2009). In this model the four identities were
used to predict a latent factor, labeled well-being that was measured by life satisfaction and positive
affect. Fit indices adopted to interpret the model fit were the χ2 test, the Root Mean Square Error of
Approximation [RMSEA; recommended value ≤ .08], the Comparative Fit Index [CFI;
recommended value ≥ .90] (Marsh, Hau, & Grayson, 2005) and the Standardized Root Mean Square
Residual [SRMR; recommended ≤ .08] (Hu & Bentler, 1999).
Group Differences, Age and Gender Effects on Identity and Well-Being
The first set of hypotheses refers to ethnic group, age, and gender effects in identity and
well-being. We present main effects as well as interaction effects for the expected relations among
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 19
these variables. With regards to main effects and as expected, results revealed that Roma
adolescents showed a weaker national identity [F(1, 1091) = 42.95, p < .001, d = -.56] and a
stronger religious identity compared to their mainstream peers, F(1, 1091) = 26.09, p < .001, d
= .27. Also in line with expectations, overall Roma adolescents reported considerably lower levels
of well-being in terms of less life satisfaction [F(1, 1091) = 135.30, p < .001, d = -1.16] and less
positive affect [F(1, 1091) = 16.53, p < .001, d = -.45] compared to mainstreamers, although an
inspection of the means in Table 1 suggests that this is probably not entirely true for youth in the
Czech Republic and Romania. We provide a possible interpretation of this pattern in the discussion.
Additionally, as predicted (Hypothesis 3), age effects were observed for national [F(1, 1091) =
30.47, p < .001, d = .39] and religious identity [F(1, 1091) = 37.60, p < .001, d = .35], with higher
scores for middle compared to early adolescents. Life satisfaction [F(1, 1091) = 10.41, p < .001, d =
.27] and positive affect scores were lower for middle compared to early adolescents, F(1, 1091) =
17.37, p < .001, d = .29. There were also gender effects for positive affect, with lower scores for
girls compared to boys, F(1, 1091) = 13.22, p < .001, d = .21.
With regard to interaction effects, no significant interactions with gender emerged, but
significant age by group interactions were found. National identity [F(1, 1091) = 10.47, p < .001, d
= .74] and positive affect [F(1, 1091) = 4.78, p < .01, d = .52] were significantly higher for
mainstream compared to Roma middle adolescents, whereas religious identity was stronger for
Roma middle adolescents compared to their mainstream peers, F(1, 1091) = 33.19, p < .001, d
= .64. No significant age by ethnic group interactions for familial identity and life satisfaction were
found.
Mean Differences of Identity among Roma Youth
According to our second hypothesis, we expected mean level differences in ethnic and
national identity within the Roma samples, such that Roma ethnic identity would be more endorsed
than national identity by Roma youth. Results did not show significant within-group effects.
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 20
However, there was a significant identity by group interaction, F(3, 474) = 5.75, p < .001, η2 = .035.
Post hoc Bonferroni multiple comparisons showed that national identity was significantly higher in
Roma in Kosovo compared to Roma in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, and Romania. Also, Roma
ethnic identity was lower among Roma in Romania compared to Roma in Bulgaria, the Czech
Republic, and Kosovo (see Table 1). The second hypothesis was not globally supported, but an
inspection of means in Table 1 suggests it might hold for some national contexts (e.g., the Czech
Republic) and not others (Romania; we return to this issue in the discussion).
Associations among Identity and Well-Being Variables
According to our fourth hypothesis, we expected significant positive associations among
all identities in all groups. Tables 2 and 3 present bivariate Pearson correlations among all study
variables for both Roma and mainstream youth in each country. As can be seen there, results are in
line with expectations that all identities were positively correlated. We ran a multigroup analysis
involving the Roma groups in all countries. The fit of this MIMIC model was not entirely adequate
as indicated by fit indices of the structural weights model, χ²(19, N = 1221) = 127.34, p < .001,
RMSEA = .095, SRMR = .08 and CFI = .937. As indicated by salient modification indices, we
released invariance constraints on familial and Roma ethnic identity. The resulting partial structural
weights model yielded a slightly better fit, χ²(25, N = 1221) = 132.59, p < .001, RMSEA = .083,
SRMR = .08 and CFI = .938. As can be seen in Figure 1, our hypothesis regarding the structural
relations between familial identity and well-being was largely confirmed. Regression coefficients of
familial identity were significantly positive and very strong in Kosovo and Bulgaria; in the Czech
Republic and Romania the values were lower and in the latter country the coefficient just failed to
reach significance. It is interesting that there are important group differences with regards to Roma
identity. Roma identity was negatively related to well-being for Roma youth in Bulgaria and
notably in Kosovo and unrelated in the Czech Republic and Romania. So, Roma identity was not
positively related to well-being in any country and was even negatively related in two countries.
