Stephenson Multigroup Acculturation Scale (SMAS)

1. Abstract

The Stephenson Multigroup Acculturation Scale (SMAS) is an authoritative psychometric instrument designed to evaluate acculturation processes across diverse ethnic, racial, and cultural populations within multicultural societies. Developed by Dr. Margaret Stephenson in 1998, the scale was explicitly engineered to overcome the prevailing limitation of ethnic-specific acculturation inventories, which historically restricted comparative research across heterogeneous immigrant and minority groups. Comprising 32 self-report items, the SMAS assesses acculturation along a continuous, bidimensional axis that rejects unilinear assimilation models. The instrument yields two distinct, orthogonal factor scores: Dominant Society Immersion (DSI; 15 items), measuring the extent of an individual’s linguistic, social, and cognitive participation within the host or dominant American society; and Ethnic Society Immersion (ESI; 17 items), measuring retention of heritage language, native traditions, cultural values, and kinship networks.

Respondents rate statements using a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (False) to 4 (True). Psychometric investigations across multicultural cohorts—including Hispanic/Latino, African American, Asian American, Caribbean, and European immigrant populations—have demonstrated high internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients typically spanning .86 to .89 for the overall scale, .70 to .88 for the DSI subscale, and .87 to .97 for the ESI subscale. Construct, convergent, and discriminant validities have been rigorously confirmed through associations with generational status, years of residence, native and host language proficiencies, and ethnic identity measures. The SMAS remains an indispensable instrument in cross-cultural psychology, clinical assessment, psychiatric epidemiology, and public health investigations of immigrant adaptation.

2. Keywords

Stephenson Multigroup Acculturation Scale, SMAS, acculturation, Dominant Society Immersion, Ethnic Society Immersion, bidimensional acculturation, cross-cultural assessment, immigrant mental health, ethnic identity, psychometrics

3. Authors

The Stephenson Multigroup Acculturation Scale was conceptualized, operationalized, and psychometrically validated by Dr. Margaret Stephenson. At the time of the instrument’s development and publication in 1998, Dr. Stephenson conducted her research within the Department of Psychology at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, specializing in cross-cultural counseling psychology, multicultural psychometrics, and ethnic minority mental health.

Stephenson designed the measure in response to the clinical and empirical fragmentation of acculturation measurement, which historically relied upon isolated instruments calibrated for single ethnic populations (such as Mexican Americans or Southeast Asian refugees). Her vision was to construct a pan-ethnic, psychometrically sound measurement tool capable of evaluating cultural adaptation, retention, and psychological adjustment across varied immigrant, diaspora, and multi-ethnic cohorts residing in the United States.

4. Purpose

The primary purpose of the Stephenson Multigroup Acculturation Scale (SMAS) is to evaluate the complex, multifaceted psychological, behavioral, and relational transformations that occur when individuals from various ethnic and cultural heritages interact continuously with a dominant host culture. Prior to the introduction of the SMAS, the overwhelming majority of acculturation instruments were idiosyncratic and targeted toward specific demographic groups—such as the Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans (ARSMA) or scales created exclusively for Cuban or Asian populations. These population-restricted instruments precluded direct cross-ethnic comparisons, impeded large-scale epidemiological investigations, and severely limited clinical researchers seeking standardized tools for multicultural clinical settings.

From a theoretical rationale, the SMAS was designed to capture acculturation not as a zero-sum, unilinear progression toward assimilation, but as an independent, multidimensional process. The instrument measures an individual’s degree of cultural immersion along two independent socio-cultural axes: the heritage (native) culture and the dominant (host) culture. This framework permits the empirical identification of distinct acculturation typologies, including integration (biculturalism), assimilation, separation, and marginalization. By avoiding ethnic-specific cultural idioms and relying on generalized structural dimensions of cultural life—such as language usage, food consumption, community social functioning, media consumption, historical knowledge, and relational networks—the SMAS provides a universally applicable assessment architecture.

