Ethnic Socialization in Current and Prospective Parents

Abstract

Few studies have examined whether the manner in which one has been parented impacts one’s subsequent parenting style regarding ethnic socialization. We examined this question in current and prospective parents. First, we found that receiving greater familial ethnic socialization is significantly correlated with stronger subsequent parental ethnic socialization (PES) for both current and prospective parents. Second, we found that PES did not significantly differ between current and prospective parents. Third, given the limited research examining the ethnic socialization experiences of those who are White, we examined these questions specifically for our White participants. Our findings persisted when we examined all ethnicities together and when we examined White participants alone.

Keywords

ethnic identity family parenting socialization

The United States is ethnically and racially diverse, and its population is estimated to be 18.3% Latino,¹ 13.4% Black, 6.1% Asian, 1.3% American Indian/Alaska Native, 2.7% multiracial, and 58.2% White (U.S. Census Bureau, 2019). As a result, it has become even more important for educators and parents to be aware of and understand the process that allows children to navigate racial, ethnic, and cultural diversity. Cultural socialization regarding race and ethnicity represents one of the most important processes involved in ethnic identity (EI) development (Hughes et al., 2006; Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). The current study aimed to determine if individuals’ previous ethnic socialization experiences (familial ethnic socialization [FES]) influence their subsequent parenting in this domain (parental ethnic socialization [PES]). We also examined whether current parents differed from prospective parents with regard to PES. We examined these relations for participants of all ethnicities. In addition, we examined these relations specifically for White participants due to the limited EI socialization research that exists for this population (Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020).

Ethnic socialization is an important component of childhood development. For ethnic minority families, communicating with their children about race and ethnicity is a central component of parenting (Hughes et al., 2006). Studies in the 1980s focused on Black families who described parental concerns about racial barriers and negative stereotypes their children will encounter while also emphasizing racial pride (Hughes et al., 2006). In the 1990s, studies on racial and ethnic socialization expanded to multiple ethnic minority groups (Hughes et al., 2006). The literature review by Hughes et al. (2006) identified four themes that defined much of the research in this domain for the subsequent decade (Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). These four themes were cultural socialization (e.g., transmitting cultural values and history), preparing youth for bias and discrimination, promoting mistrust of other ethnic and racial groups, and emphasizing equality among ethnic groups.

Previous research has heavily focused on ethnic socialization in childhood and adolescence and the importance of that developmental period. However, little research has examined whether socialization in childhood produces effects that extend into adulthood (Juang & Syed, 2010). The current study expands upon previous ethnic socialization research by focusing on the impact FES has on individuals as they become adults and potentially parents. Throughout this study we use four main concepts: EI, FES, PES, and parental status.

EI refers to one’s identity or sense of self as a member of an ethnic group (Phinney, 1990, 2003). An individual’s perception of belonging is an important aspect of EI regardless of accompanied engagement in cultural activities (Phinney, 2003). EI reflects an important part of an individual’s self-concept and can be particularly relevant during adolescence (Phinney, 1992). Apart from having knowledge and understanding of one’s group affiliation, a secure EI is formed from experiences developed over time (Phinney & Ong, 2007).

FES refers to the degree to which family members expose, discuss, and possibly directly teach their children about their ethnic background (Umaña-Taylor & Yazedjian, 2006). FES encompasses the role family has in preparing their children for living in a culturally diverse society (Phinney & Nakayama, 1991). In this study, we conceptualize FES as the ethnic socialization received by our participants in their youth. A review by Umaña-Taylor and Hill (2020) indicates that there is a robust and positive association between cultural socialization and indicators of positive youth development such self-confidence and a cohesive sense of identity. Children gain information about their EI from other sources in their environment, such as the media, their peers, and at school; however, research indicates that family has the central role in this process (Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020; Umaña-Taylor & Yazedjian, 2006).

PES refers specifically to parental influence in ethnic socialization and has been conceptualized as a subset of FES (Phinney & Chavira, 1995). In this study, we define PES as the parental intention (or process) of incorporating ethnic socialization into the parenting process. PES specifically focuses on the parents and not the children. Thus, in this study, we conceptualize PES as ethnic socialization espoused by our participants in a parenting role.

