Integrating two cultures successfully: Factors influencing acculturation attitude of international postgraduate students in Malaysia

Abstract

Based on Berry’s seminal work on the acculturation process, this study examines the pattern of acculturation attitude among international postgraduate students in Malaysia, an emerging education hub in Asia. It also investigates the influence of several demographic factors (gender, geographical region, marital status, and education level) and predictors (English language proficiency, media usage, intention to stay in the host country after graduation, and perceived positive stereotype image) on international postgraduate students’ four acculturation attitudes integration, separation, assimilation, and marginalization. Our survey of a sample of 1186 international postgraduate students reveals that the most prevalent acculturation attitude chosen by the international postgraduate students is integration. The identified predictors are shown to positively influence integration attitude while the demographic factors have no significant effect on international postgraduate students’ acculturation attitude in Malaysia. Study findings provide valuable insights for education policymakers and university administrators to manage and address the needs of international students via effective acculturation programs.

Keywords

Acculturation attitude adaptation education internationalization higher education mobility international students Malaysia

Introduction

With the increase of international mobility in higher education, a considerable number of studies have emerged to portray ‘acculturation’, the change process that occurs in individuals as a result of two or more cultures coming into contact with each other (Berry, 2005). Residing in a country outside the home country for the purpose of pursuing education is one of the main sources of acculturative stress for international students, since they have to cope with two or more cultures at the same time (Berry, 2006). Handling the discrepancy between one’s ethnic cultural norms/values and those of the host country is a potential cause of frustration and anxiety for international students (Sumer, 2009). If the challenges that international students experience in the host country are not addressed in time, it may lead to negative consequences for individuals and host society (Ang and Liamputtong, 2007).

Therefore, several studies have been carried out in various contexts in order to better understand individuals’ acculturation process in a new environment, seeking to minimize their acculturative stress, including studies in the United States (Gebhard, 2012; Yeh and Inose, 2003), Australia (Hisham Motkal, 2013; Leung, 2001), New Zealand (Leong, 2007; Masgoret, 2006), and the United Kingdom (Mehdizadeh and Scott, 2005; Swami, 2009), European countries including France, the Netherlands and Sweden (Berry and Sabatier, 2010; Vedder, 2005), China (Dong, 2009; Huang and Chang, 2011), Hong Kong (Tonsing, 2013; Yau et al., 2012), Japan (Tanaka et al., 1995), and Korea (Kwon, 2013), to name but a few. However, the issue of the acculturation process has not been empirically examined in the context of Malaysia, an emerging education hub, in order to shed some light on the acculturation attitude of international students and its antecedents (Yusliza and Shankar, 2010).

Background to the study

As a multicultural country, mainly comprising people from three ethnicities (Malay, Chinese, and Indian), Malaysia has emerged to be an education hub in the region (Verbik and Lasanowski, 2007) through transforming its higher education into a center of excellence and attracting growing numbers of international students (Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia, 2007). The decision made by the Malaysian Ministry of Education regarding internationalization and transformation of higher education has resulted in the arrival of a large number of international students to Malaysia. The population of international students enrolled in Malaysian educational institutions which was 80,750 in 2009, increased by 38% in just 2 years, reaching 111,939 students in 2011 (Cheng et al., 2013). In 2013, the number of international students grew even further to 117,833 (Bernama, 2014), which indicates the growth of education internationalization in Malaysia. Among international students enrolled in Malaysian universities, a large number come from Pakistan, India, China, Indonesia, Thailand, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Oman, Nigeria, Sudan, Libya, and Egypt which represent the three main geographical regions of Asia, Middle East, and Africa.

Although residing in a foreign country with the aim of pursuing higher education increases international students’ experience of cross-cultural adaptation (Barker, 2015), it can also result in frustration and negative consequences if international students find it difficult to acculturate in a new environment. The remedy for this problem involves understanding international students’ acculturation process and how they develop adaptive behavior in the host country (Earley and Ang, 2003; Molinsky, 2007).

Apart from the limited number of studies in the context of Malaysia on international students’ acculturation attitude, previous studies in different contexts have mainly investigated the factors associated with psychological and sociocultural adaptations (Brisset et al., 2010; Li and Gasser, 2005), the impact of social support (Sumer et al., 2008), self-efficacy (Li and Gasser, 2005), demographic features and domains of language use (Ting and Ling, 2013), adjustment behavior of international students (Gebhard, 2012), perceived cultural distance and discrimination (Swami, 2009), and the effect of ethnic or national language proficiency (Jiang et al., 2009). As Berry (1997) stated, the acculturation process begins with a number of personal demographic and social nature characteristics, signifying the pivotal role of demographic characteristics of individuals during the acculturation process. Thus, it echoes the importance of demographic characteristics and cultural and psychological factors which need to be examined in association with international students’ acculturation attitude in the context of Malaysia. This study can provide valuable information for academicians, education policymakers, and university administrators in Malaysia and other countries that are moving toward education internationalization. This is largely because international students’ experience of the acculturation process is related to their behavior, attitudes, and identity which can result in distinct outcomes (Williams and Berry, 1991). Encountering a new culture increases acculturative stress which can influence individuals’ choice of acculturation strategies (Berry, 1999). According to Horenczyk (1996), cultural differences affect individuals’ choice of acculturation strategies since many cultural differences minimize the chance of being well accepted in the host country. Hence, individuals’ acculturation attitude, as a factor that exacerbates acculturative stress, can influence adaptation (Hernandez, 2009). Additionally, individuals’ decisions in choosing acculturation modes/attitudes indicate their level of adaptation (DeVos, 1980).

Purpose of the study

As noted above, in the context of Malaysia there is a lack of prior studies investigating international students’ acculturation and cross-cultural adaptation process, despite being an emerging education hub. A decision made by the Malaysian Ministry of Education has increased the number of international students in this country. However, moving toward education internationalization should not only be one-dimensional. Other aspects need to be considered in transforming higher education of a country into a hub of excellence. As international students come from various cultural, social, and academic backgrounds, it is crucial to ensure that they can acculturate well and adapt to the host country. Otherwise, frustration and challenges they experience in the host country might result in negative consequences. Additionally, international students’ experience of the acculturation process is very much related to their behavior, attitudes, and identity. Therefore, to ensure that they can acculturate well in the host country, it is essential to profile their choice of acculturation attitude based on a number of demographic characteristics.

