Identity Distress among Immigrant Students during COVID-19

Abstract

The process of identity formation is complex for many; however, for immigrant populations experiencing acculturation and acculturative stress, the process may be particularly difficult. The current study examined the impact of immigration, acculturation, social support, and acculturative stress on identity formation and identity distress during the added stress of COVID-19. Late-adolescent college students from large enrollment psychology courses completed an anonymous online survey battery for course credit (N = 462). Results indicate that identity distress was higher among first-generation immigrants than second- and third-generation; however, it was highest for those with mixed parentage (one immigrant and one native-born parent). Further, acculturative stress and COVID-19 anxiety better predicted identity distress than identity development factors alone, and acculturative stress appeared to mediate the relationship between social support and identity distress. This study highlights the need for additional resources for immigrant students, especially during the current pandemic.

1. Introduction

1.1. Overview

According to the Pew Research Center, in 2017 13.7% of the American population were first-generation immigrants and 12% were second-generation immigrants [1]. Budiman and colleagues (2020) reported that 13.7% of the United States population is made up of immigrants (roughly 44.8 million people) [1]. Therefore, as of 2018, 13.7% of the United States’ population is either a first-generation immigrant or has at least one parent who was born in a foreign country. Globally, there appears to be an increase in immigration and immigrant adolescents [2]. Immigration and acculturation among adolescents are nuanced research topics that have received growing attention in scientific literature. However, less research has focused on immigration status and acculturation, and their relationship with identity formation and identity distress.

1.2. Identity Formation and Identity Distress

Adolescence is a stage in human development that can be quite complex. It is a time in development where young people must consolidate many factors of themselves, along with what goals, values, or beliefs they have in almost every facet of life. Examples of areas of concern include goals, moral values, religious beliefs, and interpersonal relationships [3]. Extending the seminal work of theorist Erik Erikson [4], Luyckx and colleagues (2008) suggested that at the time of adolescence and emerging adulthood, young people use a series of explorative and commitment processes to find a sense of identity [5]. While successful consolidation of identity looks different in various contexts and cultures, not every adolescent is successful in this effort. Some adolescents experience identity distress when facing the task of identity consolidation, and those with high levels of identity distress might find themselves in a prolonged state of identity crisis and may experience maladjustment among numerous other psychological issues [6].

Though identity formation is a common experience across all people, immigrants generally have more factors to reconcile and a greater number of potential obstacles to overcome in developing a successful identity. For example, Ndengeyingoma and colleagues (2014) suggested that adolescent refugees are influenced by personal, environmental, and interpersonal characteristics, all of which include potential exposure to the differences between native and host cultures [7]. During the process of identity formation, interpersonal factors might have a large effect on how immigrant children or adolescents might view themselves and their host culture.

1.3. Acculturation, Acculturative Stress, and Identity

Acculturation is defined as the adjustment and/or affiliation to another culture, which occurs when one is exposed to a different culture than one’s own. Adjustment generally occurs in beliefs, values, behaviors, and ideas. The process of acculturation is a key experience that an immigrant might face [8]. Acculturative stress is defined as stress associated with becoming acculturated, or adjusted, to a different culture [9]. Becoming acculturated in a host culture can add complexity to identity formation. Previous research has indicated that additional stressors associated with immigrant status can complicate the process of identity formation—e.g., [10]. These stressors can include discrimination, non-native language proficiency, and more limited financial resources than that of their non-immigrant peers [10]. Constantine and colleagues (2004) described a multitude of predictors of acculturative stress [11]. Examples of these predictors include generational status, ethnic identity, age of arrival to the United States in the case of first-generation immigrants, and language proficiency.

