Content uploaded by Radosveta Dimitrova
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Radosveta Dimitrova on Jan 07, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Fons Van de Vijver
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Fons Van de Vijver
Content may be subject to copyright.
This article was downloaded by: [Tilburg University]
On: 25 May 2012, At: 07:17
Publisher: Psychology Press
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
International Journal of Psychology
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/pijp20
Collective identity and wellbeing of Roma
minority adolescents in Bulgaria
Radosveta Dimitrova a , Athanasios Chasiotis a , Michael Bender a & Fons van de
Vijver a
a Department of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The
Netherlands
Available online: 27 Apr 2012
To cite this article: Radosveta Dimitrova, Athanasios Chasiotis, Michael Bender & Fons van de Vijver (2012):
Collective identity and wellbeing of Roma minority adolescents in Bulgaria, International Journal of Psychology,
DOI:10.1080/00207594.2012.682064
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2012.682064
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution
in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the
contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and
drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for
any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused
arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2012, 1–12, iFirst
Collective identity and wellbeing of Roma minority
adolescents in Bulgaria
Radosveta Dimitrova, Athanasios Chasiotis, Michael Bender, and Fons van de Vijver
Department of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands
In Europe and particularly in Bulgaria, Roma represent the largest low-status minority group that is subjected
to marked public intolerance and discrimination. This study examined links among Roma (N¼207) and
Bulgarian (N¼399) adolescents’ ethnic, familial, and religious identities as salient identity aspects for their
psychological wellbeing. Results indicated that, as expected, Roma youth reported lower levels of wellbeing than
Bulgarian youth. The latter revealed a weaker religious identity than Roma youth, whereas no ethnic group
differences emerged regarding Bulgarian or familial identity. Furthermore, we observed that collective identity
was higher in older participants of both groups. Finally, a multigroup analysis using structural equation
modeling showed that collective identity was a positive predictor of wellbeing for both Roma and Bulgarian
adolescents. Findings demonstrated differences in salience as well as structural communalities regarding ways in
which collective identity affects wellbeing of youth from two ethnically diverse communities.
Keywords: Ethnic identity; Familial identity; Religious identity; Roma minority; Wellbeing; Bulgaria.
En Europe, et particulie
`rement en Bulgarie, les Roms repre
´sentent le plus grand groupe minoritaire a
`faible
statut qui est susceptible d’eˆ tre victime d’une intole
´rance et d’une discrimination publiques marque
´es. Cette
e
´tude a examine
´les liens entre les aspects saillants des identite
´s ethnique, familiale et religieuse, en tant qu’aspects
de
´terminants du bien-eˆ tre psychologique, chez des adolescents roms (N¼207) et bulgares (N¼399). Les re
´sultats
ont indique
´que, tel qu’attendu, les jeunes Roms rapportaient des niveaux plus faibles de bien-eˆ tre que les jeunes
Bulgares. Ces derniers ont re
´ve
´le
´une identite
´religieuse plus faible que les jeunes Roms, tandis qu’aucune
diffe
´rence n’a e
´te
´souleve
´e entre les deux groupes ethniques quant a
`l’identite
´bulgare ou familiale. De plus, nous
avons observe
´que l’identite
´collective e
´tait plus e
´leve
´e chez les participants plus aˆ ge
´s chez les deux groupes.
Finalement, une analyse multigroupes, utilisant une mode
´lisation par e
´quations structurelles, a montre
´que
l’identite
´collective e
´tait un pre
´dicteur positif du bien-eˆ tre tant pour les adolescents roms que pour les adolescents
bulgares. Les re
´sultats ont de
´montre
´des diffe
´rences dans la saillance tout comme dans les communalite
´s
structurelles concernant les fac¸ ons par lesquelles l’identite
´collective affecte le bien-eˆ tre des jeunes issus de deux
communaute
´s ethniquement diffe
´rentes.