Moreover, through understanding the most prevalent acculturation attitude adopted by international students in Malaysia, we may find out how willing international students are to acculturate and adapt to the new environment. In addition, by examining the relationships between several predictors such as English language proficiency, intention to stay in the host country after graduation, media usage, and perceived stereotype image, we can offer fresh insights to education authorities in Malaysia and other countries that are moving toward education internationalization through attracting more international students.

To fill the existing gap in the literature, this research sought first to identify the most prevalent acculturation attitude among international students in Malaysia; second, to profile international postgraduate students’ choice of acculturation attitude with regard to their demographic characteristics (gender, geographical region, marital status, education level, and religion); and third, to investigate the influence of several predictors (English language proficiency, intention to stay in Malaysia after graduation, media usage, and perceived stereotype image) on international postgraduate students’ acculturation attitude. This study therefore aims to address the following three research questions:

What is the most prevalent acculturation attitude among international postgraduate students in Malaysia?

To what extent do international postgraduate students’ demographic characteristics (i.e. gender, geographical region, marital status, education level, and religion) influence their choice of acculturation attitude?

To what extent do predictors such as English language proficiency, intention to stay in Malaysia after graduation, media usage, and perceived stereotype image influence international postgraduate students’ acculturation attitude?

The insights provided through the findings of this study can contribute to a better understanding of international students’ acculturation process, adjusting policies to accommodate international students’ needs, preventing negative consequences for individuals and the host society, and achieving prosperity. Study implications are also discussed which can offer insights to higher education administrators in countries emerging as education hubs and competing in the global education sector.

Acculturation attitude

Acculturation, as Berry (2005) notes, refers to the change process that occurs to individuals as a result of two or more cultures coming into contact with each other. This definition has been adopted in this study to refer to international students’ likes and dislikes about a host country which can determine their acculturation strategy and outcomes (Arends-Tóth and Van de Vijver, 2006). Two well-known questions raised by Van Oudenhoven and Hofstra (2006) – ‘Is it of value to maintain my cultural heritage?’ and ‘Is it of value to maintain relations with other groups?’ – cause conflict for individuals in making a decision (p. 641). The yes or no response to the two questions determines individuals’ acculturation attitude (Berry et al., 1999; Bochner, 1982).

Evidence from prior research shows that uni-dimensional and more recently bi-dimensional models have been examined in studying individuals’ acculturation process (Castro, 2003). A uni-dimensional model which was applied in earlier studies considers acculturation as a gradual process of assimilation into the host-culture, the process of adopting the cultural aspects of the host-culture, and losing some of the aspects of home-culture (Gordon, 1964). A bi-dimensional model, however, emphasizes both keeping one’s original culture and adopting the host mainstream culture (LaFromboise et al., 1993; Sánchez and Fernández, 1993) and has therefore been the basis for the majority of acculturation studies.

Based on a bi-dimensional model, Berry (1990, 1997) proposed four acculturation strategies, namely, integration, assimilation, separation, and marginalization which can be derived from yes or no answers to the above-mentioned questions. Integration refers to keeping one’s ethnic country’s cultural values and norms and adapting to the host country’s cultural values and norms, assimilation refers to only adapting to the host country’s mainstream cultural values and norms, separation refers to only keeping one’s ethnic country’s cultural values and norms, and marginalization refers to neither keeping the ethnic country’s cultural values and norms nor adapting to the host country’s cultural values and norms (Berry, 1997). Among the four acculturation strategies or attitudes in Berry’s model, integration is usually the most successful whereas marginalization is regarded as a failure in the acculturation process. Assimilation and separation are at the intermediate level and fall between the two poles (Berry, 1990, 1997).

It is evident from Berry’s model that acculturation does not necessarily require individuals to either assimilate or marginalize; however, it signifies that acculturation proceeds in diverse ways (Phinney et al., 2001). The model proposed by Berry emphasizes the co-existence of various cultures in a society, multiculturalism (Phinney, 1990), which can ground a comprehensive understanding of the acculturation process (Berry, 1997; LaFromboise et al., 1993). Therefore, a number of previous studies in different contexts employed Berry’s acculturation model to study individuals’ acculturation process and its relationship with various influential factors.

To portray the pattern of international postgraduate students’ acculturation attitude with regard to their demographic characteristics, and to investigate the influence of some antecedents on international postgraduate students’ most prevalent acculturation attitude, this study adapted Berry’s acculturation model comprising four acculturation attitudes: (a) integration, (b) assimilation, (c) separation, and (d) marginalization. There are two main reasons why Berry’s model was appropriate for this study. First, in developing the acculturation model, Berry divides the acculturating groups based on three main factors; voluntariness, mobility, and permanence. Among the different acculturating groups living in plural societies there are immigrants, refugees, indigenous people, national minorities, and sojourners such as international students and guest workers (Berry, 1997). While various factors may influence the process of acculturation for these different groups, the process of adaptation seems to be common among all of them (Berry and Sam, 1997). Second, in Berry’s acculturation model, the four strategies – especially integration (keeping one’s ethnic cultural values and adapting to the host country’s mainstream culture) – can only be pursued by non-dominant groups in multicultural societies (Berry, 1997), which is the case for international students in Malaysia. Therefore, considering multicultural nature of the Malaysian society and the increasing number of international students in this country as an acculturating group, Berry’s four-faceted acculturation strategies appear to be suitable for meeting the study objectives.

Methodology

Participants

International students enrolled in a postgraduate level program (Masters or PhD) at the time of the study were invited to complete a questionnaire. The sampling frame included international students from the six top public universities in Malaysia. These universities were selected as they are the most popular choices for international students especially at the postgraduate level in Malaysia, according to the 2014 Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) Worldwide University Rankings. These universities have also been ranked as the top research universities in Malaysia by the Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education and have attracted a large number of international students especially at the postgraduate level (Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia, 2006).