Acculturative stress may be experienced differently among immigrants from various areas. As explained by Liu and colleagues (2021), immigrants from various backgrounds might experience acculturative stress differently due to disparities between native culture and host culture [12]. Current literature indicates that larger disparities (e.g., individualistic culture versus collectivist culture, differences in achievement expectations) between the native and host cultures might be related to greater levels of acculturative stress [12]. In a study analyzing acculturation among Chinese international students, it was found that acculturative stress was positively associated with higher levels of maladaptive perfectionism. Additionally, higher levels of acculturative stress and maladaptive perfectionism were associated with higher levels of depression and anxiety [12]. However, Guler and Berman (2019) found that a potential protective factor against identity distress and internalizing disorders is one’s native culture identity [8].

Another factor to consider is the unique experience of adolescents with mixed heritage (i.e., adolescents with parents from two different countries). A qualitative study conducted by Soliz and colleagues (2017) found a variety of benefits (e.g., being able to shift identities based on context) and challenges (e.g., disconnection from a single, cohesive identity) associated with mixed heritage [13]. Williams and colleagues (2002) explained that those with a mixed heritage may experience stress from a variety of factors such as conflicting values of the parents’ origin cultures [14]. Anxiety, therefore, may be a component associated with the process of acculturation for individuals of mixed heritage due to the unique barriers that they likely face [14].

Acculturation may be affected by the attitudes of and treatment by those around them. Immigrants may feel the need to separate, may feel marginalized, or even feel pressure to assimilate based on multiple external factors [7]. Brown (2011) found that American elementary school children generally had strong ideas of what it meant to be an American, including an opinion that Americans are generally White [15]. Furthermore, many of the children held negative attitudes towards certain populations of immigrants, namely immigrants originating from Mexico [15]. Negative attitudes exhibited towards immigrants might lead to maladaptive identity formation and a marginalized, assimilated, or separated acculturation status.

1.4. Social Support

Social support has been shown to be negatively related to acculturative stress [16,17,18]. In a study of acculturative stress, social support, and career outcome expectations among international students, Franco and colleagues (2019) found that acculturative stress was negatively related to social support and career outcome expectations, and that decreased social support indirectly and partially explained the relationships between acculturative stress and outcome expectations [19]. The authors suggested that in order to promote more positive outcomes for international students, counselors should not only address acculturative stress, but also its relationship with social support.

Social support has also been linked to identity development and reduced identity distress. In a sample of 269 college students, Cassidy (2004) found that problem-solving style, perceived social support, and strength of identity were the best predictors of both reduced distress and illness [20]. In another study with college students, Captari and colleagues (2021) found that traumatic loss can lead to identity distress [21]. In their discussion of this finding, they suggested that social support might help to reduce this identity distress. Indeed, Gfellner and Cordoba (2011) found a significant relationship between social support and reduced identity distress among college students in Spain and Canada; however, when controlling for ego strength the relationship decreased significantly [22]. It is possible that the relationship among social support, acculturative stress, and identity distress is similar, in that social support may reduce acculturative stress, which in turn might decrease identity distress.

Acculturative stress, coping skills, and subsequent adjustment outcomes may be affected by the ability to seek help among peers and adults within their school system. A study conducted by Tummala-Narra and Sathasivam-Rueckert (2016) found that immigrant adolescents felt more comfortable seeking help from friends or peers from a similar background [10]. Additionally, many adolescents within the study described feeling uncomfortable seeking help among adults at school (e.g., teachers or counselors), as they had various concerns surrounding their ability to feel understood due in part to differences in culture and upbringing [10].

1.5. Mental Health

Acculturation level and acculturation strategy can affect health outcomes among immigrants. Nguyen and Benet-Martínez (2013) found that those who used the strategy of integration, therefore were bicultural (i.e., adopted bicultural attitudes), had better adjustment outcomes than individuals who were acculturated to only their native or host culture [23]. In a study conducted with Asian American immigrants, it was found that acculturative stress was significantly related to ratings of depression. Furthermore, family cohesion among Asian American immigrants was negatively correlated to ratings of depression. Therefore, low familial support and greater feelings of acculturative stress predicted higher levels of depression among Asian American immigrants [24].

