↓ Skip to main content

Acculturation Versus Cultural Retention: The Interactive Impact of Acculturation and Co-ethnic Ties on Substance Use Among Chinese Students in the United States

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
Title
Acculturation Versus Cultural Retention: The Interactive Impact of Acculturation and Co-ethnic Ties on Substance Use Among Chinese Students in the United States
Published in
Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, May 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10903-017-0598-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaozhao Yousef Yang, Fenggang Yang

Abstract

Acculturation is often found to increase substance use among immigrants in the U.S., but such effect may depend on how immigrants are attached to their co-ethnic community. Meanwhile, the high socioeconomic status of some new immigrant groups also challenges the classical assumption that ties to co-ethnic community are associated with deviance. With a sample (n = 960) collected from a population of Chinese students in a large public university in the U.S., we tested how do the interplays between acculturation and co-ethnic ties affect substance use. This study establishes that: (1) different dimensions of acculturation have opposite effects on substance use; (2) acculturative stress does not explain the association between acculturation and substance use; (3) acculturation increases the likelihood of substance use only when one has weak attachment to their co-ethnic community. The findings are consistent for three dependent variables: smoking, drinking, and drunkenness, and for the different constructs of acculturation and co-ethnic ties. Ties to co-ethnic community may provide important social support for immigrants, while acculturation may alleviate the insular subculture that promotes at-risk behaviors. We encourage policy makers to consider the cooperative nature of acculturation and cultural retention for the improvement of health among this growing population.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 68 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 16%
Other 8 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Student > Master 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 22 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 28%
Social Sciences 12 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 23 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 January 2018.
All research outputs
#21,376,200
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health
#1,168
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#275,201
of 314,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health
#23
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,261 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,669 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.