Sampling procedures

Data for this study were collected using stratified random sampling. The complete list of international postgraduate students in the six public universities in Malaysia was obtained upon the submission to each university of the consent letter provided by the Malaysian Ministry of Education. A random generated numbering system in Microsoft Office Excel 2007 was applied to randomly select student samples from each university. The link to an online questionnaire was sent to the study sample, comprising 3189 international postgraduate students across the six universities.

To adhere to ethical considerations, the purpose of the study was clearly explained in the cover page of the questionnaire. Participants were also informed that the questionnaire would remain anonymous and results would be treated confidentially. The questionnaire was written in English, as the medium of instruction for international students in the Malaysian universities is English, and international students need to demonstrate satisfactory English language proficiency in order to be accepted by Malaysian universities. A total of 1298 responses were received, yielding a response rate of 41%, although only 1186 questionnaires were complete and usable. Table 1 illustrates the demographic profile of the respondents.

Table 1.

Demographic profile of the respondents.

Demographic information (N = 1186)	Categories	n (%)
Gender	Male	802 (67.6)
	Female	384 (32.4)
Age (years)	Below 25	91 (7.7)
	25–30	443 (37.4)
	31–35	315 (26.6)
	36–40	162 (13.7)
	41–45	97 (8.2)
	46–50	49 (4.1)
	51 and above	29 (2.4)
Marital status	Married	506 (42.7)
	Single	680 (57.3)
Education level	Masters	501 (42.2)
	PhD	685 (57.8)
Geographical region	Middle Eastern	563 (47.5)
	Asian	366 (30.9)
	African	257 (21.7)

Measures

The following scales were adapted from the literature to measure the variables considered in the study. Items in the scales were modified to suit the context of the study and the scales validity and reliability were ensured through a pilot study implemented prior to administering the questionnaire to the study samples.

Acculturation attitude

The acculturation attitude of international postgraduate students in this study was measured using a bi-dimensional model, ‘Adopt and Keep’ by Swaidan et al. (2006). This scale is regarded as one which clearly measures individuals’ acculturation attitude (Celenk et al., 2014) and it is developed based on a bi-dimensional framework and Berry’s conceptualization of the four types of acculturation attitude. The scale consisted of two sub-scales: ‘adopt’ (adjusting to the host country’s culture) and ‘keep’ (attaching to one’s ethnic country’s culture), including five items each. The ‘adopt’ sub-scale measured international postgraduate students’ tendency to adjust to the host country’s mainstream cultural values and norms, while the ‘keep’ sub-scale measured their tendency to attach to their own ethnic country’s cultural values and norms. A 6-point Likert-type scale ranging from ‘1’ (strongly disagree) to ‘6’ (strongly agree) was used for evaluating all items. A sample item for the ‘adopt’ sub-scale is ‘I should behave in accordance with Malaysian culture’ and a sample item for the ‘keep’ sub-scale is ‘I should mix with people from my country’. The two dimensions of the scale were later used as the basis to categorize respondents’ acculturation attitude into four strategies which are in line with Berry’s conceptualization (Berry, 1997).

English language proficiency

English language proficiency was measured using a self-assessment scale developed by Kwak (1991) known as the ‘English Language Proficiency Scale’. The scale included four items measured in a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from ‘not at all’ (coded as 1) to ‘very well’ (coded as 5), which assessed students’ abilities in understanding, reading, writing, and communicating with host nationals in the English language. The sample item for this scale is ‘I am able to understand host people when they speak with me in English’.

Media usage

Media usage was assessed using the ‘Bicultural Involvement and Adjustment Scale’ developed by Szapocznik et al. (1980), which examined students’ usage of any sort of media device to learn about Malaysian cultural norms and values. All the four items were evaluated in a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from ‘never’ (coded as 1) to ‘always’ (coded as 5). A sample item for the media usage scale is ‘I use media to understand the Malaysian value system’.

Intention to stay in Malaysia after graduation

Intention to stay in Malaysia after graduation was measured using the ‘Intention Scale’ of Tartakovsky (2012) which assessed students’ intention to stay in the host country after graduation. The scale included four items which measured students’ willingness to stay in the host country upon completion of their studies. Items were modified to suit the context of this study and were evaluated using a 6-point Likert-type scale ranging from ‘1’ (strongly disagree) to ‘6’ (strongly agree). A sample item for this scale is ‘I desire to live in Malaysia after graduation’.

Perceived stereotype image

The perceived stereotype image of international postgraduate students was assessed using Carpenter’s (1995) ‘Stereotype Image Scale’. All the five items of the scale were assessed in a 6-point Likert-type scale ranging from ‘1’ (strongly disagree) to ‘6’ (strongly agree). The items were modified and contextualized to measure international postgraduate students’ perceptions about their image in Malaysia: particularly, how positively international postgraduate students perceived their image and the students from their country in the context of Malaysia. A sample item here is ‘Malaysian people talk positively about the students from my country’.

Suitability of the measurement scales was verified through expert opinion. First, the construct validity of the scales was verified by five independent experts from the higher education sector in terms of item clarity and the relevance of the measurement scales for measuring what they were supposed to measure. Then, the instrument was pilot-tested using a sample of 30 international students to verify the reliability of the variables. Finally, after collecting the data for the main study, we performed routine analysis to evaluate the reliability of the constructs. Additionally, results of exploratory factor analysis with Varimax rotation (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin [KMO]: 0.848, significance [sig.]: 0.000) validated the factorial structure of the instrument, as all items loaded appropriately under their respective constructs with a loading greater than 0.5. Moreover, common methods bias – a major threat to the validity of the conclusions regarding relationships between variables – did not appear to be a pervasive problem in this study. We performed Harman’s single factor test (Podsakoff et al., 2003) to assess the presence of common method bias and our analysis revealed that the first factor accounted for only 34.8% of the total variance in the un-rotated component matrix. Table 2 presents Cronbach’s alpha, mean (M), and standard deviation (SD) measured for each construct across the three groups of Asian, Middle Eastern, and African students.

Table 2.

Cronbach’s alpha, M, and SD of the factors.