En Europa y particularmente en Bulgaria, los romanı
´es representan el grupo minoritario ma
´s grande, de bajo
nivel, que es sujeto de una notable intolerancia pu´ blica y discriminacio
´n. Este estudio examino
´la relacio
´n
entre las identidades e
´tnica, familiar y religiosa de adolescentes romanı
´es (N¼207) y bu´ lgaros (N¼399), como
aspectos sobresalientes de la identidad para su bienestar psicolo
´gico. Los resultados indicaron que, como se
esperaba, los jo
´venes romanı
´es informaron niveles de bienestar ma
´s bajos que los jo
´venes bu´ lgaros. Estos u´ ltimos
revelaron una identidad religiosa ma
´sde
´bil que los jo
´venes romanı
´es, mientras que no hubo diferencias de grupo
e
´tnico acerca de la identidad bu´ lgara o familiar. Adema
´s, observamos que la identidad colectiva fue mayor en los
participantes de mayor edad de ambos grupos. Finalmente, un ana
´lisis multigrupal por modelado de ecuaciones
estructurales mostro
´que la identidad colectiva fue un predictor positivo de bienestar tanto para los adolescentes
romanı
´es como para los bu´ lgaros. Los hallazgos demostraron diferencias sobresalientes, ası
´como comunalidades
Correspondence should be addressed to Radosveta Dimitrova, Tilburg University – Cross-Cultural Psychology, Warandelaan 2,
Tilburg 5037AB, The Netherlands. (E-mail: r.dimitrova@uvt.nl).
The authors would like to thank Mrs Neli Filipova, Mrs Jekova, Mrs Velianova, Mrs Chergova, Ms Hristova, Mr
Stamatov, and Mrs Valcheva, all school personnel, students and parents for their help in carrying out the study.
ß2012 International Union of Psychological Science
http://www.psypress.com/ijp http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2012.682064
Downloaded by [Tilburg University] at 07:17 25 May 2012
estructurales con respecto a las formas en que la identidad colectiva afecta el bienestar de los jo
´venes de dos
comunidades e
´tnicamente distintas.
Adolescence is a critical developmental period
marked by self-exploration within multiple social
categories. Yet, there has been little work on the
role of social identities among youth with ethnic
minority backgrounds (Lopez, Huynh, & Fuligni,
2011). The present study investigates the scarcely
considered relations among ethnic, familial, and
religious identities (but see Dimitrova, Chasiotis,
Bender, & van de Vijver, 2012) and their influence
on Roma adolescents’ wellbeing. The Roma are
the largest minority group in Europe (estimates
vary from 7 to 10 million people); their past and
current situation is worsened by marked social
marginalization and continuous challenges for
youth of this group as they are often enrolled in
segregated schools, which effectively limit their
educational and occupational prospects
(Gerganov, Varbanova, & Kyuchukov, 2005).
Because of these specific characteristics of such a
large yet neglected minority group in Europe, we
examine whether Roma differ from mainstream
Bulgarians in identity components and how these
components impact their wellbeing. As Roma
youth are traditionally facing adverse circum-
stances, it is theoretically and practically impor-
tant to investigate beneficial resources from which
these minority adolescents can derive an enhanced
psychological wellbeing.
COLLECTIVE IDENTITY
Research has increasingly recognized that collec-
tive identity components, such as familial and
religious identity, have a significant influence on
wellbeing (Dimitrova et al., 2012; Fuligni & Flook,
2005; Kiang, Yip, & Fuligni, 2008). Across
different cultural groups, strong religious and
familial identity have been associated with positive
development in youth (Bagger, Li, & Gutek, 2008;
Bartowski, Xu, & Levin, 2008; Fuligni & Flook,
2005). In contrast, lack of integration of these
multiple identities may be conducive to identity
threat and thus a compromised psychological
wellbeing (Jaspal & Cinnirella, 2010).
