- P-ISSN1229-0653
- KCI
다문화시대 한국인의 심리적 적응: 집단정체성, 문화적응 이데올로기와 접촉이 이주민에 대한 편견에 미치는 영향
Psychological Adaptation of Koreans in the Multicultural Era: The Effects of Social Identity, Acculturation-related Ideologies, and Intergroup Contact on Prejudice Against Migrants in Korea
김도영 (아주대학교)
신희천 (아주대학교)
이주연 (아주대학교)
초록
본 조사 연구에서는 한국인들이 이주민 집단들(즉, 이주노동자, 결혼이주여성, 다문화가정자녀, 새터민 및 조선족)에 대해 가지는 태도가 내집단에 대한 태도와 비교해 얼마나 부정적이며, 또한 이러한 태도가 집단정체성, 문화적응 관련 신념 및 집단간 접촉 정도에 의해 어떻게 영향 받는지를 검토하고자 하였다. 이를 위해 전국적 조사 연구를 실시하여 한국인 1800명(성인 1000명, 중고등학생 800명)을 다단계층화 표집방법을 통해 표집하고 개별 인터뷰 방법으로 응답하도록 하였다. 그 결과, 예상대로 한국인들은 강한 내집단 편애 혹은 상대적 외집단 비하 태도를 나타냈는데, 대상 집단에 따라 다른 태도가 나타났으며 특히 청소년들의 이주민에 대한 태도가 성인에 비해 더욱 부정적이었다. 위계적 회귀분석 결과, 사회정체 이론이 제안하는 대로 한국인으로서의 정체성이 높을수록 이주민에 대한 편견적 태도가 더 높았는데, 이러한 효과는 정체성위협이 높아질수록 더 강해졌다. 또한 접촉 수와 달리 접촉 빈도만이 편견감소를 예측하는 효과를 나타내었다. 또한 접촉과 신념간의 상호작용이 편견적 태도를 예측하였다. 마지막으로 접촉 빈도와 동화주의 신념이 편견에 미치는 영향 과정은 각각 집단간 불안이나 위협감(이득, 정체성)에 의해 매개된다는 결과가 나타났다. 이러한 결과의 이론적 의미와 현실적 의미에 대해서 논의하였다.
- keywords
- attitudes towards migrants in Korea, social identity, multiculturalism, assimilation ideology, contact, 이주민에 대한 태도, 사회정체성, 다문화주의 이데올로기, 동화주의 이데올로기, 접촉
Abstract
This survey research investigated whether Koreans’ attitudes toward migrants were affected by group identity, acculturation-related ideologies, threat, and intergroup contact. More specifically, we compared Koreans’ attitudes toward five different migrant groups (i.e., migrant workers, marriage migrant women, children of multicultural family, North Korean defectors and ethnic Koreans in China) to those toward Koreans (i.e., ingroup). We also explored whether prejudice toward migrants was affected by the in-group identification as Koreans, multiculturalism or assimilation ideologies, and the degree of contact with the migrants. To explore these issues, we conducted a nation-wide survey using the stratified sampling method, in which 1,000 Korean adults and 800 adolescents participated and responded to the questionnaire items asking about their attitudes (i.e., feeling thermometer, social distance, ideology, identification) through individual interviews. As expected, the results demonstrated that Koreans exhibited strong in-group favoritism: they evaluated their in-group more favorably than the migrant groups on the feeling thermometer scale, and the in-group favoritism of adolescents was stronger than that of adults. The results also demonstrated that in line with the social identity theory, high in-group identifiers showed more negative attitudes toward migrant groups than low in-group identifiers, especially when the participants perceived high identity (i.e., symbolic) threat. The hierarchical regression analyses on the social distance measures (i.e., ingroup-outgroup) demonstrated that the more Koreans endorsed assimilation ideology, the more the number of out-group acquaintances and the more they perceived realistic threats, the more negative their attitudes toward migrants became. On the other hand, endorsing multiculturalism ideology and contacting the migrants more frequently was associated with more positive out-group attitudes. Finally, intergroup anxiety as well as identity threat or realistic threat, respectively partially mediated the effects of contact frequency(or the endorsement of assimilation ideology or value of authoritarianism) on attitudes toward migrants. We discussed the theoretical and practical implications of these results.