In terms of parental status, we use the concepts of “current parent” and “prospective parent.” The term current parent refers to individuals who currently identify as being the primary caregiver for another person. An individual can consider themselves a current parent in various roles, such as biological mother/father, adoptive mother/father, step-mother/father, grandmother, grandfather, aunt, uncle, sister, brother, cousin, and other similar roles. “Prospective parent” refers to individuals who are not currently and have not previously been the primary caregiver for another person. These are individuals who are considering how they would act as a parent for the purpose of this study, regardless of whether they actually plan to have children.

FES

Research indicates that involvement of family in the development of EI is a crucial factor for FES (Umaña-Taylor & Fine, 2004; Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). Socialization can be covert, meaning family does not intentionally try to teach their children about their ethnicity, but rather do so inadvertently with their choices of decor, food, or activities. Socialization can also be overt, meaning that family purposefully and directly teaches their children about their ethnicity, what it means to them, and how it impacts their life (Umaña-Taylor & Yazedjian, 2006). Phinney and Nakayama (1991) found differences among ethnic groups in terms of the socialization practices they used: Latino parents described having cultural traditions practiced in the home, Asian parents were more likely to talk about culture with their adolescents, and Black and Latino parents were more likely to identify negative discrimination as more prevalent than Asian parents. Furthermore, for ethnic minority groups, FES is a way of creating a protective barrier against prejudice and discrimination (Brown et al., 2007). Family members tend to be aware of the implications their culture has had on their life and want to help their child understand it as well (Phinney & Nakayama, 1991).

Umaña-Taylor and Fine (2004) noted that many researchers address the importance of EI during adolescence but few have studied the developmental aspects past childhood. The literature at this point amply explains the construct of EI and how FES guides the ethnic development for children and adolescents. However, it is important for research to also examine the later developmental stages of individuals as they age beyond adolescence.

PES

In this study, we were also interested in examining participants’ subsequent parenting practices in the realm of EI. The influence of parents on children’s EI development is significant. Strong EI has been linked to positive outcomes such as higher self-esteem, life satisfaction, happiness, and lower loneliness and depression (Juang & Syed, 2010). Strong EI is also related to academic achievement and ability to cope with discrimination and racism (Umaña-Taylor et al., 2006). Umaña-Taylor and Hill (2020) found that parents have a significant role in reducing the negative effects of ethnic-racial inequities by helping children develop a strong sense of identity. When parents have positive thoughts about their ethnic and racial identities, they communicate more about their culture, and youth are subsequently more likely to internalize these cultural beliefs (Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). For example, mothers who have positive perceptions about their ethnic and racial identity are more likely to engage in socialization strategies that prepare their children for ethnic- and racial-based threats that they may experience (Kulish et al., 2019). Parental involvement in their ethnic minority community also directly relate to an adolescent’s sense of EI (Rosenthal & Feldman, 1992).

Much of the existing research has focused on the development of EI and the influence that family has on children’s EI. Research examining the impact of parents on EI is more limited. In this study, we were particularly interested in examining how FES impacts subsequent PES.

Parental Status

We were also interested in examining participant parental status as current or prospective parents to determine whether thoughts about parenting differ from the reality of being a parent. Preparation for parenthood through reading, attending classes, or caring for infants of others have helped prospective parents become more prepared and confident; however, no amount of preparation or rehearsal can simulate the real experience (Miller & Sollie, 1980). Even when individuals believe they are prepared for parenting, their thoughts and level of confidence change once they actually became parents (Miller & Sollie, 1980). Pancer et al. (2000) found that both men and women demonstrate significant increases in the complexity of their thinking surrounding parenthood after becoming a parent.

Previous research has not compared prospective parents’ and current parents’ thoughts about incorporating ethnicity into their children’s lives. Given the results of the limited existing research, it seems that thoughts about PES may also change as a result of having children.