Consequently, identification with each of these
identity components provides an important basis
for the construction of self-concept for adolescents
from ethnic minority groups. Ethnic and main-
stream identity develops along a variety of
dimensions from maintaining positive distinctive-
ness, attitudes, and feelings toward a specific
ethnic group to exploration and commitment
culminating in a secure sense of ethnic group
belonging (Phinney, 1989; Phinney & Ong, 2007).
In the context of immigrant groups, this sense of
belonging will involve both the heritage and host
culture. Ethnic (or heritage) identity relates to
minority groups’ identification with their country
of origin and mainstream identity relates to their
association with the host country (Phinney,
Horenczyk, Liebkind, & Vedder, 2001). Ethnic
and mainstream identities have been conceptua-
lized as two independent dimensions of group
identity such that each identity can be either solid
or weak (Phinney, Berry, Vedder, & Liebkind,
2006; Jasinskaja-Lahti, Liebkind, & Solheim,
2009; Verkuyten, 2005, 2007). Compared to
ethnic identity, however, there has been much
less work focusing on ethnic minorities’ identifica-
tion with their mainstream society. Similar to
ethnic identity, mainstream identity is a relevant
yet complex construct involving feelings of belong-
ing and attitudes to the host society (Phinney &
Devich-Navarro, 1997). Mainstream identity is
likely to be weak when members of minority
groups develop a strong sense of attachment to
their ethnic community as a reaction to assimila-
tion pressures of the dominant society (Phinney
et al., 2001). A pronounced mainstream identity
may also reflect changes in social status and thus
be a sign of a minority groups’ integration within
the dominant culture (Devos, Gavin, & Quintana,
2010).
The present study focuses on Roma adolescents’
identification with the Bulgarian context because
we were interested in how mainstream identity is
part of their collective identity. Another important
identity domain involves religion (Lopez et al.,
2011). Adolescents’ feelings of attachment and
importance assigned to religion are shaped by
cultural socialization practices within their families
(King, Furrow, & Roth, 2002). Families are the
core of religious socialization and serve as the basis
of the adolescents’ primary social groups of
belonging. This might be particularly true for
youth from ethnic minority groups, as they often
strongly value family relatedness and commitment
(Fuligni & Flook, 2005).
Given the significance of Bulgarian nationality,
family, and religion, it is important to examine
these multiple social identities in the process of
Roma minority youth’s conceivable solidification
2 DIMITROVA ET AL.
Downloaded by [Tilburg University] at 07:17 25 May 2012
of their sense of self. Adolescents’ identification
with their minority background, religious commu-
nity, and families can be regarded as protective
resources against acculturative stress (Furrow,
King, & White, 2004). Scholars have consistently
shown that minority compared to majority youth
across different cultural contexts display stronger
ethnic, familial, and religious identities, which in
turn promote their wellbeing (Smith & Silva, 2011;
Verkuyten & Yildiz, 2009). It has also been
recognized that demographic factors, such as age
and gender, influence adolescents’ ethnic, familial,
and religious identity, and it therefore is reason-
able to expect age- and gender-related differences
(Erikson, 1968; Phinney, 1990).
AGE EFFECTS AND GENDER
DIFFERENCES IN COLLECTIVE
IDENTITY
The concept of collective identity encompasses
(among other aspects) ethnicity, family, and
religion and is best described as a dynamic
construct, characterized by an increasing aware-
ness and better self-understanding as youth age.
