P S YC H O LO GY
3. Are you proud to be Chinese? (1: very em barrassed, 5: very proud) 4. Do you like being Chinese? (1: really dis like, 5: really like) 5. Are you more Chinese or more American? (1: much more American, 5: much more Chinese) 6. Is being Chinese a big part of who you are? (1: very small part, 5: very big part) 7. How often do your parents talk about Chi nese history or Chinese culture? (1: never, 5: all the time) 8. Do you speak any Chinese? (1: speak no Chinese, 5: daily and fluently) 9. Do your parents speak any Chinese? (1: speak no Chinese, 5: daily and fluently) 10. Of your closest five friends, are any Chi nese? List their initials. The second part examined the children’s American ethnic identity using the same initial questions from the ethnic identity questionnaire in Pfeifer et al. (2007). The results formed the composite variable of “American identity.” 1. Are you happy to be American? 2. Is being American an important part of yourself ? 3. Are you proud to be American? 4. Do you like being American? 5. Is being American a big part of who you are? The third part asked two questions about whether the children found their Chinese and American identity compatible (Dunham, personal communication, 28 November 2012), forming the composite variable of “dual identity.” 1. Do you feel that being Chinese and being American are compatible or incompat ible? (1: very incompatible, 5: very compatible) 2. Do you worry that if people think of you as Chinese, they might not think of you as American? (1: very worried, 5: not worried at all) The fourth part measured the children’s atti16 | UNFOUND
tudes toward Chinese Americans by listing 10 adjectives (rich, bad, friendly, ugly, smart, selfish, good at sports, lazy, honest, and shy) and asking how many Chinese people they felt exemplified those qualities (also a 5-point scale, anchored at none and almost all). These also were taken from Pfeifer et al. (2007). After reverse-scoring the five negative variables, the results formed the composite variable of “Attitudes toward Chinese Americans.” Ideally, to correspond more closely to the dimensions of the Stereotype Content Model, the questions measuring attitudes would have been child-friendly, modified versions of the questionnaires used by Fiske et al. (2002) and SAAAS used by Lin et al. (2005). Unfortunately, those questions were too numerous and complex to modify for 8-10 year old children to complete in under 5 minutes. So for the purposes of this study, the adjectives rich, smart, and lazy (reverse scored) corresponded with measures of competence, while the adjectives friendly, good at sports, and shy (reverse scored) corresponded with measures of sociability. The fifth part of the survey measured the children’s attitudes toward Americans, listing the same adjectives as part four, and forming the composite variable of “Attitudes toward Americans.” Finally, because the principal investigator could not personally administer the survey, the survey included a section for the children to indicate if they had any problems completing the survey as well a section for parents to indicate whether there were any problems or if it took significantly longer than 10 minutes to complete. Most participants reported that the survey took about 5-10 minutes to complete; only one indicated it took significantly longer than 10 minutes. No major difficulties were reported. Several parents, however, did use this section to indicate that they thought the questions were inappropriate for their children to be considering (see Discussion for more information).