ACCULTURATION AND INDIVIDUALISM AS PREDICTORS OF WORK-.docx

ACCULTURATION AND
INDIVIDUALISM AS PREDICTORS
OF WORK-FAMILY CONFLICT IN
A DIVERSE WORKFORCE
K R I S T I N E J . O L S O N , A N N H . H U F F M A N ,
P E D R O I .
L E I V A , A N D S AT O R I S S . C U L B E R T S O N
Ethnic and cultural diversity is an increasing reality in the US
workplace. The
current study highlights the importance of acknowledging the
culturally het-
erogeneous nature of ethnic groups, and the need to focus on
social iden-
tity characteristics such as cultural values when assessing group
differences.
We demonstrate that cultural values (i.e., individualism)
contribute to em-
ployees’ experiences of work-family confl ict beyond the
effects of ethnicity.
Specifi cally, we introduce a model informed by social identity
theory that

explains why acculturation is related to work-family confl ict.
The model was
tested with a sample of 309 employed Caucasian and Hispanic
Americans. An
empirical test of our model provides evidence that
individualism mediates
the relationship between language- and social-based
acculturation and work-
family confl ict, even when controlling for ethnicity.
Additionally, alternative
models further reveal that the effects of acculturation and
individualism con-
tribute to work interfering with family. As an implication of the
current study,
we suggest that researchers and organizational managers should
consider
the cultural values of their diverse workforce when
implementing policies
that affect confl ict between work and family. © 2013 Wiley
Periodicals, Inc.
Keywords: work-family confl ict, diversity, social identity
theory
Correspondence to: Kristine J. Olson, Dixie State University,
Department of Psychology, 225 S. 700 E, Saint

George, UT 84770, Phone: 435.879.4405, Fax: 435.656.4032, E-
mail: [email protected]
Human Resource Management, September–October 2013, Vol.
52, No. 5. Pp. 741–769
© 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Published online in Wiley Online Library
(wileyonlinelibrary.com).
DOI:10.1002/hrm.21559
I
n the last 30 years the US workforce has
become increasingly heterogeneous,
with ethnic diversity becoming a norm
across many jobs and occupations (Mor
Barak, 2006). Workplace diversity, if not
understood, can bring challenges to organi-
zations in the form of intergroup conflict
among employees, or lawsuits based on dis-
crimination and/or adverse impact. Yet, if
diversity and the potential differences associ-
ated with it are understood, diversity can
benefit organizations. For example, work-
place diversity can attract a larger pool of
talented employees and procure the business
742 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, SEPTEMBER–
OCTOBER 2013

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm
The current
research seeks to
shed light upon how
individuals within a
diverse workforce
differentially
experience work-
family conflict based
upon culturally
influenced values
(i.e., acculturation
and individualism).
of a diverse clientele (Childs, 2005; Kochan et
al., 2003). In fact, C. I. Chavez and Weisinger
(2008) have stressed that organizations that
“manage for diversity” as opposed to “man-
aging diversity” can be more inclusive and
productive organizations.
Surprisingly, there has been very lit-
tle research that has examined individu-
als’ increased participation in combining

work- and family-role responsibilities among
a diverse workforce (for exceptions, see
Roehling, Jarvis, & Swope, 2005; Yang, Chen,
Choi, & Zou, 2000). The current research
seeks to shed light upon how individu-
als within a diverse workforce differentially
experience work-family conflict based upon
culturally influenced values (i.e.,
acculturation and individual-
ism). We respond to researchers’
calls for the need to examine cul-
tural influences in relation to the
work-family interface (Duxbury &
Higgins, 1991; Powell, Francesco,
& Ling, 2009; Roehling et al.,
2005). We focus our research
on experiences of Caucasian
employees and the fastest-grow-
ing minority population in the
US workforce, Hispanic-American
employees.
Similar to other minor-
ity groups in the United States,
Hispanic employees have received
very little attention from work-
family researchers (Grzywacz
et al., 2007). This limited num-
ber of studies is troubling because
Hispanic employees are becom-
ing increasingly prevalent in the
US workforce. Currently, Hispanic individu-
als comprise approximately 15 percent of
the total US population (US Census Bureau,

2008), and are projected to make up approxi-
mately 25 percent of the population in 2050
(US Census Bureau, 2005). As of 2009, the
US Bureau of Labor Statistics indicates that
64.9 percent of the Hispanic population in
the United States participate in the work-
force, in comparison to 63.6 percent of the
Caucasian population. Moreover, 80.7 per-
cent of Hispanic males in the United States
are active employees in the United States, in
comparison to the 73.5 percent of Caucasian
males engaged in employment. Considering
the growth in the Hispanic population, stem-
ming from births in the United States in tan-
dem with immigration patterns, the high
rates of Hispanic participation in the current
US workforce will continue over the coming
decades.
Additionally, work and family are two
domains affected by cultural norms that
might differ for Hispanic and non-Hispanic
employees. For example, the norm within the
US workplace is individualism, a standard that
might not be so conventional for Hispanic
employees (Hofstede, 1983). Similarly, fam-
ily structure and expectations differ depend-
ing on ethnicity, with Hispanic individuals
more likely to be more family-oriented (e.g.,
National Research Council, 2006) than non-
Hispanic individuals. Thus, an aim of the cur-
rent study is to shed light upon the work and
family experiences of an understudied ethnic
minority group that has promise to become
an increasing larger demographic proportion

in the United States.
The current study investigates the inter-
section of ethnic diversity and work-family
experiences by using social identity theory
(Burke & Stets, 2009) as a theoretical guide.
Social identity theory suggests that individu-
als have an identity associated with each of
the roles and values that guide her or his life
(Burke & Stets, 2009; Schwartz, Montgomery,
& Briones, 2006). Whereas the current
research does not directly test the validity of
the theoretical tenets of social identity theory,
we propose that this theory is a useful frame-
work to guide our model that links accultura-
tion (i.e., integration into a different culture)
and work-family conflict. More specifically,
we present a model of work-family cultural
values (see Figure 1) that proposes individual-
ism mediates the relationship between accul-
turation and levels of work-family conflict.
The Infl uence of Social Identity on
Work-Family Confl ict
Work-family conflict occurs when role de-
mands associated with work come in conflict
CULTURAL VALUES AND WORK-FAMILY CONFLICT 743
with the demands and responsibilities stem-
ming from the family, and vice versa (Kahn,

Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek, & Rosenthal, 1964).
The most common work-family conflict
model (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985) suggests
that conflict can arise from incompatible re-
quirements of time and strain between roles.
Time-based conflict occurs when individuals
spend an excessive amount of time in one
role, leaving insufficient time to physically
fulfill the responsibilities in another role.
Strain-based conflict occurs when individuals
are affected by the physical or emotional de-
mands (e.g., fatigue and irritability) of engag-
ing in one role to the point where they are
unable to attend to their other role(s). In ad-
dition to the distinction between time-based
and strain-based conflict, another important
distinction is the source of the conflict.
Demands can originate either at home or at
work and, depending on the source of the de-
mands, will determine whether the individ-
ual is experiencing work interference with
family (WIF) or family interference with work
(FIW) (e.g., Carlson, Kacmar, & Williams,
2000; Frone, Russell, & Cooper, 1992;
Netemeyer, Boles, & McMurrian, 1996).
Contemporary researchers primarily
use the theoretical structures of role theory
(Goode, 1960; Kahn et al., 1964) to describe
work-family conflict. Similar to Joplin,
Francesco, Shaffer, and Lau (2003), we also
suggest that social identity theory (Burke &
Stets, 2009) complements and guides the
explanatory power of role occupation in
the context of culture. More specifically,

Adams and Marshall (1996) suggest that iden-
tities based on commitments, values, and
goals provide individuals a consistent struc-
ture to direct their attention so that they can
select behaviors that are adaptive within each
of their roles. As such, individuals compare
the results of their own values, behaviors, and
performance to the results of a peer who is
assuming a similar role. It is this comparison
of one’s own behavior in relation to others
that verifies the merit of the values and asso-
ciated behaviors within a given role. The end
result of adapting one’s behavior, in compari-
son to others, is the creation of an identity
within a role that is satisfying and rewarding
(Burke & Stets, 2009). If discrepancies exist
between the expected and actual rewards
received within specific roles, individuals
will change their behaviors to assume new
identities within those roles. For example, if
an individual develops an identity of being
a good employee that incorporates spending
long hours on the job, he or she might expe-
rience conflict with the family-role identity
if the family identity of being a good spouse
requires spending time with his or her signifi-
cant other each evening after work.
Work-Family Confl ict and Ethnicity
Work-family conflict research has gained mo-
mentum in the past several years, with the
majority of the research being conducted on
Caucasian employees who reside in the
FIGURE 1. Proposed Work-Family Cultural Values Model

WIF = work interference with family.
FIW = family interference with work.
Individualism
Social
Acculturation
Strain-based WIF
Time-based FIW
Strain-based FIW
Time-based WIF
Language
Acculturation
OCTOBER 2013
The current study
aims to demonstrate
that ethnicity is
not an adequate

predictor of work-
family conflict.
Instead, we suggest
that examining
traits related to
cultural values
(i.e., individualism),
which are affected
by the process of
acculturation, are a
better predictor of
work-family conflict.
United States (Casper, Eby, Bordeaux,
Lockwood, & Lambert, 2007). Yet, there has
been a small number of studies that have ex-
amined work-family conflict among ethni-
cally diverse groups (Barnett, DelCampo,
DelCampo, & Steiner, 2003; DelCampo &
Hinrichs, 2006; Grzywacz, Quandt, Arcury, &
Marín, 2005; Roehling et al., 2005). These
studies, however, do not provide consistent
results with regard to distinguishing differ-
ences in work-family conflict. For example,
within the United States, Grzywacz et al.

