Can I Be Myself Around Natives?

Authenticity

Authenticity has been defined as the extent to which a person can express their true core self – including their inner values, desires, and feelings – in a given environment (Harter, 2002; Kernis & Goldman, 2006). People act authentically when they feel they can simply be themselves without having to self-monitor or control the impressions they convey to others (Lenton, Bruder, Slabu, & Sedikides, 2013).

While authenticity and inauthenticity are both commonly experienced by humans (Lenton et al., 2013), people generally strive for authenticity, which is associated with more positive affect, higher need fulfillment, and wellbeing (Harter, Marold, Whitesell, & Cobbs, 1996; Leak & Cooney, 2001; Lenton et al., 2013). Authenticity has also consistently been linked with higher relationship quality (Josephs et al., 2019; Lopez & Rice, 2006; Swann, De La Ronde, & Hixon, 1994), indicating that being honest and open toward others may be an important element of close relationships (Josephs et al., 2019). Research that connects authenticity to experiences of positive affirmation, secure attachment, and unconditional regard (Didonato & Krueger, 2010; Gillath, Sesko, Shaver, & Chun, 2010; Harter et al., 1996) suggests that in order to be able to feel authentic, individuals need to feel accepted. Conversely, individuals seem to experience a heightened sense of inauthenticity when they anticipate that they may be rejected by others, as indicated by research associating inauthenticity with rejection sensitivity and feelings of being evaluated (Josephs et al., 2019; Snyder, 1987).

In line with this reasoning, ethnic minorities have been shown to respond with increased feelings of inauthenticity, when they perceived their social ingroup – a central component of individuals’ self (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) – to be rejected (Shelton, Richeson, & Salvatore, 2005): Compared to a control condition, African Americans who were told that anti-African American prejudice was still very common among White US-Americans, reported an increased sense of inauthenticity and negative affect in a subsequent interaction with a White conversation partner. Although their White interaction partners were blind to condition, African Americans’ perception of White people’s hostility toward their ingroup shaped their experiences of authenticity in these interactions. In this research, we investigated whether a similar pattern would show for refugee migrants in Germany and whether, in the field, too, the perceived prevalence of hostility toward individuals’ ingroup would shape their sense of authenticity in interactions with the majority group.

Authenticity and Self-Segregation

In this research, we build on the SAFE model of Schmader and Sedikides (2018), which assumes that individuals’ desire for authenticity and avoidance of inauthenticity contributes to self-segregation in diverse domains. Based on evidence for occupational self-segregation by gender (Peterson & Morgan, 1995), housing self-segregation by race (Ihlanfeldt & Scafidi, 2002), and social segregation in friendships (Bonilla-Silva & Embrick, 2007; Titzmann & Silbereisen, 2009), Schmader and Sedikides (2018) hypothesized that individuals who share a social identity would cluster together in certain environments which allow them to show their true selves, and they would conversely avoid environments in which they expect to feel inauthentic.

Environmental cues that signal a high fit of individuals’ social identity – like the existence of salient role models who are perceived to be similar to oneself (Cheryan, 2012; Cheryan, Drury, & Vichayapai, 2013; Hall, Inness, Schmader, Aday, & Croft, 2018) – can, according to Schmader and Sedikides (2018), help individuals develop a sense of authenticity. In contrast, environmental cues that signal a low fit of individuals’ social identity in a given environment – like a low representation of people who share that social identity (Purdie-Vaughns, Steele, Davies, Ditlmann, & Crosby, 2008) or the perceived discrimination of people with a shared social identity as investigated in this work – are predicted to impair individuals’ authenticity and make them hesitant to show their true selves around others. Based on individuals’ shared motivation to approach situations in which they feel authentic and avoid inauthentic situations, individuals with the same social identity are predicted to over time cluster together in environments that signal a high fit and acceptance of individuals’ social identity and thus facilitate their sense of authenticity.

While much research supports the assumption that environmental cues can signal a sense of fit to individuals based on their social identity and thus lead them to approach or avoid this environment (Cheryan, Plaut, Davies, & Steele, 2009; Hall et al., 2018; Murphy, Steele, & Gross, 2007; Purdie-Vaughns et al., 2008), the proposed mediational role of authenticity in these processes – a crucial prediction of the SAFE model – remains to be tested. This work aims to start filling this lack of empirical work by investigating the role of authenticity in mediating the relationship between environmental cues – in this case, natives’ identity-based discrimination as perceived by refugees – and refugees’ tendencies to avoid (inauthentic) interactions with natives.