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 21
Religious identity was positively related to well-being across all Roma groups. It should be noted
that the regression coefficients of national identity were very low in comparison to those for
familial and religious identity; the regression coefficients were not significant in any country,
indicating the marginal role (if any at all) of mainstream identity in well-being of Roma youth.
It has been reported that multiple identity relations can differ across developmental periods
(Verkuyten et al., 2012). Therefore, we reran the multigroup path model separately for early and
middle adolescents. We found full invariance of all parameters in Figure 1, suggesting that the
associations between the variables in our model are not different across the age groups.
In summary, religious and familial identity were positively related to well-being for Roma in
the four countries studied, whereas national identity and Roma identity did not show such positive
relations and could even be negatively related to well-being. Multiple identities and their relations
with well-being remained invariant in different developmental periods from early to middle
adolescence. Furthermore, strong relations were found among ethnic, national, familial, and
religious identity.
Discussion
The objective of this paper was to compare how multiple identities are related to well-being
in Roma adolescents living in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Kosovo, and Romania. Resources
available to Roma communities and policies to improve their conditions vary significantly across
these countries. Our study suggests that differences in identity endorsement might reflect
differences in these national policies, combined with other societal and local factors.
With regard to our first prediction, we expected group differences in national and religious
identity and well-being of Roma youth compared to their mainstream peers. Results were in line
with the expectation that Roma would show weak national identities across countries. Globally, we
found low scores on well-being, in line with the marginalized nature of the group. Roma minority
youth tended to show lower levels of positive affect and life satisfaction than their mainstream peers
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 22
across all national contexts. Results largely supported our expectations, although the support was
better in Bulgaria and Kosovo than in the Czech Republic and Romania. It might be that Roma
youth in these latter countries are doing better than other Roma youth, possibly because of more
favorable national policies or better socio-economic conditions.
In line with our second prediction, we expected mean level differences in ethnic and national
identity within the Roma samples such that Roma ethnic identity would be stronger than national
identity. Relevant frameworks, such as the Rejection-Identification Model (RIM; Branscombe et al.,
1999) and the Rejection-Disidentification Model (RDIM; Jasinskaja-Lahti, Liebkind, & Solheim,
2009), seem to be based on the interaction of ethnic and national identities, where a reduction of
national identity, often after discrimination experiences, is associated with an enhanced ethnic
identity. We do not find evidence for these dynamics in Roma. We could not detect significant
within-group effects among these two identity domains. It seems that in the case of Roma groups,
ethnic background may no longer provide a positive source of identification and that both ethnic
Roma and national identities have low endorsement levels. This finding is particularly interesting
from a developmental perspective because research that supports RIM and RDIM models has
mostly relied on adult samples. On the one hand and in line with prepositions of these models,
ethnic identification in light of discrimination may not really protect self-esteem in these youth,
because both national and ethnic identities undergo similar formation processes and they are equally
challenged during adolescence. On the other hand, ethnic identity could be expected to be more
stable than national identity for immigrant and minority adults. One plausible explanation would be
that the dynamics that are expected from the RIM and RDIM models do not hold during
adolescence. However, the lack of within-group differences in ethnic and national identity,
considering country profiles with regard to policy towards Roma, calls for caution in considering
how country specifics relate to our findings. Possibly, there is much more complexity at work in
each of the country contexts and the relations between these contexts and identity among Roma
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 23
represented here. A direct assessment of these relations would be particularly valuable to pursue in
future research. In addition, the pattern of low identification with both the ethnic and national group
is known in acculturation research as marginalization. Other findings among Roma have also
reported a marginalized identity characterized by low levels of endorsement of both national and
ethnic identities, arguably as a reaction to a marginalization of their community (Dimitrova et al.,
2014). Therefore, the strength and salience of both ethnic and national identities for Roma minority
appear to be moderated by contextual factors of severe marginalization. Another possibility, as
anticipated in the introduction, may be that marginalized identities could reflect more individualistic
strategies of social mobility in light of recent economic changes in the societies our samples are
living (Bourhis et al., 1997). This possibility is in line with our findings that other identity domains
(i.e., familial, religious) emerge as more important correlates of well-being than ethnic (or national)
sense of belonging.