Extant literature documents the existence of
significant changes in ethnic, familial, and religious
identity from early to middle adolescence. Linear
stage models suggest a general increase in ethnic
identity, starting with an initial period of unaware-
ness and disinterest in ethnicity issues, which is
usually followed by a process of exploration and
an emerging sense of ethnic group belonging
(Phinney, 1990). A review addressing various
cultural contexts suggests that older adolescents
have a clearer and more firmly defined sense of
their ethnicity than younger adolescents (French,
Seidman, Allen, & Aber, 2006). Similarly, older
youth and young adults experience a stronger
connectedness to family values and relationships
than their younger counterparts (Aryee & Luk,
1996; Georgas, Berry, Shaw, Christakopoulou, &
Mylonas, 1996). There are mixed findings regard-
ing the development of religious identity from
early to middle adolescence; evidence has been
found for a linear decrease in religious behaviors
(Arnett & Jensen, 2002), for stability in the
reported importance of religious beliefs (Stoppa
& Lefkowitz, 2010), and also for an increase in
intrinsic religious commitment (Lee, 2003). A
possible explanation for these incongruent findings
may be the poor control of relevant moderators,
such as the diversity of contexts, age of partici-
pants, differences in measures, as well as differing
definitions of religious identity that were applied
across studies.
Gender represents an additional aspect that may
be important for ethnic, familial, and religious
socialization. Although findings on gender are
inconsistent (Phinney, 1990), some studies indicate
that the identification with their ethnic group is
more important for girls (Yip & Fuligni, 2002),
and that girls are more involved with their family
and religious community and exhibit a stronger
religious commitment than boys (Stoppa &
Lefkowitz, 2010). Girls have also been reported
to attend religious activities more frequently and
assign greater importance to religion compared to
boys (King, Elder, & Whitbeck, 1997).
To summarize, previous studies suggest effects
of both age and gender on ethnic, familial, and
religious identity. It is not clear yet whether these
age and gender differences would also emerge in
Roma minority groups, since most previous work
included other European-American samples (King
et al., 2002). We therefore extended the existing
work by examining differences across collective
identity domains in Roma minority and main-
stream Bulgarian youth based on both age and
gender comparisons.
THE ROMA MINORITY
An accurate estimation of the Roma minority in
Europe is difficult to establish due to a general
absence of census information on ethnic origin in
most European Union (EU) Member States
(European Union Agency for Fundamental
Rights, 2010). A European Commission report
(2004) mention estimates varying from 3 to 7
million and up to 10 million after the enlargement
of the EU to 27 Member States (European
Parliament Resolution, 2008). Other sources
report estimates between 7 and 9 million people
for Central and Eastern Europe, which would
account for over 8% of the national population in
those areas (Vermeersch & Ram, 2009).
The Roma represent a prototypical low-status
minority across Europe, which also holds for their
relationship with the dominant Bulgarian major-
ity. The Roma minority in Bulgaria is subjected to
marked public intolerance, making them a con-
venient scapegoat for the economic crisis during
the postcommunist transition (Vassilev, 2004).
Consistently, Roma occupy the lowest strata of
society and face severe discrimination in all areas
of life; as a consequence, they suffer from poverty,
low levels of education, poor housing and sanitary
conditions, and malnutrition (Amnesty
ROMA ADOLESCENTS IN BULGARIA 3
Downloaded by [Tilburg University] at 07:17 25 May 2012
International, 2007; Zeman, Depken, & Senchina,
2010). The Roma face continuous challenges in
accessing education, health services, and job
opportunities (Rechel, Blackburn, Spencer, &
Rechel, 2009). Roma youth grow up in geogra-
phically isolated areas. They are often enrolled in
segregated schools of limited educational quality
and thus have poor employment prospects (Open
Society Institute, 2007; Rechel, 2008). In Sofia, the
capital city of Bulgaria, and other major Bulgarian
cities, the Roma communities are segregated into
neighborhoods resembling ghettos. Recently, there
has been an increase of Roma emancipation in
higher education, an emergence of Roma national
associations, and more equal participation in
political and social life (United Nations
Development Programme, 2005). Also important
for the purposes of this study are the distinctive
familial characteristics of the Roma. In contrast to
the nationwide tendency in many European
countries, Roma families are characterized by
increasing birth rates, in particular among teenage
mothers (Durst, 2002).
