Past research examining cultural variables has primarily focused on racial/ethnic minority individuals in relation to the dominant culture, or mainstream U.S. culture, , however an individual can also experience stress emanating from tensions within their own racial/ethnic group.This phenomenon, known as intragroup marginalization,refers to the perceived interpersonal distancing by members of one’s racial/ethnicgroup when the individual diverges from racial/ethnicnorms . Deviating from racial/ethnicnorms can create a backlash whereby group members reject or distance themselves from the individual. The interpersonal distancing occurring from intragroup marginalization can be viewed as a social sanction placed on the individual and can take the form of teasing and criticism. Intragroup marginalization is based on social identity theory suggesting that group members marginalize in-group members when they do not conform to group standards in order to maintain the uniqueness and stability of the group .Group members displaying behaviors or attitudes that conflict with group norms can be perceived as threatening the distinctiveness of the group and can then be marginalized in order to preserve the group’s distinctiveness. Intragroup marginalization may be experienced by any racial/ethnic group. Additionally, family, friends, harvest drying rack and other racial/ethnic members in the community can all impose group norms and engage in the process of intragroup marginalization.
Limited research suggests intragroup marginalization may lead to higher levels of acculturative stress, or stress associated with adapting to a new culture, and increased alcohol use among young adults .Past research, while not directly investigating intragroup marginalization, has made potential links between familial and peer stress with tobacco and marijuana use . Foster and Spencer suggest that marijuana and other drug use may underlie a deeper need for connection in the absence of close familial connections for marginalized young adults, or young adults that have been rejected by their families. These young adults may be seeking opportunities to connect and create a sense of belonging,and marijuana use can play a common and significant social role in building supportive and caring relationships . Researchers further contend that investigation is needed to better understand how culture impacts these young adults’ drug use . Currently, intragroup marginalization is measured using the Intragroup Marginalization Inventory , which is comprised of three separate scales measuring perceived intragroup marginalization from the heritage culture family , friends , and other members of the individual’s ethnic group . The inventory is comprised of 42-items rated on a 7-point Likert scale . While the scale is comprehensive, the length of the survey can make it difficult for researchers to distribute the entire inventory, with many opting to use only one scale in their research . In practice this has limited studies of intragroup marginalization to focus either on family members or friends, rather than examining both.
Due to the length of the survey, the feasibility of using the measure in large scale studies or with large sample sizes has been limited. Most studies using the inventory have limited sample sizes focused on one racial/ethnic group . Greater sample sizes allow for segmentation of the data across demographic characteristics , reduce the margin of error, and provide the statistical power to conduct more advanced analyses.In addition, some items may have less applicability for certain groups, such as items related to linguistic expectations .Lastly, the inventory was developed and validated with a college population and hasnot been validated with non-college populations . Tobacco and marijuana use are problematic for all young adults and intragroup marginalization may be an important factor in understanding tobacco and marijuana disparities in this population as a whole.Yet,without an efficient means to assess intragroup marginalization, this important construct will continue to remain absent within health disparities research.Limited research addresses whether shared cultural values or feelings of marginalization may help explain high rates of tobacco and marijuana use among young adults . The purpose of this study is to provide a psychometrically sound abbreviated measure of intragroup marginalization. Such a measure would have great utility when survey length is of concern and the survey needs to be distributed across diverse racial/ethnic groups. This study tests and validates an abbreviated measure of the Intragroup Marginalization Inventory, which we refer to as the IMI-6. The IMI-6 consists of six items that measure perceived intragroup marginalization from the heritage culture family and friends.
The items of the IMI-6 are hypothesized to have content validity, as items were taken directly from the existing scale, which has already been found to have content validity and were selected in consultation with the survey developer and by the primary author whose research focuses on racial/ethnic minority issues and intragroup marginalization in specific. We hypothesize that the IMI-6 also has construct validity, which we establish in this study through exploratory factor analyses. In addition to testing the feasibility of using this abbreviated measure, a primary aim of this study was to apply the IMI-6and examine relationships between intragroup marginalization and tobacco and marijuana use. We hypothesize that participants reporting more experiences of intragroup marginalization would be more likely to use cigarettes, e-cigarettes, cigars, blunts, hookahs, and marijuana.The original Intragroup Marginalization Inventory consists of three scales: Family, Friend, and Ethnic Group. The scales have a common factor structure, and while there are slight differences in items and factor names, they fall into five general factors: Homeostatic Pressure , Linguistic Expectations , and Accusations of Assimilation , Accusations of Differentiation , and Discrepant Values . The IMI-6 consists of six items that measure perceived intragroup marginalization from the heritage culture family and friends. The original scale developer provided consultation during item selection, ultimately reviewing and approving the final six items. Items were selected based on the researchers’ and developer’s experience with the survey as well as those items that had the greatest applicability to a diverse pool of respondents and were broad enough to remain appropriate for different racial/ethnic groups. Items from the Accusations of Assimilation and Linguistic Expectations factors were not included as they contained items that were tailored to specific racial/ethnic groups . Items from the Homeostatic Pressure were similar to items from the Accusations of Differentiation factor, however items from the Homeostatic Pressure focused solely on the individual’s behavior, while items from the Accusations of Differentiation included items assessing both behavior and appearance. The selected items were taken from the Discrepant Values factor and the Accusation of Differentiation factor of the full inventory .Two items were taken from the Discrepant Values factor assessing whether family and friends have the same hopes and dreams as the respondent. Four items were taken from the Accusation Differentiation factor assessing whether family and friends accuse the respondent of not really being a member of one’s ethnic group because s/he does not look like and act like members of the group. Responses were rated on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from ‘never/does not apply’ to ‘extremely often .’ Items 3 and 6 were reverse coded, so that higher numbers represent greater experiences of intragroup marginalization. Items were piloted with 45 young adults from the San Francisco Bay Area. Participants were recruited from local bars on a Thursday, Friday and Saturday evening to be interviewed that same weekend and received a $75 incentive if they participated in a one-hour focus group, pipp rack completed the pilot questionnaire, and engaged in an interview with project staff to share feedback about the questionnaire Individuals reviewed the item clarity and representation of their experiences. No items were altered and participant feedback suggested that the selected items accurately captured participant experiences.