A significant identity by group interaction showed that national identity was higher for
Roma youth in Kosovo compared to their peers in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, and Romania. The
higher score on national identity of Roma in Kosovo might be related to the history of this recently
formed state, possibly indicating that all citizens are proud of the independence of their country and
its culture. The mainstreamers in Kosovo also seem to have a high score on national identity. Roma
ethnic identity was found to be the lowest for Roma youth in Romania compared to their peers in
Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, and Kosovo. This pattern is not in line with the argument that ethnic
identity should be higher in countries with more integration oriented policies (which are stronger in
Romania than in Bulgaria and Kosovo). Yet, the low mean is in line with our field observations and
knowledge of the research site in Romania (Brasov). In Brasov, there is a dwindling population
speaking Romani language, and a decreasing number of Roma perform traditional occupations and
maintain ethnic customs. It is unclear whether this trend still reflects the massive discrimination
faced by Roma in Romania in the past.
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 24
In line with our third prediction and prior research (French et al., 2006; Phinney, 1989), we
found associations and interactions between age, ethnic background and multiple identities. An
interesting age-related finding was that national identity was more pronounced for mainstream
compared to Roma middle adolescents, whereas religious identity was significantly stronger for
Roma middle compared to mainstream adolescents. It may well be that middle adolescence is a
more relevant developmental period for ethnic minority than mainstream youth to evaluate different
identity options because they need to negotiate between cultural values of their heritage and
dominant society (Crocetti et al., 2008). Roma middle adolescents have to consider and reconsider
different identity alternatives - probably to a greater extent than mainstream middle adolescents. A
rival explanation could be the gradual ethnic identity endorsement accompanied by an increasing
knowledge and awareness of identity alternatives (Cross & Madson, 1997) as well as national
identity shift over time due to increasing and accumulating exposure to the mainstream culture
(Sam, Vedder, Liebkind, Neto, & Virta, 2008). It is also worth to note that the relations between
multiple identities and well-being of Roma across all four countries were invariant across age
groups. In fact, we could confirm that ethnic, national, familial, and religious identities are related
to well-being for both early and middle adolescents in the same way.
In addition, our results reveal that gender is not systematically related to any identity. On
average, ethnic, national, familial, and religious identity salience was similar for girls and boys. It
thus seems that the underlying process of establishing identity is similar for boys and girls in our
Roma groups. A similar absence of gender differences among Roma was reported in prior work
(Dimitrova et al., 2013, 2014). Our findings are in line with many studies that failed to report
gender differences (e.g., Nesdale, Rooney, & Smith, 1997; Virta & Westin, 1999).
With regard to our fourth prediction, we expected a significant positive association between
Roma ethnic and national identity for youth in countries with more pronounced integration policies
and a negative association for countries with more pronounced assimilation practices. This
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 25
prediction was partly supported by significantly positive associations being strongest for Roma in
Romania and Kosovo, followed by Bulgaria, whereas no significant results emerged for the Czech
Republic. These findings reflect the complexity in contextual diversity in addition to what official
reports had provided on policy implementation among Roma. Possibly, in countries with weak
integration policies (like Bulgaria and Kosovo), Roma youth integrate ethnic and national identities
as a coping strategy. Confirming expectations, we did not find a significant relation in Romania and
the Czech Republic. Yet, in the latter country, Roma identity was endorsed more than national
identity, confirming the lack of integration between these identities in countries with more
pronounced assimilation policies. Finally, we also observed strong, positive correlations between
Roma ethnic and religious identity, particularly for the Roma in Bulgaria and Kosovo.
Lastly, we expected to observe overall positive effects of ethnic, familial, and religious
identity on well-being. We based our reasoning on prior research providing strong evidence for
advantages of simultaneously studying multiple social identities that are salient for youth as they
provide a coherent picture of how ethnic, familial, and religious domains jointly influence well-
being (Verkuyten et al., 2012). This hypothesis was largely confirmed for the Roma, where the
strongest and most consistent association between familial identity and well-being was observed.
Past research has shown that familial identity is the most salient identity for Roma in Bulgaria
(Dimitrova et al., 2013, 2014) and this study shows the same to be true for Roma in the Czech
Republic, Kosovo, and Romania. This finding supports the notion that familial identity can be
regarded as a psychological resource to face challenges for Roma youth, and replicates the
frequently reported observation that the family is crucial within the Roma community. Conceivably,
the extended family system characterizes this community as a salient resource in the collectivist
Roma settlements, whereas ethnic heritage identity cannot be directly anchored on an existing social
structure due to the fact that Roma do not have a country or state to identify with.
