The present study compared the dimensionality and viability of Cuéllar, Arnold, and Maldonado’s 18-item Marginality Scale to the recently proposed 17-item revision of this scale by Gutierrez, Franco, Powell, Peterson, and Reid. Confirmatory factor analyses indicated that a 15-item 3-factor solution based on Cuéllar et al. and a 17-item 2-factor solution based on Gutierrez et al. both produced adequate fits to the data. However, MANOVA results using Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans–II (ARSMA-II) Scale-1 acculturation typologies (separation, assimilation, integration, and marginalization) to form separate groups showed more sensitive differentiation with the Cuéllar et al. three-subscale structure (Anglo Marginalization, Mexican Marginalization, and Mexican American Marginalization) than the Gutierrez et al. two-subscale structure (Dominant Culture Marginality and Native Culture Marginality). Implications for future research were discussed.
BaumanS. (2005). The reliability and validity of the Brief Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans-II for children and adolescents. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 27, 426-441.
2.
BentlerP. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238-246.
3.
BerryJ. W. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaptation. In PadillaA. (Ed.), Acculturation: Theory, models, and findings (pp. 9-25). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
4.
BerryJ. W. (1990). Acculturation and adaptation: A general framework. In HoltzmanW. H.BorenmannT. H. (Eds.), Mental health of immigrants and refugees (pp. 90-102). Austin, TX: Hogg Foundation for Mental Health.
5.
BerryJ. W. (2003). Conceptual approaches to acculturation. In ChunK. M.OrganistaP. B.MarinG. (Eds.), Acculturation: Advances in theory, measurement, and applied research (pp. 17-37). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
6.
BerryJ. W.SamD. (1997). Acculturation and adaptation. In BerryJ. W.SegallM. H.KagitcibasiI. (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology: Vol. 3. Social behavior and applications (pp. 291-326). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
7.
BraithwaiteL. (1960). Pluralism. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 83, 816-836.
8.
BrownT. A.MooreM. T. (2012). Confirmatory factor analysis. In HoyleR. H. (Ed.), Handbook of structural equation modeling (pp. 361-379). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
9.
CastilloL. G.ConoleyC. W.BrossartD. F.QuirosA. E. (2007). Construction and validation of the Intragroup Marginalization Inventory. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13, 232-240.
10.
CuéllarI.ArnoldB.MaldonadoR. (1995). Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans-II: A revision of the original ARSMA Scale. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 17, 275-304.
11.
CuéllarI.HarrisL.JassoR. (1980). An acculturation scale for Mexican American normal and clinical populations. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 2, 199-217.
12.
CullenB. T.PretesM. (2000). The meaning of marginality: Interpretation and perception in social sciences. Social Science Journal, 37, 215-229.
13.
DanaR. H. (2014). Personality tests and psychological science: Instruments, populations, practice. In LeongT. L.Comas-DiazL.HallG. C. N.McLoydV. C.TrimbleJ. E. (Eds.) APA handbook of multicultural psychology: Applications and training. (Vol. 2, pp. 181-196). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
14.
Del PilarJ. A.UdascoJ. O. (2004). Marginality theory: The lack of construct validity. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 26, 3-15.
15.
Dickie-ClarkH. F. (1966). The marginal situation: A sociological study of a coloured group. London, England: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
16.
FlanneryW. P.ReiseS. P.YuJ. (2001). An empirical comparison of acculturation models. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1035-1045.
17.
GamstG.DanaR. H.Der-KarabetianA.AragonM.ArellanoL. M.KramerT. (2002). Effects of Latino acculturation and ethnic identity on mental health outcomes. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 24, 479-504.
18.
GamstG.LiangC. T. H.Der-KarabetianA. (2011). Handbook of multicultural measures. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
19.
GamstG.MeyersL. S.BurkeH.GuarinoA. J. (2015). Scale development and validation. In GuestG. S.NameyE. E. (Eds.), Public health research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
GolovenskyD. I. (1952). The marginal man concept, an analysis and critique. Social Forces, 30, 333-339.
22.
GordonM. M. (1964). Assimilation in American life: The role of race, religion, and national origin. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
23.
GravesT. (1967). Acculturation, access, and alcohol in a tri-ethnic community. American Anthropologist, 69, 396-421.
24.
GreenA. W. (1947). A re-examination of the marginal man concept. Social Forces, 26, 167-171.
25.
GutierrezM. A.FrancoL. M.PowellK. G.PetersonN. A.ReidR. J. (2009). Psychometric properties of the acculturation rating scale for Mexican Americans-II: Exploring dimensions of marginality among a diverse Latino population. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 31, 340-356.