(2005) found low incident rates of work-
family conflict among Hispanic immigrant
employees, whereas Roehling et al. (2005) did
not find any difference in levels of work-
family conflict based on ethnic
identification.
It should be noted that most
of the work-family conflict studies
(for exceptions, see Barnett et al.,
2003, and DelCampo & Hinrichs,
2006) examined cultural differ-
ences in terms of discrete ethnic
identification categories, and not
as continuous dimensions (i.e.,
acculturation levels or other cul-
tural characteristics). Researchers
(e.g., Casper et al., 2007; Phinney,
1996; Phinney & Ong, 2007; Pless
& Maak, 2004) have suggested
that differences in ethnic and cul-
tural identity need to be examined
because of the increasing diversity
of the workforce, and the need to
increase workplace inclusiveness.
Assessing ethnicity as an ante-
cedent to work-family conflict is a
considerable limitation due to het-
erogeneity within specific ethnic
groups. Phinney (1996) stressed
that, due to the within-group vari-
ation, “ethnic group membership
alone cannot predict behaviors or
attitudes in any psychologically

meaningful way” (p. 919). Since the broad
category of ethnicity does not fully describe
one’s identity, we believe that the category of
ethnicity is not a sensitive predictor of work-
family conflict. Indeed, past research has
documented that ethnicity (i.e., Caucasian,
African-American, Hispanic) has not been a
significant predictor of work-family conflict
(Roehling et al., 2005).
Instead of examining ethnicity, Phinney
(1996) suggests that there is a need to under-
stand how cultural values contribute to dif-
ferences in behavior and attitudes. As such,
the current study aims to demonstrate that
ethnicity is not an adequate predictor of
work-family conflict. Instead, we suggest that
examining traits related to cultural values
(i.e., individualism), which are affected by
the process of acculturation, are a better pre-
dictor of work-family conflict.
The Infl uence of Social Identity
Acculturation and Individualism
Acculturation is a process that is relevant for
a large number of residents/employees in the
United States. Within this country, 40 per-
cent of individuals who are of Hispanic origin
(approximately 14 million) are foreign-born
(US Census Bureau, 2008). As individuals
physically move from one culture to another,
they are exposed to new cultural values. As
the individuals move, they must decide

whether they will maintain or discard cul-
tural characteristics of their former culture or
seek out relationships and participate with
the mainstream group in the host country
(Marín & Gamba, 2003; Sam & Berry, 2006).
This phenomenon, termed acculturation
(Berry, Poortinga, Segall, & Dasen, 1992), oc-
curs “when groups of individuals having dif-
ferent cultures come into continuous first-
hand contact, with subsequent changes in
the original culture patterns of either or both
groups” (Redfield, Linton, & Herskovits,
1936, p. 149). Acculturation is a process that
can span generations, depending on the level
of immersion of the individual and family
into the majority culture (Roysircari-
Sodowsky & Maestas, 2000; Sam & Berry,
2006). In terms of acculturation of Hispanics
within the United States, researchers have re-
vealed a weakening adherence to traditional
cultural values of immigrant and subsequent
generations of Hispanics living in the United
States (Marín & Gamba, 2003). Thus,
Hispanics who emigrate from their native
Individualism has
been shown to
be significantly

different between
people in the United
States and Hispanic
countries (e.g.,
Mexico, Panama,
and Venezuela),
with US employers
valuing individualism
to a greater degree
than employers in
Hispanic countries.
country to the United States tend to alter
their cultural values as they undergo the pro-
cess of acculturation.
According to acculturation theory (Marín,
Sabogal, Marín, Otero-Sabogal, & Perez-Stable,
1987; Sam & Berry, 2006), acculturation can
occur along several dimensions, including
language and socialization. Language accul-
turation occurs as individuals learn and
use the predominant language of their new
nation. Language is the “primary medium”
whereby cultural information is transferred

(Sam & Berry, 2006). In fact, language acquisi-
tion may be considered the first step of accul-
turation, whereas a lack of communication
proficiency is a barrier to social interactions
and connections with members of the host
country. Socialization acculturation, on the
other hand, occurs as individuals adapt to
their new surroundings through social inter-
actions, such as developing and maintaining
friendships with individuals. Linguistic and
social interactions lead to sociocultural adap-
tation and the internalization of mainstream
cultural values, thus affecting one’s social
identity within the new culture (Schwartz
et al., 2006). Thus, while many Hispanics
are foreign-born, over time these individuals
acculturate toward an American-based value
and identity system.
Based on cultural value research (Hofstede,
1983; Singelis, Triandis, Bhawuk, & Gelfand,
1995), a cultural value that is significantly dif-
ferent between people in different countries
is individualism. Individualism describes a
preference for independence, freedom, com-
petition, and low levels of group identifica-
tion/integration (Hofstede & McCrae, 2004;
Pless & Maak, 2004; Singelis et al., 1995).
Within the context of the US workplace, indi-
vidualist traits are valued among employers
(Hofstede, 1983). The hierarchical leadership
business norm in the United States fosters
a system in which subordinates are encour-
aged to adapt to the thinking of their superi-
ors (Pless & Maak, 2004). Within the United
States, work supervisors typically support

the idea of competition, production, build-
ing relationships for the sake of usefulness,
and individualistic market conditions, with
little regard for the social factors that lead to
a sustainable workforce (e.g., creating a work-
force where diverse groups are able to work
together, creating a climate that reduces con-
flict between work and family; Pless & Maak,
2004). Individualism has been shown to be
significantly different between people in the
United States and Hispanic countries (e.g.,
Mexico, Panama, and Venezuela), with US
employers valuing individualism to a greater
degree than employers in Hispanic countries
(Hofstede, 1983; Singelis et al., 1995).
Since Hofstede’s (1983) early investiga-
tions into the cultural value of individualism,
many theoretical and measurement advance-
ments have been made that show individual-
ism is not a construct that is dichotomous in
relation to collectivism (Triandis
& Gelfand, 1998). In fact, individ-
ualism can be best characterized
in a polythetic manner that con-
sists of independence, priority for
individual over group goals, self-
reliance, competition, emotional
distance from groups, hedonism,
individual attitude preference over
group norms, and group behavior
that relies on exchange over com-
munal practices (Triandis, 1995;
Triandis & Gelfand, 1998). To
translate this theoretical concern

into a measure that can examine
the depth of the individualism
construct, Triandis and Gelfand
(1998) created and validated a
multidimensional assessment
that has been used extensively in
cross-cultural research (e.g., Tsui,
Nifadkar, & Ou, 2007).
Whereas the investigation
of individualism has often been
examined at the cultural level,
theoretical and empirical evi-
dence suggest that this construct
can also be measured at the individual
level (e.g., Barrett et al., 2004; Carpenter &
Radhakrishnan, 2000; Chen, Brockner, &
Chen, 2002; Eby & Dobbins, 1997; Moorman
& Blakely, 1995; Triandis, Bontempo,
Villareal, Asai, & Lucca, 1988; Triandis &
Gelfand, 1998; Yamaguchi, Kuhlman, &
Sugimori, 1995). Assessing individualism
OCTOBER 2013
Failure to engage
in the social norms
with neighbors and

other members of
society creates
awkward social
encounters and
can prevent the
development of a
new social network
that can provide
social support.
at the individual level acknowledges that,
whereas a particular society may be gener-
ally described as having high or low levels
of individualistic values, the people within
that given society can differ in their personal
level of individualism (i.e., an individual dif-
ference) dependent on their personal ideolo-
gies and/or the influences of their immediate
environment (Moorman & Blakely, 1994;
Schwartz et al., 2006). The multifaceted con-
struct of individualism has been successfully
assessed at the “individual level” (p. 126)
between Caucasian and Korean participants
with a measure developed by Triandis and
Gelfand (1998). Since Triandis and Gelfand’s
measure was validated, other researchers have
utilized this measure to assess indi-

vidualism between Caucasian and
Hispanic participants (e.g., Lee &
Choi, 2005; Schwartz, 2007).
Social identity theory can
guide the understanding of the
underlying processes associated
with acculturation and the change
of personal values such as of indi-
vidualism (Schwartz et al., 2006).
Identity can be described as an
individual’s ability to find mean-
ing in values and goals as well as
the ability to recognize how those
values and associated behaviors
can affect their future success. As
immigrants move from one cul-
ture into another, they must come
to terms with how their identity
as a family member and employee
fit into a new culture whose val-
ues may be different. Moreover,
as the immigrant is exposed to
cultural ideals and interacts with
the new social environment, his or her iden-
tity will likely change. In fact, Sam and Berry
(2006) suggest that while personality is typi-
cally considered a stable trait, the process of
acculturation does indeed contribute to per-
sonality changes. In sum, acculturation can
cause changes in identity pertaining to per-
sonal values such as individualism (Sam &
Berry, 2006; Schwartz et al., 2006).
Social identity theory (Burke & Stets, 2009;

Schwartz et al., 2006) suggests that individuals
who have relocated to a new country will feel
compelled to adjust their behaviors, values,
and identities (i.e., increased endorsement
of individualistic values) as a means of creat-
ing a sense of belonging among the majority
group, or as a mechanism to ensure success
within the familial and employment domains
within a new culture. This act of becoming
aligned with individualistic expectations of
the general societal and workplace standards
for behavior can alleviate any stress associ-
ated with having a personal identity that dif-
fers from current environmental standards. If
individuals choose not to acculturate to the
cultural norm (i.e., individualism) of the new
culture, consequences beyond individual
stress may occur. For example, not conform-
ing to the individualistic culture of the work-
place (e.g., not working mandatory overtime,
or not meeting high individual sales quotas)
could result in negative work outcomes (e.g.,
lack of promotions, loss of the job). Thus,
employees are likely to conform to the busi-
ness logic of their employer (e.g., respond-
ing to the demands of increased production,
working long hours). Eventually, the indi-
vidual will begin to internalize those behav-
iors. Moreover, failure to engage in the social
norms with neighbors and other members of
society creates awkward social encounters and
can prevent the development of a new social
network that can provide social support.
Empirical evidence and theory (Marín

& Gamba, 2003; Moorman & Blakely, 1994;
Sam & Berry, 2006; Schwartz et al., 2006) sug-
gest that immigrants’ value of individualism
can change due to the effects of acculturation.
Thus, we predict that Hispanics acculturating
to the United States would be exposed to, and
acculturate toward, increased levels of indi-
vidualism (Gomez, 2003).
Hypothesis 1: While controlling for ethnicity, ac-
culturation to the United States positively relates
to the cultural value of individualism.
Cultural values, including individualism,
have been proposed to affect experiences
of work-family conflict (Joplin et al., 2003;
Korabik, Lero, & Ayman, 2003). Joplin et al.
(2003) and Korabik et al. (2003) presented
models of cross-cultural work-family research
whereby they explicitly proposed a signifi-
cant link between individualism and work-
family conflict. The Korabik et al. framework
proposes that employees in individualistic
countries will experience greater WIF due
to societal policies and expectations that
included less social support from coworkers
and supervisors in tandem with fewer family-
friendly organizational policies, and higher
work demands that included longer work

hours, work overload, and increased work
involvement. Each of these organizational
characteristics is associated with increased
levels of work-family conflict (Byron, 2005).
In a similar vein, it has been suggested that
individualism is associated with decreased
family-related support systems (DelCampo &
Hinrichs, 2006; Hofstede, 1983; Korabik et al.,
2003) and work-family integration (Grzywacz
et al., 2007).
We found only one study (Yang et al.,
2000) that examined a relationship between
individualism and work-family conflict. They
found that employees in the United States
(i.e., individualists) experienced increased
levels of work-family conflict compared
to employees in China (i.e., collectivists).
Interestingly, Yang et al. (2000) did not explic-
itly measure individualism in their study,
instead letting individualism be determined
on the basis of the country in which partici-
pants resided. Though much theorizing has
been conducted pertaining to the linking of
individualism with work-family conflict (e.g.,
DelCampo & Hinrichs, 2006; Grzywacz et al.,
2007; Korabik et al., 2003), this relationship
has not been rigorously assessed.
Similar to Joplin et al. (2003) and Schwartz
et al. (2006), we suggest that individualism
can become part of one’s identity. People who
are individualistic have identities that tend to
be self-oriented, independent, and competi-
tive (Hofstede, 1983). Moreover, in a culture
that is driven by individualistic characteristics,