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 26
Relations among identity domains and well-being vary across countries. In fact, the
association between Roma identity and well-being was positive in the Czech Republic and
Romania, and negative in Kosovo and Bulgaria. The negative association between Roma identity
and well-being in Roma youth in Bulgaria and Kosovo could be associated with policies aimed at
improving the overall conditions of Roma, which are stronger in the Czech Republic and Romania
than in Kosovo and Bulgaria. This pattern was most pronounced for Roma youth in Kosovo, where
it appears that being Roma is associated with worse psychological outcomes. Possibly, adverse
circumstances may be responsible for the negative association between Roma identity and well-
being in our Roma participants in Bulgaria and Kosovo. Not all aspects of social identity contribute
to well-being. For Roma youth, only those identity aspects that are resources to deal with adversity
(notably family and religion) contribute to their well-being. Neither their (enforced) national
identity nor their (marginalized) Roma identity appear to provide adequate resources, which is an
exceptional finding as links between ethnic identity and well-being are often reported (Smith &
Silva, 2011). We conclude that the link between identity and well-being can be moderated by
contextual conditions and a strong endorsement of a specific identity is not necessarily linked with
more well-being when this identity is strongly rejected by society.
Limitations and suggestions. Our study is not without limitations. First, we lacked in-depth
information on local Roma ethnic communities, which could be critical in further understanding
multiple identities. Qualitative data including interviews and focus group discussions on different
identity and how these are embedded in everyday life of Roma youth in different countries would
be helpful in that regard. A second important limitation concerns the sample selection. By necessity,
we focused on Roma youth who attended public schools. However, dropping out of school is
particularly common among Roma students (Decade of Roma Inclusion, 2005-2015). Therefore,
students who drop out of school are clearly at risk for marked discrimination and poor well-being.
We cannot generalize our findings to all Roma youth and specifically to those who might be at
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 27
greater risk for compromised adjustment and overall well-being. Another limitation concerns that
we could not directly assess how public policies, the education system, and other policies directed
at Roma have been implemented in local communities. An examination of direct effects of
indicators of Roma policy (European Commission, 2011) on identity and well-being of Roma youth
would be particularly valuable. Additionally, we did not measure perceived discrimination
experiences. Although we know that discrimination has been part and parcel of the history of these
four groups, we could not assess the individually experienced discrimination of youth in our
sample, which could have complemented the information on identity. Relatedly, our cross-sectional
study design limits our ability to establish the nature of associations, which could well be
bidirectional. On a final note, future studies can benefit from a cultural (emic) perspective in order
to further explore the concept of well-being in cultural groups in terms of values and lifestyle
embedded in everyday life of Roma communities.
Our findings stress the need to pay close attention to multiple identities and to address
contextual conditions to advance our knowledge about how Roma youth identity is related to well-
being. Our study has also practical implications. The beneficial effects of familial and religious
identity point to the importance of positive identification resources for well-being of Roma youth.
This observation can serve as the starting point in designing targeted education and policies to
promote positive development of Roma communities in Europe. For example, interventions and
policies could include opportunities for the Roma to enact their religious and familial identity (e.g.,
their familial bonds, religious customs and traditions) that are associated with an improved sense of
well-being. Intervention programs that start from the group’s strengths may be more appealing to
Roma and may have longer lasting effects. The findings and implications of this study are relevant
both to understanding Roma adolescents’ multiple identity processes and to advance our
understanding of these processes related to well-being and adjustment of such underrepresented
ethnic minority group across Europe.
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 28
References
Amnesty International (2007). Europe: Discrimination against Roma. Retrieved from
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/EUR01/012/2007
Arbuckle, J. (2009). Amos 19. Crawfordville, FL, USA: AMOS Development Corporation.
