Description

The Bi-Ethnic Identity Scale was designed to measure bicultural ethnic identity among American Indian youth and young adults. It evolved from Orthogonal Cultural Identification Theory (OCIT) (Oetting & Beauvais, 1990–91), which proposes that identifications with different cultural groups are independent and not mutually exclusive. The measure originally drew on four items from Oetting & Beauvais (1991) and was expanded to include eight items. These items assess family cultural activities, future personal involvement in cultural traditions, language use, and the importance of religious or spiritual beliefs. Higher scores reflect stronger bicultural ethnic identity.

AI/AN Communities where the measure has been used

  • Northern Plains and South Central study sites; nine reservation high schools representing 31 tribes (Moran et al., 1999).
  • Native communities in Montana and Wyoming (Manzo, 2015).
  • Native communities in Phoenix, AZ, representing 18 different tribal affiliations, with (Kulis et al., 2013; Kulis et al., 2016).
  • Tribal nation in Oklahoma (Garroutte et al., 2006).

Demographics of AI/AN participants where the scale has been used

  • American Indian students, grades 9–12, ages 14–19 (Moran et al., 1999).
  • American Indian youth and young adults, including high school and tribal college students, both reservation and urban (Manzo, 2015).
  • Urban American Indian middle school students, ages 11–15 (Kulis et al., 2013; Kulis et al., 2016).
  • Older American Indian adults, ages 50+ (Garroutte et al., 2006).

Notes on adaptations or modifications

  1. Manzo (2015) adapted the same 8 items into what she referred to as the American Indian Cultural Identity Scale, using a 5-point Likert scale and minor wording adjustments.
  2. Kulis et al. (2013) used two items from the original scale: “Do you live by or follow the American Indian way of life” and “Do you live by or follow the White or Anglo way of life.” Response options were 1 = Not at all, 2 = A little, 3 = Some, 4 = A lot.
  3. Kulis et al. (2016) used the first six items from the original scale (for both the American Indian way of life and White/Anglo way of life subscale). Response options were 1 = Not at all, 2 = A little, 3 = Some, 4 = A lot.
  4. Garroutte et al. (2006) used a total of five items from the American Indian and White-American identity subscale, with the following items:
    • “To what extent do you live by or follow the American-Indian way of life?”
    • “To what extent does your family live by or follow the American-Indian way of life?”
    • “How important is it for you to follow religious or spiritual beliefs that are based on traditional Indian beliefs?”
    • “To what extent do you live by or follow the white-American way of life?”
    • “To what extent does your family live by or follow the white-American way of life?” Responses were measured on a 4-point Likert scale: 0 = not at all, 1 = a little, 2 = some, 3 = a lot.

Modality and administration

Self-report; paper-based survey, administered in classrooms, typically within one class period (Moran et al., 1999); community or school-based survey formats – both digital and paper-based (Kulis et al., 2013, 2016); paper-based clinical survey format (Garroutte et al., 2006).

Scoring

  • Original Moran scale: Eight items rated on a 4-point Likert scale. Scores ranged from 8 to 32, with higher scores reflecting stronger bicultural ethnic identity.
  • Manzo adaptation: Eight items rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Scores ranged from 8 to 40, with higher scores reflecting stronger cultural identity.
  • Garroutte et al. (2006) adaptation: Responses were summed and averaged to create 2 separate identity indices, each with possible scores ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (a lot).

Psychometric evidence

  • Moran et al. (1999) used factor analytic approaches to evaluate the structure of the measure and supported its validity for assessing bicultural ethnic identity.
  • Reliability coefficients were acceptable across studies, with Cronbach’s alpha typically in the .70s range.
  • Kulis et al. (2016): Reported strong reliability for a modified ethnic identity measure (α = .90) and validated latent classes with differences in academic outcomes and identity descriptions.

Citation(s)

Original Citation(s):

  • Moran, J. R., Fleming, C. M., Somervell, P., & Manson, S. M. (1999). Measuring bicultural ethnic identity among American Indian adolescents: A factor analytic study. Journal of Adolescent Research, 14(4), 405–426.
  • Oetting, E. R., & Beauvais, F. (1990–91). Orthogonal cultural identification theory: The cultural identification of minority adolescents. International Journal of the Addictions, 25(5A–6A), 655–685.

Example Use Citation(s):

  • Manzo, K. (2015). Suicidal Ideation, Attempts, and Associated Psychosocial Risk and Protective Factors in American Indian Youth and Young Adults. Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports, 6161. https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd/6161
  • Kulis, S., Wagaman, M. A., Tso, C., & Brown, E. F. (2013). Exploring Indigenous Identities of Urban American Indian Youth of the Southwest. Journal of Adolescent Research, 28(3), 271–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558413477195
  • Kulis, S. S., Robbins, D. E., Baker, T. M., Denetsosie, S., & Deschine Parkhurst, N. A. (2016). A latent class analysis of urban American Indian youth identities. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 22(2), 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000024
  • Garroutte, E. M., Sarkisian, N., Arguelles, L., Goldberg, J., & Buchwald, D. (2006). Cultural identities and perceptions of health among health care providers and older American Indians. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 21(2), 111–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00321.x

Disclaimer: The included citations are not exhaustive, but represent the examples we had access to. If you are an original author or have other work that could be included here, please contact us.