Research has indicated a relationship between identity distress, internalizing problems, posttraumatic stress, and exposure to natural disaster [25]. Scott and colleagues (2014) found an indirect effect of natural disaster exposure on identity distress through posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms. It is possible that potential identity disturbances (e.g., greater identity distress) and psychological adjustment outcomes (e.g., internalizing problems) of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic are similar to that of a natural disaster [25]. Therefore, the COVID-19 pandemic may potentially affect identity formation and psychological adjustment in a similar way to other traumatic events such as a natural disaster. Research has indicated that the COVID-19 pandemic has affected immigrant and refugee populations disproportionately. Immigrants of all forms (refugees, migrants, asylum seekers) were found to be a vulnerable population during the pandemic. This is potentially due to the insecure and unpredictable nature of finances, living, and working conditions that immigrants might experience [26]. Additionally, interventions and other aids during the pandemic, (i.e., help-lines and telehealth) were less accessible to these populations, possibly due to barriers, such as potential differences in digital literacy and foreign language proficiency [27]. We decided to measure variables related to COVID-19 impact because this is a moment in time where we can evaluate a unique environmental stressor that may disproportionately affect immigrants and therefore have an effect on identity and acculturative distress.

1.6. Rationale and Hypotheses

The current study aimed to measure the level of identity distress and acculturative stress among immigrant college students. Previous research has focused on the barriers and limited resources of immigrant populations but has not investigated the role of identity distress in relation to ethnic identity, acculturation, and acculturative stress. In addition, the current study investigated this topic during the current pandemic, allowing for a real-world assessment of the effects of an external stressor and its interaction with identity and acculturation among immigrants. The following hypotheses were tested:

Hypothesis 1.

First generation immigrants would have more identity distress than second-generation immigrants, and second-generation immigrants would have more identity distress than third-generation immigrants.

Hypothesis 2.

Due to the limited resources available to immigrants and the instability during COVID-19 (career, financial, and living instability) [26], it was predicted that first-generation immigrants would have the most COVID-19 anxiety followed by second- then third-generation immigrants.

Hypothesis 3.

Social support would be related to acculturative stress and identity distress; however, acculturative stress would mediate the relationship between social support and identity distress, such that when controlling for acculturative stress, social support would no longer predict identity distress.

Hypothesis 4.

Identity distress would be better predicted by acculturative stress and COVID-19 anxiety than by identity development factors alone.

2. Methods

2.1. Participants

College students were recruited from a large metropolitan southeastern university in the United States for this study (n = 462). The age of participants ranged from 18 to 53 (M_age = 20.13, SD = 4.76). The gender breakdown included 63.2% females, 33.8% males, 1.9% non-binary, 0.4% transgender, and 0.6% other. Due to the limited number of participants in some gender groups, the groups were collapsed into three groups for analyses (292 females, 156 males, and 14 other). The ethnic breakdown included 36.8% White, 32.7% Hispanic, 12.1% Black, 11.5% Asian, 0.2% Native American or Alaskan Native, and 6.7% Mixed or Other. Ethnicity was also condensed into five groups (170 White participants, 151 Hispanic participants, 56 Black participants, 53 Asian participants, and 32 Other. The breakdown of education included 54.8% freshmen, 14.3% sophomores, 17.3% juniors, 12.8% seniors, 0.2% non-degree-seeking, 0.2% graduate students, and 0.2% other. Of the 462 participants, 363 were born in the United States and 99 were not born in the United States. We separated immigration status into four groups: first-generation immigrants (n = 99), second-generation immigrants (n = 143), mixed immigrants (those who had one parent born in the United States and the other parent born outside the United States; n = 32), and third- or higher-generation immigrants (n = 188).

2.2. Measures

2.2.1. Demographic Questionnaire

The demographic questionnaire included questions about age, gender, education, ethnicity/race, immigration status, and parent immigration status.

2.2.2. Measure of Socioeconomic Status

The Measure of Socioeconomic Status (MSES) [28] is an 8-item scale that measures the participants’ socioeconomic status by recording their parents’ marital, employment, and educational statuses, as well as their level of aid from government assistance. Example items are as follows: “What was the employment status of your mother (or mother figure/primary parent)?” and “What was the level of your father’s (second parent) education?”