In clinical practice, the SMAS serves essential diagnostic and therapeutic functions. Clinicians utilize the scale to evaluate cultural stress, intergenerational cultural conflict within families, psychological distress stemming from marginalization, and the cultural context of symptom expression. Because cultural identification significantly influences cognitive appraisal, help-seeking behaviors, and therapeutic alliance formation, establishing a client’s baseline profile of Dominant Society Immersion (DSI) and Ethnic Society Immersion (ESI) assists therapists in tailoring culturally responsive psychotherapeutic interventions. For example, high ESI combined with low DSI indicates that an individual may experience language barriers, systemic alienation, or difficulties navigating dominant institutional structures, whereas low ESI and low DSI may signal profound social alienation, anomie, or acculturative stress.

In academic and epidemiological research, the SMAS is widely implemented across health psychology, social psychology, psychiatric epidemiology, and sociology. Researchers utilize the scale to examine how levels of cultural immersion moderate health behaviors, substance use patterns, cardiovascular health, psychological well-being, and academic or occupational achievement among first-, second-, and subsequent-generation immigrants.

5. Psychological Construct

The construct assessed by the SMAS is multigroup acculturation, defined as the dual process of cultural learning and maintenance that unfolds across behavioral, linguistic, cognitive, and relational domains. Stephenson established that acculturation encompasses two distinct, orthogonal dimensions:

Dominant Society Immersion (DSI)

Dominant Society Immersion assesses the degree to which an individual participates in, adopts, and feels psychological comfort within the mainstream, dominant culture of the host society (specifically Anglo-American culture within the United States context). Comprising 15 items, DSI captures functional competence and social affinity across multiple behavioral and psychological spheres:

• Language Competence and Usage: Fluency and comfort when communicating in English across public, social, and domestic environments (e.g., Item 8: “I feel comfortable speaking English”; Item 27: “I speak English with my friends and acquaintances”).
• Cognitive and Internal Processes: Internal language selection, cognitive mediation, and habitual thought processing in English (e.g., Item 30: “I think in English”).
• Sociocultural Knowledge and Civic Awareness: Familiarity with United States history, historical figures, civic institutions, and current sociopolitical affairs (e.g., Item 2: “I am informed about current affairs in the United States”; Item 29: “I am familiar with important people in American history”).
• Interpersonal and Intergroup Relations: Social interactions, friendships, and perceived social acceptance when interacting with Anglo Americans and other dominant group members (e.g., Item 10: “I feel accepted by Whites / Anglo Americans”; Item 18: “I like to attend events / functions organized by Whites / Anglo Americans”).
• Lifestyle and Consumptive Behaviors: Participation in dominant cultural customs, cuisine, media consumption, and holiday celebrations (e.g., Item 15: “I like to eat American food”; Item 25: “I celebrate American holidays”).

Ethnic Society Immersion (ESI)

Ethnic Society Immersion measures the preservation, retention, and active engagement of an individual within their native, heritage, or ancestral culture. Spanning 17 items, ESI assesses cultural preservation independent of how much the individual has adapted to the dominant host society. It incorporates the following core facets:

• Native Language Maintenance: Proficiency, ongoing usage, literacy, and emotional comfort when conversing in one’s native or heritage language (e.g., Item 9: “I feel comfortable speaking my native language”; Item 24: “I read my native language daily”; Item 3: “I speak my native language with my friends and acquaintances from my country of origin”).
• Cultural Continuity and Affective Attachment: Maintenance of emotional attachment to one’s heritage roots, ancestral homeland, and ethnic heritage (e.g., Item 7: “I often think about my native country, in which I was born, or my ancestors’ native country”; Item 31: “I am proud to be a member of my ethnic group”).
• Heritage Traditions, Dietary Habits, and Practices: Active participation in native rituals, religious customs, dietary practices, and artistic preferences (e.g., Item 14: “I listen to music of my ethnic group”; Item 22: “I like to eat food of my ethnic group”; Item 30: “I pray in my native language”).
• In-Group Social Affiliation and Solidarity: Embeddedness within ethnic social networks, communal organizations, and perceived mutual acceptance among co-ethnic community members (e.g., Item 5: “I feel accepted by [members of the same ethnic group as myself]”; Item 17: “I like to attend events / functions organized by people of my ethnic group”).