employee success is based on fulfilling high
work demands. Similarly, individualists are
less likely to have extended social support
at home, thus causing them to simultane-
ously need to fulfill home demands them-
selves. As such, we propose that the identity
characteristics of individualists will lead to
conflict between work and family roles.
Hypothesis 2: Individualism positively relates to
WIF and FIW.
Work-Family Confl ict Cultural Values
Model
Individuals who have immigrated to the
United States tend to immediately become
involved in the job market. This labor market
participation is important because employ-
ment is a crucial feature of being successful
after immigration (Bacallao & Smokowski,
2007; Grzywacz et al., 2005). As such, the
workplace becomes an integral part of their
acculturative process. This involvement with
the job market contributes to the employees’
interactions with individualistic workplace
business characteristics such as competition
and production orientation (Pless & Maak,
2004). This exposure of individualistic work-
place behaviors becomes internalized as em-
ployees need to meet behavior standards of
their employers and steer acculturative pro-
cesses and identity change in a way such that
individuals integrate individualism into their
personal identities. Whereby organizations

require adherence to company policies, indi-
viduals must comply with those rules or risk
forfeiture of their jobs. Thus, the conditions
of employment (e.g., long hours), alongside a
lack of job flexibility or permeability on the
part of an organization, lead to increased lev-
els of WIF.
The US culture lacks some of the norms
(e.g., distinct gender role responsibilities and
family support) that can attenuate work-
family conflict that are prevalent in other
countries. For example, in several Latin
American countries there are strong beliefs
that women are primarily responsible for
child rearing and household maintenance,
whereas men are the household breadwin-
ners (Paterna & Martinez, 2006). This situa-
tion allows many women to stay at home and
focus their energies on family responsibilities.
However, upon immigration, employment
and family responsibilities may transform,
with women being more likely to enter the
OCTOBER 2013
workforce (Bacallao & Smokowski, 2007),
a situation that is associated with increased
levels of FIW as each adult in the family must
contribute to work and family (Duxbury &
Higgins, 1991). Thus, the adults in the house-

hold must alter their family-related identities
in terms of reallocating domestic responsi-
bilities. Moreover, the ideal of valuing family
over individual interests is conducive to situ-
ations where extended family members assist
with the day-to-day family affairs (Bacallao &
Smokowski, 2007). Alternatively, US culture’s
ideal of individualism over family interests
lends itself to the loss of social support that
immigrants may have enjoyed in their native
culture (Bacallao & Smokowski, 2007; Spector
et al., 2004). The isolation and disconnect
stemming from single-family housing that is
predominant in individualistic cultures may
be stressful (Spector et al., 2004) and lead to
increased FIW (Byron, 2005). In sum, we pro-
pose that identity changes occurring during
the processes of acculturation to the United
States lead individuals to take on the iden-
tity characteristics of individualism. In turn,
adherence to an individualistic identity con-
tributes to greater levels of WIF and FIW.
Hypothesis 3: While controlling for ethnicity, in-
dividualism mediates the relationship between ac-
culturation and WIF/FIW.
Alternative Model
A smaller body of literature has suggested that
an inverse relationship, as opposed to what is
described in Hypothesis 1, exists between accul-
turation and individualistic characteristics. This
alternate theoretical approach postulates that
immigrants to the United States are self-selected
individuals who possess the individual charac-

teristics of high motivation and a drive to suc-
ceed in the host nation’s economic labor mar-
ket (Chiswick, 1978). Carola and Suárez-Orozco
(1994) examined the personalities of Hispanic
migrants and found that the individuals tended
to have an achievement-nurturance factor to
their personality. Similarly, Boneva and Frieze
(2001) found that Hispanic immigrants have
personalities that consist of high work motiva-
tion, a desire for achievement, and a decreased
need for affiliation. Whereas these particular
studies do not specifically attribute “individual-
ism” to immigrants’ desire to leave their native
country for work in the United States, some of
the personality traits that are examined (e.g.,
high achievement, high motivation) are char-
acteristic of individualism. As such, we tested
an alternative model that examined whether,
while controlling for ethnicity, acculturation
mediates the relationship between individual-
ism and WIF/FIW.
Method
Participants
A total of 997 participants submitted an on-
line or paper survey. For participants to be in-
cluded in the final sample, they had to work
at least 20 hours per week, live with at least
one family member, live and work in the
United States, and identify as Caucasian/
Anglo or Hispanic. A further consideration of
study inclusion was that the participants
completed all portions of the survey.

Participant completion of the survey indi-
cated that participants were able to identify
with the constructs contained within the sur-
vey. For example, completion of the accultur-
ation questions provided evidence that
knowledge of the English and/or Spanish lan-
guage and affiliation with Hispanics and
Caucasians were meaningful to their lives.
The final sample included 309 participants
who were employed in an independent and
diverse range of industries (see Table I for a
breakdown of participants by industry). Of
these participants, 176 identified themselves
as Caucasian (100 men and 76 women) and
133 identified themselves as Hispanic
(76 men and 57 women). See Table II for a
descriptive summary of participant demo-
graphics along with means and standard de-
viations of measures included in the study.
One hundred sixty-one (91.5 percent)
Caucasians and 75 (56.4 percent) Hispanics
completed the survey via the Internet.
Remaining participants completed the survey
using a paper format. The nature of our re-
cruitment strategies does not permit us to cal-
culate a survey response rate.
Measures
Demographic Characteristics

Participants were asked to indicate their gen-
der, ethnicity, marital status, level of educa-
tion, number of children living in the home
under the age of 18, and generation of immi-
gration status.
Acculturation
The 12-item Short Acculturation Scale for
Hispanics was used to assess an individual’s
adherence to Hispanic culture (Marín et al.,
1987). A sample item that measures linguistic
acculturation is “What language(s) do you
usually speak at home?” while a sample item
that measures acculturation based on social-
ization includes, “Your close friends are—.”
Response options ranged from 1 (only Spanish
or All Latinos/Hispanics) to 5 (only English or
All Americans). The design of this measure is
similar to multiple other acculturation mea-
sures that ask participants to choose prefer-
ence between a mainstream norm and an
ethnic minority norm (Kang, 2006; Taras,
2008). The level of acculturation is inferred
from five questions about English-language
use and preference in childhood, at home,
with friends, when reading and speaking, and
when thinking. This particular measure was
T A B L E I Industry of Employment Among Study
Participants
Caucasian Hispanic

Industry n n
Administration, offi ce 4 5
Advertising, media, art 7 4
Architecture, landscape 3 –
Conservation, recreation 1 2
Construction 7 19
Education 22 10
Engineering 4 4
Finance 15 4
Government 11 5
Health care 15 12
Information technology 10 4
Law enforcement, legal, security 13 7
Manufacturing, production 14 5
Military 2 1
Power generation, mining 7 3
Retail, sales 18 16
Service, hospitality, restaurant 7 20

Social services 7 1
Telecommunications 4 1
Transportation 5 4
Warehouse – 2
Four participants did not indicate their occupation.
OCTOBER 2013
chosen to assess acculturation because theo-
retical and empirical studies have provided
strong evidence that culture is disseminated
and acquired through language and interac-
tions with others (Kang, 2006; Lau, Lee, &
Chiu, 2004; Sam & Berry, 2006). Marín et al.
(1987) validated the scale among samples of
Hispanic and non-Hispanic Caucasian sam-
ples, finding that the measure had the same
number of factors among the non-Hispanic
group and the Hispanic group, while also pro-
viding evidence of discriminant validity be-
tween the two ethnic groups. This measure
has been successfully utilized to assess the
level of acculturation among Hispanics and
Caucasians living in the United States across
numerous studies (e.g., Calvillo & Flaskerud,
1993; L. R. Chavez, McMullin, Mishra, &
Hubbell, 2001; Johnsen, Spring, Pingitore,

Sommerfeld, & MacKirnan, 2002; Landier
et al., 2011).
The computation of reliabilities of the
acculturation scales for the whole sample
follows: socialization acculturation had a
Cronbach’s α of 0.90 (with standardized
items 0.91) and language acculturation had
a Cronbach’s α of 0.95 (with standardized
items 0.95). The computation of reliabilities
of the acculturation scales for the Caucasian
sample follows: socialization acculturation
had a Cronbach’s α of 0.87 (with standard-
ized items 0.88) and language acculturation
had a Cronbach’s α of 0.78 (with standardized
items 0.81). The computation of reliabilities
of the acculturation scales for the Hispanic
sample follows: socialization acculturation
ized items 0.87) and language acculturation
ized items 0.94).
Individualism
Eight items from the Horizontal and Vertical
Individualism and Collectivism measure
(Triandis & Gelfand, 1998) were utilized to
T A B L E I I Descriptive Characteristics of Participants
Utilizing All Scale Items Before Model Fitting
Caucasian (n = 176) Hispanic (n = 133)
Mean SD Mean SD

