Download Impact of Social Bonding Theory on Substance Use among Asian Americans and Whites and more Thesis Sociology in PDF only on Docsity!
ABSTRACT
Social Bonding Theory, Model Minority Stereotype, and Differences in Drug Use between Whites and Asians Daniel Jang Director: Dr. Jerry Park, Sociology
Although the concept of Asian Americans being “model minorities” has been referenced in relation to racial/ethnic differences in educational and socioeconomic achievement, criminologists have not explored whether the stereotype is relevant to the explanation of differences in delinquency and drug use between Asian and non-Asian adolescents. The model minority stereotype would have us expect Asian American adolescents to be “model” in their family relations and educational attainment in the way that whites are. However, continuing covert marginalization of Asians Americans questions the extent to which these “model” characteristics explain delinquency, such as substance use, between Asians and whites. Applying this to Hirschi’s social bonding theory, I hypothesize that bonding variables of attachment, specifically, affection towards and communication with parents, are less likely to explain drug use among Asian American adolescents than the other bonding elements, that is, commitment to school, compared to their white peers. To test these hypotheses, I analyze the first two waves of restricted data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health.
APPROVED BY DIRECTOR OF HONORS THESIS:
______________________________________________
Dr. Jerry Park, Department of Sociology
APPROVED BY THE HONORS PROGRAM:
_____________________________________________
Dr. Andrew Wisely, Director
DATE:___________________
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- CHAPTER ONE .................................................................................................................. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii
- Introduction ......................................................................................................................
- Theoretical Background and Literature Review ..............................................................
- Du Bois and Double Consciousness .............................................................................
- Racial Hierarchical Structures ......................................................................................
- Edward Said and Orientalism .......................................................................................
- Model Minority Stereotype ..........................................................................................
- Hirschi’s Social Bonding Theory ...............................................................................
- Social Bonding Elements and Drug Use ....................................................................
- Hypotheses .....................................................................................................................
- CHAPTER TWO ...............................................................................................................
- Methods ..........................................................................................................................
- Data Set: Add Health ..................................................................................................
- Independent Variables ................................................................................................
- Race/Ethnicity ........................................................................................................
- Dimensions of Hirschi’s Social Bonding Theory ..................................................
- Peer Drug Use ........................................................................................................
- Immigrant Status ....................................................................................................
- Dependent Variable: Respondent Drug Use...............................................................
- Results ............................................................................................................................
- Analysis ......................................................................................................................
- Predictors of Adolescent Smoking.........................................................................
- Full Sample ................................................................................................
- Smoking ..................................................................................................... Disaggregated predictors of White and Asian American Adolescent
- Predictors of Adolescent Drinking.........................................................................
- Full Sample ................................................................................................
- Drinking ..................................................................................................... Disaggregated predictors of White and Asian American Adolescent
- Predictors of Adolescent Marijuana Use ...............................................................
- Full Sample ................................................................................................
- Marijuana Use ............................................................................................ Disaggregated predictors of White and Asian American Adolescent
- CHAPTER THREE ...........................................................................................................
- Discussion of Results .....................................................................................................
- Conclusions and Future Research ..................................................................................
- APPENDIX ........................................................................................................................
- REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................
CHAPTER ONE
Introduction Though studies regarding Asian American delinquency have increased over the past decade, it is still a relatively under-researched topic, mainly focusing on minority groups who are considered to be more at risk for delinquent influences due to their overall lower-than-average socioeconomic standing. The model minority myth has often been a reason to ignore Asian American deviance due to the assumption that they are expected to have lower rates of crime. By analyzing the application of Hirschi‟s social bonding theory in determining drug use among different races, we can make inferences about how certain factors affect delinquency and its implications on the model minority myth.