Arnett, J. J., & Jensen, L. A. (2002). A congregation of one: Individualized religious beliefs among
emerging adults. Journal of Adolescent Research, 17, 451–467.
doi:10.1177/0743558402175002
Ashmore, R. D., Deaux, K., & McLaughlin-Volpe, T. (2004). An organizing framework for
collective identity: Articulation and significance of multidimensionality. Psychological
Bulletin, 130, 80-114. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.130.1.80
Bartkowski, J. P., Xu, X., & Levin, M. L. (2008). Religion and child development: Evidence from
the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study. Social Science Research, 37, 18-36.
doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2007.02.001
Berry, J. W., Phinney, J. S., Sam, D. L., & Vedder, P. (2006). Immigrant youth: Acculturation,
identity, and adaptation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 55, 303-332. doi:
10.1111/j.1464-0597.2006.00256.x
Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology, 46, 5-34.
doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.1997.tb01087.x
Bourhis, R., Moise, L. C., Perreault, S., & Senecal, S. (1997). Towards an interactive acculturation
model: A social psychological approach. International Journal of Psychology, 32, 369-386.
doi:10.1080/002075997400629
Branscombe, N. R., Schmitt, M. T., & Harvey, R. D. (1999). Perceiving pervasive discrimination
among African Americans: Implications for group identification and well-being. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 135-149. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.1.135
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 29
Civil Society Monitoring Report Bulgaria (2013). Implementation of the national Roma integration
strategy and decade action plan in 2012. Retrieved from
http://www.romadecade.org/cms/upload/file/9270_file4_bg_civil-society-monitoring-
report_en.pdf
Civil Society Monitoring Report Czech Republic (2013). Implementation of the national Roma
integration strategy and decade action plan in 2012. Retrieved from
http://www.romadecade.org/cms/upload/file/9270_file6_cr_civil-society-monitoring-
report_en.pdf
Council of Europe (2010). Statistics. Retrieved from
http://www.coe.int/t/dg3/romatravellers/default_en.asp
Crocetti, E., Rubini, M., & Meeus, W. (2008). Capturing the dynamics of identity formation in
various ethnic groups: Development and validation of a three-dimensional model. Journal of
Adolescence, 31, 207–222. doi:10.1007/s10964-007-9222-2
Cross, S. E., & Madson, L. (1997). Models of the self: Self-construals and gender. Psychological
Bulletin, 122, 5-37. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.122.1.5
Csepeli, G., & Simon, D. (2004). Construction of Roma identity in Eastern and Central Europe:
Perception and self-identification. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 30, 129-150.
doi:10.1080/1369183032000170204
Czech Statistical Office (2013). Population and housing census. Retrieved from
http://vdb.czso.cz/sldbvo/#!stranka=podle-
tematu&tu=30628&th=&v=&vo=null&vseuzemi=null&void=
Decade of Roma Inclusion (2005-2015). Decade declaration. Retrieved from
http://www.romadecade.org/about-the-decade-decade-in-brief
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction with Life Scale.
Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 30
Dimitrova, R., Ferrer-Wreder, L., & Trost, K. (2015). Intergenerational transmission of ethnic
identity and well-being of Roma minority adolescents and their parents. Journal of
Adolescence, 45, 296-306. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2015.10.014
Dimitrova, R., Chasiotis, A., Bender, M., & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2014). Collective identity and
well-being of Bulgarian Roma minority adolescents and their mothers. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 43, 375-386. doi:10.1007/s10964-013-0043-1
Dimitrova, R., Chasiotis, A., Bender, M., & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2013). Collective identity and
well-being of Roma adolescents in Bulgaria. International Journal of Psychology, 48, 502-
513. doi:10.1080/00207594.2012.682064
Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York, NY, USA: Norton.
European Commission (2003). EU support for Roma communities in Central and Eastern Europe.
Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/brochure_roma_oct2003_en.pdf
European Commission (2011). An EU framework for national Roma integration strategies up to
2020. Retrieved from
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/policies/discrimination/docs/com_2011_173_en.pdf
European Commission (2013). Roma Integration Concept for 2010 – 1013. Retrieved from
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/files/roma_czech_republic_strategy_en.pdf
European Roma Rights Centre (2011). Abandoned minority. Roma rights history in Kosovo.
Retrieved from http://www.errc.org/cms/upload/file/abandoned-minority-roma-rights-
history-in-kosovo-dec-2011.pdf
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2010). Addressing the Roma issue in the EU.
Retrieved from http://fra.europa.eu/fraWebsite/roma/roma_en.htm
French, S. E., Seidman, E., Allen, L., & Aber, J. L. (2006). The development of ethnic identity
during adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 42, 1-10. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.42.1.1
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 31
Fuligni, A. J. (Ed.). (2007). Contesting stereotypes, creating identities: Social categories, social
identities, and educational participation. New York, NY, USA: Russell Sage Foundation.
Fuligni, A. J., & Flook, L. (2005). A social identity approach to ethnic differences in family
relationships during adolescence. In R. Kail (Ed.), Advances in child development and
behavior (pp. 125–152). San Diego, CA, USA: Elsevier.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values.