Sex 0.44 0.50 0.43 0.50
Age 37.18 10.69 32.84 10.70
Education 4.07 1.25 3.19 1.53
Number of children at home 0.93 1.10 1.27 1.40
Marital status 0.72 0.45 0.41 0.49
Generation 2.89 0.39 1.95 0.87
Format 0.94 0.23 0.57 0.49
Individualism 3.87 0.60 3.75 0.69
Acculturation (socialization) 4.21 0.74 2.81 1.09
Acculturation (language) 4.88 0.27 3.46 1.28
Time-based WIF 2.77 1.04 2.81 1.07
Strain-based WIF 2.47 1.05 2.59 1.12
Time-based FIW 2.13 0.82 2.32 1.01
Strain-based FIW 2.01 0.86 2.25 1.02
Education levels: 1 = less than high school, 2 = completed high
school, 3 = some college, 4 = four-year college degree, 5 =
advanced

degree, 6 = professional degree.
Marital status: 0 = married, 1 = not married.
Generation: 1 = fi rst generation, 2 = second generation, 3 =
third-plus generation.
Higher values indicate higher levels of the specifi c scale.
measure individualism. Sample items from
the scales include “I often do my own thing”
and “winning is everything.” Response op-
tions ranged from 1 (never) to 7 (always). The
Cronbach’s α for this measure was .73.
Work-Family Confl ict
Twelve items from the Work-Family Conflict
Scale (Carlson et al., 2000) were used to mea-
sure time- and strain-based WIF and FIW. A
higher mean score on each of the four scales
indicates greater inter-role interference.
Sample items from the scales include: “I have
to miss family activities due to the amount of
time I must spend on work responsibilities”
(time-based WIF; α = .86); “when I get home
from work I am often too frazzled to partici-
pate in family activities/responsibilities”
(strain-based WIF; α = .90); “the time I spend

on family responsibilities often interferes
with my work responsibilities” (time-based
FIW; α = .86); and “due to stress at home, I
am often preoccupied with family matters at
work” (strain-based FIW; α = .90). Response
options ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5
(strongly agree).
Procedure
The survey included questions assessing
demographic characteristics, acculturation,
individualism, and work-family conflict. All
participants were told that the study exam-
ined work and family experiences. Participants
were not provided with any incentive to
participate.
To accomplish our objective of recruit-
ing a diverse sample of both Caucasian and
Hispanic participants, all participants were
given the option of completing an online
or paper/pencil survey in either English or
Spanish. The informed consent, instructions,
and survey were translated from English to
Spanish via back-translation and committee
approach by two people, as suggested by Van
de Vijver and Hambleton (1996). Thirty-six
participants completed the survey in Spanish,
with 35 participants being Hispanic and one
participant being Caucasian.
Two participant recruitment strategies
were employed. The first strategy consisted
of the administration of English and Spanish
surveys to patrons of motor vehicle offices in

the southwest United States over three con-
secutive weeks in January 2008. The second
recruitment strategy consisted of recruiting
participants via the Internet to a web-based
survey that was available in English and
Spanish. We recruited via posted links to the
survey on the Internet through: (a) focused
postings with the URL of the survey posted on
websites (e.g., Craigslist, MySpace, Facebook)
and (b) the snowball method that included
approximately 30 initial contacts (Goodman,
1961). Because a higher proportion of
Caucasian participants were recruited via
the Internet, we included the type of format
the participant used to answer the question-
naire (online vs. paper/pencil) as a control
variable.
Results
Data Analysis and Model
Development
An initial analysis of the data showed that the
constructs utilized in the current study dem-
onstrated adequate measurement characteris-
tics. The Cronbach’s alpha reliabilities of
each of the scales were above .70. Further evi-
dence of the effectiveness of the acculturation
measure was seen in the expected validity be-
tween the Caucasian and Hispanic partici-
pants in an analysis of the means between the
two ethnic groups. The Caucasian participant
averages for language and social acculturation
were 4.88 (SD = .27) and 4.21 (SD = .74), re-
spectively. These scores are extremely high

considering the highest score was 5.0. The
Hispanic participants scored 3.46 (SD = 1.28)
and 2.81 (SD = 1.09), respectively. Caucasian
participants were significantly more socially
acculturated than Hispanic participants ac-
cording to an independent samples t-test
t(306) = 10.75, p < .01, and the Caucasian
participants were significantly more socially
acculturated than Hispanic participants
OCTOBER 2013
according to an independent samples t-test
t(307) = 15.33, p < .01. The discrimination be-
tween the scores mimics the findings of Marín
et al. (1987), leading us to believe that the
measure is assessing acculturation among
Caucasians and Hispanics as it was designed.
Adequate power for a model that includes
Hispanic and Caucasian participants, along
with the necessary control variables, indicates
38 degrees of freedom. According to Gnambs
(2011) and Kim (2005), the model requires
a sample size of 285 participants to achieve a
power of .80. Thus, our model has adequate
power given the number of participants in
the current study.
In order to test the measurement model
associated with Hypotheses 1–3, a confirma-

tory factor analysis was performed with LISREL
8.54 (Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1993). We followed
standard recommendations for global fit indi-
ces (i.e., Bentler, 1990; Bentler & Bonett, 1980;
Brown, 2006; Hu & Bentler, 1999). The initial
model was tested with 32 items loading onto
six oblique factors (N = 262, after listwise
deletion of participants with missing data).
This initial measurement model provided a
poor fit for the data (χ2 = 1,659.82, df = 449,
p < .0001, root mean square error of approxi-
mation [RMSEA] = .10, goodness-of-fit index
[GFI] = .72, comparative fit index [CFI] = .92,
normed fit index [NFI] = .89, non-normed fit
index [NNFI] = .91).
Theoretical rationale in combination
with statistical modification indices provided
information that guided the trimming of a
model to improve fit. In fact, according to
Brown (2006), most models require modifi-
cations to improve fit of the data. For exam-
ple, items from the acculturation scale were
dropped based on the factor analysis reported
in Marín et al. (1987). As such, the 12-item
acculturation scale was split into a three-item
socialization acculturation factor and a four-
item language-based acculturation factor for
use in the current study, α = .90 and α = .95,
respectively. In an effort to modify the indi-
vidualism scale, we examined the published
structural properties of the measure (Triandis
& Gelfand, 1998). Triandis and Gelfand
(1998) provide evidence that the factor load-
ings onto the latent variables were low (i.e.,

.40–.68). Further, the applicability of the indi-
vidualism items for a sample with a large pro-
portion of Hispanic participants is unknown,
leaving the post-hoc item trimming based on
statistical properties of the scale. Considering
a lack of strong evidence from the literature
with regard to the selection of items to be
retained for the individualism scale, we opted
to examine the modification indices to make
decisions. Modification indices suggested the
retention of four individualism items (see
the Appendix). Each of the three-item work-
family conflict measures were also assessed
for model fit. Similar to the individualism
items, the work-family conflict items have
never been tested among a sample contain-
ing a large proportion of Hispanic partici-
pants; thus, post-hoc item trimming based
on statistical properties of the scale was
conducted. Further, research indicates that
work-family conflict can be effectively mea-
sured with as few as one item per construct
(Matthews, Kath, & Barnes-Farrell, 2010). As
such, two items from each of the four work-
family conflict subscales were included in
the final model. In sum, a new seven-factor
oblique measurement model was tested (see
the Appendix).
The final model provided good global
goodness-of-fit indices (χ2 = 164.80, df = 131,
p > .01, RMSEA = .03, GFI = .94, CFI = .99,
NFI = .96, NNFI = .99), which were signifi-
cantly better than the fit indices for the one-
factor model (χ2 = 1,854.14, df = 152, p < .01,
RMSEA = .20, GFI = .58, CFI = .66, NFI = 64,

NNFI = .92; Δχ2 = 1,689.34, df = 21, p < .01).
To estimate the threat for common method
bias, a new CFA with an unmeasured latent
method factor was conducted (Podsakoff,
MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). This
model did not show a significantly better
goodness of fit (χ2 = 163.88, df = 130, p >
.01, RMSEA = .03, GFI = .94, CFI = .99, NFI =
96, NNFI = .99; Δχ2 = 0.92, df = 21, p > .05),
providing evidence that common method
bias was not a threat to the model.
Test of the Hypotheses
Statistical control of variables that can con-
tribute to alternative explanations is important
when testing models related to organizational
research (Becker, 2005). Past research (e.g.,
Byron, 2005) has shown that demographic
characteristics heavily influence individuals’
experiences of work-family conflict. Further,
Marín and Marín (1991) advised researchers
to take basic demographics into account
when assessing characteristics related to eth-
nicity (e.g., in order to control for potential
differences related to demographics and not
ethnicity). Thus, in the current study, we
chose our demographic control variables
based on their significant association with

our primary variables of interest (i.e., accul-
turation, individualism, and work-family
conflict). In an examination of Table III, the
Pearson correlation coefficients indicate that
ethnicity, gender, number of children, level
of education, marital status, format of the
survey (i.e., online vs. paper/pencil), and gen-
eration of immigration are significantly asso-
ciated with our primary variables. Thus, we
controlled for these variables as well as the
type of format in the analysis of our model.
Had we not controlled for these variables in
the final model, the analysis of the hypothe-
ses relating to acculturation, individualism,
and work-family conflict would have been
confounded (Becker, 2005; Marín & Marín,
1991).
A full test of the hypothesized relation-
ships was conducted (N = 296, after listwise
deletion of participants with missing data) by
averaging the items from each scale and per-
forming a path analysis with covariance struc-
ture analysis using LISREL 8.54 (Jöreskog &
Sörbom, 1993). As shown in Figure 1, p. 743,
the relationships between predictor variables
and each of the time- and strain-based WIF/
FIW outcomes were differentially estimated
in the model. A theoretically based correla-
tion between each of the WIF/FIW variables
was modeled. Similarly, a theoretically based
correlated relationship between language and
socialization acculturation was estimated in
the model. The hypothesized model generated
an excellent goodness of fit (χ2 = 13.00, df =
38, p > .05, RMSEA = 0.00, GFI = 0.99, CFI =

1.00, NFI = 0.99, NNFI = 1.03). Nevertheless,
individualism predicted significantly only
strain-based WIF. After constraining the
nonsignificant relationships to zero, the
final model showed excellent goodness of fit
(χ2=15.60, df = 41, p > .05, RMSEA = 0.00,
GFI = 0.99, CFI = 1.00, NFI = 0.99, NNFI =
1.03) and the comparison of the chi-square
showed not to be significant (Δχ2 = 2.60, df
= 3, p > .05), suggesting that this final model
had a better fit based on the data. In order to
test whether the mediation relationships were
only partial, a full mediation model was esti-
mated. The goodness of fit for this model was
excellent (χ2 = 3.03, df = 30, p > 0.05, RMSEA
= 0.00, GFI = 1.00, CFI = 1.00, NFI = 1.00,
NNFI = 1.05), but the improvement on the
chi-square was not significant (Δχ2 =12.57,
df = 11, p > .05), suggesting that the added
relationships, which tested whether the rela-
tionships were partial, were not significant.
Finally, a null model, with all the hypoth-
esized relationships constrained to zero, was
shown to have a significantly lower good-
ness of fit than the final model (χ2 = 51.86,
df = 44, p < .05, RMSEA = .03, GFI = .98,
CFI = .99, NFI = 97, NNFI = .99; Δχ2 = 36.26,
df = 3, p < .001).
As shown in Figure 2, the final model
shows that several demographic variables are
related to the variables of the study. Hispanic
individuals, compared to non-Hispanics,
showed a significantly lower level of social-
ization acculturation (β = −.26; COV1 = −.59,

t(295) = −4.96, p < .05) , as well as a lower level
of language socialization (β = −.16; COV =
−.35, t(295) = −3.50, p < .05). Women showed a
significantly lower level of individualism (β =
−.18; COV = −.24, t(295) = −3.26, p < .05) and
less time-based WIF than did men (β = –.15;
COV = –.33, t(295) = –2.95, p < .05). Also, those
who reported to be third generation showed a
higher level of socialization acculturation (β =
.16; COV = .23, t(295) = 3.07, p < .05), language
acculturation (β = .42; COV = .59, t(295) = 9.34,
p < .05) but lower levels of individualism
(β = –.23; COV = –.19, t(295) = –2.85, p < .05).
Last, response format was positively related
to higher levels of socialization acculturation
(β = .25; COV = .70, t(295) = 4.96, p < .05)
and language acculturation (β = .24; COV =
.65, t(295) = 5.18, p < .05). The similarity of fit
and coefficients between the full model and
the Hispanic-only model provide evidence
OCTOBER 2013
T
A
B
L
E

I
I
I
P
e
a
rs
o
n
C
o
rr
e
la
ti
o
n
C
o
e
ffi
c
ie

n
ts
B
e
tw
e
e
n
V
a
ri
a
b
le
s
in
F
in
a
l
M
o
d
e

l
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1.
F
o
rm
a
t
–

2
.
E
th
n
ic
it
y
−
.4
3
*
*
–
3
.
S
e
x
−
.0
7
−
.0

0
–
4
.
A
g
e
.0
8
−
.2
0
*
*
−
.1
6
*
*
–
5
.
E

d
u
c
a
ti
o
n
l
e
v
e
l
.5
7
*
*
−
.3
0
*
*
−
.0
1
.1
2

*
–
6
.
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
ch
il
d
re
n
−
.2
8
*
*
.1

3
*
.0
7
.0
4
−
.1
9
*
*
–
7.
M
a
ri
ta
l
s
ta
tu
s
.0
8

−
.3
1
*
*
−
.1
8
*
*
.3
3
*
*
.1
2
*
.1
7
*
*
–
8
.