Variables	Cronbach’s alpha	Asian (N = 563)		Middle Eastern (N = 366)		African (N = 257)
Variables	Cronbach’s alpha	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD
English language proficiency	0.80	4.19	0.63	4.25	0.56	4.54	0.51
Media usage	0.92	2.72	0.98	2.68	0.99	2.73	1
Intention to stay in Malaysia after graduation	0.88	3.39	1.42	3.4	1.43	2.67	1.47
Adjustment attitude	0.86	4.48	0.9	4.33	0.96	4.52	0.98
Attachment attitude	0.85	4.72	0.84	4.5	0.83	4.77	0.93
Perceived stereotype image	0.94	4.08	1.13	3.98	1.27	3.53	1.3

M: mean; SD: standard deviation.

The relationships between items and their respective scales were analyzed through the corrected item to total correlation and by analyzing the impact of discarding individual items on Cronbach’s alpha values. All constructs had Cronbach’s alpha values higher than 0.80 (see Table 2) which were above the cut-off value of 0.70 (Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994). The reliability of the scales was therefore verified. The next section illustrates findings of this study followed by discussion of the results.

Findings

Preferred acculturation attitude among international postgraduate students in Malaysia

To identify the prevalent acculturation attitude of international students in Malaysia, we calculated each respondent’s mean score for adjustment and attachment approach, which could range from 1 to 5. The score for adjustment to the new culture and the score for attachment to the home culture were then used to categorize acculturation attitude into Berry’s fourfold acculturation classification. To this end, in line with Berry’s acculturation categorization, students were clustered into four groups of acculturation attitude based on their adjustment and attachment scores as follows: students with a low adjustment score (less than 3) and a low attachment score (less than 3) were labeled as the marginalization group, students with a low adjustment score (less than 3) and a high attachment score (more than 3) were labeled as the separation group, students with a high adjustment score (more than 3) and a low attachment score (less than 3) were labeled as the assimilation group, and students with a high adjustment score (more than 3) and a high attachment score (more than 3) were labeled as the integration group. Table 3 shows the classification of international students based on their acculturation attitude, indicating that the strongest acculturation attitude among international students in Malaysia is integration, with 79% of students upholding an integration attitude, followed by separation (12%), assimilation (7%), and marginalization (2%).

Table 3.

International students’ acculturation attitude.

	Acculturation attitude				Total
	Marginalization	Separation	Assimilation	Integration	Total
All respondents	26 (2%)	143 (12%)	81 (7%)	936 (79%)	1186

Demographic profiling of international students by acculturation attitude

To illustrate the differences between international students’ acculturation attitude with regard to several demographic characteristics, descriptive statistics were employed (Table 4). Results of the evaluation reveal that almost the same common pattern of acculturation attitude exists across different demographic groups investigated in this study, with integration as the strongest acculturation attitude, followed by separation, assimilation, and marginalization. The only exception occurs for students belonging to ‘Buddhism’ or ‘other’ groups, for which the marginalization attitude has a higher frequency than assimilation. Nonetheless, even for these two groups, the most prevalent acculturation attitudes are integration and separation, respectively.

Table 4.

Profile of international students in Malaysia according to their acculturation attitude.

	Acculturation attitude				Total
	Marginalization	Separation	Assimilation	Integration	Total
Gender
Male	14 (2%)	95 (12%)	55 (7%)	638 (80%)	802
Female	12 (3%)	48 (13%)	26 (7%)	298 (78%)	384
Geographical region
Asian	10 (2%)	61 (11%)	29 (5%)	463 (82%)	563
Middle Eastern	11 (3%)	53 (14%)	30 (8%)	272 (74%)	366
African	5 (2%)	29 (11%)	22 (9%)	201 (78%)	257
Marital status
Single	14 (3%)	58 (11%)	44 (9%)	390 (77%)	506
Married	12 (2%)	85 (13%)	37 (5%)	546 (80%)	680
Education level
Masters	12 (2%)	48 (10%)	33 (7%)	408 (81%)	501
PhD	14 (2%)	95 (14%)	48 (7%)	528 (77%)	685
Religion
Islam	20 (2%)	123 (12.1%)	69 (6.8%)	802 (79.1%)	1014
Christianity	1 (1.4%)	7 (9.7%)	5 (6.9%)	59 (81.9%)	72
Buddhism	1 (4.5%)	2 (9.1%)	0 (0%)	19 (86.4%)	22
Hinduism	0 (0%)	2 (8.7%)	2 (8.7%)	19 (82.6%)	23
No religion	2 (4.5%)	7 (15.9%)	4 (9.1%)	31 (70.5%)	44
Other	2 (18.2%)	2 (18.2%)	1 (9.1%)	6 (54.5%)	11

Influence of predictors on acculturation attitude

The study also sought to investigate the relationships between several factors such as English language proficiency, intention to stay in Malaysia after graduation, media usage, perceived stereotype image, and acculturation attitude of international students. Multiple regression analyses were undertaken to more rigorously examine the extent to which each acculturation attitude is influenced by English language proficiency, intention to stay in Malaysia after graduation, media usage, and perceived stereotype image. Three out of the four regression models were significant (all except assimilation), indicating the explanatory power of independent variables. Results of the regression analysis are included in Tables 5 –8.

Table 5.

Results of linear regression for marginalization.

Variables	Beta coefficients		t *	Sig.**
Variables	Unstandardized	Standardized	t *	Sig.**
Constant	0.22		6.70	0.00
ELP	−0.03	−0.11	−3.74	0.00
INaG	0.00	−0.02	−0.60	0.55
MU	−0.01	−0.04	−1.31	0.19
PSI	−0.02	−0.15	−4.86	0.00

sig.: significant; ELP: English Language Proficiency; INaG: Intention after Graduation; MU: Media Usage; PSI: Perceived Stereotype Image.

Model R²: 0.04, sig. F change: 0.000.

t-statistics.

Significance level.

Table 6.

Results of linear regression for separation.

Variables	Beta coefficients		t	Sig.
Variables	Unstandardized	Standardized	t	Sig.
Constant	0.67		9.48	0.00
ELP	−0.02	−0.04	−1.51	0.13
INaG	−0.03	−0.13	−4.62	0.00
MU	−0.06	−0.18	−6.19	0.00
PSI	−0.05	−0.20	−6.86	0.00

sig.: significant; ELP: English Language Proficiency; INaG: Intention after Graduation; MU: Media Usage; PSI: Perceived Stereotype Image.