2.2.3. The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support

The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS; Zimet et al., 1988) is a 12-item measure assessing social support across three domains (family, friends, and significant others). Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1-Strongly disagree to 5-Strongly Agree. Examples of items are “I get the emotional help and support I need from my family” and “there is a special person in my life who cares about my feelings.” This measure was previously found to have a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.88.

2.2.4. Short Acculturation Scale for Hispanics

The Short Acculturation Scale for Hispanics (SASH) [29] is a 12-item scale that measures bicultural acculturation for Hispanic individuals living in the United States. The items are rated on a 5-point scale of 1-only Spanish to 5-only English or 1-all Latinos/Hispanics to 5-all Americans. The scale was found to be reliable with an alpha coefficient of 0.92 [30]. Because our survey looks at immigrants from many different areas of the world, we changed the answer options to range from 1-only English to 5-only another language and 1-all immigrants to 5-all Anglo-Americans. Example items are: “In general, in what language(s) are the movies, T.V. and radio programs you prefer to watch and listen to?” and “You prefer going to social gatherings/parties at which the people are.” Because our participant pool consisted of college students, we eliminated the 12th question on the scale referring to the participants’ children.

2.2.5. Social, Attitudinal, Familial, and Environmental Acculturation Stress Scale

The Social, Attitudinal, Familial, and Environmental Acculturation Stress Scale (SAFE) [31] is a 60-item scale that measures levels of acculturative stress. Mena and colleagues (1987) shortened the scale to 24 items. The 24 items present various stressful situations the participants may have previously experienced, and the participants rate how stressful they found the situations to be on a scale of 0-Have not experienced, 1-Not at all stressful, 2-Somewhat stressful, 3-Moderately stressful, 4-Very stressful, and 5- Extremely stressful. Example items are as follows: “I have more barriers to overcome than most people” and “I feel uncomfortable when others make jokes about or put down people of my cultural background.” The scale was previously found to have a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.89 [32].

2.2.6. Identity Distress Survey

The Identity Distress Survey (IDS) [3] measures how much worry, distress, or discomfort one feels regarding their identity. The IDS consists of 7 items measuring 7 domains of identity: Long-Term Goals, Career Choice, Friendships, Sexual Orientation and Behavior, Religion, Values or Beliefs, and Group Loyalties. Distress around each domain was rated on a 5-point scale of 1-none at all to 5-very severely. An example item is “To what degree have you recently been upset, distressed, or worried over your career choice (e.g., deciding on a trade or profession).” The IDS was found to have a test re-test reliability of 0.82 and an internal consistency of 0.84 [3]. A total identity distress score was computed by averaging the distress scores for the 7 domains.

2.2.7. Dimensions of Identity Development Scale

The Dimensions of Identity Development Scale (DIDS) [5] is a 25-item scale that measures identity development in terms of five domains: Commitment Making, Identification with Commitment, Exploration in Breadth, Exploration in Depth with Reconsideration, and Ruminative Exploration. The items are rated on a 7-point scale of 1-strongly disagree to 7-strongly agree. The DIDS has been shown to have Cronbach’s alphas ranging from 0.62 to 0.91. For the purpose of this study, we chose to use a newly developed short form of the DIDS. Marttinen and colleagues (2016) [33] developed the short form by analyzing the confirmatory factor analysis from Luyckx and colleagues’ (2008) [5] original 25 item scale. The new short form consists of two to three items from each subscale of the original DIDS, for a total of 11 items. Example items from the shortened scale are as follows: “I have decided on the direction I want to follow in my life,” “My future plans give me self-confidence,” “I think actively about different directions I might take in my life,” “I think about whether the aims I already have for life really suit me,” and “I am doubtful about what I really want to achieve in life.”