G
e
n
e
ra
ti
o
n
.4
8
*
*
−
.6
0
*
*
.0
6
.1
5
*
.3
4

*
*
−
.0
9
.2
1
*
*
–
9
.
In
d
iv
id
u
a
li
s
m
.1
7
*
*

−
.1
0
−
.2
0
*
*
.0
3
.1
0
−
.1
4
*
−
.0
1
.0
8
(.
5
3

)
1
0
.
A
c
c
u
lt
u
ra
ti
o
n
(s
o
c
ia
li
za
ti
o
n
)

.5
7
*
*
−
.6
1
*
*
−
.0
7
.1
3
*
.4
0
*
*
−
.1
3
*
.2
5

*
*
.5
9
*
*
.2
4
*
*
(.
9
0
)
11
.
A
c
c
u
lt
u
ra
ti
o
n

(l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
)
.5
7
*
*
−
.6
3
*
*
.0
0
.1
8
*
*

.3
6
*
*
−
.0
8
.2
6
*
*
.7
2
*
*
.2
5
*
*
.7
0
*
*
(.
9
5

)
1
2
. T
im
e
-b
a
s
e
d
W
IF
.0
1
.0
2
−
.2
0
*
*
−
.0
3

−
.0
3
−
.0
0
.0
7
−
.0
7
.1
4
*
.1
0
.0
2
–
1
3
.
S
tr
a

in
-b
a
s
e
d
W
IF
−
.1
1
.0
5
−
.0
1
−
.0
3
−
.1
4
*
.0

9
−
.0
2
−
.0
7
.1
1
−
.0
6
−
.0
8
.5
0
*
*
–
1
4
. T
im
e

-b
a
s
e
d
F
IW
−
.1
8
.1
1
−
.0
4
−
.0
4
−
.1
1
.0
7
−
.0

5
−
.1
6
*
*
−
.0
2
−
.0
8
−
.1
5
*
.2
8
*
*
.2
5
*
*
–

1
5
.
S
tr
a
in
-b
a
s
e
d
F
IW
−
.2
2
*
*
.1
3
*
−
.0
1
−

.0
4
−
.1
9
*
*
.1
1
−
.0
4
−
.1
6
*
*
−
.0
2
−
.1
6
*
*

−
.1
7
*
*
.2
7
*
*
.4
7
*
*
.3
7
*
*
*
p
<
0
.0
5
.
*
*
p

<
0
.0
1.
C
ro
n
b
a
ch
’s
a
lp
h
a
c
o
e
ffi
c
ie
n
ts

a
re
r
e
p
o
rt
e
d
o
n
t
h
e
d
ia
g
o
n
a
l.
W
IF
=

w
o
rk
i
n
te
rf
e
re
n
c
e
w
it
h
f
a
m
il
y
.
F
IW
=
f

a
m
il
y
i
n
te
rf
e
re
n
c
e
w
it
h
w
o
rk
.
F
o
rm
a
t:
0

=
p
a
p
e
r,
1
=
w
e
b
.
E
th
n
ic
it
y
:
0
=
C
a
u
c
a

s
ia
n
,
1
=
H
is
p
a
n
ic
.
S
e
x
:
0
=
m
a
le
,
1
=
f

e
m
a
le
.
E
d
u
c
a
ti
o
n
l
e
v
e
ls
:
1
=
l
e
s
s
t
h

a
n
h
ig
h
s
ch
o
o
l,
2
=
c
o
m
p
le
te
d
h
ig
h
s
ch
o

o
l,
3
=
s
o
m
e
c
o
ll
e
g
e
,
4
=
t
w
o
-y
e
a
r

c
o
ll
e
g
e
d
e
g
re
e
,
5
=
f
o
u
r-
y
e
a
r
c
o
ll
e

g
e
d
e
g
re
e
,
6
=
a
d
v
a
n
c
e
d
d
e
g
re
e
,

7
=
p
ro
fe
s
s
io
n
a
l
d
e
g
re
e
.
M
a
ri
ta
l
s
ta
tu

s
:
0
=
n
o
t
m
a
rr
ie
d
,
1
=
m
a
rr
ie
d
.
G
e
n
e
ra

ti
o
n
:
1
=
fi
r
s
t-
g
e
n
e
ra
ti
o
n
i
m
m
ig
ra
ti
o

n
,
2
=
s
e
c
o
n
d
-g
e
n
e
ra
ti
o
n
i
m
m
ig
ra
ti
o

n
,
3
=
t
h
ir
d
-p
lu
s
-g
e
n
e
ra
ti
o
n
i
m
m
ig
ra

ti
o
n
.
H
ig
h
e
r
v
a
lu
e
s
i
n
d
ic
a
te
d
a
h
ig
h
e

r
le
v
e
l
o
n
t
h
e
r
e
s
p
e
c
ti
v
e
s
c
a
le
.

that the relationships between constructs are
meaningful for both ethnic groups.
The final model results provide support
for Hypothesis 1, which predicted that accul-
turation to the United States will be positively
related to individualism after controlling for
ethnicity. Social-based acculturation level was
significantly related to individualism (β = .19;
COV = .11, t(295) = 2.35, p < .05), as well as
language acculturation, which also was sig-
nificantly related to individualism (β = .41;
COV = .24, t(295) = 4.35, p < .05).
Hypothesis 2 predicted a significant rela-
tionship between individualism and WIF as
well as FIW. According to the model, how-
ever, the individualism was only significantly
related to strain-based WIF (β = .12; COV =
.19, t(295) = 2.32, p < .05). Individualism was
only indirectly related to time-based WIF (β
= .04; COV = .06, t(295) = 2.25, p < .05), with
time-based FIW (β = .01; COV = .01, t(295) =
2.16, p < .05), and with strain-based FIW (β =
.03; COV = .05, t(295) = 2.22, p < .05) through
strain-based WIF. Thus, Hypothesis 2 was
only partially supported.
Although there was not adequate power
(i.e., small sample of Hispanic-only partici-
pants) to detect statistically significant dif-
ferences, we tested the hypothesized model

with Hispanic-only participants (N = 123,
after listwise deletion of participants with
missing data) to assess whether the patterns
of the relationships were similar across mod-
els. The model had excellent goodness of fit
(χ2 = 10.47, df = 31, p > .05, RMSEA = 0.00,
GFI = 0.99, CFI = 1.00, NFI = 0.98, NNFI =
1.10), no significant different goodness of fit
than the full mediation model (χ2 = 3.62,
df = 23, p > .05, RMSEA = 0.00, GFI = 1.00,
CFI = 1.00, NFI = 0.99, NNFI = 1.13; Δχ2
=6.85, df = 8, p > .05), and a better fit than
the null model (χ2 = 39.96, df = 38, p > .05,
RMSEA = 0.00, GFI = 0.95, CFI = 0.99, NFI
= 0.93, NNFI = 0.99; Δχ2 = 29.49, df = 7,
FIGURE 2. Work-Family Cultural Values Model with
Standardized Beta-Weights
.19
–.05
.02
.01
.10
.29
–.15
–.16–.30
.42 .23

.20
Acculturation
(socialization)
.247
.08
.16 .16
.25
Strain-based WIF
.28
.16
Time-based FIW
Strain-based FIW
Time-based WIF
.11
.12
Gender Number of
children
.49Acculturation
(language)

Individualism
.31
Marital
status
.07
–.30
.17
–.23
Education
Generation
Format
Only Hispanic participants are represented in this model.
Hypothesized paths with coeffi cients having a signifi cance of
p < .05 are indicated with a solid line.
Format: 0 = paper, 1 = web.
Ethnicity: 0 = Caucasian, 1= Hispanic.
Sex: 0 = male, 1 = female.
school, 3 = some college, 4 = two-year college
degree, 5 = four-year college degree, 6 = advanced degree, 7 =

professional degree.
Marital status: 0 = not married, 1 = married.
Generation: 1 = fi rst-generation immigration, 2 = second-
generation immigration, 3 = third-plus-generation
immigration.
Higher values indicated a higher level on the respective scale.
OCTOBER 2013
p < .01). Language-based acculturation was
significantly related to individualism (β = .49;
COV = .26, t(122) = 3.90, p < .05). However,
with the loss of statistical power due to the
reduced sample size, social-based accultura-
tion did not reach the significance level to
support the relationship with individualism
(β = .06; COV = .10, t(122) = 0.88, p > .05)
(see Figure 3). Further, due to the low level
of statistical power, despite the fact that the
coefficient was exactly the same as the one
obtained with the whole sample, the hypoth-
esized relationship between individualism
and strain-based WIF was not significant