KerckhoffA. C.McCormickT. C. (1955). Marginal status and marginal personality. Social Forces, 34, 48-55.
29.
KimB. S. K.AbreuJ. M. (2001). Acculturation measurement: Theory, current instruments, and future directions. In PonterottoJ. G.CasasJ. M.SuzukiL. A.AlexanderC. M. (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (2nd ed., pp. 394-424). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
30.
KimS. Y.GonzalesN. A.StrohK.WangJ. J.-L. (2006). Parent-child cultural marginalization and depressive symptoms in Asian American family members. Journal of Community Psychology, 34, 167-182.
31.
KlineR. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
32.
LamT. C. M. (1995). A review of conceptualization and measurement of acculturation. In Multicultural education: The state of the art (Vol. 2, pp. 129-143). Toronto, Ontario: Multicultural Education Society of Canada.
33.
LopezF. A. (2009). Developmental considerations and acculturation of children. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 31, 57-72.
34.
MannJ. W. (1958). Group relations and the marginal personality. Human Relations, 11, 77-92.
35.
MannJ. W. (1973). Status: The marginal reaction—Mixed-bloods and Jews. In WatsonP. (Ed.), Psychology and race (pp. 213-223). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Penguin Education.
36.
MarinG.GambaR. J. (1996). A new measurement of acculturation for Hispanics: The Bidimensional Acculturation Scale for Hispanics (BAS). Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 8, 297-316.
37.
MeyersL. S.GamstG.GuarinoA. J. (2013). Applied multivariate analysis: Design and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
38.
MohantyJ.NewhillC. E. (2011). Asian adolescent and young adult adoptees’ psychological well-being: Examining the mediating role of marginality. Children and Youth Services Review, 33, 1189-1195.
39.
OjedaL.NavarroR. L.Rosales MezaR.ArbonaC. (2012). Too Latino and not Latino enough: The role of ethnicity-related stressors on Latino college students’ life satisfaction. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 11, 14-28.
40.
PadillaA. M. (1980). The role of cultural awareness and ethnic loyalty in acculturation. In PadillaA. M. (Ed.), Acculturation: Theory, models, and some new findings (pp. 47-84). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
41.
PadillaA. M. (2006). Bicultural social development. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 28, 467-497.
42.
ParkR. E. (1928). Human migration and the marginal man. American Journal of Sociology, 33, 881-893.
43.
RedfieldR.LintonR.HerskovitsM. (1936). Memorandum on the study of acculturation. American Anthropologist, 38, 149-152.
44.
ReuterE. B. (1940). Racial theory. American Journal of Sociology, 50, 452-461.
45.
RiveraL. M. (2008). Acculturation and multicultural assessment: Issues, trends, and practice. In SusukiL. A.PonterottoJ. G. (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural assessment: Clinical, psychological, and educational application (pp. 73-91). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley.
46.
RoglerL. H.CortesD. E.MalgadyR. G. (1991). Acculturation and mental health status among Hispanics: Convergence and new directions for research. American Psychologist, 46, 585-597.
47.
SchumackerR. E.LomaxR. G. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
48.
StonequistE. V. (1937). The marginal man. New York, NY: Scribner.
49.
WallaceP. M.PomeryE. A.LatimerA. E.MartinezJ. L.SaloveyP. (2010). A review of acculturation measures and their utility in studies promoting Latino health. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 32, 37-54.
50.
WangJ.WangX. (2012). Structural equation modeling: Applications using Mplus. Chichester, UK: John Wiley.
51.
WestS. G.TaylorA. B.WuW. (2012). Model fit and model selection in structural equation modeling. In HoyleR. H. (Ed.), Handbook of structural equation modeling (pp. 209-231). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
52.
WrightR. D.WrightS. N. (1972). A plea for a further refinement of the marginal man theory. Phylon, 33, 361-368.
53.
YoonE.LangrehrK.OngL. Z. (2011). Content analysis of acculturation research in counseling and counseling psychology: A 22-year review. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58, 83-96.
54.
ZaneN.MakW. (2003). Major approaches to the measurement of acculturation among ethnic minority populations: A content analysis and an alternative empirical strategy. In ChunK. M.OrganistaP. B.MarinG. (Eds.), Acculturation: Advances in theory, measurement, and applied research (pp. 39-60). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
55.
ZillerR. C. (1973). The social self. New York, NY: Pergamon Press.
