Xinyi Zhang
George Washington University
Abstract
During my application process, some seniors from Psy.D. programs shared their experiences of being admitted into a program that is “too white”, which made them feel lonely, anxious, and pressured to acculturate into the US culture. Holding the same fear, I remembered being excited to see that more than 30% of my cohort were international students during Orientation Day. It was a great relief to me because I knew I would not be alone if I encountered issues that only international students would face (e.g., visa, work permit, language barrier, etc.). I was more than excited to find there were also other Chinese students, and some of them were even from the same city as mine. Thinking back, I noticed that I automatically separated my cohort into different groups during the first day, and self-categorized into my own racial group. I naturally sat with them during class, whispered in Mandarin about things we were unsure of, and chatted with each other using WeChat instead of WhatsApp. It felt safe, familiar, effortless, and a strong sense of belonging.
Introduction
Social Identity and Cultural Bubbles
This behavior of differentiating “we” as insiders and “they” as outsiders is well-discussed in the social identity theory (Tajfel, 1974). According to this theory, we derive self-esteem and reduce uncertainty by identifying with groups (McKeown et al., 2016). For me, being with other Chinese students felt like finding a small island of home in an unfamiliar sea. A group is a social microcosm, and what happens in our cohort group also reflects the outside world. Just like Chinatowns and other ethnic areas across the US, people from the same cultural background naturally cluster together, creating small communities that provide social and economic support, affirm their identity, and protect them from outside uncertainty. Researchers have identified the phenomenon of ethnic groups concentrating in specific areas, known as ethnic enclaves, which are believed to be beneficial in many ways (Espinoza-Kulick et al., 2021). However, there are mixed findings in terms of its effects. For example, while studies showed ethnic enclave was associated with better economic outcomes, lower depression rates, and protection against discrimination, it was found to limit access to multiple resources, create feelings of exclusion, and exacerbate bias and stereotypes (Espinoza-Kulick et al., 2021). It seems like residential segregation protects people and isolates them at the same time.
These complex feelings also emerged in my daily life moving forward. Over time, I realized that belonging can sometimes come with quiet isolation. During one of our courses, we were asked to conduct a cultural self-assessment, exploring our cultural heritage and identifying the areas in which we hold privilege (Hays, 2016). What stood out to me was the follow-up task: assessing the people we spend the most time with. It’s not very surprising to see that I only hang out with people who share a similar identity with me. Hays (2016) explained that being attracted to similar people is not uncommon; however, minority groups have no choice but to interact with different people due to their limited numbers. Then I realized my privilege in belonging to one of the world’s numerical majority groups: it was never difficult for me to find compatriots in foreign countries. It somehow reinforced my behavior pattern to always seek help from my Chinese peers rather than reaching out to others, whom I unconsciously categorized as “foreigners” from my angle. Growing up in a largely monoracial country, I had little experience interacting with people from diverse racial backgrounds. When I arrived here, in a varied and strange environment, my fear of being judged (perhaps also a projection of my own harsh self-criticism) made me withdraw from the unfamiliar world and stay within a sub-group that I found more manageable. After all, if I could get all the support I needed from my small group, why bother facing unpredictable challenges outside it? However, this kind of withdrawal mindset, on the other hand, caused other people to unconsciously not engage with me, reflecting a “self-fulfilling prophecy” that what I expect (they will judge me and don’t want to connect with me) turns into reality.
Reflecting on my personal experiences, I decided to use the term “cultural bubbles” to describe the sub-group within my cohort. I chose not to use “comfort bubble/zone” because it wasn’t just about comfort. It was about culture(s) and acculturation. Berry’s strategy model on acculturation provides a theoretical foundation for examining cultural bubbles (Berry, 1990). Separation occurs when “minority members highly identify with their ethnic culture and do not want to interact with that of the majority,” and assimilation is the opposite of separation when minority individuals only engage with the mainstream culture (McKeown et al., 2016, p. 58). Separation reflects the isolation aspect of bubbles, while assimilation abandons those bubbles (one’s original identity). Adverse effects might arise in both situations. A healthier approach is to integrate both identities compatibly, sustain the distinctiveness of one’s ethnic identity, while also fitting in the mainstream culture (McKeown et al., 2016). Under this bicultural integration, individuals could experience switching between two different cultures or creating a new identity based on integration (McKeown et al., 2016). I am now experiencing such integration because our program strives to build a closer community by creating small group interactions, such as monthly professional breakfasts with faculty members and bi-weekly support groups among students. Based on my personal experiences of being able to shift from separation to integration in these small groups gradually, I wonder if such a transition can also happen in group psychotherapy and what I should do to facilitate it as a group leader.