Beverly Hills, CA, USA: Sage.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis:
Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
Jasinskaja-Lahti, I., Liebkind, K., & Solheim, E. (2009). To identify or not to identify? National
disidentification as an alternative reaction to perceived ethnic discrimination. Applied
Psychology: An International Review, 58, 105-128. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00384.x
Jöreskog, K. G., & Goldberger, A. S. (1975). Estimation of a model with multiple indicators and
multiple causes of a single latent variable. Journal of the American Statistical Association,
70, 631-639.
Kiang, L., Yip, T., & Fuligni, A. J. (2008). Multiple social identities and adjustment in young adults
from ethnically diverse backgrounds. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 18, 643–670.
doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2008.00575.x
Lee, J. J. (2003). Religion and college attendance: Change among students. Review of Higher
Education, 25, 369–384. doi:10.1353/rhe.2002.0020
Liebkind, K. (1997). Acculturation and stress: Vietnamese refugees in Finland. Journal of Cross-
Cultural Psychology, 27, 161-180. doi:10.1177/0022022196272002
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 32
Liebkind, K. (2006). Ethnic identity and acculturation. In D. L. Sam & J. W. Berry
(Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of acculturation psychology (pp. 78–96).
Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Ljujic, V., Vedder, P. H., & Dekker, H. (2012). Romaphobia among Serbian adolescents: The role of
national in-group attitudes and perceived threat. Political Psychology, 33, 911–924.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00927.x
Lopez, A. B., Huynh, V. W., & Fuligni, A. J. (2011). A longitudinal study of religious identity and
participation during adolescence. Child Development, 82, 1297-1309. doi:10.1111/j.1467
Maimon, D., Browning, C. R., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2010). Collective efficacy, family attachment,
and urban adolescent suicide attempts. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 51, 307-324.
doi:10.1177/00221465103778788624.2011.01609.x
Marcia, J. E. (1980). Identity in adolescence. In J. Adelson (Ed.), Handbook of adolescent
psychology (pp. 159-187). New York, NY, USA: Wiley.
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., & Grayson, D. (2005). Goodness of fit evaluation in structural equation
modeling. In A. Maydeu-Olivares, & J. McCardle (Eds.), Contemporary psychometrics: A
Festschrift to Roderick P. McDonald (pp. 275–340). Mahwah, NJ, USA: Erlbaum.
Marushiakova, E., & Popov, V. (2010). Roma identities in Central, South-Eastern and Eastern
Europe. In H. Kyuchukov & I. Hancock (Eds.), Roma identity (pp. 39-52). Prague, Czech
Republic: NGO Slovo.
National Statistics Institute (NSI) (2011). Census 2011. Sofia, Bulgaria: NSI Press.
Nesbitt, E., & Arweck, E. (2010). Issues arising from an ethnographic investigation of the religious
identity formation of young people in mixed-faith families. Fieldwork in Religion, 5, 7-30.
Nesdale, D., Rooney, R., & Smith, L. (1997). Migrant ethnic identity and psychological distress.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28, 569-588. doi:10.1177/0022022197285004
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 33
Park, J. Z. (2008). Second-generation Asian American pan-ethnic identity: Pluralized meanings of a
racial label. Sociological Perspectives, 51, 541-561. doi:10.1525/sop.2008.51.3.541.
Phinney, J. S. (1989). Stages of ethnic identity development in minority group adolescents. Journal
of Early Adolescence, 9, 34-49. doi:10.1177/0272431689091004
Phinney, J. S., & Devich-Navarro, S. M. (1997). Variations in bicultural identification among
African American and Mexican American adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence,
7, 3–32. doi:10.1207/s15327795jra0701 2
Phinney, J. S., & Ong, A. D. (2007). Conceptualization and measurement of ethnic identity: Current
status and future directions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54, 271-281.
doi:10.1037/0022-0167.54.3.271
Prieto-Flores, O. (2009). Does the canonical theory of assimilation explain the Roma case? Some
evidence from Central and Eastern Europe. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 32, 1387-1405.
doi:10.1080/01419870903006988.