Immigrants’ Friendship Formation

When comparing immigrants same-ethnic ad interethnic friendships, research indicates that immigrants generally tend to report relatively few friendships with members of the majority ethnic group of the receiving country than with people who share their ethnic background (e.g., Leszczensky & Pink, 2017; Titzmann, Silbereisen, & Mesch, 2012) – especially in the initial stage of the integration process (Titzmann & Silbereisen, 2009). The percentage of immigrants’ intra-ethnic friends has been shown to decrease and the share of native friends to increase with time spent in the receiving country, until leveling off at a more stable rate (Titzmann, 2014; Titzmann & Silbereisen, 2009; Titzmann et al., 2012). Overall, however, the share of native friends still remains smaller than would be expected by chance (Titzmann & Silbereisen, 2009; Titzmann et al., 2012) – even for ethnic minorities who were born and raised in the country of residence (Aboud, Mendelson, & Purdy, 2003; Baerveldt, Van Duijn, Vermeij, & Van Hemert, 2004). While it is assumed that these friendship patterns at least partly reflect immigrants’ own preference for same-ethnic friends (Franco, 2019; Titzmann, 2014; Titzmann et al., 2007), it should also be kept in mind that natives likely contribute to segregated friendship patterns as well. Natives often show hostile, unwelcoming attitudes toward immigrants (see Titzmann, 2017, for a review), resulting in social barriers that contribute to segregated friendship patterns, too.

In our study, we focus primarily on friendships with natives rather than intra-ethnic friendships, since previous research has highlighted the particular importance of these social connections. While intra-ethnic friendships may fulfill important psychological functions, such as reassurance about one’s own cultural identity (Hoare, 2019), they cannot replace inter-ethnic friendships. Interethnic-friendships may for example reduce acculturative stress (Castillo, Cano, Chen, Blucker, & Olds, 2008) and support individuals’ overall integration by generating significant social capital (Bourdieu, 1987) needed to be successful in the receiving society (e.g., Lancee & Hartung, 2012; Roth, 2013; Werum, 2000). For the larger society, too, inter-ethnic friends are an important basis for social cohesion, since they improve interethnic relationships (e.g., Hewstone, 2015; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006) and may even reduce the risk of radicalization due to marginalization (Lyons-Padilla, Gelfand, Mirahmadi, Farooq, & Van Egmond, 2015).

Discrimination and Friendship Formation

Discrimination can affect those discriminated against in diverse ways. Instances of discrimination oftentimes lead to direct disadvantages for the targets of discrimination in relevant domains, like in a situation in which a person does not get a job or a rental contract based on their social identity. Above and beyond the actual occurrence of discrimination, the subjective perception of discrimination also carries pervasive negative effects on the psychological and behavioral level. Amongst others, previous longitudinal research has shown perceived discrimination to be connected to decreased wellbeing, heightened anxiety, stress, substance abuse, conduct problems, and educational performance (Borsch et al., 2019; Brody et al., 2006; da Silva Rebelo, Fernández, & Achotegui, 2018; Gibbons, Gerrard, Cleveland, Wills, & Brody, 2004; Levin, Van Laar, & Foote, 2006; Suleman, Garber, & Rutkow, 2018). With regard to intergroup processes, research indicates that perceived discrimination may cause ethnic minorities to turn away from the majority group and toward their ethnic ingroup. Perceived discrimination has for example been associated with stronger disidentification from the majority group (Jasinskaja-Lahti, Liebkind, & Solheim, 2009; Matschke & Sassenberg, 2010; Verkuyten & Yildiz, 2007), as well as increased ethnic identity exploration (Branscombe, Schmitt, & Harvey, 1999; Pahl & Way, 2006; Ramos, Cassidy, Reicher, & Haslam, 2012; Verkuyten & Yildiz, 2007).