Theoretical Background and Literature Review When studying race differences in general, criminological studies tend to focus on minorities who have the most prevalent criminal records. (Fomby 2010, Galvan 2003) With respect to juvenile delinquency, criminology theories such as Hirschi‟s social bonding theory, Sutherland‟s differential association theory, and Agnew‟s general strain theory, attempt to determine the characteristics that best explain why juveniles participate in delinquent behavior. Whites are often used as a control group because they are understood to possess certain characteristics that promote prosocial behavior and deter
them from committing delinquent acts. Asian Americans are assumed to possess these same qualities which are used to explain their generally low levels of delinquent behavior and high social standing. (Chou 2008) Perceptions of Asian culture related to the model minority myth have been systematically reinforced throughout American history. Because of this, Asian Americans have also generally been understudied compared to other minorities.
While research on Asian American delinquency has been scarce until recently, it has become a growing topic of interest. Research on factors that affect delinquency among a group that maintains low levels of deviant behavior may provide new insight into preexisting theories. The recognition of where Asian Americans are placed within a white-dominated racial structure and the applicability of conventional explanations for delinquency reveal to what extent social structures are racially based. Empirical findings also support the need for a clear acknowledgement of the uniqueness that can often provide problems for current theories.
Du Bois and “Double Consciousness” W.E.B. Du Bois is known for his critical sociological analysis of African American experience throughout American history and his sociological explanations of conflicts between whites and blacks based on the observation of significant events in American history. Du Bois firmly believed that the problems of the twentieth century stemmed from racial inequality and the formation of the “color line”. (Du Bois 1903) He argues that despite ideals of the “melting pot” and a “color-blind society”, whites have
existence of a more subtle, yet institutionalized, racial hierarchical structure. Despite varying structure types, group social position is generally based on relation to whites or white standards.
Bonilla-Silva (2004) describes a new emerging racial structure based on the call for a more “color-blind” society. This changes the basis for racial inequality from color- based to merit-based, based on conventional achievements as perceived by whites. This then transforms the biracial dichotomy of whites and non-whites to a “tri-racial” structure, introducing a third category which Bonilla-Silva describes as “honorary whites”. This category is comprised of those who have similar socioeconomic characteristics as whites, but are placed in a different category to account for a characteristic that has not allowed them to be fully accepted by the white community as one of their own. This third group also acts as a buffer in conflicts between the polar opposites of “whites” and “collective blacks”, as they still have characteristics that are not in alignment with white conventional values, yet continue to adopt and conform to the norms of white Americans. By regrouping several different races into these new categories, Bonilla-Silva warns that this movement towards a “color-blind” society ignores the racial struggles of minorities, explaining any inequality among races as the fault of the values of a race rather than a fault in the system.
Analysis of historical events such as the Red Apple Boycott in New York has also shed light on the emergence of a third racial category. Following this event, the common rationalization was that the racial inequality suffered by blacks led them to commit violence against those who they considered responsible for their continued oppression. Rather than direct their efforts towards whites directly, they settle to vent their
frustrations on a buffering racial group, namely Asian-Americans, due to their status as “honorary whites”. Kim (2003) rethought the event, offering an alternative to the “racial scapegoating” explanation that had become so prevalent among media outlets regarding this incident. Similar to the L.A. riots, which involved a large amount of black violence directed toward Korean business owners, sociologists tended to delegitimize the significance of this redirected violence. Rather than address their significant role in the racial conflict, whites attempted to focus solely on the conflict between whites and blacks, assuming a “color blind” stance. Whites played the two races against one another while remaining relatively invisible to the media. Kim argues that this is an indication of the existence of a racial power, “the systematic tendency of the racial status quo to reproduce itself.” (2003) By having whites portrayed as a neutral and invisible racial entity, they are able to systematically reinforce the existing racial hierarchy despite the introduction of new racial groups into American society.
Kim‟s analysis also provides a new categorization of races. Rather than organizing races along a single-scale hierarchy, she places the four major race/ethnic groups in a field structure created with two axes: superiority vs. inferiority and insider vs. foreigner. Placement within this field is based on the perspective of the white American. For Asian Americans specifically, alignment with values of whites places them in the socially superior area, while their inherent foreignness separates them from being in the same category as whites. This creates a paradox where Asians are praised by whites for their values while simultaneously rejected due to their foreignness.