Rivas-Drake, D., Syed, M., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Markstrom, C., French, S., Schwartz, S. J., Lee,
R. M., & Ethnic and Racial Identity Study Group (2014). Feeling good, happy, and proud: A
meta-analysis of positive ethnic-racial affect and adjustment. Child Development, 85, 77-
102. doi:10.1111/cdev.12175
Romania Census (2011). Population and housing. Retrieved from
http://www.insse.ro/cms/files/statistici/comunicate/alte/2012/Comunicat%20DATE
%20PROVIZORII%20RPL%202011.pdf
Sagiv, L., Roccas, S., & Hazan, O. (2012). Identification with groups: The role of personality and
context. Journal of Personality, 80, 345-374. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00733
Sam, D., & Berry, J. W. (Eds.) (2006). Cambridge handbook of acculturation psychology.
Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 34
Sam, D. L., Vedder, P., Liebkind, K., Neto, F., & Virta, E. (2008). Immigration, acculturation and
the paradox of adaptation in Europe. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 5,
138–158. doi:10.1080/17405620701563348
Smith, T. B., & Silva, L. (2011). Ethnic identity and personal well-being of people of color: A
meta-analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58, 42-60. doi:10.1037/a0021528
Spilimbergo, A. & Ubeda, L. (2004). Family attachment and the decision to move by race. Journal
of Urban Economics, 55, 478–497. doi:10.1016/j.jue.2003.07.004
Stoppa, T. M., & Lefkowitz, E. S. (2010). Longitudinal changes in religiosity among emerging
adult college students. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20, 23–38. doi:10.1111/j.1532-
7795.2009.00630.x
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (2001). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In M. A. Hogg & D.
Abrams (Eds.), Relations: Essential readings. Key readings in social psychology (pp. 94-109).
New York, NY, USA: Psychology Press.
Tcherenkov, L., & Laderich, S. (2004). The Roma. Basel, Switzerland: Schwabe Verlag.
Tomova, I. (2000). Attitudes toward Roma in Bulgaria. In V. Rusanov (Ed.), Aspects of ethno-
cultural situation in Bulgaria (pp. 281-318). Sofia, Bulgaria: Open Society Foundation.
Triandis, H. C., Bontempo, R., Villareal, M. J., Asai, M., & Lucca, N. (1988). Individualism and
collectivism: Cross-cultural perspectives on self-in-group relationships. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 323-38. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.2.323
Triandis, H. C., McCusker, C., & Hui, C. H. (1990). Multimethod probes of individualism and
collectivism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1006-1020.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.59.5.1006
Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering
the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, United Kingdom: Blackwell.
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 35
Verkuyten, M., Thijs, J., & Stevens, G. (2012). Multiple identities and religious transmission: A
study among Moroccan-Dutch Muslim adolescents and their parents. Child Development,
83, 1577–1590. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01794.x.
Vermeersch, P., & Ram, M. H. (2009). The Roma. In B. Rechel (Ed.). Minority rights in Central
and Eastern Europe (pp. 61-73). London and New York: Routledge
Virta, E. & Westin, C. (1999). Psychosocial adjustment of adolescents with immigrant background
in Sweden. Occasional Papers, No. 2. Stockholm, Sweden: Centre for Research on
International Migration and Ethnic Relations, Stockholm University
Wallace, J. M., Forman, T. A., Caldwell, C. H., & Willis, D. S. (2003). Religion and U.S. secondary
school students: Current patterns, recent trends, and sociodemographic correlates. Youth and
Society, 35, 98-125. doi:10.1177/0044118X03254564
Walsh, C., & Krieg, B. (2007). Roma identity: Contrasting constructions. Canadian Ethnic Studies, 39,
169-186. doi:10.1353/ces.0.0007
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of
positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 54, 1063-1070. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063