Method

Participants

Participants were individuals at least 18 years old who lived in the United States for a minimum of 2 years. Individuals who did not complete at least 80% of the questions were excluded from the analyses. The final sample size (N = 378) consisted of participants between the ages of 18 and 50 years (M = 25.49, SD = 8.49). In terms of ethnicity, 1.3% of our participants identified as “Black, African, or African American,” 2.9% “Hispanic, Latino/a, Chicano/a, or Spanish Origin,” 1.1% “Native American, American Indian, or Alaska Native,” 8.2% “Asian or Asian American,” .3% “Middle Eastern or Middle Eastern American,” 11.9% “Biracial or Multiracial,” 2.4% identified as “Other,” and 71.9% “White or European American.” Regarding gender, 60.3% of participants identified as female, 33.6% identified as male, 5.0% identified as nonbinary, and 1.1% identified as “Other.” With regard to parental status, 86.5% (n = 327) of participants identified as a prospective parent and 13.5% (n = 51) identified as a current parent. Approximately 6.7% of the participants reported their household income to be less than $10,000, 8.1% reported $10,001–$20,000, 21.4% reported $20,001–$50,000, 19.4% reported $50,001–$75,000, 12.8% reported $75,001–$100,000, 27.2% reported 100,001 or more, and 4.3% preferred not to respond.

Measures

A 42-item survey was created that consisted of demographic questions and two ethnic socialization measures.

FES

The FES was designed to assess the level of family ethnic socialization that individuals received in their youth (Umaña-Taylor & Fine, 2004; Umaña-Taylor et al., 2009). Each item on this 12-item measure is scored using a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very often). Item scores are then averaged to produce an overall score, with higher scores indicating a higher level of FES exposure. Our sample scored slightly below the scale’s midpoint on the FES (M = 2.71, SD = .96). Participants were informed that the phrase “my family” refers to the primary caregivers who raised them. In this context, primary caregiver was defined as the person(s) who had a main parenting role. The questions were modified from present tense in the original form to past tense. An “(s)” was added at the end of each statement to capture biracial and multiracial individuals. The FES has demonstrated reliability and validity and has been used with ethnically diverse individuals (coefficient α ranged from .81 to .86; Umaña-Taylor et al., 2006). In terms of reliability, the FES had a Cronbach’s α of .91 in our study, suggesting strong reliability.

PES

We created a modified version of the FES (Umaña-Taylor & Fine, 2004; Umaña-Taylor et al., 2009) called the Parental Ethnic Socialization Measure (PES) to assess participants’ desire to socialize their children or future children with ethnic and cultural behaviors. The PES assesses how willing individuals would be to ethnically socialize their children. We modified the FES items to be future tense forms of each statement and changed the words “my family” to “as a parent.” In addition, “(s)” was added at the end of each statement to capture biracial and multiracial individuals. Items on the PES are scored using a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very often). Item scores are then averaged to produce an overall score, with higher scores illustrating greater intent to ethnically socialize one’s children. The overall sample scored slightly below the scale’s midpoint on the PES (M = 2.88, SD = 1.02). PES had a Cronbach’s α of .94 in our study, indicating strong reliability.

Procedure

Approval for this study was obtained from our university institutional review board. Participants were recruited online using Reddit, an online forum, and completed an online survey without any benefit or reward. Interested participants were guided to a description of our study where they read a short introduction and followed a link to the online survey. Informed consent was gathered at the beginning of the survey and participants were informed that submission of their data was voluntary and anonymous. Each participant completed both the FES (recalling how they were ethnically socialized by their family) and then the PES (indicating how they do/would parent).

Results

We found that FES had a significant, positive relation to PES for current parents, B = .72, p < .001, R ² = .55. This indicates that 55% of the variance of PES is accounted for by FES. The results indicate that as a current parent’s FES increases, the strength of their PES also increases. We found the same pattern when we examined the perspective of White participants. FES had a significant, positive relation to PES for current White parents, B = .63, p < .001, R ² = .41. The effect sizes for these results were large (Cohen, 1992).

In addition, FES had a significant, positive relation to PES for prospective parents, B = .63, p < .001, R ² = .34. This indicates that 34% of the variance of PES is accounted for by FES. The results indicate that as a prospective parent’s FES increases, the strength of their PES also increases. One again, we found the same pattern when we examined White participants alone. FES had a significant, positive relation to PES for prospective White parents, B = .71, p < .001, R ² = .41. The effect sizes for these results were large (Cohen, 1992).