Model R²: 0.127, sig. F change: 0.000.

Table 7.

Results of linear regression for assimilation.

Variables	Beta coefficients		t	Sig.
Variables	Unstandardized	Standardized	t	Sig.
Constant	0.06		1.04	0.30
ELP	0.01	0.01	0.38	0.71
INaG	0.00	0.02	0.63	0.53
MU	0.00	−0.01	−0.45	0.66
PSI	0.00	−0.02	−0.58	0.56

sig.: significant; ELP: English Language Proficiency; INaG: Intention after Graduation; MU: Media Usage; PSI: Perceived Stereotype Image.

Model R²: 0.001, sig. F change: 0.926.

Table 8.

Results of linear regression for integration.

Variables	Beta coefficients		t	Sig.
Variables	Unstandardized	Standardized	t	Sig.
Constant	0.04		0.46	0.64
ELP	0.04	0.07	2.36	0.02
INaG	0.03	0.10	3.49	0.00
MU	0.07	0.16	5.72	0.00
PSI	0.07	0.22	7.68	0.00

sig.: significant; ELP: English Language Proficiency; INaG: Intention after Graduation; MU: Media Usage; PSI: Perceived Stereotype Image.

Model R²: 0.124, sig. F change: 0.000.

Marginalization

Results of the first regression model indicate that independent variables can explain 4% of the variance on marginalization attitude of international postgraduate students, with English language proficiency and perceived stereotype image as the significant variables. It was found that English language proficiency and perceived stereotype image negatively influence marginalization attitude of students (Table 5). The results reveal that students with a low level of English language proficiency are more likely to be found in the marginalized group. Moreover, students with a less positive stereotype image in the new society are mostly inclined to marginalization attitude. The most important predictor of marginalization is the level of English language proficiency, followed by perceived stereotype image.

Separation

The second regression model explains 13% of the variance on the separation attitude of international postgraduate students. The model is significant and intention to stay in Malaysia after graduation, media usage, and perceived stereotype image are three variables which negatively influence the separation attitude of students (Table 6). This further suggests that students who do not intend to stay in Malaysia after graduation, who have a lower level of media usage, and who perceive a less positive image in the host community are more likely to separate themselves from the host community. Among these three predictors, it appears that media usage is the most important determinant of separation attitude.

Assimilation

The third regression model is not significant as less than 1% of variance on assimilation attitude of students is explained by the variables investigated. None of the variables shows a significant influence on the assimilation attitude of students (Table 7), signaling the need for investigation of other variables in future. These results suggest that future researchers should look for other reasons to explain why some students choose the assimilation approach.

Integration

The fourth regression model can explain 12.4% of variance on integration attitude of international postgraduate students. All variables are significantly and positively related to international students’ integration attitude (Table 8). Findings show that students with a higher level of media usage, a more positive stereotype image in the host community, a higher level of English language proficiency, and with an intention to stay in Malaysia after graduation are more likely to choose an integration approach. Among the predictors of integration attitude, it appears that media usage and perceived stereotype image are equally the most crucial determinants of integration approach among international students.

Discussion

This study identified international postgraduate students’ strongest predictor of acculturation attitude among the four acculturation attitudes (integration, assimilation, separation, and marginalization) in Malaysian public universities. It further profiled the demographic characteristics of international postgraduate students with regard to their acculturation attitudes. In addition, the influence of several predictors such as English language proficiency, intention to stay in Malaysia after graduation, media usage, and perceived stereotype image was examined on the four acculturation attitudes to find out what specific factors could impact international postgraduate students’ integration, assimilation, separation, and marginalization attitudes.

The most prevalent acculturation attitude

Findings suggest that integration is the most prevalent acculturation attitude for the international postgraduate students in Malaysian public universities. As Hernandez (2009) stated, when the host society is culturally diverse and prejudice is low, integration would be the most favorable acculturation attitude. Integration was also highlighted as the most effective acculturation strategy in Berry’s bi-dimensional model of acculturation (Berry, 1997). The cultural diversity of Malaysia, as a multicultural society mainly comprising Malay, Chinese, and Indian communities (Malaysian Government, 2014), could stimulate international postgraduate students to not only maintain their own ethnic country’s cultural norms and values, but also to adapt to the host country’s mainstream cultural norms and values. This may also be related to the various cultural activities and events held in Malaysia which involve international students from various countries showcasing their countries’ food, costumes, and traditions, and also sharing their cultural values with people from Malaysia and other countries. It can be understood that the lower the gap between the cultural values and norms of ethnic and host countries, the higher the tendency by international students both to adapt to the host country’s culture and to keep the ethnic country’s culture. Through providing opportunities for international postgraduate students to practice their cultural values and share them with peers in Malaysia, the cultural gap between the ethnic and host country could be minimized, creating a higher level of cultural empathy for international students.

Demographic factors and acculturation attitude

This study further explored the influence of some demographic features such as gender, marital status, geographic region, education level, and religion on the choice of international postgraduate students’ acculturation attitude in Malaysia. Interestingly, the pattern for the strongest predictor of acculturation attitude is integration, separation, assimilation, and marginalization, regardless of the demographic discrepancies. In particular, the most prevalent acculturation attitude is integration, followed by separation, for male and female; single and married; Asian, Middle Eastern, and African students; masters and doctoral students; and international students with different religions.

Previous studies which mainly focused on immigrants in different countries obtained contradictory findings regarding the most prevalent acculturation attitude of individuals. For instance, Vedder and Virta (2005) found assimilation as the strongest predictor of acculturation attitude for Turkish adolescents in the Netherlands. Acculturation attitude of Asian immigrants in the United States was shown to vary across Indian, Korean, and Filipino groups (Baek Choi and Thomas, 2009). In a study of Turkish and Dutch adults, Arends-Tóth and Van De Vijver (2003) found that integration was the most prevalent acculturation attitude by both host adults and immigrants in public domains. However, the identified pattern of the most prevalent acculturation attitude in this study is consistent with findings of Berry (2008) in which the profile distribution of adolescents from 13 different countries showed a clear orientation toward integration, followed by separation, assimilation, and marginalization.

