The Impact of Acculturation and Acculturative Stress on Alcohol Use Across Asian Immigrant Subgroups

Abstract

Acculturation and acculturative stress are examined as predictors of alcohol use among Asian immigrants, using the 2004 National Latino and Asian Americans Survey (NLAAS). Separate regression analyses were conducted for Chinese (n = 600), Filipino (n = 508), and Vietnamese (n = 520) immigrants. Alcohol use varied for the three groups. English proficiency was associated with drinking for all groups. Family conflict was associated with drinking for Chinese immigrants. General acculturative stress and discrimination were associated with drinking for Vietnamese immigrants. Results underscore acculturation and acculturative stress as being contributors to alcohol consumption, and the importance of considering the heterogeneity of Asian immigrants in research on their alcohol use. The study's limitations are noted.

Keywords :

• Asian Americans
• acculturation
• acculturative stress

Notes

1 The reader is reminded that each subgroup also can represent heterogeneity and not homogeneity in terms of relevant parameters for individual and group adaptation and functioning, daily, in a variety of roles, contexts, situations, and environments in which a range of resources (strengths, skills, abilities, energy levels) as well as limitations are accessible and available with necessary opportunities for their operation. Traditional demographics noted in research generally do not relate to this. Editor's note.

2 The reader is reminded that the concepts of “risk factors,” as well as “protective factors,” are often noted in the literature, without adequately noting their dimensions (linear, nonlinear; rates of development; anchoring or integration, cessation, etc.), their “demands”, the critical necessary conditions (endogenously as well as exogenously; from a micro to a meso to a macro level) which are necessary for either of them to operate (begin, continue, become anchored and integrate, change as de facto realities change, cease, etc.) or not to, and whether their underpinnings are theory-driven, empirically based, individual and/or systemic stake holder- bound, based upon “principles of faith, doctrinaire positions, “personal truths,” historical observation, precedents and traditions that accumulate over time, conventional wisdom, perceptual and judgmental constraints, “transient public opinion.” or what. This is necessary to consider and to clarify if these term are not to remain as yet additional shibboleth in a field of many stereotypes, tradition-driven activities, “principles of faith” and stakeholder objectives. Editor's note.