Sample—This study used data we collected in 2014 as part of the San Francisco Bay Area Young Adult Health Survey, a probabilistic multi-mode household survey of 18–26 year old young adults, stratified by race/ethnicity. The study was conducted in Alameda and San Francisco Counties in California. We identified potential respondent households using address lists from Marketing Systems Group in which there was an approximately 30–40% chance that an eligible young adult resided at a selected address . We used 2009–2013 American Community Survey and 2010 decennial census data in a multistage sampling design to identify Census Block Groups and then Census Blocks in which at least 15% of residents were Latino or nonHispanic Black adults in the eligible age range. Ultimately, we randomly selected 61 blocks, then households within these blocks then young adults within eligible households . We oversampled these blocks because young nonwhite urban adults are among the most difficult populations to survey, and we wished to ensure appropriate population representation. We surveyed in three stages and utilized four modes of contact . In the first stage we conducted a series of three mailings with sample 1 households; respondents returned paper questionnaires or completed surveys online using Qualtrics. In the second stage we telephoned those who did not respond to mail, and lastly we performed face-to-face interviews with a random selection of the remaining non-responders from sample 1 as well as all of the households identified in sample 2. Potential sample 2 respondents did not participate in the mail or telephone phases of the survey; each of these households was visited in person. The final sample consisted of 1,363 young adult participants, for a response rate of approximately 30%, with race, sex and age distributions closely reflecting those of the young adult population overall in the two counties surveyed. Ethnicity/race was measured using items from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey instrument, with participants first asked to identify if there were Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin and then to select their race from 14 categories. Race/ethnicity was then collapsed into mutually exclusive categories including Hispanic, non-Hispanic White, nonHispanic black, non-Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander and Mixed Race. Those who selected more than one race/ethnic category were categorized as Mixed Race.We constructed individual sample and post-stratification adjustment weights during data reduction .Results support the use of an abbreviated measure of intragroup marginalization. The IMI-6 was found to be psychometrically sound and representative of the full construct of intragroup marginalization as theorized by Castillo and colleagues . Two factors emerged from the abbreviated scale. The first factor encompassed items related to belonging and membership, capturing whether individuals felt marginalized due to deviations in their physical appearance or behaviors . The second factor encompassed whether the individual shared similar hopes and dreams as their families and friends. These factors reflected similarly identified factors from the validation study of the full inventory scales, suggesting good agreement between the original measure and the abbreviated version. Examining racial/ethnic differences in mean scores across factors demonstrated significant differences in Factor 1. Latinos and Mixed Race young adults experienced greater intragroup marginalization related to not looking or acting like members of their racial/ethnic group compared to non-Hispanic Blacks and Asian Americans/ Pacific Islanders. The full Intragroup Marginalization Inventory was developed with a diverse sample and past research has explored intragroup marginalization with African Americans , Asian Americans and Latinos ; however, specific racial/ethnic differences have not been examined. Latinos may be particularly susceptible to intragroup marginalization given the heterogeneity among Latinos in terms of national origin, physical appearance, political ideology, immigration status, and class status . In particular, Latinos can encompass different racial groups , which can contribute to differences in appearance one of the concepts captured in Factor 1. Physical appearance can limit the extent to which people are accepted as belonging to a certain racial/ethnic group, which is also especially relevant for multiracial individuals, whose physical appearance may not align with any specific ethnic/racial group. Additionally, multiracial individuals describe feeling marginalized from peers rooted in having different appearance, culture, and/or beliefs than their peers , explaining the higher rates of intragroup marginalization observed in this study. Research examining young adult tobacco and marijuana use often relies on college samples, thereby neglecting individuals in this age group that may be at greater risk of substance use . The Intragroup Marginalization Inventory, which may have particular utility with young adults who are negotiating the stresses of transitioning to adulthood, was also developed and tested with a college-only sample . This study validates an abbreviated version of the IMI, the IMI-6, which was developed to capture tensions experienced within racial/ethnic groups.We tested the IMI-6in a large representative household sample of racially/ethnically diverse young adults in the San Francisco Bay Area in order to better understand the impact of cultural stressors on tobacco and marijuana use among young adults in general. When controlling for demographic characteristics, Factor 1 was associated with greater marijuana use.