From Cohort Groups to Therapy Groups
International students face a double burden of transition compared to their local peers, and most of them will go through a process from being the majority in their home country to a minority status in the United States (Dipeolu et al., 2007). They are also likely to experience relational issues, such as isolation and loneliness (Ribeiro, 2020). Although they constitute a great portion of US students, the percentage of them seeking therapy help is very limited (Dipeolu et al., 2007). Language barrier and lack of therapists who are sensitive to the unique cultural issues international students face are important reasons why they hesitate to seek help (Dipeolu et al., 2007). Yet, if designed with cultural awareness, group therapy can be of great help in providing support, validating feelings, providing a non-evaluative environment for practicing English, developing socializing skills, and fostering a sense of belonging (Dipeolu et al., 2007). Creating such a safe space does not mean making everyone the same. We need enough similarity to build cohesion, but we also need enough differences to learn and grow.
It is noteworthy that Yalom & Lescz (2005) emphasized that group composition requires a delicate balance between homogeneity and heterogeneity: “change is preceded by a state of dissonance or incongruity precedes change”, but “heterogeneity must not be maintained at the price of creating a group isolate” (Yalom & Lescz, 2005, p. 273). Even if we composed a group that encompasses both homogeneity and heterogeneity, sub-groups are highly likely to emerge when individuals find shared experiences with others, which is a natural process that a group leader cannot prevent. This tension mirrors the dilemma mentioned above that I experienced in my cohort group. However, it is actually an excellent opportunity to name it and foster trust, similar to the support provided by my program’s faculty member. It was pointed out by Yalom & Lescz (2005) that the way a group leader sets a group is important: if a group leader conveys implicit favor towards the similarity search and does not encourage group members to self-disclose different views, such group norms might cause groups to remain superficial. I deeply resonate with their insights on how to attend to group dynamics. When I first participated in our support group, I disclosed only feelings I thought would be more acceptable, tried to relate to others’ sharing, and looked for commonalities. This is common in the early stage of a group, when members are testing boundaries and developing group cohesiveness. This process reminds me that what feels safe can also become a restriction, both in my cohort group and support group. For group leaders, we need to balance members’ need for belonging and safety while gently encouraging openness across differences.
Based on my personal reflections and theories of group psychotherapy, I have developed a deeper understanding of “cultural bubbles.” Like many defense mechanisms, they can be adaptive at first but may also become limiting if we rely on them exclusively. The same is true for professional groups, where group leaders need to balance both cohesion and diversity. This balance echoes one of the oldest Chinese philosophies: Yin and Yang (its shape also looks like a bubble), the harmony between opposites (Graham, 2015). As a future group leader, I need to be aware of my own social identity and cultural heritage, and to use this awareness as a valuable tool to support and connect diverse populations.
References
Berry, J. W. (1990). Acculturation and adaptation: A general framework. In Mental health of immigrants and refugees (pp. 90–102). Hogg Foundation for Mental Health.
Dipeolu, A., Kang, J., & Cooper, C. (2007). Support Group for International Students: A Counseling Center’s Experience. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 22(1), 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1300/J035v22n01_05
Espinoza-Kulick, M. A. V., Fennelly, M., & Beck, K. (2021). Ethnic Enclaves. In M. A. V. Espinoza-Kulick, M. Fennelly, & K. Beck, Sociology. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199756384-0257
Graham, A. C. (2015). Disputers of the Tao: Philosophical Argument in Ancient China. Open Court.
Hays, P. A. (2016). Addressing cultural complexities in practice: Assessment, diagnosis, and therapy (3rd ed.). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14801-000
McKeown, S., Haji, R., & Ferguson, N. (Eds.). (2016). Understanding Peace and Conflict Through Social Identity Theory: Contemporary Global Perspectives. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29869-6
Ribeiro, M. D. (Ed.). (2020). Examining Social Identities and Diversity Issues in Group Therapy: Knocking at the Boundaries (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429022364
Tajfel, H. (1974). Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Social Science Information, 13(2), 65–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901847401300204
Yalom, I. D., & Lescz, M. (2005). The theory and practice of group psychotherapy (fifth edition). Basic Books – Perseus Group.
Return to The Group Psychologist Homepage