(β = .12; COV = .19, t(122) = 1.53, p > .05).
This pattern of the coefficients obtained from
the Hispanic-only model suggests that the
results obtained with the full sample (i.e.,
Caucasians and Hispanics) were not necessar-
ily due to the inclusion of Caucasians in the
study. Despite the lack of significance of spe-
cific coefficients, the fit of the model in addi-
tion to the achievement of a similar pattern of
coefficients among the model variables show
that this model explains the effect of accul-
turation indirectly through individualism
on WIF among Hispanics as well as among
Caucasians.
The comparison of the final model with
the fully mediated model provides sup-
port for Hypothesis 3, which proposed that
acculturation and individualism mediate
the relationship between ethnicity and WIF/
FIW. Specifically, individualism mediates
the relationship between acculturation and
strain-based WIF. Moreover, this mediation
effect reaches to significant inter-correlations
between strain-based WIF and each of the
other WFC constructs. The lack of significance
on the change of the chi-square after includ-
ing all the partial mediation relationships
in the full model shows that individualism
mediates the relationship between language-
based acculturation and strain-based WIF.
Two final alternative models were esti-
mated to test whether acculturation was
mediating the relationship between individu-
alism and WIF/FIW, first with the whole sam-

ple and second with only Hispanics. In this
model, individualism was hypothesized to
influence both types of acculturation, which
in turn influence the four dimensions of
WIF/FIW. This model with the whole sample
showed excellent goodness of fit (χ2 = 11.80,
df = 34, p > .05, RMSEA = 0.00, GFI = 0.99,
CFI = 1.00, NFI = 0.99, NNFI = 1.03); unfortu-
nately, since this model is not nested with the
hypothesized model, statistical comparison is
not possible. Nevertheless, individualism pre-
dicted significantly only time-based WIF. After
constraining the nonsignificant relationships
to zero, the final model also showed excel-
lent goodness of fit (χ2 = 14.71, df = 41, p >
.05, RMSEA = 0.00, GFI = 0.99, CFI = 1.00,
NFI = 0.99, NNFI = 1.03) and the compari-
son of the chi-square was not to be significant
(Δχ2 = 2.91, df = 7, p > .05), suggesting that
this final model had a better fit based on the
data. The full mediation model did not show
a significant difference in goodness of fit
(χ2 = 3.03, df = 30, p > .05, RMSEA = 0.00,
GFI = 1.00, CFI = 1.00, NFI = 1.00, NNFI =
1.05; Δχ2 =11.68, df = 11, p > .05) and a bet-
ter fit than the null model (χ2 = 51.86, df =
44, p > .05, RMSEA = 0.03, GFI = 0.98, CFI =
0.99, NFI = 0.97, NNFI = 0.99; Δχ2 =37.15, df
= 3, p < .01). As shown in Figure 4, individu-
alism was significantly related to social-based
acculturation (β = .13; COV = .23, t(295) = 3.30,
p < .05) and to language acculturation, which
also was significantly related to individualism
(β = .17; COV = .28, t(295) = 4.83, p < .05).
Nevertheless, only social-based acculturation

was significantly related to time-based WIF (β
= .17; COV = .17, t(295) = 2.52, p < .05).
The same analysis conducted with only
Hispanics showed that the initial model had
very good fit indices (χ2 = 8.19, df = 27, p >
.05, RMSEA = 0.00, GFI = 0.99, CFI = 1.00, NFI
= 0.99, NNFI = 1.03). Nevertheless, as shown
in Figure 5, due to a loss of power due to the
smaller sample size, even though the relation-
ship between social-based acculturation and
time-based WIF was even higher than with
the whole sample (β = .15; COV = .14, t(122)
= 1.31, p > .05), no significant paths were
found between either type of acculturation
and any of the four dimensions of WIF/FIW
measures. Similarly, the relationship between
individualism and social-based accultura-
tion was not significant (β = .10; COV = .15,
t(122) = 1.38, p > .05). In summary, the results
suggest that, empirically, the primary (accul-
turation to individualism) and alternative
models (individualism to acculturation) are
both good models. Nevertheless, considering
the lack of strong theoretical theory support-
ing the notion that individualism would be
an antecedent of acculturation, these results
might be interpreted cautiously.

Discussion
Peppas (2006) wrote, “Companies have real-
ized the necessity of building a multicultural
workforce and have actively recruited greater
numbers of Hispanics at all organizational
levels” (p. 119). With the increase of minority
employees (e.g., Hispanic employees) in the
workforce, it is imperative that organizational
decision makers understand how the work-
family interface affects employees from diverse
backgrounds. Organizations will benefit
when they realize that ethnicity, when exam-
ined alone, does not contribute to differences
in employees’ work-family experiences.
Instead, employers need to look at how a di-
verse group of employees is differentially ac-
culturating to the values of the US business
regimen. The findings of this study contrib-
ute to a small body of empirical research that
examines work-family issues of the growing
population of Hispanic employees. Further,
our findings provide insight into how manag-
ers might better use the diversity of their
workforce to inform organizational work-
family policies.
Researchers who have examined work-
family conflict between Hispanic and
Caucasian Americans have found low rates
of role conflict among Hispanic immigrant
employees (Grzywacz et al., 2005) or no
.19

.24
–.15
–.18
–19.
.42 .16
.19
Acculturation
(socialization)
.247
.13
.15 .17
.25
Strain-based WIF
.27
.17
Time-based FIW
Strain-based FIW
.16
.11

Number of
children
–.16
.41Acculturation
(language)
Individualism
–.26
.25
Ethnicity
Marital
status
.10
Education
GenderGeneration
Format
Time-based WIF
FIGURE 3. Work-Family Cultural Values Model with
Standardized Beta-Weights
This model includes Hispanic and Caucasian participants.
Only coeffi cients with signifi cance of p < .05 are included in
the fi gure. Dashed boxes and arrows indicate control

variables. Bolded boxes and arrows indicate a signifi cant path.
Ethnicity: 0 = Caucasian, 1 = Hispanic.
immigration.
OCTOBER 2013
differences between Hispanic employees and
other groups (e.g., Caucasian and African-

American employees; Roehling et al., 2005).
Our findings, however, suggest that these
equivocal results may have been due to a
focus on ethnicity as the variable of interest
rather than on culturally relevant variables
(i.e., acculturation and individualism) that
are more likely to actually affect work-fam-
ily conflict. Thus, in the current study, we
focused on acculturation and individualism
while holding ethnicity constant to allow us
to understand how culture, and not ethnicity,
predicts WIF in a diverse workforce.
The work-family conflict cultural values
model proposed in the current research is con-
sistent with Singelis et al.’s (1995) suggestion
that the US culture is positively associated
with individualism, and the findings provide
evidence that language and acculturation are
directly related to individualism. Although
the Hispanic-only analyses were underpow-
ered, the model shows the same patterns of
results regardless of whether the analyses
were conducted with only Hispanic partici-
pants or with a combination of Hispanic and
Caucasian participants (see Figures 2 and 3).
In accordance with our model, we suggest
that the relationship from acculturation to
individualism exists because language and
socialization are a key component by which
people connect to and interpret their environ-
ment (Sam & Berry, 2006). While individuals
who are isolated from the environment of
the new country due to a language or social
barrier are unable to pick up and adapt to the

nuances of cultural values such as individual-
ism, those who become fluent (i.e., accultur-
ated) to the host-country language are more
likely to understand and possibly internalize
the overarching cultural values of that host
country.
–.02
.04
.23
–.14
–.16.24
–.01 .50
.16
Acculturation
(socialization)
.16
.07
.20 .24
.28
Strain-based WIF
.25

Time-based FIW
Strain-based FIW
–.03
Format
GenderGeneration Number of
children
.25
Individualism
.29
Marital
status
.06
Education
.15
.18
–.07
–.13
.09 .13
.10
.18

–.23
.19
.26
–.02
Time-based WIF
Acculturation
(language)
FIGURE 4. Work-Family Cultural Values Alternative Model
with Standardized
Beta-Weights
Only Hispanic participants are represented in this model.
Coeffi cients with signifi cance of p < .05 are indicated with a
solid line. Dashed boxes and arrows indicate control
variables.

immigration.
Additionally, our results indicate that
individualism is directly related to strain-
based WIF. It appears that the more employ-
ees prescribe to individualistic norms, the
more likely they will report work interfering
with their home lives, but not necessarily
home life interfering with their work lives.
This could be because individualistic employ-
ees associate their identity with the success
of their job and allow their work to interfere
with their home life. These employees may
create a situation where their home role is
permeable, allowing for work to interfere with
it, while their work role has a strict boundary
around it that does not allow home issues to
interfere. Alternatively, it may be that these

individuals simply may not feel the need for
privacy at work, and thus the interference of
family with work may not be felt to the same
extent.
The alternative model (see Figures 4 and
5) proposed in this research also provides evi-
dence that cultural values (i.e., individualism
and acculturation), and not ethnicity, con-
tribute to differences in levels of WIF among
Hispanic and Caucasian employees. The
alternative model suggests that acculturation
mediates the relationship between individu-
alism and WFC. Similar to the original model,
despite the nonsignificant path coefficients
of the Hispanic-only analyses due to a lack of
power, this model showed a similar pattern
of results when data were analyzed for the
Hispanic participants as well as for a combina-
tion of Hispanic and Caucasian participants.
However, in this model, it is time-based WIF
that is the outcome of the model, as opposed
to strain-based WIF as the outcome. Whereas
the form of WIF is different from the original
model in this study, the results indicate that
.24
–.14
–.20
.17
.00 .43
.18 .287

.13
.16 .17
.26.27
–.25
.17
–.16
.25
.10
.16
.14 .14
.13
GenderGeneration Number of
children
Marital
status
Education
Time-based WIF
Strain-based WIF
Time-based FIW

Strain-based FIW
Acculturation
(socialization)
Acculturation
(language)
Format
Individualism
Ethnicity
FIGURE 5. Work-Family Cultural Values Alternative Model
with Standardized
Beta-Weights
This model includes Hispanic and Caucasian participants.
Only coeffi cients with signifi cance of p < .05 are included in
the fi gure. Dashed boxes and arrows indicate
control variables. Bolded boxes and arrows indicate a signifi
cant path.

immigration.
OCTOBER 2013
the effects of acculturation and individualism
contribute to work interfering with family.
Implications
The results of the current study provide theo-
retical and practical implications. Using the
tenets of social identity theory (e.g., Burke &
Stets, 2009) to inform the original model, the
current study provides evidence that accul-
turation and cultural values affect levels of
work-family conflict above and beyond the

effect of ethnicity.
In connection with our findings, we sug-
gest that managers should not assume that an
individual possesses particular traits because
he or she is categorized as belonging to a par-
ticular ethnic group. Earley (1993) suggested
researchers measure cultural values when they
are interested in diverse groups. This proposal
should also be followed in the workplace. In
line with Gomez’s (2003) suggestion, we urge
managers to avoid cultural generalizations,
but instead take into account the employ-
ees’ cultural values to better manage a diverse
workforce. Perhaps managers might consider
their own attitudes about members of ethnic
minority groups and seek out training that
can provide insight into cultural differences.
The findings from this study also pro-
vide insight to help human resource manag-
ers work with a diverse workforce. As a result
of our findings, managers might realize that
cultural assimilation (Berry et al., 1992; con-
formity to the norm of the majority) is not
necessarily best for the organization. Our
findings showed that increased acculturation
leads to individualism. In turn, individualism
leads to strain-based WIF. Thus, individual-
ism, a cultural dimension, is related to higher
levels of strain-based WIF. Managers should
understand that increased levels of WIF are
associated with deleterious job and personal
outcomes such as decreased job satisfaction
and increased psychical health symptoms
(e.g., Allen, Herst, Bruck, & Sutton, 2000).