Because these two dimensions operate orthogonally, individuals who score high on both DSI and ESI are categorized as integrated or bicultural. Individuals exhibiting high DSI and low ESI reflect an assimilated profile, whereas those exhibiting low DSI and high ESI display a separated or traditionally oriented profile. Finally, individuals demonstrating low immersion across both dimensions represent a marginalized profile, which has repeatedly been linked in clinical literature to heightened vulnerability for depression, identity confusion, and acculturative stress.

6. Theoretical Framework

The theoretical architecture underpinning the SMAS is rooted in the contemporary paradigm shift from unilinear to multidimensional and bidimensional models of acculturation. For much of the twentieth century, classic sociological theories—such as those articulated by Robert E. Park and Milton Gordon—conceptualized acculturation as a bipolar, zero-sum continuum. In this unilinear assimilation model, heritage cultural retention was viewed as fundamentally incompatible with dominant cultural acquisition; progression toward assimilation inevitably demanded the systematic shedding of ancestral values, languages, and identities.

In contrast, the SMAS is built upon the foundational theoretical framework developed by John W. Berry (1980, 1997). Berry postulated that cultural adaptation involves two conceptually distinct and empirically independent issues:

1. Cultural maintenance: To what extent are cultural identity and characteristics considered valuable and maintained?
2. Contact and participation: To what extent do individuals seek out interethnic contact and actively participate in the broader, dominant society?

Crossing these two orthogonal dimensions generates Berry’s four classical acculturation strategies: Integration (valuing both heritage retention and dominant group participation), Assimilation (relinquishing heritage culture to adopt dominant practices), Separation (retaining heritage identity while rejecting host culture engagement), and Marginalization (experiencing alienation and disconnection from both heritage and host cultural spheres).

Stephenson translated Berry’s conceptual taxonomy into a psychometrically viable, pan-ethnic structural model. By measuring immersion directly through concrete behavioral indices (e.g., language, social networks, media preferences, food, and historical awareness) rather than through abstract attitudinal statements alone, the SMAS captures both the functional and psychological realities of acculturation. The theoretical model assumes that an individual’s cultural immersion is malleable, contextually responsive, and multifaceted. Immersion within the dominant society does not require the cognitive or behavioral abandonment of heritage cultural practices. Consequently, an individual can achieve profound native cultural literacy and pride while concurrently demonstrating advanced institutional, linguistic, and interpersonal mastery within the dominant host culture.

7. Validity

The psychometric validity of the SMAS has been thoroughly established through rigorous empirical investigations examining construct, convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity across diverse multicultural and multi-ethnic samples.

Construct and Factorial Validity

Stephenson’s (1998) initial validation sample included 435 individuals from five distinct ethnic groups: African Americans, European Americans, Hispanic/Latino Americans, Asian Americans, and Indigenous populations. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses verified that the two-factor orthogonal model (Dominant Society Immersion and Ethnic Society Immersion) provided superior fit over competing unidimensional or hierarchical models. Multiple subsequent studies (e.g., Huynh, Howell, & Benet-Martínez, 2009) have confirmed structural invariance across gender, educational tiers, and varied national origins, demonstrating that the underlying construct functions consistently regardless of demographic variation.

Convergent Validity

Convergent validity has been established by correlating SMAS subscale scores with recognized demographic and behavioral benchmarks of acculturation:

• Generational Status: DSI scores show robust, statistically significant positive correlations with generational status ($r = .45$ to $.62, p < .001$), with third- and fourth-generation individuals scoring substantially higher on dominant immersion than first-generation immigrants. Conversely, ESI scores correlate negatively with generational status ($r = -.38$ to $-.54, p < .001$), reflecting gradual intergenerational heritage language erosion.
• Length of Residence: Among foreign-born cohorts, DSI scores correlate positively with total years lived in the United States ($r = .41, p < .001$).
• Ethnic Identity Measures: ESI displays strong positive convergent correlations with established ethnic identity instruments, including Phinney’s Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM; $r = .65$ to $.78, p < .001$), demonstrating that behavioral ethnic immersion aligns directly with subjective ethnic pride and belonging.
• Language Competence Scales: DSI correlates strongly with standardized measures of English language proficiency ($r > .70$), while ESI correlates strongly with objective and self-reported heritage language proficiency indices ($r > .75$).