We compared PES scores for prospective parents (M = 2.71, SD = .95) and current parents (M = 2.67, SD = 1.01) using independent t-tests. We found no significant difference in scores on the PES for current parents compared to prospective parents, t(376) = −.09, ns. Similarly, we found no significant difference, t(269) = −.54, ns, between prospective (M = 2.50, SD = .87) and current White parents (M = 2.42, SD = .87).

Discussion

Our study yielded four main findings. First, we found that higher FES was associated with higher PES among current parents. In other words, current parents who received greater FES were more likely to provide a stronger PES experience for their children. Second, we found that higher FES was associated with higher PES among prospective parents. This suggests that prospective parents who received greater FES were more likely to believe that they would provide a stronger PES experience for their children. Third, PES scores did not differ between current and prospective parents. This was somewhat surprising, given previous research that indicates that thoughts about parenthood change and become more complex once people become parents (Pancer et al., 2000). Our findings could be an artifact of our methodology (e.g., cross-sectional vs. longitudinal) or domain of research (e.g., ethnic socialization). However, it may also not be surprising, given the strength of the relation between FES and PES. Fourth, all three of our findings were replicated when we solely focused on the perspective of our White participants.

Our study has a number of limitations. Our sample included a higher representation of prospective parents than current parents. This may be due to our use of Reddit as a sampling method and the potential that current parents have less time or interest in completing online surveys compared to prospective parents. Similarly, using an online forum for participation increases the likelihood of including individuals who had an intention to seek out and complete surveys. It was important to have a large sample of White participants, given the limited research in this domain that has examined the unique perspective of White participants (Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). However, a smaller representation from other ethnic and racial groups makes it difficult to generalize our findings to other specific groups.

Despite the limitations, our study has a number of important implications. First, our findings highlight the impact of FES received on subsequent PES implemented. Thus, when people receive messages that strengthen their EI in formative years, they are more likely to foster stronger EI among their own children. This is important, given the many positive outcomes (e.g., self-confidence, academic performance) associated with strong EI (Brown et al, 2007; Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020).

The strong relation between FES and PES suggests that ethnic socialization serves to transmit cultural language, traditions, values, and history from one generation to the next. Parents who have positive thoughts about their ethnic and racial identities communicate more about their culture and foster more subsequent cultural beliefs in their children (Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). Involvement in their ethnic minority community on the part of parents also fosters positive adolescent EI (Rosenthal & Feldman, 1992). This is important for families who may be concerned about the impact of acculturation on their children. Conscious decisions to foster cultural socialization may mitigate fears about the impact of acculturation and loss of culture.

A strong relation between FES and PES increases the likelihood that youth receive ethnic socialization that helps prepare them to navigate and cope with experiences of bias and discrimination. However, this may not be true for everyone. The largest proportion of youth under age 18 in the United States are multiracial (Atkin & Yoo, 2019). A strong relation between FES on subsequent PES may negatively impact the ethnic socialization experiences of biracial and multiracial people by parents who do not share the same ethnic or racial identity. For example, existing research indicates that White parents were unprepared for the racism that they experienced from their families and communities and implemented a color-blind perspective when ethnically socializing their children (Rauktis et al., 2016). This type of approach inadequately prepared their children for the bias and discrimination that they experienced. Rauktis et al. (2016) suggest that is important for parents in such situations to receive early support and intervention.

Fostering strong EI also has the potential to foster divisions between different ethnic and racial groups. One of the themes identified by the Hughes et al. (2006) review was that ethnic socialization may promote mistrust of other ethnic and racial groups. Ethnic and racial mistrust and tension is a salient concern in the current U.S. zeitgeist. However, strong EI does not have to be insular. Strong EI may simultaneously foster ethnic and racial pride, allow for the recognition of commonalities, and celebrate the beauty of the differences that exist. The manner in which people are ethnically socialized is likely to have a strong impact on the manner in which they subsequently ethnically socialize their children—irrespective of parental status and ethnicity. A better understanding of ethnic socialization, and its long-term impact, will allow us to better support the changing demographics of our country.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Jane M. Tram

Note

References

Atkin

A. L.

Yoo

H. C.

(2019). Familial racial-ethnic socialization of multiracial American youth: A systematic review of the literature with MultiCrit. Developmental Review, 53, 100869.