- keywords
- attitudes towards migrants in Korea, social identity, multiculturalism, assimilation ideology, contact, 이주민에 대한 태도, 사회정체성, 다문화주의 이데올로기, 동화주의 이데올로기, 접촉
참고문헌
김금미, 한덕웅, 한영석(2003). 남성의 성별관계 인식과성별사회정체성이 양성평등 행동의도에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 17(1), 31-47.
김금미, 한영석(2002). 여성의 합법성, 안정성 및 성별사회정체성이 양성평등신념과 행동에 미치는 영향-여대생을 중심으로-. 한국심리학회지：여성, 7(3),1-20.
김이선, 김민정, 한건수(2006). 여성 결혼이민자의 문화적 갈등 경험과 소통 증진을 위한 정책과제. 한국여성개발원.
김이선, 황정미, 이진영(2007). 다민족․다문화사회로의이행을 위한 정책 패러다임 구축(Ⅰ): 한국사회의수용현실과 정책과제, 한국여성정책연구원, 2007.
김혜숙(1994). 한국집단자아존중척도. 한국심리학회지:사회, 8(1), 103-116.
김혜숙(2002). 대학생들이 중요시하는 가치와 북한 사람 및 대북정책에 대한 태도와의 관계에 관한 조사 연구. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 16, 35-50.
김혜숙(2007). 우리나라 사람들이 가지는 가치가 소수집단에 대한 편견적 태도에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 21(4), 91-104.
김혜숙, 고재홍, 안미영, 안상수, 이선이, 최인철(2003).다수 집단과 소수 집단에 대한 고정관념의 내용：유능성과 따뜻함의 차원에서의 분석. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 17(3), 121-143.
김혜숙, 오승섭(1999). 북한사람에 대한 대학생과 일반인의 고정관념, 감정과 태도: 외국인에 대한 태도와의 비교. 심리과학, 8(1), 1-22.
노경란, 방희정(2008). 한국 대학생과 국내 체류 외국대학생간에 인종에 대한 명시적 및 암묵적 태도의차이. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 22(4), 75-92.
노경란, 방희정(2009). 다문화시대 한국 초등학생의 인종에 대한 명시적 및 암묵적 태도 발달과 태도변화. 한국심리학회지: 사회문제, 15(1), 49-79.
매일경제신문(2010, 1,1). 외국인의 한국생활 애로사항.
박군석, 한덕웅(2003). 영호남인의 사회구조 요인 지각과 사회정체성이 상대박탈과 집합전략에 미치는영향. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 17(2), 59-72.
박수미, 정기선, 김혜숙, 박건(2004). 차별에 대한 국민의식 및 수용성 연구. 한국여성개발원.
박주희, 정진경(2007). 국제결혼 이주여성의 문화적응과 정체성. 한국심리학회지: 여성, 12(4), 395-432.
설동훈(1992). 국제노동력 이동과 한국내 외국인 노동자. 한국사회사연구회 논문집, 37, 231-325.
설동훈(1998). 외국인 노동자와 한국 사회. 서울대학교출판부.
송미경, 지승희, 조은경, 임영선(2008). 다문화가정 외국인 모의 부모경험에 관한 연구. 한국심리학회지:상담 및 심리치료, 20(2), 497-517.
전우영, 조은경(2000). 북한에 대한 고정관념과 통일에대한 거리감. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 14(1),167-184.
안미영, 김혜숙, 안상수(2004). 집단의 지위, 정당성 및안정성의 구조적 측면에 대한 지각이 차별 경험에미치는 영향：성별 집단과 지역 집단의 경우. 한국심리학회지：사회 및 성격, 18(2), 107-135.
양계민(2009). 국내 소수 집단에 대한 청소년들의 태도에 영향을 미치는 요인. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및성격, 23, 59-79.
양계민(2010). 현실갈등인식과 지각된 경제수준이 이주노동자에 대한 태도에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 24(1), 111-128.
양애경, 이선주, 최훈석, 김선화, 정혁(2007). 여성결혼이민자에 대한 지역사회의 수용성 연구. 한국여성개발원.
오계택, 이정환, 이규용(2007). 아주노동자에 대한 한국인의 인식: 일터를 중심으로. 한국여성정책연구원.
오은순, 김민정, 홍선주, 안지혜(2008). 다문화 교육을위한 범교과 교수·학습 프로그램 개발 연구. 한국여성정책연구원과 한국교육과정평가원.
정진경, 양계민(2004). 문화적응이론의 전개와 현황. 한국심리학회지: 일반, 23, 101-136.
조정아, 임순희, 정진경(2006). 새터민의 문화갈등과 문화적 통합방안. 한국여성개발원.
