Ethnic/cultural identity salience and conflict styles in four US ethnic groups

This study examined the influence of ethnic background, ethnic identity, and cultural identity on conflict styles among African Americans, Asian Americans, European Americans, and Latino(a) Americans. Panethnic factor analysis yielded four dimensions of ethnic identity: ethnic belonging, fringe, intergroup interaction, and assimilation. A second-order factor analysis yielded two clear identity dimensions: ethnic identity salience and cultural identity salience. In addition, panethnic factor analysis yielded seven conflict management styles: integrating, compromising, dominating, avoiding, neglecting, emotional expression, and third party. Some of the major findings of the study are: (1) African Americans have a stronger ethnic identity and a weaker cultural identity than the other ethnic groups; (2) European Americans have a weaker ethnic identity than the other groups. (3) Latino(a) Americans and Asian Americans use avoiding and third party conflict styles more than African Americans, and, Asian Americans use avoiding conflict style more than European Americans; (4) Individuals with a strong cultural identity (i.e., identifying with the larger US culture) use integrating, compromising, and emotionally expressive conflict styles more than individuals with a weak cultural identity; (5) Individuals with a strong ethnic identity (i.e., identifying with their ethnic memberships) use integrating conflict style more than individuals with a weak ethnic identity; (6) bicultural, assimilated, and traditional-oriented groups use integrating and compromising conflict styles more than the marginal group, and the marginal group uses third party help more than the other three groups. (C) 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.