Cited by 502Racial and Ethnic Identity ResearchSocial and Intergroup PsychologyDiaspora, migration, transnational identity

The Meaning of “Being Chinese” and “Being American”: Variation among Chinese American Young Adults

Tsai, Jeanne L., Ying, Yu-Wen, Lee, Peter A.·2000·Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology

Abstract

Few studies have investigated how the meanings attached to being of a particular culture vary within cultural groups. The meanings of “being Chinese” and “being American” were compared among three Chinese American groups: 122 American-born Chinese (ABC), 119 immigrant Chinese who arrived in the United States before or at age 12, and 112 immigrant Chinese who arrived in the United States after age 12. Participants completed the General Ethnicity Questionnaire (abridged version). For each group, the relationship between “being Chinese” and “being American” and the specific cultural domains (e.g., engagement in American activities, Chinese language proficiency) on which they were based were assessed. Results suggest that “being Chinese” and “being American” were unrelated for ABC, but were negatively related for immigrant Chinese. Results also suggest that for immigrants, the domains on which “being Chinese” and “being American” are based change with increased stay in the United States.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0022022100031003002

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • There is robust evidence supporting the psychometric validity of the bidirectional model of acculturation and its advantages over unidimensional models in predicting a wide array of outcomes.

    “There is now robust evidence supporting the psychometric validity of this bidirectional model of acculturation and its advantages over unidimensional models in predicting a wide array of outcomes (Flannery, 1998;Ryder, Allen, & Paulhus, 2000;Tsai, Ying, & Lee, 2000).”

    From Bicultural Identity Integration (BII): Components and Psychosocial Antecedents (2005) · cites this paper as Tsai, Ying, & Lee, 2000

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tsai, J. L., Ying, Y.-W., & Lee, P. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
Venue
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology
Published
2000-05
Volume
31
Issue
3
Pages
302-332
ISSN
  • 0022-0221 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-5422
OpenAlex
W2147853917
Cited by
502
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 35
FWCI
35.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Diaspora, migration, transnational identity
Keywords
ethnic identity, Chinese Americans, American Born Chinese, bicultural identity, Chinese language proficiency, Americanization

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