통계청(2010). 가계동향자료.
홍달아기, 채옥희(2007). 국제결혼부부의 가치관 및 의사소통유형과 갈등과의 관계. 한국생활과학회지,16(4), 733-744.
황정미, 김이선, 이명진, 최현, 이동주(2007). 한국사회의 다민족ㆍ다문화 지향성에 대한 조사연구. 한국여성개발원.
황지현, 김돈진, 김혜숙.(2009). 다문화주의 및 동화주의 이데올로기를 지지하는 설득 메시지가 동남아시아 이주민에 대한 명시적 · 암묵적 태도에 미치는 영향. 2009 한국심리학회 연차학술대회 초록집.
Amir, Y. & Ben-Ari, R. (1989) Enhancing intergrouprelations in Israel: a differential approach.Stereotyping and Prejudice: ChangingConceptions, pp. 243-257. New York: Springer.
Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of Prejudice.Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Aron, A., Aron, E.N. (1996) Self and self-expansionin relationships, New York: Academic Press.
Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). Themoderator-mediator variable distinction in socialpsychological research: Conceptual, strategic, andstatistical considerations. Journal of PersonalitySocial Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
Berry, J. W. (1984). Cultural relations in pluralsocieties: Alternatives to segregation and theirsociopsychological implications. In N. Miller &M. Brewer (Eds.), Groups in contact. New York:Academic Press.
Berry, J. W. (2001). A Psychology of immigration.Journal of Social Issues, 57, 615-631.
Berry, J. W. (2003). Conceptual approaches toacculturation. In K.M. Chun, P.B. Organista, &G. Marin (Eds.), Acculturation. Advances intheory, measurement, and applied research.Washington, D.C.: American PsychologicalAssociation.
Berry, J. W. (2006). Mutual attitudes amongimmigrants and ethnocultural group in Canada.International Journal of Intercultural Relations,20, 719-734.
Binder, J., Zagefka, H., Brown, R., Funke, F.,Kessler, T., Amelie, M., Maquil,A., Demoulin S.,Leyens, J.P. (2009). Does contact reduceprejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? Alongitudinal test of the contact hypothesis amongmajority and minority groups in three europeancountries. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 96, 843-856.
Bogardus, E. S. (1925). Measuring social distances.Journal of Applied Sociology, 9, 299-308.
Brewer, M. B. (2000). Superordinate goals versussuperordinate identity as bases of intergroupcooperation. In D. Capozza & R. Brown (Eds.),Social identity processes: Trends in theory andresearch(pp. 117-132). Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
Brewer, M. B., & Miller, N. (1984). Beyond thecontact hypothesis: Theoretical perspectives ondesegregation. In N. Miller & M. B. Brewer(Eds.), Groups in contact: The psychology ofdesegregation (pp. 281-302). Orlando, FL:Academic Press.
Brown, R., & Hewstone, M. (2005). An integrativetheory of intergroup contact. In M.P. Zanna(Ed.), Advances in Experimental SocialPsychology Vol.37, pp. 255-343. San Diego, CA:Academic Press.
Cook. S. W. (1984). Cooperative interaction inmulti-ethnic contexts. In N. Miller & M. Brewer(Eds.), Groups in contact: The psychology ofdesegregation (pp. 156-186). New York:Academic Press.
Crisp, R., & Hewstone, M. (2007). Multiple SocialCategorization. Advances in Experimental SocialPsychology, 39, 163-254.
Crocker, J., & Luhtanen, S. R. (1990). Collectiveself-esteem and ingroup bias. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 58: 60-67.
Crocker, J., & Park, L. E. (2004). The costly pursuitof self esteem. Psychological Bulletin, 130,392-414.
Dovidio. J. F., Brigham, J. C., Johnson, B. T., &Gaertner, S. L. (1996). Stereotyping, Prejudice,and discrimination: Another look. In N. Macrae,C. Stangor, & M. Hewstone (Eds.), stereotypesand stereotyping (pp. 276-319). New York:Guilford.
Dovidio, J. F. & Gaertner, S. L. (2010). A CommonIngroup Identity: A categorization-basedapproach for reducing intergroup bias. In. T.Nelson (Ed.), Handbook of prejudice. (pp.489-506). Philadelphia, PA: Taylor & Francis.
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S.L., & Saguy, T. (2007).Another view of "we": Majority and minoritygroup perspectives on a common ingroupidentity. European Review of Social Psychology,18, 296-330.