THE CURRENT STUDY
This study was designed to investigate links among
domains of identification that are neglected, yet
important for psychological wellbeing, during
early and middle adolescence in Roma minority
and Bulgarian majority groups. The core research
question is to what extent multiple identity
domains contribute to wellbeing of Roma minority
adolescents, as they represent a particularly inter-
esting group because of their cohesive, extended
ethnic, and family community. The key questions
of this study are fourfold: (1) Are there ethnic
differences in the salience of identity domains
between Roma and Bulgarian youth? (2) Are there
age and gender differences in mainstream, familial,
and religious identities? (3) Are there differences in
psychological wellbeing between Roma and
Bulgarian groups, and (4) to what extent does
collective identity, i.e., ethnic mainstream, familial,
and religious identities, predict adolescents’
wellbeing?
Prior evidence documents that the mainstream
Bulgarian population is characterized by generally
low levels of religiousness (Kanev, 2002; Loek &
Petterson, 2002). In relation to the first research
question, we therefore expect religious identity to
be lower in the Bulgarian group compared to the
Roma minority (Kanev, 2002). Religious and
familial identities were expected to be stronger
among Roma adolescents, due to their ethnic
minority status and specific characteristics of their
family context (Hypothesis 1). Our second and
third hypotheses regard age and gender differences
in collective identity. Consistent with prior work
(French et al., 2006; Phinney, 1990; Stoppa &
Lefkowitz, 2010), we expect that older compared
to younger adolescents will report more pro-
nounced ethnic mainstream, familial, and religious
identities (Hypothesis 2). We predict a stronger
familial identity in girls compared to boys
(Hypothesis 3a), and because of the relevance of
an extended family network in their ethnic group,
we also expect Roma girls to report higher levels of
familial identity than Bulgarian girls
(Hypothesis 3b). Equally important, we address
the question of whether levels of psychological
wellbeing vary by group. Youth who belong to
stigmatized minority groups are likely to experi-
ence less psychological wellbeing (Verkuyten,
2008). Therefore, we expect Roma adolescents to
report lower levels of wellbeing than their main-
stream Bulgarian peers (Hypothesis 4). Finally, we
build on prior research showing that a simultaneous
identification with mainstream, religious, and
familial contexts is positively linked to adolescents’
wellbeing (Furrow et al., 2004; Lopez et al., 2011);
we expect positive relations among identifications
in the mainstream, familial, and religious domains
and these identifications are positively associated to
wellbeing in each group (Hypothesis 5).
METHOD
Sample
Participants in this study were recruited from five
ethnically diverse public middle and high schools
in the South Central and South Western regions of
Bulgaria. The sample consisted of 606 participants
with Roma (n¼207) and Bulgarian (n¼399)
background. There were 332 girls and 272 boys
and their age varied from 11 to 18 years, with a
mean age of 14.65 (SD ¼1.83). A chi-square test
was used to explore ethnic group differences for
gender. No group differences were observed, w
2
(1,
N¼604) ¼.677, p¼.411. Similarly, ANOVA
shows that there were no significant age differences
among ethnic groups, F(1, 564) ¼.247, p¼.620.
Socioeconomic status (SES) was computed as a
composite score of education (primary, secondary,
and university degree) and occupation of both
parents (unskilled, semiprofessional, professional
job), resulting in three levels of low, middle, and
high SES (Oakes & Ross, 2003; Shavers, 1997).
Ethnic groups differed with respect to family SES,
4 DIMITROVA ET AL.
Downloaded by [Tilburg University] at 07:17 25 May 2012
w
2
(2, N¼600) ¼145.36, p5.001, with Bulgarian
youth, not surprisingly, having a higher familial
SES (see Table 1). Because there was one
significant effect of low SES on religious identity,
F(2, 599) ¼4.76, p5.001, SES was controlled for
in further analyses.
Measures
Measures of the present study included self-report
questionnaires previously applied in a sample of
ethnic minority and majority youth in Bulgaria
(Dimitrova et al., 2012). Three scales on main-
stream, familial, and religious identity were
specifically developed for the Bulgarian context,
given that to our knowledge no comprehensive
measures were available at the time of the study.