2.2.8. Coronavirus Anxiety Scale

The Coronavirus Anxiety Scale (CAS) [34] is a 5-item scale that measures levels of fear and anxiety surrounding COVID-19. The items are rated on a scale of 1-none at all to 5-very often. Example items are as follows: “I felt dizzy, lightheaded, or faint, when I read or listened to news about the coronavirus,” and “I had trouble falling or staying asleep because I was thinking about the coronavirus.” The CAS was found to have an alpha of 0.92 [34].

2.3. Procedure

After the study received Institutional Review Board approval, participants were recruited from large enrollment psychology courses. The participants completed the anonymous survey online for course credit. Students who did not want to participate were given an alternative option of equal time and effort to receive course credit. All participants reviewed the explanation of research and consented to taking the survey before participating.

3. Results

3.1. Descriptive and Preliminary Analyses

The means and standard deviations for all measures used are reported in

Table 1. Means, standard deviations, and alphas for all study measures.

Measure	Mean	SD	Alpha
Social Support	3.99	0.83	0.91
Acculturation	4.05	0.78	0.73
Acculturative Stress	2.27	0.80	0.91
Identity Distress	2.38	0.87	0.84
Commitment Making	5.49	1.31	0.93
Identification with Commitment	5.20	1.47	0.92
Exploration in Breadth	5.69	1.13	0.86
Exploration in Depth with Reconsideration	5.61	1.10	0.58
Ruminative Exploration	4.45	1.63	0.86
COVID-19 Anxiety	1.51	0.80	0.91

. As a preliminary step, all measures were evaluated for demographic differences. Age was negatively correlated with socioeconomic status (r = −0.10, p = 0.046) and acculturation (r = −0.12, p = 0.024). To determine if scores differed by gender, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted. Significant differences were found for identity distress (F_{(2, 459)} = 4.07, p = 0.001) and acculturative stress (F_{(2, 459)} = 6.64, p = 0.001). An LSD post hoc analysis revealed differences on a measure of identity distress with males being significantly less distressed than females or those in the “other” category. All genders differed significantly on acculturative stress with those who identified as “other” having the highest stress, followed by females, then followed by males with the least acculturative stress.

To determine if scores differed by ethnicity, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted. Significant differences between ethnicities were found for identity distress (F_{(4, 457)} = 2.54, p = 0.039), SES (F_{(4, 457)} = 8.80, p < 0.001), acculturation (F_{(4, 457)} = 45.82 p < 0.001), and acculturative stress (F_{(4, 457)} = 16.37, p < 0.001). An LSD post hoc analysis revealed that the means for ethnicity were significantly different on a measure of identity distress with White individuals scoring significantly higher than both Black and Mixed/Other individuals. On a measure of socioeconomic status, white individuals scored significantly higher than Black, Hispanic, and Asian individuals. On a measure of acculturation, White and Black individuals scored the highest, followed by Mixed/Other individuals, followed by Asian individuals, and Hispanic individuals scored significantly lower than all other groups. On a measure of acculturative stress, White individuals scored significantly lower than all other ethnicity groups. Additionally, Asian individuals scored higher than White and Black individuals.

A chi-squared test was also conducted for immigration identity and identity status but was not significant. A bivariate correlation revealed a significant relationship between acculturation and years in the US (r = 0.47, p < 0.001).

3.2. Main Analyses

Hypothesis 1 (first-generation immigrants will have more identity distress than second-generation immigrants, and second-generation immigrants will have more identity distress than third-generation immigrants) was analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The resulting equation was significant (F_{(3, 458)} = 2.80, p = 0.039). As expected, out of the three generations hypothesized, the first-generation immigrants had the most identity distress (M = 2.48), followed by second-generation (M = 2.39), and then third-generation (M = 2.26). Interestingly, the mixed-generation (those who had one parent born in the United States and the other parent born outside the United States) had more identity distress (M = 2.67) than the three generations hypothesized. The mixed-generation was not in our initial hypotheses, but after reviewing the data to see that participants reported having one parent born in the US, and another parent born outside of the US, we decided to conduct an additional ANOVA to further investigate this mixed-generation.