Findings of this study verify that given the chance to practice both ethnic and host country’s cultural values, international postgraduate students predominantly choose integration attitude regardless of their demographic differences. This could be attributed to the role played by cultural diversity of the host country as the crucial factor in boosting international students’ willingness to integrate the ethnic and host country’s cultures (Berry, 2005). However, in the face of a low positive stereotype image in the host country, international postgraduate students are inclined to choose a separation or marginalization attitude. Hence, Malaysia’s open, inclusive, and diverse culture could have paved the way for international postgraduate students to choose an integration attitude.

Other contributing factors and acculturation attitude

This study also adds to the substantial body of acculturation literature by identifying several factors that influence the choice of acculturation attitude by international postgraduate students.

Factors contributing to integration attitude

This study shows that English language proficiency, intention to stay in Malaysia after graduation, media usage, and perceived positive stereotype image are significantly and positively related to the integration attitude of students. English language proficiency provides opportunities for international students to communicate with host nationals and share their cultural values, and can therefore influence students’ willingness to adapt to the host country’s culture (Mahmud et al., 2010). This confirms the findings of a study by Clément (1986) in which the relationship between second language proficiency and acculturation was observed. Moreover, international students’ intention to stay in the host country after graduation can provoke their tendency toward learning about the host country’s cultural values and minimizing their acculturative stress (Sumer, 2009). This can ultimately encourage students to adapt to the host country’s culture, while maintaining their ethnic cultural values.

Furthermore, media usage is a pervasive way for international students to gain and absorb cultural knowledge and understanding about the host society (Yang et al., 2004). Therefore, international students can gradually fill the cultural gap between the ethnic and host country’s cultures through increasing their cultural knowledge which can result in an integration attitude. This study indicates that perceived positive stereotype image is one of the most important contributing factors to the integration attitude. The stereotype image perceived by international students in the host country is directly related to their self-categorization and identification with the dominant group according to social identity theory (Tajfel, 1981). Thus, the more positively they perceive their image in the host country, the more respected and accepted they feel. This can lead to greater willingness to adapt to the host country’s culture, while maintaining their ethnic country’s culture (i.e. integration attitude).

Factors contributing to separation attitude

The second most prevalent acculturation attitude of international postgraduate students in Malaysia is separation. Among the four factors considered in this study, only media usage, intention to stay in Malaysia after graduation, and perceived stereotype image negatively and significantly associate with separation attitude. Since separation attitude is concerned with only maintaining the ethnic country’s cultural values and norms, the factors which enhance individuals’ involvement in the host country’s culture are negatively related to separation attitude. This is consistent with a statement by Berry (2008) which associates separation with individuals’ avoidance of interaction with host nationals.

Using media to learn about the host country’s cultural values, intending to stay in Malaysia after graduation, and possessing a positive stereotype image in the host country enhance international students’ interaction with host nationals and their tendency to blend into the host country’s culture, which can discourage separation attitude. Therefore, to minimize separation attitude which might result in isolation of international students from the locals, it is paramount to emphasize these factors in the context of international students in Malaysia.

Factors contributing to marginalization attitude

English language proficiency and perceived positive stereotype image negatively influence marginalization attitude. Since English language proficiency is a communication tool for international students (Ward, 2004), if they possess good command of English language they will be able to communicate effectively with host nationals resulting in less inclination toward marginalization attitude. As highlighted by Clément (1986), language proficiency is highly related to individuals’ acculturation. Therefore, in the lack of language proficiency, linguistics confidence will be lower which can result in less interaction with host nationals. It can further lead to cultural and psychological loss since the skills and ability to make contacts in the host country is lacking (Berry, 2008). Furthermore, a perceived positive stereotype image refers to how well individuals perceive social acceptance in a society (Hean, 2009). Based on the findings of this study, when international postgraduate students perceive positive image in Malaysia, they have more acceptance in the host society which may lead to higher willingness to adapt to the host country’s culture and a lower tendency toward a marginalization attitude.

On the whole, the factors which promote greater interaction between international students and host nationals, and enhance cultural knowledge and empathy, are positively related to integration while they are negatively associated with separation and marginalization as shown in this study, which is in accordance with previous studies (e.g. Berry, 2008; Berry et al., 2006). The findings also support the principle of culture learning theory which emphasizes the pivotal role of interaction and culture learning in achieving better acculturation (Argyle, 1969).

Implications

Unlike prior studies, which mainly focused on acculturation attitude and its influence on adaptation (e.g. Ting and Ling, 2013; Vedder, 2005; Vedder and Virta, 2005), this study explored factors which influence acculturation attitude among international students. The study elucidates the pattern of acculturation attitude in the context of international postgraduate students in Malaysia, where there is a lack of sufficient empirical studies to clearly portray acculturation attitude and the factors influencing it. A better understanding of international students in Malaysia could benefit education policymakers, as well as university and academic administrators, in countries which have begun to transform their higher education and move toward internationalization of education.

Since integration attitude of international students allows for successful adaptation and psychological well-being (Berry et al., 2006), it is crucial to foster an integration attitude. Our findings shed some light on the factors which could promote an integration attitude in the context of international students as the most successful acculturation strategy (Ramos et al., 2015). Countries which host international students need to provide a multicultural environment where cultural diversity is appreciated and fairness is valued, because in such an environment international students could ‘freely’ choose to integrate their ethnic and host country’s cultures and ultimately achieve successful adaptation.

Moreover, the factors shown to influence international students’ integration attitude mainly focus on interaction between international students and host nationals as well as culture learning, which are the two essential areas upon which host countries can focus. International students feel more accepted when there is less discrimination and negative stereotype image in the host society. Therefore, host societies need to educate their people about cultural differences and treat international students fairly in order to help them find a niche in the host country. Additionally, international students need to learn about host culture values and respect them if they are to flourish in the host country.

Conclusion

This study provides empirical evidence of international postgraduate students’ most prevalent acculturation attitude, various demographic features in association with the four types of acculturation attitudes, and the influence of English language proficiency, intention to stay in Malaysia after graduation, media usage, and perceived positive stereotype image on four acculturation attitudes.