Wolfe-Murray, R. (2010). There's room for 'Roma' and 'Romanian'. The Guardian. Retrieved from
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/08/roma-romanian-name
Yip, T., & Fuligni, A. J. (2002). Daily variation in ethnic identity, ethnic behaviors, and
psychological wellbeing among American adolescents of Chinese descent. Child
Development, 73, 1557–1572. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00490
Yuval-Davis, N. (2006). Intersectionality and feminist politics. European Journal of Women’s
Studies, 13, 193–209. doi:10.1177/1350506806065752
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 28
Table 1. Means and Standard Deviations for Roma and Mainstream Adolescents in Four Countries
Bulgaria The Czech Republic Kosovo Romania
Roma
n = 194
Bulgarian
n = 155
Roma
n = 153
Czech
n = 142
Roma
n = 150
Albanian
n = 150
Roma
n = 135
Romanian
n = 142
Age
Mean (SD) 16.11 (1.37) 16.57 (.88) 15.03 (1.23) 14.80 (1.03) 15.73 (1.30) 16.47 (1.36) 16.79 (1.13) 16.35 (.65)
Gender, %
Female 58 40 46 47 44 64 43 68
Male 42 60 54 53 56 36 57 32
SES, %
Low 97 27 65 52 98 45 86 29
Middle 3 21 8 25 2 40 4 44
High 0 52 27 23 0 15 0 27
Identity
Roma 3.20 (.70)a - 3.58 (.78)a - 3.64 (.61)a - 2.68 (.89)b -
National 3.33 (.62)c 3.95 (.64) 2.91 (.71)c 3.15 (.77) 3.45 (.61)d 4.06 (.48) 3.13 (.79)c 3.39 (.65)
Familial 3.56 (.73) 4.25 (.55) 3.84 (.70) 3.97 (.68) 3.88 (.53) 4.41 (.43) 3.49 (.86) 4.08 (.59)
Religious 3.12 (.54) 3.26 (.82) 2.91 (.72) 1.86 (1.02) 3.73 (.55) 3.71 (.75) 3.05 (.79) 2.83 (.87)
Well-being
Satisfaction with life 2.45 (1.53)e 4.95 (1.14)f 4.40 (1.23)e 4.47 (1.07)f 3.08 (1.24)e 4.98 (.95)f 4.63 (1.32)e 5.31 (.98)f
Positive Affect 2.16 (1.11)g 3.20 (.84)h 2.85 (.71)g 2.73 (.75)h 2.90 (.66)g 3.31 (.49)h 3.29 (.79)g 3.11 (.75)h
Note. Means with different subscripts differ significantly across groups at p < .001.
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 37
Table 2
Correlations Among All Study Variables for Roma Adolescents in Four Countries
Bulgaria The Czech Republic Kosovo Romania
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
1.ROI - - - -
2. NI .35* - .11 - .54* - .42* -
3. FI .43* .83* - .58* .42* - .70* .63* - .42* .74* -
4. RI .70* .51* .49* - .38* .25* .39* - .81* .61* .82* - .64* .81* .75* -
5. SL .23* .62* .68* .40* - .36* .28* .39* .25* - .14 .09 .21* .07 - .13 .23* .35* .24* -
6. PA .27* .60* .73* .29* .69* - .10 .15 .19* .16 .24* - -.00 .19* .19* .13 .43* - .20* .11 .12 .23* .19* -
ROI = Roma Identity, NI = National Identity, FI = Familial Identity, RI = Religious Identity, SL = Satisfaction with Life, PA = Positive Affect.
*p < .001.
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 38
Table 3
Correlations Among All Study Variables for Mainstream Adolescents in Four Countries
Bulgaria The Czech Republic Kosovo Romania
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
1. NI - - - -
2. FI .54* - .44* - .48* - .41* -
3. RI .53* .31* - -.03 .33* - .43* .40* - .53* .45* -
4. SL .24* .31* .07 - .25* .34* .20* - .20* -.06 .18* - .21* .44* .26* -
5. PA .25* .21* -.06 .40* - .10 .20* .15 .20* - .23* -.03 .21* .26* - .19* .29* .06 .38* -
NI = National Identity, FI = Familial Identity, RI = Religious Identity, SL = Satisfaction with Life, PA = Positive Affect. *p < .001.
ROMA ADOLESCENTS 28
Figure 1
Path Model of Identity and Well-Being for Roma Groups
National identity Roma identity Familial identity Religious identity
Well-being
Life satisfaction Positive affect
BG: -.17*RO: .08CZ: .17KV: -.67***
BG: .84***RO: .24† CZ: .37*KV: .62***
BG: .08*RO: .24*CZ: .22*KV: .13*
BG: .81***RO: .43***CZ: .47***KV: .61***
BG: .79***RO: .45***CZ: .49***KV: .68***
BG: .34***RO: .45***CZ: .17***KV: .21***
BG: .34***RO: .37***CZ: .34***KV: .23***
BG: .24***RO: .48***CZ: .19***KV: .25***
BG: .46***RO: .59***CZ: .25***KV: .28***
BG: .02RO: .07CZ: .06KV: .04
BG: .25***RO: .53***CZ: .15***KV: .21***
BG: .34***RO: .44***CZ: .17***KV: .20***
ROMA ADOLESCENTS40
Note. BG = Bulgaria, CZ = the Czech Republic, KV = Kosovo, RO = Romania. †p < .10; *p <
.05; ***p < .001.