Hypothesis 2 (first-generation immigrants will have the most COVID-19 anxiety followed by second-, then third-generation immigrants) was analyzed using a one-way ANOVA. There were no significant differences between groups; thus, this hypothesis was not confirmed.

Hypothesis 3 (acculturative stress will mediate the relationship between social support and identity distress) was tested with a series of multiple regression analyses. Following the procedure to establish mediation suggested by Holmbeck (1997), three regressions are needed [35]. In the first regression, variable A (social support) must significantly predict variable B (acculturative stress). In the second regression, variable A (social support) must significantly predict variable C (identity distress). In the third regression both variables A (social support) and B (acculturative stress) are entered on the same step to predict variable C (identity distress), but to prove mediation, variable A (social support) should be no longer associated with variable C (identity distress). Furthermore, a significant relationship should still be seen between variable B (acculturative stress) and variable C (identity distress) in this final regression. In other words, when controlling for acculturative stress, social support no longer predicts identity distress. In each regression, age, gender, and socioeconomic status were entered as control variables. In the first regression, social support significantly predicted acculturative stress (R² = 0.07, adjusted R² = 0.06, F_{(4, 443)} = 8.23, p < 0.001). Acculturative stress scores were significantly predicted by age (β = −0.10, t = −2.20, p = 0.029), gender (β = 0.17, t = 3.55, p < 0.001), and social support (β = −0.19, t = −4.05, p < 0.001). In the second regression, social support significantly predicted identity distress (R² = 0.13, adjusted R² = 0.13, F_{(4, 443)} = 16.59, p < 0.001). Identity distress scores were significantly predicted by socioeconomic status (β = −0.12, t = −2.59, p = 0.010), gender (β = 0.18, t = 4.00, p < 0.001), and social support (β = −0.28, t = −6.11, p < 0.001). In the third and final regression, using both social support and acculturative stress to predict identity distress, the overall model was significant (R² = 0.21, adjusted R² = 0.20, F_{(5, 432)} = 22.56, p < 0.001). Identity distress scores were significantly predicted by age (β = −0.11, t = −2.64, p = 0.009), gender (β = 0.09, t = 2.14, p = 0.033), and acculturative stress (β = 0.40, t = 8.62, p < 0.001). Social support was no longer a significant predictor (β = −0.08, t = −1.77, p = 0.077), thus fulfilling all of Holmbeck’s (1997) requirements to establish mediation [35].

Hypothesis 4 (identity distress will be better predicted by acculturative stress and COVID-19 anxiety than by identity development factors alone) was tested using a stepwise linear regression. Socioeconomic status, gender, and age were entered as control variables on step 1, the identity development variables (commitment making, exploration in breadth, ruminative exploration, exploration in depth, and identification with commitment) were entered on step 2, and acculturative stress and COVID-19 anxiety were entered on step 3, with identity distress as the dependent variable. The overall model was significant (R² = 0.28, adjusted R² = 0.26, F_{(10, 418)} = 15.96, p < 0.001). Identity distress scores were significantly predicted by age (β = −0.09, t = −2.02, p = 0.044), ruminative exploration (β = 0.19, t = 3.47, p < 0.001), acculturative stress (β = 0.34, t = 7.55, p < 0.001), and COVID-19 anxiety (β = 0.14, t = 3.20, p = 0.001). There was a significant change in F on step 3 (F_{change (2, 418)} = 42.78, R²_change = 0.15, p < 0.001), indicating that hypothesis 4 was confirmed; identity distress was better predicted by acculturative stress and COVID-19 anxiety than by identity development factors alone.