Relatedly, perceived discrimination has also been connected to more segregated friendship patterns over time: The more discrimination ethnic minority members report, the more they tend to have same-ethnic minority rather than ethnic majority friends (Franco, 2019; Levin et al., 2003; Titzmann et al., 2007). Similarly, ethnicity-based rejection sensitivity – the anxious expectation to be rejected because of one’s ethnic background – has been associated with segregated friendship patterns. Interestingly, no discrimination-friendship-segregation association was found in some studies with a cross-sectional design (Titzmann, Serwata, Silbereisen, & Davidov, 2016; Titzmann et al., 2007) and/or non-visible minorities (Titzmann & Silbereisen, 2009; Titzmann et al., 2007. These findings indicate that (i) visible minorities (such as most of the refugees recently arrived in the West) may be more susceptible to the effects of discrimination (Levin et al., 2003; Walton & Cohen, 2007), and (ii) effects of discrimination on friendship patterns may need time to develop, showing longitudinally, but not necessarily cross-sectionally.

Affective, Motivational, and Behavioral Tendencies to Avoid Friendships With Natives

Why, however, are perceptions of discrimination connected to a lower number of native friends? It could be argued that perceived discrimination constitutes a proxy for an individuals’ overall social exclusion emanating from natives, which is connected to a reduced number of interethnic friends. In addition, it is also possible that perceived discrimination weakens refugees’ inclination to actively reach out to natives. Such self-segregational tendencies would indicate an impairment in immigrants’ ability to make use of existing opportunities for potentially valuable interethnic connections. Both processes – one driven through natives and one primarily through migrants – may very well simultaneously be at play and together contribute to the link between discrimination and interethnic friendships. In this research, we specifically focused on migrants’ tendencies to befriend natives. While a reduction in anti-immigrant hostility and connected discrimination rates should always be the primary goal and much research is already focusing on this endeavor (e.g., Bauer & Hannover, 2020; Brauer & Er-Rafiy, 2011; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006), it will be difficult to prevent any and all experiences of discrimination. We therefore considered understanding and improving the way individuals respond to experiences of discrimination to be crucial.

To get a comprehensive view of relevant processes, the tendency to befriend natives was measured on an affective, motivational, and behavioral level. Affective tendencies refer to individuals’ anticipation to feel negative emotions during encounters with natives (expected affect), which are crucial determinants of individuals’ future behavior (Livingston & Drwecki, 2007; Tugade, Shiota, & Kirby, 2014). Motivational tendencies were operationalized as the extent to which individuals generally wish to be integrated in German society (integration motivation). Behavioral tendencies were measured as individuals’ anticipation whether they would engage in such an encounter if an opportunity arises (behavioral engagement; cf. Oettingen & Mayer, 2002). In particular, we assessed anticipated response to an invitation for a party with natives.

Procedure

Data were derived from a larger project with refugees in Germany. Refugees were recruited through refugee shelters, social organizations, as well as an online social platform. In sum, we contacted 384 organizations via email or phone and posted 246 invitations in Facebook groups. Once participants had registered for our project, surveys were sent out online through email or an app. As incentives, participants received 10 € or a voucher for an online shopping portal for the same value for their participation in this research project.

The project incorporated a total of three surveys. Data were taken from surveys 2 and 3 (which will be referred to as time 1 and 2 for the purpose of this study). Survey 2 was implemented in spring 2018 (3 months after individuals had completed Survey 1). Survey 2 included our predictor perceived discrimination and no other measures addressed in the current study. Survey 3 was sent out 6 months after Survey 2. Survey 3, which served as the focus of our analyses, included measures of perceived discrimination, number of native and intra-ethnic friends, authenticity, and motivational as well as behavioral variables relating to friendship formation. Materials (including all translations) as well as data are available on the Open Science Framework https://osf.io/ks9mu/?view_only=65843002d32d4cf58adf3d7f94d7cbc2

Participants

A total of 299 refugees participated in the research project. However, only participants who completed the relevant measures could be included in our analyses. Thus, data from a total of 115 participants, who had completed Survey 3, were included in this study. While our main cross-sectional analyses of Survey 3 included all of these 115 participants, analyses replicating the previous long-term association between discrimination and friendship segregation with data from Surveys 2 and 3 included a subpopulation of 75 participants.