Sociodemographic questionnaire
All participants completed a short questionnaire
assessing their ethnicity, nationality, gender, age,
place of birth, and parental education and
occupation.
Collective identity
The Bulgarian Mainstream Identity Scale was
specifically created by the authors to investigate
Bulgarian identity according to domains of
self-categorization, attachment, evaluation,
importance, and behavioral involvement
(Ashmore, Deaux, & McLaughlin-Volpe, 2004).
The scale has 21 items such as ‘‘I consider myself
Bulgarian’’ and ‘‘I participate in Bulgarian cultural
practices.’’ Answers were given on a five-point
Likert scale, ranging from completely disagree to
completely agree. Across both groups, the internal
consistencies of the scale were excellent, with a
values of .93 (Roma) and .90 (Bulgarian).
The Familial Identity Scale was created follow-
ing the same format and domains as the ethnic
identity scale. Examples of the 21 items constitut-
ing the scale are ‘‘I see problems of my family as
my problems’’ and ‘‘I have a strong sense of
belonging to my family’’ with internal consisten-
cies of a¼.91 (Roma) to a¼.90 (Bulgarian).
The Religious Identity Scale was developed,
following the previously reported structure of
ethnic and familial identity scales. The 21 items
refer to religious self-categorization, attachment,
evaluation, importance, and involvement. Sample
items are: for religious self-categorization ‘‘I see
myself as a member of my religious community,’’
for evaluation ‘‘I am proud to be a member of my
religious community,’’ for importance ‘‘Being a
member of a religious group is important for me,’’
for attachment ‘‘I feel strongly connected to my
religious group,’’ and for behavioral involvement
‘‘I have spent much time exploring my religious
group (e.g., its rituals, history and traditions).’’
The internal consistencies were very high, a¼.95
(Roma) and a¼.94 (Bulgarian). Factor analyses
TABLE 1
Sample characteristics, collective identity, and wellbeing by ethnic group
Roma (n ¼207) Bulgarian (n ¼399) Group comparison
2
Age
Range 11–18 11–18
Mean (SD) 14.71 (1.96) 14.63 (1.77) F(1, 564) ¼.247 .000
Gender, n (%)
Boys 118 (57%) 214 (54%) w
2
(1, N¼604) ¼.677 .000
Girls 88 (43%) 184 (46%)
SES, n (%)
Low 173 (85%) 131 (33%) w
2
(2, N¼600) ¼145.36 .211***
Middle 24 (12%) 163 (41%)
High 7 (3 %) 102 (26%)
Identity, M (SD)
Bulgarian 3.79 (.83) 3.73 (.75) F(1, 558) ¼1.85 .003
Familial 4.24 (.70) 4.24 (.64) F(1, 558) ¼.25 .000
Religious 3.59 (.83) 3.15 (.87) F(1, 558) ¼9.07 .016***
Wellbeing, M (SD)
Satisfaction with life 22.71 (7.06) 25.17 (6.61) F(1, 605) ¼18.00 .029***
Positive affect 32.90 (7.44) 32.23 (8.43) F(1, 605) ¼.928 .002
***p5.001.
ROMA ADOLESCENTS IN BULGARIA 5
Downloaded by [Tilburg University] at 07:17 25 May 2012
performed on each of the collective identity
components showed that ethnic, religious, and
familial identity items loaded strongly on one
factor with values ranging between .41 and .85.
Wellbeing
The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) was
applied to measure global life satisfaction (Diener,
Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985). The scale
consists of five items rated on a seven-point scale
(1 ¼strongly disagree,7¼strongly agree). Sample
items include ‘‘In most ways my life is close to my
ideal,’’ ‘‘I am satisfied with life,’’ and ‘‘If I could
live my life over, I would change almost nothing.’’