4. Discussion

This study quantitatively measured identity distress in relation to immigrant generation, socioeconomic status, COVID-19 anxiety, acculturation, acculturative stress, and social support. As Ndengeyingoma and colleagues (2014) predicted, it appears that personal, environmental, and interpersonal characteristics could be some of the main factors impacting the level of identity distress immigrants are experiencing in regard to their acculturation and acculturative stress [7]. Therefore, the immigrants in our study likely experienced more identity distress than non-immigrants because they have more external and interpersonal factors influencing their identity development. One of these factors could be the additional barriers and limited resources for immigrants during the current pandemic, such as financial, living, and career instability as stated by Orcutt and colleagues (2020) [26]. Other barriers immigrants face that may impact identity development, and therefore may influence levels of acculturative stress and identity distress, include those described by Tummala-Narra and Sathasivam-Rueckert (2016), such as language barriers [10].

The current study found that acculturative stress predicted identity distress. This was expected as Constantine and colleagues (2004) found many factors that impact acculturative stress, such as immigrant generation status, ethnic identity, and age at which they moved to the United States [11]. Our study added to previous literature by directly measuring identity distress in relation to acculturative stress and COVID-19 anxiety, demonstrating that both contribute to identity distress, above and beyond identity development factors, which are the more obvious theoretically relevant and empirically investigated precursors to identity distress. This has important implications for prevention and intervention efforts aimed at mental health adjustment of immigrant youth. In addition to focusing on acculturation, awareness of the effect that interconnections between acculturative stress and other external stressors have on identity distress in the lives of late adolescent immigrants provides multiple avenues for promoting healthy development and adjustment.

Adding a mixed immigrant generation (one immigrant parent and one native-born parent) allowed us to take a closer look at the differences between not only 1st-, 2nd-, and 3rd-generation immigrants but also those who do not fall perfectly into one category. The fact that this group had the highest mean for identity distress suggests that they might be having difficulty integrating the two unique cultures in their heritage. This suggests the need for further investigation into this under-studied group, which may be in need of more specialized prevention and intervention services to help them navigate this added risk factor for problematic identity development and resolution.

An interesting relationship was also found between social support, acculturative stress, and identity distress. While social support has been linked to decreased levels of both acculturative stress [17,18] and identity distress [22], no previous investigation has looked at all three constructs in the same study. Although the results of this study suggest that both social support and acculturative stress can predict identity distress individually, when combined, social support was no longer a significant predicter of identity distress, or in other words, when controlling for acculturative stress, social support was no longer linked to identity distress. This would be consistent with a mediation model suggesting that social support decreases acculturative stress, which in turn decreases identity development. It is worth noting that our social support measure focuses on support from friends, family, and significant others. This could mean that social support from friends, family, and significant others may be the most helpful in regard to acculturative stress. It should be emphasized that this study is correlational in design, which precludes causal interpretations. Thus, while these results are consistent with the model, they cannot be taken as proof of the validity of the model. To prove causation an experimental design would be required that would experimentally manipulate social support. Of course, ethical considerations would likely contraindicate such a study. In the absence of an experimental design, longitudinal and quasi-experimental designs might be used to further strengthen the empirical support for this model.

5. Limitations and Future Directions

The data for this study were self-reported, which could lead to biased responses if the participants did not accurately report their answers. It is possible that the participants under- or overestimated the amount of identity distress or COVID-19 anxiety they were experiencing. Future research could use clinical interviews in addition to self-report measures to help in this regard. In addition, our sample consisted of college students and future studies would benefit from studying acculturation across various immigrant generations and age generations in addition to college-aged late adolescents. Future research could also develop a longitudinal study that determines how acculturation, acculturative stress, ethnic identity, and identity distress change over time. Using a larger sample of participants with a wider range of demographic variables, such as age and gender, would yield results that are a better representation of the total population. Our study was correlational in nature; therefore, causation of the study variables cannot be assumed. Future research is needed to replicate our findings and to explore the underlying causes for varying levels of acculturative stress and identity distress. Qualitative studies might also be helpful in this regard.

Despite these limitations, the finding that acculturative stress can exacerbate identity distress, especially in the context of other external stressors (e.g., COVID-19), has important implications for prevention and intervention programs aimed at positive youth development. Knowing that immigrants are particularly vulnerable to such disruptions in identity development should suggest new targets for mental health specialists to consider and address.