As such, actions should be taken to help
employees alleviate conflict between work
and family.
In the current study, language-based accul-
turation (a primary form of acculturation;
Sam & Berry, 2006) leads to the acquisition
of individualism with a greater effect size in
comparison to social-based acculturation. As
such, human resource managers might be
especially concerned with soliciting feedback
about work-family policies and procedures
from employees who are less fluent in English.
Incorporating these employees into the dia-
logue of company policy can be a mutually
beneficial situation in terms of the manag-
ers’ gaining valuable feedback from a diverse
perspective while the employee feels a sense
of value within the organization. Including
employees in the dialogue may become dif-
ficult if individual employees come from a
culture where it is customary to refrain from
expressing opinion and personal worries to
supervisors. Thus, management might place
an emphasis upon open communication by
conducting informal “town hall meetings” or
focus groups to learn about work-family inte-
gration issues.
The differences in cultural values among
employees suggest that a diverse workforce
might appreciate different organizational
benefits depending on their culture and
acculturation level. With this in mind, organi-
zations might offer employees flexible sched-

uling options that would allow employees to
choose a work schedule situation that would
allow them to best meet the needs of the com-
pany as well as meet the demands of their
family responsibilities. Some of these benefits
might include the use of “floating holidays,”
telework, job sharing, or split shifts. However,
as noted by Jayne and Dipboye (2004), no
single answer exists for managers aiming to
manage for diversity; the solution will be
uniquely designed based on a needs assess-
ment and management commitment.
Finally, we should point out that we do
not imply that employees should avoid learn-
ing or using the common language (i.e.,
English) or avoid socializing with more accul-
turated employees within the organization in
which they are employed in order to avoid
strain-based work-family conflict. Whereas
less acculturation seems to garner less strain-
based WIF, a lack of acculturation into the
host society is associated with other stress-
ors that can manifest as psychological and
We simply suggest
that managers might
develop sensitivity

toward the unique
work-family needs of
employees who are
less acculturated to
the US culture.
physical complaints (Sam & Berry, 2006). We
simply suggest that managers might develop
sensitivity toward the unique work-family
needs of employees who are less acculturated
to the US culture.
Limitations and Future Studies
The current research provides insight into the
mechanisms of how ethnicity and cultural
values affect work-family conflict. However,
with all research, we acknowledge that our
work has some limitations. To further this re-
search area and to provide guidance for prac-
titioners, we describe areas for future research
as well as provide suggestions that may assist
managers of a diverse workforce in the para-
graphs that follow.
The data were self-reported, a non-objec-
tive form of data collection that possesses the
inherent bias of the participant who is report-
ing his or her own behavior. While accultura-
tion is a fluid process (Sam & Berry, 2006),
our research has taken only a snapshot of par-

ticipants’ experiences. Our research does not
provide causal relationships between the pro-
cess of acculturation and the development
of individualism. In fact, the fit analyses of
the alternate model in the current article sug-
gest that people who choose to immigrate to
the United States have higher individualistic
traits. While previous research has not spe-
cifically indicated that immigrants are indi-
vidualistic, the literature does indicate those
who immigrate may have characteristics such
as high need for achievement that are driv-
ing those individuals to move to the United
States for economic gain (e.g., Boneva &
Frieze, 2001; Grzywacz et al., 2005). Thus,
individualism may be a variable that precedes
an inclination to immigration and the sub-
sequent acculturation process. Despite the
fact both models provide a good fit for
the data, the theoretical premises of social
identity theory (Schwartz et al., 2006) along
with acculturation theory (Sam & Berry, 2006)
provide a more comprehensive argument that
language and intercultural social interaction
are precursors to individualism. To address
the limitations of the current study in regard
to determining the ordering of variables
pertaining to the fluid processes pertaining to
acculturation and the adaptation of cultural
values over time, future researchers should
longitudinally examine these relationships.
One factor that does vary in a diverse
workforce is income. Unfortunately, the
majority of our participants (83 percent)

did not provide income information. While
Byron’s (2005) meta-analysis indicates that
there is no relationship between income and
FIW, she found that there is a small effect
between income and WIF (ρ = .10). Future
researchers should include income as a key
variable, especially when examining work-life
issues of diverse groups so they can tease out
effects related to minority status versus socio-
economic status. This said, our
recruitment strategies (i.e., con-
tacting people at the Department
of Motor Vehicles and snowball
sampling) likely led to a diverse
sample in terms of income, since
most people, regardless of income,
need to get drivers’ licenses and
register their vehicles and many
individuals utilize social-network-
ing sites, regardless of income
level. As such, although we could
not assess or control for income in
the current study, the sample was
likely diverse in this regard, and
the results therefore are not likely
unduly influenced by level of income.
It should also be noted that behavior-
based conflict was not examined in the cur-
rent study. This omission was based on the
fact that behavior-based conflict is less under-
stood within the current work-family litera-
ture (Kelloway, Gottlieb, & Barham, 1999).
In fact, research conducted by Dierdorff and
Ellington (2008) indicates that this form of
conflict is attributable to the type of occu-

pation in which the employee is engaged.
Thus, to model the effects of behavior-based
conflict, researchers need to develop and test
nested models that include variables at occu-
pational and individual levels. While there
were individual-level occupational identifiers
in the current study, there were not enough
participants across each occupation to con-
duct multilevel statistical analysis. As such,
OCTOBER 2013
Considering
the limitations
inherent with the
acculturation
measures that are
currently available,
we stress the
importance of
future researchers’
examining how

varying aspects of
acculturation might
affect the attainment
of cultural values
and their effect on
work-family conflict.
future researchers might delve into how vary-
ing levels of acculturation and individualism
affect employees across occupations.
In the future, the work-family conflict
cultural values model should be tested with
data collected from other ethnically diverse
groups, including samples of participants
who stem from other regions that are cul-
turally collective. Testing the veracity of the
current model with data from any of these
diverse ethnic groups would provide empiri-
cal insight that would further the devel-
opment of acculturative and work-family
research. We also suggest testing the model
with the inclusion of other cultural values
(e.g., masculinity) beyond individualism.
Future researchers might
consider how varying facets of
acculturation might affect work-
family conflict across various
ethnic groups. Within the scope

of the acculturation literature
(e.g., Cabassa, 2003; Sam & Berry,
2006), there is much debate about
how acculturation should be most
accurately assessed. Main points
of debate within the literature sur-
round orientation (i.e., styles and
attitudes about acculturation),
dimensionality (i.e., regarding
whether acculturation is a unidi-
mensional or multidimensional
process), context (i.e., status of
acculturation based on refugee
status, immigrant worker status,
reconciliation with family), and
domain specificity (i.e., accultura-
tion processes, behaviors, and
attitudes across public and private
contexts) (Cabassa, 2003; Celnek
& Van de Viver, 2011). In the
current study, a brief self-report
unidimensional measure was uti-
lized. This measure was chosen
for its strong history of psycho-
metric properties, its validation
across Caucasian and multi-ethnic
Hispanic (e.g., Cuban, Mexican, Dominican,
Central and South American) samples (Davis
& Engel, 2011), and its length. Past research
has suggested that acculturation assessments
that move away from proxy measures (e.g.,
age of immigration, language spoken, place
of birth) and incorporate more comprehen-
sive acculturative histories are important

since the proxy measures only provide an
incomplete and indirect processes of accul-
turation (Cabassa, 2003). However, due to the
fact that the acculturation measure was inte-
grated into a multi-item survey administered
to participants who were not compensated,
it was not feasible to utilize structured inter-
view assessments that capture a larger context
of participants’ experiences. Considering the
limitations inherent with the acculturation
measures that are currently available, we stress
the importance of future researchers’ exam-
ining how varying aspects of acculturation
might affect the attainment of cultural values
and their effect on work-family conflict.
The current research does not provide
evidence concerning which facet of individ-
ualism (i.e., competitiveness, preference for
isolated working conditions) is elevating lev-
els of strain-based WIF. Some possible compo-
nents of individualism that might contribute
to strain-based WIF include: a sense of inde-
pendence to an exclusion of asking for, or
receiving, assistance; engaging in competi-
tive behaviors at work that are draining the
employee, thus causing the employee to not
be able to engage in family-related tasks; and
a lack of cohesion among individualists at
work that could contribute to poor coworker
and supervisor support. Researchers might
wish to parse out the facets of individualism
to determine why this cultural value would
contribute, specifically, to strain-based WIF.
While the current study utilized social

identity theory (Adams & Marshall, 1996;
Burke & Stets, 2009) as a framework to sup-
port the model tested in the current study, an
actual test of social identity theory was not
conducted within this study. Thus, future
researchers should incorporate specific mea-
sures of social identity. For example, within
the scope of a longitudinal study, research-
ers could survey recent immigrants’ identity
pertaining to their work and family roles in
terms of individualism. Then, as the partici-
pants work through the process of immigra-
tion, researchers could reassess participants’
identity with individualism as it pertains to
their work and family roles.
Finally, while the current research has
focused on the negative impact of the work-
family interface, future research could exam-
ine how minority employees’ values affect
work-family facilitation. For example, the
cultural value of collectivism might experi-
ence increased levels of work-family facilita-
tion via the processes of social support.
Conclusion
Gomez (2003) wrote, “One step in better
managing diversity would be to understand

the degree to which acculturation shapes val-
ues that influence important individual work
attitudes” (p. 1090). The current study has
provided a unique set of results that contrib-
ute to a growing body of research linking in-
dividualism and acculturation to work-family
conflict. In light of these findings, we suggest
that human resource managers incorporate
the diverse social and cultural needs of their
employees so that the work environment de-
velops into a milieu where personal growth
and business success are valued.
Acknowledgments
Research was partially funded by the
Coconino County Hispanic Advisory Council
and the Vicki Green Thesis Scholarship.
Portions of the research were conducted as
partial fulfillment of the master’s degree by
the first author under the supervision of the
second author. Portions of the research were
presented at the 2009 Society for Industrial
and Organizational Psychology Annual
Conference in New Orleans, LA. The authors
wish to thank Sara Aleman, Barbara Brumbach,
Andrew W. Gardner, and Valerie A. Jepson for
their support in conducting the research.
Note
1. COV = covariance, LISREL maximum likelihood
estimates.