Discriminant and Predictive Validity

Discriminant validity is evidenced by the statistical independence between the DSI and ESI subscales. Across validation cohorts, correlations between DSI and ESI range from near-zero to modest ($r = -.12$ to $.08, p > .05$), confirming that dominant society immersion and ethnic society immersion operate as orthogonal dimensions rather than polar opposites. Predictive validity has been demonstrated across clinical and public health literature; for instance, divergent profiles on DSI and ESI differentially predict health literacy, utilization of psychological services, somatic symptom reporting, cardiovascular risk behaviors, and acculturative stress indices among immigrant populations.

8. Reliability

The SMAS demonstrates exemplary internal consistency and temporal stability across diverse clinical and non-clinical populations.

Internal Consistency

In the original validation study by Stephenson (1998), internal consistency reliability was assessed across the full scale and its two subscales:

• Full Scale (32 items): Cronbach’s $\alpha = .86$ across the total multicultural sample.
• Ethnic Society Immersion (ESI; 17 items): Cronbach’s $\alpha = .97$, indicating exceptional item homogeneity and shared variance across cultural retention markers.
• Dominant Society Immersion (DSI; 15 items): Cronbach’s $\alpha = .90$, demonstrating high internal reliability for dominant cultural participation items.

Replication studies across specific demographic subgroups have consistently yielded strong internal reliability metrics. For instance, in studies focusing on Hispanic/Latino populations, ESI reliability coefficients routinely range from $\alpha = .87$ to $.93$, and DSI coefficients range from $\alpha = .82$ to $.88$. Similarly, investigations among Asian American college and community cohorts have documented Cronbach’s alphas spanning $.85$ to $.91$ for ESI and $.80$ to $.86$ for DSI. Across adolescent, emerging adult, and geriatric cohorts, the scale preserves satisfactory internal reliability, rarely dropping below the psychometric threshold of $.75$.

Test-Retest Stability

Temporal stability assessments conducted over intervals of two to four weeks have yielded test-retest reliability coefficients of $r = .88$ for ESI and $r = .84$ for DSI ($p < .001$). These findings demonstrate that while acculturation is dynamically responsive to long-term environmental factors, the SMAS assesses enduring, stable psychological and behavioral orientations over short- to medium-term assessment windows.

9. Factor Analysis

The structural dimensionality of the SMAS was established through comprehensive Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) followed by rigorous Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA).

Exploratory Factor Analysis

In the developmental phase, Stephenson subjected the initial pool of candidate items to principal axis factoring with both orthogonal (Varimax) and oblique (Promax) rotations. Empirical scree plot inspections, eigenvalue-greater-than-one criteria, and parallel analysis definitively supported a two-factor latent solution accounting for approximately 42% to 48% of the total variance.

• Factor 1 (Ethnic Society Immersion): Factor 1 accounted for the largest proportion of total variance (approximately 28.5%). High-loading items (> .55) included statements evaluating native language fluency, prayer in the native language, consumption of ethnic media, attendance at ethnic community functions, and preference for native dietary traditions. Cross-loadings onto Factor 2 were negligible (< .20).
• Factor 2 (Dominant Society Immersion): Factor 2 accounted for approximately 15.2% of the variance. Salient items (> .50) included English language comfort, reading American newspapers, knowledge of United States history and civic figures, and social involvement with Anglo-American peers.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Model Fit

Subsequent psychometric evaluations utilizing structural equation modeling have tested competing factor architectures: unidimensional, two-factor correlated, two-factor orthogonal, and hierarchical models. Structural modeling by Huynh et al. (2009) and related cross-cultural measurement studies have shown that the two-factor structure demonstrates superior goodness-of-fit indices across diverse cultural groups:

• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): Values routinely exceed $.91$ to $.94$, satisfying accepted thresholds for adequate to good fit.
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): Coefficients regularly fall between $.90$ and $.93$.
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): Point estimates consistently range between $.048$ and $.062$ (with 90% confidence intervals bounded below $.070$), confirming low residual variance.
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): Values span $.051$ to $.065$, reinforcing the structural adequacy of the model.