Ellemers, N., van Knippenberg, A., & Wilke, H.(1990). The influence of permeability of groupboundaries and stability of group status onstrategies of individual mobility and socialchange. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29,233-246.
Ellemers, N., Wilke, H., & van Knippenberg, A.(1993). Effects of the legitimacy of low group orindividual status on individual and collectivestatus-enhancement strategies. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 64, 766-778.
Ellemers, N., Doosje, B. J., van Knippenberg, A., &Wilke, H. (1992). Status protection in high statusminority groups. European Journal of SocialPsychology, 22, 123-140.
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002).A model of (often mixed) stereotype content:Competence and warmth respectively follow fromperceived status and competition. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 82, 878-902.
Fredrickson, G. M. (1999). Models of American ethnic relations: A historical perspective. In D.A. Prentice & D. T. Miller (Eds.), Culturaldivides: Understanding and overcoming groupconflict (pp. 23-34). New York: Russell SageFoundation.
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1986). Theaversive form of racism. In J. F. Dovidio Diego,CA：Academic and S. L. Gaertner(Eds.), Prejudice,discrimination, and racism (pp.61-89). San Press.
Gaertner, S. L., Mann, J. A., Dovidio, J. F., Murrell,A. J., & Pomare, M. (1990). How doescooperation reduce intergroup bias? Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 59, 692-704.
Gaertner, S. L., Mann, J. A., Murrell, A., & Dovidio,J. F. (1989). Reducing intergroup bias: Thebenefits of recategorization. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 57, 239-249.
Gonzalez, R., & Brown, R. (2006). Dual identities inintergroup contact: Group status and sizemoderate the generalization of positive attitudechange. Journal of Experimental SocialPsychology, 42, 753-767.
Guimond, S., Chatard., A., Martinot, D., Crisp, R. J.,Redersdorft, S. (2006). Social comparison,self-stereotyping and gender differences inself-construals. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 90, 221-242.
Haddock,. G., Zanna, M. P & Esses, V. M.(1993).Assessing the structure of prejudicial attitudes:The case of attitudes toward homosexuals.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,65, 1105-1118.
Haddock, G., Zanna, M. P., & Esses, V. M. (1994).Mood and the expression of intergroup attitudes:The moderating role of affect intensity.European Journal of Social Psychology, 24,189-205.
Hewstone, M. (1996). Contact and categorization:Social psychological interventions to changeintergroup relations. In N. Macrae, M. Hewstone,& C. Stangor (Eds.), Foundations of stereotypesand stereotyping (pp. 323-368). New York:Guilford Press.
Hewstone, M., & Brown, R. (1986). Contact is notenough: An intergroup perspective on the contacthypothesis. In M. Hewstone & R. Brown (Eds.),Contact and conflict in intergroup encounters(pp.3–44). Oxford: Blackwell.
Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Socialidentifications. New York： Routledge, Chapman& Hall.
Hornsey, M., & Hogg, M. A.(2000). Assimilation andDiversity: An Integrative Model of SubgroupRelations. Personality and Social PsychologyReview, 4(2), 143-156.
Hwang, J .H, Kim, D. J., Kim, H. S. (2009). The effect of a persuasive message endorsing themulticulturalism or assimilationism ideologies onexplicit and implicit attitude toward the Southeast Asian immigrants in Korea, Asian Association of Social Psychology.
Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role ofstereo- typing in system-justification and theproduction of false consciousness. British Journalof Social Psychology, 33, 1-27.
Jussim, L., Nelson, T. E., Manis, M., & Soffin, S.(1995). Prejudice, stereotypes, and labellingeffects: Sources of bias in person perception.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,68, 228-246.
Katz, I., & Hass, R. G. (1988). Racial ambivalenceand value conflict： Correlational and primingstudies of dual cognitive structures. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 55, 893-905.
Leary, M. R. (2007). Motivational and EmotionalAspects of the self, Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 317-344.
Mackie, D. M., Devos, T., & Smith, E. R. (2000).Intergroup emotions： Explaining offensive actiontendencies in an intergroup context. Journal ofPersonalty and Social Psychology, 79, 602-616.
Maio, G. R., & Olson, J. M. (1995). Relationsbetween values, attitudes and behavioralintentions: The moderating role of attitudefunction. Journal of Experimental SocialPsychology, 31, 266-285.
Markus, H., Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and theself: Implications for cognition, emotion, andmotivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.