These racial structures provide a setting in which the achievements of Asian Americans are measured solely by their educational or economic value, giving many the
in one‟s mind a familiar space which is „ours‟ and an unfamiliar space beyond „ours,‟ which is „theirs,‟ is a way of making geographical distinctions that can be arbitrary.” (Said 1978) The arbitrary nature of these distinctions creates a social (and in this case, racial) structure that can change only by those of the dominant class. In racial terms, because the Western world has had the most influence in shaping the definitions of mainstream culture, whites have maintained the power to determine who is fully accepted into society and who remains foreign.
This idea of “Eastern culture” is seen through the continuing stereotyping of Asians that have immigrated to the United States and other Western countries, some of whom have resided for several generations. While explicitly negative effects of this stereotyping have become less visible within the past several decades, it still has a powerful effect in shaping the perception of Asian Americans in America. While Asian Americans are now generally seen in a positive light due to their economic and educational success, Said‟s observations suggest that despite these accomplishments, they will still be considered foreign and therefore cannot fully assimilate into American society.
One prominent example of this is the model minority stereotype and its prevalence in the United States as a legitimate way of accepting Asian Americans. Said explains how racial structures created by those in power can influence not only other Americans‟ perceptions of Eastern culture, but can even influence other Asian Americans to accept this way of thinking as fact. While the effects of the model minority stereotype seem harmless, further analysis of the creation and perpetuation of racial structures mask the negative effects they may have on Asian American individuals.
Model Minority Stereotype Sociologists analyze interactions between different race groups and note how important the role of racial identity is to the possession of social power. The social position that is determined by one‟s race creates a stratification model referred to by some as a racial hierarchy. The model minority stereotype refers to the labeling of Asian Americans as characteristic as whites within the racial hierarchy. Their placement within the racial hierarchy is established based on their social standing and their educational and occupational achievement, which the stereotype attributes to certain cultural characteristics that enable them to become more successful. Their label as “honorary whites” has legitimized this stereotype, which is a primary reason why Asian Americans are an understudied population in criminology. The model minority stereotype portrays Asian Americans as “model” in terms of their social characteristics, such as higher socioeconomic status. This in turn forces Asian Americans to conform to white norms in order to continue being considered “model”. While these norms appear to give Asian Americans a higher status among other race groups, they tend to mask the hierarchical racial structure that is actively being implemented within American society. This stereotype exemplifies Kim‟s (2003) theory, where the racial hierarchical structure would continue to label Asians as foreign, never allowing them true acceptance among the dominant white culture.
Not until recently has there been an increasing interest in determining how the model minority stereotype is truly affecting Asian Americans. Because the model minority stereotype attributes the socioeconomic and educational success of Asian Americans is due to their similarities to white values, these values are expected to
Hirschi’s Social Bonding Theory To test how the effect of certain aspects of Asian American life on delinquent behaviors differs from whites, we can use theories that address these dimensions of social control. Social control theories involve many dimensions that address areas of differences and similarities between different social groups. Hirschi‟s (1969) social bonding theory has been used as a valid explanation for the reason certain individuals are deterred from participating in delinquent behaviors by studying their bond of affection with certain social entities, such as family, school, and peers. Unlike theories such as Agnew‟s General Strain Theory, which attempts to answer what factors cause certain people to be prone to deviance, control theories, such as Hirschi‟s, attempt to answer what causes people to conform. In other words, control theories are more concerned with the social factors that prevent crime, not cause it. Breaking this bond would then be the cause for an individual to pursue delinquency. Hirschi‟s social bonding theory has been studied by criminologists to determine which forms of bonding have been the most significant in deterring delinquency. Hirschi (1969) specifies four different bonding types in Causes of Delinquency : attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief. For the purposes of this study, emphasis is given mainly to the observance of attachment and commitment variables, specifically towards family and school, respectively.