Prior to the execution of our study, power analyses were conducted. Based on estimated medium effect sizes similar to previous studies (Franco, 2019; Levin et al., 2003; Titzmann et al., 2007), power analyses using G*Power (Faul, Erdfelder, Lang, & Buchner, 2007) with a power level of .80 indicated a minimum sample size of 64 participants for the long-term association between discrimination and friendship patterns (estimated effect size r² = .3), and 68 participants for cross-sectional correlations and regressions underlying mediational analyses (estimated effect sizes, r² = .3 and f² = .15).

Demographics of the total sample were as follows. The gender distribution was 35% female, 57% male, and 8% preferred not to indicate their gender. The average age was M = 26.68 (SD = 8.57). Participants reported coming from diverse African and Middle Eastern countries. Most participants reported coming from Syria (30%), Iran (25%), or Afghanistan (21%). The average duration of stay in Germany (reported at the beginning of the project) was M = 1.90 years (SD = 0.90).

Measures

All measures were translated into German, Arabic, and Farsi. In order to create these translations, individuals who were fluent in both English and the respective language translated the English version back and forth. Discrepancies were solved through discussion.

Long-Term Relationship Between Discrimination and Number of Native and Non-Native Friends

We tested whether perceived discrimination predicts a more segregated friendship pattern over time, and regressed discrimination at time 1 onto the number of reported friends at time 2. Discrimination at time 1 was associated with fewer native friends, β = −.23, p = .048, but more intra-ethnic friends at time 2, β = .37, p = .001. The overall number of friends that participants reported was not affected by previously experienced discrimination, β = .07, p = .56. Similarly, the number of friends from third countries (i.e., friends that came neither from Germany nor the immigrant’s respective country of origin) did not differ depending on levels of discrimination, β = .16, p = .18.

Cross-Sectional Correlations of Discrimination With Authenticity and Tendencies Not to Befriend Natives

As evident in Table 1, correlative analyses support our second hypothesis: at time 2, perceived discrimination was negatively associated with authenticity as well as affective, motivational, and behavioral tendencies to befriend natives. In support of Hypothesis 2, individuals who perceived higher discrimination reported to feel less authentic in interactions with Germans, they expected to feel worse in future interactions with Germans (expected affect), showed lower motivation to integrate in Germany (integration motivation), and were less likely to report that they would go to a party with Germans (behavioral engagement).

Table 1 Correlations, means (M), and standard deviations (SD) of psychological constructs at time 2

			Correlations
Variable	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5
Note. *p < .05; **p < .01 (two-tailed).
1. Discrimination	3.46	1.39	1	−.23*	−.26*	−.38**	−.21*
2. Authenticity	3.73	0.99		1	.41**	.45**	.30**
3. Behavioral engagement with natives	4.08	1.02			1	.60**	.39**
4. Expected affect	3.80	0.82				1	.34**
5. Integration motivation	4.30	0.70					1

Table 1 Correlations, means (M), and standard deviations (SD) of psychological constructs at time 2

View as image HTML

Indirect Effects of Discrimination Through Authenticity

We conducted mediation analyses following Preacher and Hayes (2004) to test indirect effects of perceived discrimination at t2 through authenticity on affective, motivational and behavioral tendencies not to befriend natives. As expected, we found significant indirect effects of perceived discrimination through authenticity on expected affect concerning interactions with Germans, ab = −.05, SE = .02, 95% CI [−0.09, −0.01], on integration motivation, ab = −.03, SE = .02, 95% CI [−0.06, −0.01], and on behavioral engagement with natives, ab = −.06, SE = .03, 95% CI [−0.12, −0.02]. While no significant direct effect of discrimination remained for integration motivation, c = −.07, SE = .05, 95% CI [−0.16, 0.02], a significant direct effect of discrimination was still observed for expected affect, c = −.17, SE = .04, 95% CI [−0.27, −0.08], and behavioral engagement, c = −.13, SE = .06, 95% CI [−0.26, −0.004]. In sum, Hypothesis 3 was thus supported. Individuals who experienced more discrimination felt to a lesser extent that they can be themselves in social interactions with Germans. This reduced feeling of authenticity in turn resulted in expectations of more negative affect regarding interactions with Germans, weaker overall integration motivation, and lower engagement with natives.