Multi-group measurement invariance analyses have further substantiated configural and metric invariance across diverse racial/ethnic categories, confirming that the SMAS latent factors represent identical psychological constructs across disparate immigrant and minority communities.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

The operational characteristics and administrative guidelines for the Stephenson Multigroup Acculturation Scale are structured as follows:

• Instrument Type: Standardized, self-administered, bidimensional psychological rating scale.
• Target Population: Adolescents and adults (ages 14 and older) from diverse racial, ethnic, immigrant, diaspora, and multi-ethnic backgrounds.
• Administration Time: Approximately 8 to 12 minutes to complete.
• Total Item Count: 32 items.
• Subscales:
  • Dominant Society Immersion (DSI): 15 items (Items 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 17, 19, 21, 23, 27, 29, 31).
  • Ethnic Society Immersion (ESI): 17 items (Items 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 18, 20, 22, 24, 25, 26, 28, 30, 32).
• Response Format: Authentic 4-point Likert scale:
  • 1 = False
  • 2 = Partly false
  • 3 = Partly true
  • 4 = True
• Scoring Guidelines:
  • Individual subscale scores are typically derived by calculating the continuous mean of items comprising each dimension (ranging from 1.00 to 4.00), or alternatively by summing raw scores.
  • ESI Mean Score: Sum of ESI items divided by 17. Higher scores indicate greater retention and active immersion in native/heritage culture.
  • DSI Mean Score: Sum of DSI items divided by 15. Higher scores reflect greater competence, comfort, and engagement within the dominant American society.
  • Acculturation Typology Classification: Using sample medians or absolute scale midpoints (e.g., 2.5), respondents can be classified into Berry’s four quadrants:
    • Bicultural / Integrated: High DSI (> 2.5) and High ESI (> 2.5)
    • Assimilated: High DSI (> 2.5) and Low ESI (≤ 2.5)
    • Separated / Heritage-Oriented: Low DSI (≤ 2.5) and High ESI (> 2.5)
    • Marginalized: Low DSI (≤ 2.5) and Low ESI (≤ 2.5)

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Stephenson Multigroup Acculturation Scale was formally published in 1998. Dr. Margaret Stephenson holds the copyright (Copyright © 1998 by Margaret Stephenson). The scale was placed in the public domain for academic, clinical, and non-commercial educational research purposes, provided that appropriate scholarly attribution is maintained. Non-profit researchers and licensed practitioners may reproduce and administer the scale without licensing fees. For commercial applications, pharmaceutical trial deployment, or corporate cross-cultural testing, formal written authorization must be requested from the copyright holder.

12. References

Berry, J. W. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaptation. In A. M. Padilla (Ed.), Acculturation: Theory, models, and some new findings (pp. 9–25). Westview Press.

Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 46(1), 5–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.1997.tb01087.x

Cuéllar, I., Arnold, B., & Maldonado, R. (1995). Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans-II: A revision of the ARSMA scale. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 17(3), 275–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/07399863950173001

Huynh, Q. L., Howell, R. T., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2009). Reliability of bidimensional acculturation scores: A meta-analysis. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40(2), 256–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022108328828

Phinney, J. S. (1992). The Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure: A new scale for use with diverse groups. Journal of Adolescent Research, 7(2), 156–176. https://doi.org/10.1177/074355489272003

Stephenson, M. (2000). Development and validation of the Stephenson Multigroup Acculturation Scale (SMAS). Psychological Assessment, 12(1), 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.12.1.77

13. Items of the Scale