Cited by 51Racial and Ethnic Identity ResearchPsychometric Methodologies and TestingCultural Differences and Values

The Cultural Socialization Scale: Assessing family and peer socialization toward heritage and mainstream cultures.

Open access
Wang, Yijie, Benner, Aprile D., Kim, Su Yeong·2015·Psychological Assessment

Abstract

In a culturally diverse society, youth learn about multiple cultures from a variety of sources, yet the existing assessment of cultural socialization has been limited to parents' efforts to teach youth about their heritage culture. The current study adapted and extended an existing cultural socialization measure (Umaña-Taylor & Fine, 2004) to assess 4 types of socialization practices encountered specifically during adolescence: cultural socialization by families and peers toward both one's heritage culture and the mainstream culture. In a pilot study, we developed the Cultural Socialization Scale based on retrospective reports from 208 young adults, maximizing young adults' ability to reason and reflect their adolescent experiences with various socialization practices. In the primary study, we examined the psychometric properties of the scale using reports from 252 adolescents. Cultural socialization occurred from both socialization agents toward both cultures. Our Cultural Socialization Scale demonstrated stable factor structures and high reliabilities. We observed strong factorial invariance across the 4 subscales (6 items). Multiple indicators multiple causes models also demonstrated invariance for each subscale across adolescents' demographic characteristics (i.e., gender, race/ethnicity, nativity, socioeconomic status, language of assessment). The implications of the Cultural Socialization Scale are discussed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/pas0000136

Cites

62 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The four cultural socialization subscales capture distinct dimensions and have a stable factor structure across gender, race/ethnicity, nativity, socioemotional status, and language of assessment.

    “Our prior work showed that the four subscales capture distinct dimensions of cultural socialization, and all the subscales demonstrated stable factor structure across gender, race/ethnicity, nativity, socioemotional status, and language of assessment (Y. Wang et al., 2015).”

    From Cultural Socialization Across Contexts: Family–Peer Congruence and Adolescent Well-Being (2016) · cites this paper as Y. Wang et al., 2015

    The Results (Factor Structure and Measurement Equivalence; page unavailable) identify four subscales, each with a well-fitting one-factor model, and report measurement invariance across most groups tested. The Discussion (page unavailable) specifies socioeconomic status, not socioemotional status, and notes a few non-invariant items across gender; the claim overstates stability across all listed groups. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Strong factorial invariance across the subscales was established in the current sample, permitting mean comparisons across the four cultural socialization types.

    “We were also able to establish strong factorial invariance across the subscales using the current sample (Y. Wang et al., 2015), enabling mean comparisons across the four types of cultural socialization.”

    From Cultural Socialization Across Contexts: Family–Peer Congruence and Adolescent Well-Being (2016) · cites this paper as Y. Wang et al., 2015

    In Results (Measurement equivalence of the cultural socialization scale), the paper reports that strong invariance across the four subscales did not fit adequately for the original scale. It reports strong invariance—and permits mean comparisons across socialization agents and cultures—only after dropping two items to form a revised six-item scale. The claim omits that restriction; its reference to the citing authors’ current sample is their own finding, not one established by this source. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The authors' prior mixed-methods study found that parents actively emphasize learning mainstream American culture, teach its values and practices, and implicitly socialize mainstream culture through events and activities.

    “Our own work using a mixed-methods approach demonstrated that parents actively stress the importance of learning about the mainstream American culture, teach children about the values and practices of the mainstream culture, and implicitly practice mainstream cultural socialization by involving adolescents in events and activities that represent the mainstream culture (Y. Wang, Benner, & Kim, 2015”

    From Cultural Socialization Across Contexts: Family–Peer Congruence and Adolescent Well-Being (2016) · cites this paper as Y. Wang, Benner, & Kim, 2015

  • Peers endorse heritage and mainstream socialization practices similar to those of families.

    “Our recent work demonstrated that peers endorse similar heritage and mainstream socialization practices as families, including talking to youth about the importance of learning the heritage and mainstream American culture, encouraging youth to hang out with people from one’s own or other racial/ethnic groups, and attending concerts by artists from their heritage or the mainstream American groups (”
  • The cultural socialization measure showed good reliability and validity.

    “The cultural socialization measure demonstrated good reliability and validity.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Kline RB 2011 Principles and practice of structural equation modeling New York, NY The Guilford Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wang, Y., Benner, A. D., & Kim, S. Y.
Affiliations
The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Venue
Psychological Assessment
Published
2015-12
Volume
27
Issue
4
Pages
1452-1462
ISSN
  • 1040-3590 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-134X
OpenAlex
W1626080033
Cited by
51
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2
FWCI
4.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Assessment (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • William T. Grant Foundation
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
  • University of Texas at Austin (R24 HD42849)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Cultural Differences and Values
Keywords
cultural socialization, heritage culture, dominant culture, family socialization, peer socialization, adolescents, scale development, psychometric properties, measurement invariance, multiple indicators multiple causes model, cultural diversity, heritage language learners
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Family, Female, Humans, Male, Peer Group, Pilot Projects, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Retrospective Studies, Socialization, Cultural Diversity, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review