Despite the contributions made by this study, there are a number of limitations which could be addressed in future studies. The factors explored in this study were not found to influence assimilation attitude of international postgraduate students, suggesting that there are other contributing factors to assimilation attitude, which might be investigated in future studies. The research was also limited by its sampling of public universities without including private institutions. Furthermore, the sampling frame in the study included only international postgraduate students and excluded undergraduate students. Future research might also investigate and identify other factors related to the four types of acculturation attitude.

Footnotes

Funding

The first author is a recipient of USM Global Fellowship. The authors also acknowledge the support of Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) through Research University Grant (Grant Number: 1001/PGURU/816267).

Author biographies

Azadeh Shafaei is a PhD research fellow at the School of Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) and a recipient of a USM Global Fellowship. Her current research interests include cross-cultural adaptation among international students, acculturation, education mobility, and higher education internationalization.

Nordin Abd Razak is an Associate Professor at the School of Educational Studies, USM. He obtained his doctoral degree from Flinders University, Australia. He is a member of the Malaysia Psychometric Association and has been appointed as a member of the Research Committee for Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) by the Curriculum Development Division, and Educational Planning and Research Division, of the Ministry of Education.

Mehran Nejati is the Program Manager for Research and Consultancy at the Graduate School of Business, USM. He holds a PhD in Management and is a certified Six Sigma Green Belt by the American Society for Quality.

References

Ang

Liamputtong

(2007) ‘Out of the circle’: reflection on conducting research into the views of international students from mainland China towards the use of university counselling services. Journal of Australian and New Zealand Student Services Association 30: 6–26.

Arends-Tóth

Van de Vijver

FJR

(2003) Multiculturalism and acculturation: views of Dutch and Turkish–Dutch. European Journal of Social Psychology 33(2): 249–266.

Arends-Tóth

Van de Vijver

FJR

(2006) Issues in the conceptualization and assessment of acculturation. In: Bornstein

Cote

(eds) Acculturation and Parent-Child Relationships: Measurement and Development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 33–62.

Argyle

(1969) Social Interaction. London: Methuen.

Baek Choi

Thomas

(2009) Predictive factors of acculturation attitudes and social support among Asian immigrants in the USA. International Journal of Social Welfare 18(1): 76–84.

Barker

(2015) Choosing the best of both worlds: the acculturation process revisited. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 45: 56–69.

Bernama (2014) 12,850 applications received from international students, 8 May. Available at: http://www.theborneopost.com/2014/05/08/12850-applications-received-from-international-students/ (accessed from 03 March 2015).

Berry

(1990) Psychology of acculturation: understanding individuals moving between cultures. In: Brislin

(ed.) Applied Cross-Cultural Psychology. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE, pp. 232–253.

Berry

(1997) Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology 46(1): 5–34.

10.

Berry

(1999) Intercultural relations in plural societies. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne 40(1): 12–21.

11.

Berry

(2005) Acculturation: living successfully in two cultures. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 29(6): 697–712.

12.

Berry

(2006) Stress perspectives on acculturation. In: Sam

Berry

(eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Acculturation Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 43–57.

13.

Berry

(2008) Globalisation and acculturation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 32(4): 328–336.

14.

Berry

Sabatier

(2010) Acculturation, discrimination, and adaptation among second generation immigrant youth in Montreal and Paris. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 34(3): 191–207.

15.

Berry

Sam

(1997) Acculturation and adaptation. In Berry

Segall

Kağıtçıbaşı

(eds) Handbook of cross-cultural psychology. Social behavior and applications. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, vol. 3, pp. 291–326.

16.

Berry

Phinney

Sam

. (2006) Immigrant youth: acculturation, identity, and adaptation. Applied Psychology 55(3): 303–332.

17.

Berry

Segall

Kagitcibasi

(1999) Handbook of Cross-Cultural Psychology: Social Behavior and Applications. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

18.

Bochner

(1982) Cultures in Contact: Studies in Cross-Cultural Interaction. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

19.

Brisset

Safdar

Lewis

. (2010) Psychological and sociocultural adaptation of university students in France: the case of Vietnamese international students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 34(4): 413–426.

20.

Carpenter

(1995) Doctors and nurses: stereotypes and stereotype change in interprofessional education. Journal of Interprofessional Care 9(2): 151–161.

21.

Castro

(2003) Acculturation and Psychological Adaptation. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

22.

Celenk

Van de Vijver

(2014) Assessment of acculturation and multiculturalism: an overview of measures in the public domain. In: Benet-Martinez

Hong

(eds) The Oxford Handbook of Multicultural Identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 205–226.

23.

Cheng

Mahmood

Yeap

(2013) Malaysia as a regional education hub: a demand-side analysis. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 35(5): 523–536.

24.

Clément

(1986) Second language proficiency and acculturation: an investigation of the effects of language status and individual characteristics. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 5(4): 271–290.

25.

DeVos

(1980) Ethnic adaptation and minority status. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 11(1): 101–124.

26.

Dong

(2009) ‘Isn’t it enough to be a Chinese speaker’: language ideology and migrant identity construction in a public primary school in Beijing. Language & Communication 29(2): 115–126.

27.

Earley

Ang

(2003) Cultural Intelligence: Individual Interactions across Cultures. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

28.

Gebhard

(2012) International students’ adjustment problems and behaviors. Journal of International Students 2(2): 184–193.

29.

Gordon

(1964) Assimilation in American Life. London: Oxford University Press.

30.

Hean

(2009) The measurement of stereotypes in the evaluation of interprofessional education. In: Jackson

Blateau

(eds) Innovation, Implementation and Evaluation: The Keys to Unlocking InterProfessional Learning. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 144–164.

31.

Hernandez

(2009) Psychological theories of immigration. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment 19(6): 713–729.

32.

Hisham Motkal

A-R

(2013) Psychological and socio-cultural adaptation of immigrant and national adolescents in Australia: a test of the acculturative stress hypothesis. American Journal of Applied Psychology 2(1): 1–6.

33.

Horenczyk

(1996) Migrant identities in conflict: acculturation attitudes and perceived acculturation ideologies. In: Breakwell

Lyons

(eds) Changing European Identities: Social Psychological Analyses of Social Change. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, pp. 241–250.

34.

Huang

Chang

(2011) The relationship between international students’ and cross-cultural adaptation and dominant language in Taiwan. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science 1(7): 137–145.