Limitations and Future Research

Our work raises important questions for future research to investigate. Firstly, future studies should use different methods that complement our correlational field-study design to assess the relationship between discrimination, authenticity, and friendship formation processes from different angles. Laboratory experiment and/or cross-lagged panel analyses should be used to test the causal relationship between variables. While laboratory experiments could be used to test short-term motivational and behavioral consequences of salient discrimination experiences, cross-lagged panel studies could be used to further examine the long-term effects of discrimination on friendship patterns. In addition, daily diary studies could be conducted assessing experiences of discrimination and connected variations in authenticity as well as motivational and behavioral variables related to interethnic friendship formation. Together, these studies could provide us with a comprehensive picture about the relationship between discrimination and friendship formation processes.

Secondly, future research should also explore the role of potential additional variables relevant in the relationship between perceptions of rejection (such as discrimination) and self-segregation. Further research should examine if our findings would generalize across different forms of rejection, other than perceptions of discrimination. According to the SAFE model (Schmader & Sedikides, 2018), any environmental cue which signals a low fit of individuals in a given environment should trigger feelings of inauthenticity and thus self-segregational tendencies. Instead of perceived discrimination, refugees’ perception about natives’ stereotypes (meta-stereotypes; e.g., Kamans, Gordijn, Oldenhuis, & Otten, 2009) could for example be explored as alternative sources of threat to individuals’ sense of authenticity and social integration. In addition, future research should also test potential additional mediators of the relationship between perceived discrimination and self-segregational tendencies. It is well conceivable that the discrimination-segregation relationship could be mediated not only by authenticity, but also by other variables: Perceptions of discrimination likely trigger negative attitudes and cognitions toward natives (Hindricks, Verkuyten, & Coenders, 2014) or doubts about one’s belonging in a given setting (Martiny & Nikitin, 2019). These processes could further contribute to self-segregational tendencies – either directly or indirectly through increased feelings of inauthenticity. Future research should explore the role of variables like these to come to yet a more complete understanding of the discrimination-segregation connection.

Thirdly, future research should investigate further possible associations between authenticity and immigrants’ friendship formation processes. Our research suggests that feelings of decreased authenticity in interactions with majority members are connected to migrants’ lower mental and behavioral tendencies to befriend them. At the same time, feelings of inauthenticity may also affect social interactions in a way that decreases the conversation partner’s willingness to pursue a friendship. Previous research has found that individuals who feel inauthentic show less extraversion, agreeableness, and openness (Fleeson & Wilt, 2010; Sheldon, Ryan, Rawsthorne, & Ilardi, 1997), but heightened self-monitoring (Lenton et al., 2013). Inauthentic feelings thus seem to translate into a more restricted and less smooth interaction dynamic which may put off research.

Finally, future work should develop and test potential interventions that could buffer the detrimental effects of discrimination on social integration. Two broad approaches are conceivable: Firstly, interventions could strengthen individuals’ sense of authenticity in such a way that they can sustain feelings of authenticity in the face of discrimination. This could be done by psychological interventions (e.g., helping individuals make sense of discrimination experiences in an adaptive way, illustrating how single instances of discrimination do not imply individuals’ rejection by the host society as a whole) and/or by creating identity-safe contexts (Hall et al., 2018) that make individuals (including their social identity) feel accepted and allow for authentic inter-ethnic interactions. Secondly, interventions could also aim to weaken the link between inauthenticity and avoidance of contact with natives. Single instances of feelings of inauthenticity seem to be a normal part of life (Lenton et al., 2013) – and may be even more so in the initial stage of getting used to a new cultural environment. Maybe interventions that illustrate how feelings of authenticity can be developed over time and are not definite indicators of one’s belonging in a certain environment could reduce adverse effects of inauthenticity, help individuals sustain their engagement with natives and develop a sense of authenticity on the long run.

Conclusion

The recent influx of refugees in the western world has sparked a rise in anti-immigrant hostility including rising discrimination (Rooduijn, 2015; Tynes, Seaton, & Zuckerman, 2015). Our research indicates that discrimination may interfere with refugees’ social integration process by making them feel inauthentic in interactions with natives. Conversely, finding ways that help strengthen their relationships with the native population in their new homes.