Oakes, P. J., Haslam, S. A., Turner, J. C. (1994).Stereotyping and social reality. Oxford andCambride, MA: Basil Blackwell.
Pettigrew, T. F., Tropp L. R. (2006). Ameta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,90, 751-783
Pettigrew, T. F., Christ, O., Wagner, U., &Stellmacher, J. (2007). Direct and indirectintergroup contact effects on prejudice: Anormative interpretation. International Journal ofIntercultural Relations, 31, 411-425.
Rothbart, M., & John, O. (1985). Social categorizationand behavioral episodes: A cognitive analysis ofthe effects of intergroup contact. Journal ofSocial Issues, 41(3), 81-104.
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the contentand structure of values: Theoretical advancesand empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances inExperimental Social Psychology, 25, 1-65.
Schwartzwald, S., Amir, Y. (1984). Schooldesegregation: Cross-cultural perspectives,Academic Press New York.
Sherif. M., Harvey, O. J., White, B. J., & Hood, W.R. (1961). Intergroup conflict and cooperation:The Robbers Cave experiment. Classics in the History of Psychology
Spears, R., Jetten, J., & Doosje, B. (2001). The(il)legitimacy of ingroup bias: from social realityto social resistance. In J. T. Jost, & B. Major(Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy: Emergingperspectives on ideology, justice, and intergrouprelations (pp. 332–362). New York: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Stangor, C., Sullivan, L. A., & Ford, T. E. (1991).Affective and cognitive determinants of prejudice.Social Cognition, 9, 59-80.
Stephan, W. G., Ageyev, V., Coastes-Shrider, L.,Stephan, C. W., & Abalakina, M. (1994). On therelationship between stereotypes and prejudice:An international study. Personality and SocialPsychology Bulletin, 20, 277-284.
Tajfel, H. (1982). Social psychology of intergrouprelations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33,1-39.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrativetheory of intergroup conflict. In W. Austin &Worchel(Eds.), The social psychology ofintergroup relations (pp.33-48).Pacific Grove,CA: Brooks/Cole.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The socialidentity theory of intergroup behavior. In S.Worchel & W. Austin(Eds.), Psychology ofintergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Chicago:Nelson-Hall.
Taush, N., Hewstone, M., Kenworthy, J., Cairns, E.,& Christ, O.(2007). Cross-Community Contact,Perceived Status Differences, and IntergroupAttitudes in Northern Ireland: The MediatingRoles of Individual-level versus Group-levelThreats and the Moderating Role of SocialIdentification. Political Psychology, 28, 53-68.
Taylor, D. M., Wright, S. C., Moghaddam, F. M., &Lalonde, R. N. (1990). The personal/groupdiscrimination discrepancy： Perceiving mygroup, but not myself, to be a target fordiscrimination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 254-262.
Troopp, L. R., & Pettigrew, T. F. (2005). DifferentialRelationships Between Intergroup Contact andAffective and Cognitive Dimensions of Prejudice.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,31(8), 1145-1158.
Turner, R. N., Hewstone, M., Voci, A., & Vonofakou,C. (2008). A test of the extended intergroupcontact hypothesis: the mediating role ofintergroup anxiety, perceived ingroup andoutgroup norms, and inclusion of the outgroup inthe self. Journal of Personal and SocialPsychology, 95(4): 843-60.
Turner, J. C., & Brown, R. (1978). Social status,cognitive alternatives and intergroup relations. InH. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between socialgroups： Studies in the social psychology ofintergroup relations(pp.235-250). London：Academic Press.
Turner, J. C., & Oakes, P. J. (1989). Self and collective: Cognition and social context:Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
Verkuyten, M. (2005). Ethnic group identification andgroup evaluation among minority and majoritygroups: Testing the multiculturalism hypothesis.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,88, 121-138.
Verkuyten, M. (2010). Assimilation ideology andsituational well-being among ethnic minoritymembers, Journal of Experimental SocialPsychology, 46, 269-275.
Wright, S. C, Aron, A., McLaughlin-Volpe., & Ropp,S. A. (1997). The extended contact effect:Knowledge of cross-group friendship andprejudice, Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology ,73, 73-90.
Wright, S. C., Taylor, D. M., & Moghaddam, F. M.(1990). Responding to Membership in aDisadvantaged Group: From Acceptance toCollective Protest. Journal of Personality andSocial Psychology, 58(6), 994-1003.
- 다운로드 수
- 조회수
- 0KCI 피인용수
- 0WOS 피인용수