Brown

T. N.

Tanner-Smith

E. E.

Lesane-Brown

C. L.

Ezell

M. E.

(2007). Child, parent, and situational correlates of familial ethnic/race socialization. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69(1), 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2006.00340.x

Cohen

(1992). A Power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155

Hughes

Rodriguez

Smith

E. P.

Johnson

D. J.

Stevenson

H. C.

Spicer

(2006). Parents’ ethnic-racial socialization practices: A review of research and directions for future study. Developmental Psychology, 42(5), 747. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.42.5.747

Juang

Syed

(2010). Family cultural socialization practices and ethnic identity in college-going emerging adults. Journal of Adolescence, 33(3), 347–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2009.11.008

Kulish

A. L.

Cavanaugh

A. M.

Stein

G. L.

Kiang

Gonzalez

L. M.

Supple

Mejia

(2019). Ethnic–racial socialization in Latino families: The influence of mothers’ socialization practices on adolescent private regard, familism, and perceived ethnic–racial discrimination. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 25(2), 199–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000222

Miller

B. C.

Sollie

D. L.

(1980). Normal stresses during the transition to parenthood. Family Relations, 29(4), 459. https://doi.org/10.2307/584459

Pancer

S. M.

Pratt

Hunsberger

Gallant

(2000). Thinking ahead: Complexity of expectations and the transition to parenthood. Journal of Personality, 68(2), 253–279. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.00097

Phinney

J. S.

(1990). Ethnic identity in adolescents and adults: Review of research. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 499–514. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.499

10.

Phinney

J. S.

(1992). The MEIM: A new scale for use with adolescents and adults from diverse groups. Journal of Adolescent Research, 7, 156–176.

11.

Phinney

J. S.

(2003). Ethnic identity and acculturation. Acculturation: Advances in Theory, Measurement, and Applied Research, 63-81. https://doi.org/10.1037/10472-006

12.

Phinney

J. S.

Chavira

(1995). Parental ethnic socialization and adolescent coping with problems related to ethnicity. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 5(1), 31–53. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327795jra0501_2

13.

Phinney

J. S.

Nakayama

(1991). Parental influences on ethnic identity formation in adolescents. Society for Research in Child Development. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED341494)

14.

Phinney

Ong

(2007). Conceptualization and measurement of ethnic identity: Current status and future directions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54, 271–281. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.54.3.271

15.

Rauktis

M. E.

Fusco

R. A.

Goodkind

Bradley-King

(2016). Motherhood in liminal spaces: White mothers’ parenting black/white children. Affilia, 31(4), 434–449. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886109916630581

16.

Rosenthal

D. A.

Feldman

S. S.

(1992). The Relationship between parenting behaviour and ethnic identity in Chinese-American and Chinese-Australian adolescents. International Journal of Psychology, 27(1), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207599208246863

17.

Umaña-Taylor

A. J.

Alfaro

E. C.

Bámaca

M. Y.

Guimond

A. B.

(2009). The Central role of familial ethnic socialization in Latino adolescents’ cultural orientation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71(1), 46–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00579.x

18.

Umaña-Taylor

A. J.

Bhanot

Shin

(2006). Ethnic identity formation during adolescence: The critical role of families. Journal of Family Issues, 27(3), 390–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513x05282960

19.

Umaña-Taylor

A. J.

Fine

M. A.

(2004). Examining ethnic identity among Mexican-origin adolescents living in the United States. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 26(1), 36–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739986303262143

20.

Umaña-Taylor

A. J.

Hill

N. E.

(2020). Ethnic–racial socialization in the family: A decade’s advance on precursors and outcomes. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(1), 244–271.

21.

Umaña-Taylor

A. J.

Yazedjian

(2006). Generational differences and similarities among Puerto Rican and Mexican mothers’ experiences with familial ethnic socialization. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 23(3), 445–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407506064214

22.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2019). Quick facts United States. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045219