KRISTINE J. OLSON is an assistant professor of psychology at
Dixie State University.
She received her PhD from Washington State University. Her
research focuses on the
work-family interface, as well as gender issues in the
workplace, harassment and dis-
crimination in the workplace, cultural issues in the workplace,
organizational climate,
and diversity issues in the workplace.
ANN H. HUFFMAN is an associate professor of psychology and
management at Northern
Arizona University. She received her PhD in industrial-
organizational psychology from
Texas A&M University in 2004. Prior to Texas A&M
University, she worked as a principal
investigator with the Walter Reed Army Research Institute-
Europe. Dr. Huffman’s primary
research interests include environmental sustainability issues,
the work-life interface,
high-stress occupations (e.g., police, military), and diversity in
the workplace. She has
written numerous research articles in journals such as the
Academy of Management
Journal, the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, the

Journal of Business and
Psychology, and Human Resource Management.
PEDRO I. LEIVA is an assistant professor in the Business
School at the University of Chile.
He received his PhD from Texas A&M University. His research
focuses on the work-family
interface, performance management, team development, and
organizational behavior
issues.
OCTOBER 2013
SATORIS S. CULBERTSON is an assistant professor of
management at Kansas State
University. She received her PhD from Texas A&M University.
Her research focuses on
the work-family interface, performance management, and the
employment interview.
Dr. Culbertson has authored and coauthored numerous articles
and book chapters. Her
work has appeared in the Journal of Applied Psychology, the
Journal of Occupational

Health Psychology, and Human Relations, among others.
References
Adams, G. R., & Marshall, S. K. (1996). A developmen-
tal social psychology of identity: Understanding
the person-in-context. Journal of Adolescence, 19,
429–442.
Allen, T. D., Herst, D. E. L., Bruck, C. S., & Sutton, M.
(2000). Consequences associated with work-to-
family confl ict: A review and agenda for future re-
search. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,
5, 278–308.
Bacallao, M. L., & Smokowski, P. R. (2007). The costs
of getting ahead: Mexican family system changes
after immigration. Family Relations, 56, 52–66.
Barnett, K. A., DelCampo, R. L., DelCampo, D. S., &
Steiner, R. L. (2003). Work and family balance
among dual-earner working class Mexican-
Americans: Implications for therapists.

Contemporary Family Therapy, 25, 353–366.
Barrett, D. W., Wosinska, W., Butner, J., Petrova,
P., Gornik-Durose, M., & Cialdini, R. B. (2004).
Individual differences in the motivation to comply
across cultures: The impact of social obligation.
Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 19–31.
Becker, T. E. (2005). Potential problems in the statisti-
cal control of variables in organizational research:
A qualitative analysis with recommendations.
Organizational Research Methods, 8, 274–289.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fi t indexes in struc-
tural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Signifi cance tests
and goodness of fi t in the analysis of covariance
structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–606.
Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Segall, M. H., & Dasen, P.
R. (1992). Cross cultural psychology: Research and
applications. New York, NY: Cambridge University

Press.
Boneva, B. S., & Frieze, I. H. (2001). Toward a concept
of migrant personality. Journal of Social Issues, 75,
477–491.
Brown, T. A. (2006). Confi rmatory factor analysis for
applied research. New York, NY: Guilford.
Burke, P. J., & Stets, J. E. (2009). Identity theory. New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Byron, K. (2005). A meta-analytic review of work-
family confl ict and its antecedents. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 67, 169–198.
Cabassa, L. J. (2003). Measuring acculturation: Where
we are and where we need to go. Hispanic Journal
of Behavioral Sciences, 25, 127–146.
Calvillo, E. R., & Flaskerud, J. H. (1993). Evaluation of
the pain response by Mexican American and Anglo
American women and their nurses. Journal of
Advanced Nursing, 18, 451–459.

Carlson, D. S., Kacmar, K. M., & Williams, L. J. (2000).
Construction and initial validation of a multidimen-
sional measure of work-family confl ict. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 56, 249–276.
Carola, E., & Suárez-Orozco, M. M. (1994). The cultural
psychology of Hispanic immigrants. In T. Weaver
(Ed.), Handbook of Hispanic cultures in the United
States: Anthropology (pp. 129–146). Houston, TX:
Arte Público Press.
Carpenter, S., & Radhakrishnan, P. (2000). Allocentrism
and idiocentrism as predictors of in-group percep-
tions: An individual difference extension of cultural
patterns. Journal of Research in Personality, 34,
262–268.
Casper, W.J., Eby, L. T., Bordeaux, C., Lockwood, A., &
Lambert, D. (2007). A review of research methods
in IO/OB work-family research. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 92, 28–45.

Celnek, O., & Van de Viver, F. J. R. (2011). Assessment
of acculturation: Issues and overview of mea-
sures. International Association for Cross-
Cultural Psychology. Retrieved from http://
scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi
?article=1105&context=orpc
Chavez, C. I., & Weisinger, J. Y. (2008). Beyond diver-
sity training: A social infusion for cultural inclusion.
Human Resource Management, 47, 331–350.
Chavez, L. R., McMullin, J. M., Mishra, S. I., & Hubbell,
F. A. (2001). Beliefs matter: Cultural beliefs and the
use of cervical cancer-screening tests. American
Anthropologist, 103, 1114–1129.
Chen, Y., Brockner, J., & Chen, X. (2002). Individual-
collective primacy and ingroup favoritism:

Enhancement and protection effects. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 482–491.
Childs, J. T. (2005). Managing workforce diversity at
IBM: A global HR topic that has arrived. Human
Resource Management, 44, 73–77.
Chiswick, B. R. (1978). The effect of Americanization
on the earnings of foreign-born men. Journal of
Political Economy, 86, 897–922.
Davis, L. E., & Engel, R. J. (2011). Measuring race and
ethnicity. New York, NY: Springer.
DelCampo, R. G., & Hinrichs, A. T. (2006). A touch of
class: Work and family balance in professional and
working class Hispanics. Journal of Business and
Management, 12, 71–81.
Dierdorff, E. C., & Ellington, J. K. (2008). It’s the nature
of the work: Examining behavior-based sources of
work-family confl ict across occupations. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 93, 883–892.

Duxbury, L. E., & Higgins, C.A. (1991). Gender differ-
ences in work-family confl ict. Journal of Applied
Earley, P. G. (1993). East meets West meets Mideast:
Further explorations of collectivistic and individu-
alistic work groups. Academy of Management
Journal, 36, 319–348.
Eby, L. T., & Dobbins, G. H. (1997). Collectivistic orienta-
tion in teams: An individual and group-level analy-
sis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 275–295.
Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1992).
Prevalence of work–family confl ict: Are work and
family boundaries asymmetrically permeable?
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 723–729.
Gnambs, T. (2011). Required sample size and power for
SEM. Retrieved from http://timo.gnambs.at/en
/scripts/powerforsem
Gomez, C. (2003). The relationship between accultura-

tion, individualism/collectivism, and job attri-
bute preferences for Hispanic MBAs. Journal of
Management Studies, 40, 1089–1105.
Goode, W. (1960). A theory of role strain. American
Sociological Review, 25, 483–496.
Goodman, L. A. (1961). Snowball sampling. Annals of
Mathematical Statistics, 32, 148–170.
Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of
confl ict between work and family roles. Academy
of Management Review, 10, 76–88.
Grzywacz, J. G., Arcury, T. A., Marín, A., Carrillo, L.,
Burke, B., Coates, M. L., & Quandt, S. A. (2007).
Work-family confl ict: Experiences and health
implications among immigrant Latinos. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 92, 1119–1130.
Grzywacz, J. G., Quandt, S. A., Arcury, T. A., & Marín,
A. (2005). The work-family challenge and men-
tal health: Experiences of Mexican immigrants.

Community, Work and Family, 8, 271–279.
Hofstede, G. (1983). National cultures in four dimen-
sions. International Studies of Management &
Organization, 13, 46–74.
Hofstede, G., & McCrae, R. R. (2004). Personality and
culture revisited: Linking traits and dimensions of
culture. Cross-Cultural Research, 38, 52–88.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for
fi t indexes in covariance structure analysis:
Conventional criteria versus new alternatives.
Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.
Jayne, M. E. A., & Dipboye, R. L. (2004). Leveraging di-
versity to improve business performance: Research
fi ndings and recommendations for organizations.
Human Resource Management, 43, 409–424.
Johnsen, L., Spring, B., Pingitore, R., Sommerfeld, B.
K., & MacKirnan, D. (2002). Smoking as subculture?
Infl uence on Hispanic and non-Hispanic white

women’s attitudes toward smoking and obesity.
Health Psychology, 21, 279–287.
Joplin, J. R. W., Francesco, A. M., Shaffer, M. A., &
Lau, T. (2003). The macro-environment and work-
family confl ict: Development of a cross cultural
comparative framework. International Journal of
Cross Cultural Management, 3, 305–328.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, K. (1993). LISREL 8:
Analysis of linear structural relationships by
maximum likelihood, instrument variables and
least squares methods (8th ed.). Mooresville, IN:
Scientifi c Software.
Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R., Snoek, J. D., &
Rosenthal, R. A. (1964). Organizational stress. New
York, NY: Wiley.
Kang, S. M. (2006). Measurement of acculturation,
scale formats, and language competence: Their im-
plications for adjustment. Journal of Cross-Cultural

Kelloway, E. K., Gottlieb, B. H., & Barham, L. (1999).
The source, nature, and direction of work and fam-
ily confl ict: A longitudinal investigation. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 337–346.
Kim, K. H. (2005). The relation among fi t indexes,
power, and sample size in structural equation mod-
eling. Structural Equation Modeling, 12, 368–390.
OCTOBER 2013
Kochan, T., Besrukova, K., Ely, R., Jackson, S., Joshi,
A., Jehn, K., . . . Thomas, D. (2003). The effects
of diversity on business performance: Report of
the diversity research network. Human Resource
Korabik, K., Lero, D. S., & Ayman, R. (2003). A
multi-level approach to cross cultural work-

family research: A micro and macro perspec-
tive. International Journal of Cross Cultural
Landier, W., Hughes, C. B., Calvillo, E. R., Anderson,
N. L., Briseño-Toomey, D., Dominguez, L., . . .
Bhatia, S. (2011). A grounded theory of the process
of adherence to oral chemotherapy in Hispanic
and Caucasian children and adolescents with
acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Journal of Pediatric
Oncology Nursing, 28, 203–223.
Lau, I. Y. M., Lee, S. I., & Chiu, C. Y. (2004). Language,
cognition, and reality: Constructing shared mean-
ings through communication. In C. S. Crandall &
M. Schaller (Eds.), The psychological foundations
of culture (pp. 77–100). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Lee, W-N., & Choi, S. M. (2005). The role of horizon-
tal and vertical individualism and collectivism in

ACCULTURATION AND INDIVIDUALISM AS PREDICTORS OF WORK-.docx

ACCULTURATION AND INDIVIDUALISM AS PREDICTORS OF WORK-.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to ACCULTURATION AND INDIVIDUALISM AS PREDICTORS OF WORK-.docx

Similar to ACCULTURATION AND INDIVIDUALISM AS PREDICTORS OF WORK-.docx (20)

More from robert345678

More from robert345678 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

ACCULTURATION AND INDIVIDUALISM AS PREDICTORS OF WORK-.docx