Attachment refers to developing a strong, affectionate bond to conventional types of social institutions. When considering the social entities that are the most significant objects of attachment, family is often the first to emerge. Attachment to parents is therefore one of the central variables in social control theory and Hirschi‟s social bonding theory. Prior theories suggested that merely stronger affection of the child with his/her
parents produced the necessary connection required to effectively transmit moral values from parent to child and therefore explained the difference between delinquency rates of lower and higher social classes. This would explain why non-delinquents were closer to their parents than delinquents and why children from broken and unstable families were more likely to commit delinquent acts than those whose families were intact. Hirschi specifies the importance of distinguishing whether or not values and norms of society are successfully transmitted, and not simply affection, that determines a child‟s likelihood of conforming to either conventional or delinquent behavior. Whether or not a parent effectively communicates to the child certain conventional norms and ideas is a better predictor a child‟s delinquency than closeness or attachment alone. For example, a parent that actually communicates and educates their child on certain values is a better means of enforcing conformity than just having a warm, loving relationship.
Peer attachment is also considered within Hirschi‟s social bonding theory. Attachment to peers is expected to be directly related to an individual‟s delinquency. While some theorized that strong attachment to peers was actually an indication that peer influence took precedence over the influence of the parent, Hirschi finds that those who indicated more favorable attitudes toward the approval of their friends actually had less favorable attitudes toward their parents. The opposite, children who prefer the influence of their parents over their peers, did not result in significant changes in attitudes towards the influence of their peers. Hirschi also notes that in the case of how delinquent peers affect an individual‟s own delinquency, those who have a higher stake in conformity to conventional achievement, or commitment to socially conventional goals are much less
provide a better focus on the topic of how stereotyped Asian American characteristics compare to those of their white peers. Observing whether or not these characteristics are unique in explaining white behavior will help to establish the generalizability of the theory or determine its role in the implementation of the white racial frame.
Social Bonding Elements and Drug Use While many studies have been conducted addressing race and drug use, not until recently has there been research done on Asian American juvenile delinquency. Studies tend to focus on verifying preexisting theories related to social control measures that affect delinquency among adolescents. (Chang 2005, Fomby 2010) According to Hirschi‟s social bonding theory, we should expect a significantly negative correlation between elements of social control, such as attachment and commitment, and drug use. We see the validity of this theory especially when observing the risk behaviors of Whites as well as other non-Asian minorities. (Caetano 1998, Fomby et al. 2010, Galvin 2003) Research also indicates that like whites, Asian American adolescents are most significantly influenced by peers, regardless of cultural values. (Kim 2000)
A different study conducted by Kim (2010) observes the elements of social control theory within a non-Western environment to see if expected results (according to theories of social control) remained, and found that there was negligible difference between parental and peer influence on substance use. By viewing an Eastern culture through a Western-constructed system, Kim is able to identify any discrepancy in the universality of the theory. Other studies with similar results show a discrepancy in
conventional theories being applied to Asian Americans. Chang and Le (2005) find that parental factors are not significant in mediating the relationship between peer delinquency and academic achievement. Lee and Rotherum-Borus (2009) found that while Asian Americans had lower rates of risk behaviors, they are becoming increasingly more at risk, perhaps indicating their assimilation into what they perceive as more (white) mainstream behavior. Cultural differences begin to emerge between Asian American adolescents and their parents due to a generational divide that becomes more evident as adolescents become more acculturated to mainstream culture, usually through their peers. This makes it difficult for the parents to create a close bond despite passing down certain values accepted by both as necessary to succeed, such as educational achievement.
Jang (2002) observed elements of social bonding theory and their effect on adolescent school delinquency. While taking into account differences among various Asian ethnicities, he found that “American adolescents of all racial/ethnic backgrounds are likely to engage in deviant behavior when they (1) fail to have their basic needs for proper socialization and adequate social control met within their families for some reason like family disruption or poverty; (2) are neither encouraged to do nor supported for doing their best at school, so that they have few „stakes in conformity‟; (3) associate with friends who see little relevance of education for their lives; and (4) believe that it is acceptable to violate social norms.” (p. 672) These conclusions suggest that social bonding theory is applicable for certain delinquent behaviors among Asian Americans. Also, as observed in other studies, family, peer and educational variables continue to attract the most attention from researchers. For this reason, we can hypothesize that these