35.

Jiang

Green

Henley

. (2009) Acculturation in relation to the acquisition of a second language. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 30(6): 481–492.

36.

Kwak

(1991) Second Language Learning in a Multicultural Society: A Comparison between the Learning of a Dominant Language and a Heritage Language. Kingston, ON, Canada: Queen’s University.

37.

Kwon

(2013) The sociocultural adjustment of Chinese graduate students at Korean universities: a qualitative study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 37(5): 536–549.

38.

LaFromboise

Coleman

Gerton

(1993) Psychological impact of biculturalism: evidence and theory. Psychological Bulletin 114(3): 395–412.

39.

Leong

C-H

(2007) Predictive validity of the Multicultural Personality Questionnaire: a longitudinal study on the socio-psychological adaptation of Asian undergraduates who took part in a study-abroad program. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 31(5): 545–559.

40.

Leung

(2001) The sociocultural and psychological adaptation of Chinese migrant adolescents in Australia and Canada. International Journal of Psychology 36(1): 8–19.

41.

Gasser

(2005) Predicting Asian international students’ sociocultural adjustment: a test of two mediation models. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 29(5): 561–576.

42.

Mahmud

Amat

Rahman

. (2010) Challenges for international students in Malaysia: culture, climate and care. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 7: 289–293.

43.

Malaysian Government (2014) Population and demography. Available at: http://www.statistics.gov.my/portal/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1465%E2%8C%A9=en (accessed 17 February 2015).

44.

Masgoret

(2006) Examining the role of language attitudes and motivation on the sociocultural adjustment and the job performance of sojourners in Spain. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 30(3): 311–331.

45.

Mehdizadeh

Scott

(2005) Adjustment problems of Iranian international students in Scotland. International Education Journal 6(4): 484–493.

46.

Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia (2006) Research universities. Available at: http://jpt.mohe.gov.my/ (accessed 16 April 2014).

47.

Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia (2007) The national higher education strategic plan: laying the foundation beyond 2020. Available at: www.mohe.gov.my (accessed 20 February 2014).

48.

Molinsky

(2007) Cross-cultural code-switching: the psychological challenges of adapting behavior in foreign cultural interactions. Academy of Management Review 32(2): 622–640.

49.

Nunnally

Bernstein

(1994) Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw Hill.

50.

Phinney

(1990) Ethnic identity in adolescents and adults: review of research. Psychological Bulletin 108(3): 499–514.

51.

Phinney

Horenczyk

Liebkind

. (2001) Ethnic identity, immigration, and well-being: an interactional perspective. Journal of Social Issues 57(3): 493–510.

52.

Podsakoff

MacKenzie

Lee

J-Y

. (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology 88(5): 879–903.

53.

Ramos

Cassidy

Reicher

. (2015) Well-being in cross-cultural transitions: discrepancies between acculturation preferences and actual intergroup and intragroup contact. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 45(1): 23–34.

54.

Sánchez

Fernández

(1993) Acculturative stress among Hispanics: a bidimensional model of ethnic identification. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 23(8): 654–668.

55.

Sumer

(2009) International students’ psychological and sociocultural adaptation in the United States. Counseling and Psychological Services Dissertations, Paper 34, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA.

56.

Sumer

Poyrazli

Grahame

(2008) Predictors of depression and anxiety among international students. Journal of Counseling and Development 86(4): 429–437.

57.

Swaidan

Vitell

Rose

. (2006) Consumer ethics: the role of acculturation in U.S. immigrant populations. Journal of Business Ethics 64(1): 1–16.

58.

Swami

(2009) Predictors of sociocultural adjustment among sojourning Malaysian students in Britain. International Journal of Psychology 44(4): 266–273.

59.

Szapocznik

Kurtines

Fernandez

(1980) Bicultural involvement and adjustment in Hispanic-American youths. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 4(3): 353–365.

60.

Tajfel

(1981) Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

61.

Tanaka

Takai

Kohyama

. (1995) Adjustment patterns of international students in Japan. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 18(1): 55–75.

62.

Tartakovsky

(2012) Factors affecting immigrants’ acculturation intentions: a theoretical model and its assessment among adolescent immigrants from Russia and Ukraine in Israel. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36(1): 83–99.

63.

Ting

S-H

Ling

T-Y

(2013) Language use and sustainability status of indigenous languages in Sarawak, Malaysia. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 34(1): 77–93.

64.

Tonsing

(2013) Predictors of psychological adaptation of South Asian immigrants in Hong Kong. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 37(2): 238–248.

65.

Van Oudenhoven

Hofstra

(2006) Personal reactions to ‘strange’situations: attachment styles and acculturation attitudes of immigrants and majority members. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 30(6): 783–798.

66.

Vedder

(2005) Language, ethnic identity, and the adaptation of immigrant youth in the Netherlands. Journal of Adolescent Research 20(3): 396–416.

67.

Vedder

Virta

(2005) Language, ethnic identity, and the adaptation of Turkish immigrant youth in the Netherlands and Sweden. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 29(3): 317–337.

68.

Verbik

Lasanowski

(2007) International student mobility: patterns and trends. World Education News and Reviews 20(10): 1–16.

69.

Ward

(2004) Psychological theories of culture contact and their implications for intercultural training and interventions. In: Landis

Bennett

(eds) Handbook of Intercultural Training. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 185–216.

70.

Williams

Berry

(1991) Primary prevention of acculturative stress among refugees: application of psychological theory and practice. American Psychologist 46(6): 632–641.

71.

Yang

Zhu

. (2004) Tuning in to fit in? Acculturation and media use among Chinese students in the United States. Asian Journal of Communication 14(1): 81–94.

72.

Yau

Sun

Fong Cheng

(2012) Relationships among academic, social and psychological adjustments to university life: comparisons across gender. Tertiary Education and Management 18(2): 97–113.

73.

Yeh

Inose

(2003) International students’ reported English fluency, social support satisfaction, and social connectedness as predictors of acculturative stress. Counselling Psychology Quarterly 16(1): 15–28.

74.

Yusliza

Shankar

(2010) Adjustment in international students in Malaysian public university. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology 1(3): 275–278.