Internal consistencies for the present sample were
a¼.72 (Roma) and a¼.75 (Bulgarian).
The Positive Affective Schedule was used to
measure positive affect (PA) (Watson, Clark, &
Tellegen, 1988). The scale consists of 10 positive
(e.g., ‘‘enthusiastic’’) mood descriptors rated on a
five-point scale (ranging from very slightly to
extremely). Internal consistencies for positive
affect across ethnic groups ranged from a¼.87
(Roma) to a¼.76 (Bulgarian). In subsequent
analyses, psychological wellbeing was measured
by using a composite variable of standardized
average scores of SWLS and PA scales, because
they correlated sufficiently highly to be combined
into a single score, r(542) ¼.30, p5.001.
Procedure
Participants in the current study were recruited
from ethnically mixed schools characterized by a
high density of Roma students. Letters were sent
to local school authorities and parents explaining
the purpose of the study and requesting consent
for students to participate. Following permission
from principals and the teachers’ councils, schools
provided access to classes. Before data collection,
the project was described to teachers and students.
Students were tested in 40–50 min sessions at their
school. Teachers were involved by providing
information on the students’ ethnic background
(Roma or Bulgarian). Roma participants were
compensated for their participation with a pen
following the testing session.
RESULTS
Prior to conducting analyses, a listwise deletion for
categorical variables and a regression-based repla-
cement of missing values were implemented.
Results are presented in three parts. First, group
differences in mainstream, familial, and religious
identities between Roma and Bulgarian adoles-
cents were investigated. Second, age and gender
differences in the three identity domains as well as
their interaction with ethnic group were examined.
These hypotheses were addressed by carrying out a
MANCOVA, which included collective identity
domains (mainstream, familial, and religious) as
dependent variables, group (Roma and Bulgarian),
SES and gender as independent variables, and age
as covariate. Finally, group differences in well-
being were investigated, followed by a multigroup
structural equation model to test associations
among the three identity domains and psycholo-
gical wellbeing.
Collective identity of Roma and
Bulgarian adolescents
The first hypothesis was whether differences in
collective identity domains might be observed
between the Roma minority and their Bulgarian
majority peers. Table 1 gives the mean scores of
Bulgarian, familial, and religious identity as a
function of ethnic group belonging. There was a
significant ethnic group difference for religious
identity, indicating that Bulgarian adolescents
(M¼3.15, SD ¼.87) show lower levels of religious
identification than their Roma peers (M¼3.59,
SD ¼.83). This finding confirms our expectation
of weak religious group identification in the
mainstream Bulgarian compared to the Roma
group. There were no significant differences
among the groups for Bulgarian (Bulgarian
M¼3.73, SD ¼.64 vs. Roma M¼3.79, SD ¼.83)
and familial identity (Bulgarian M¼4.24,
SD ¼.64 vs. Roma M¼4.24, SD ¼.70) (see
Table 1).
Collective identity, age, and gender
The second set of hypotheses stated that collective
identity would be related to age and gender
differences. This prediction was tested by perform-
ing a MANCOVA, with Bulgarian, familial, and
religious identity as dependent variables, group
(Roma and Bulgarian), SES, and gender as
independent variables, and age as a covariate.
The multivariate test for age was significant,
Wilks’ lambda ¼.97, F(1, 558) ¼5.08, p5.001,
2
¼.027. As expected, overall collective identity
was stronger in older participants in both groups
signified by the separate identity variables:
Bulgarian, F(1, 558) ¼14.02, p5.001,
2
¼.025,
religious, F(1, 558) ¼10.39, p5.001,
2
¼.019,
6 DIMITROVA ET AL.
Downloaded by [Tilburg University] at 07:17 25 May 2012
and familial identity, F(1, 558) ¼6.73, p5.01,
2
¼.012.
As to differences in collective identity for boys
and girls, the results did not show significant
gender effects. Contrary to predictions, there were
no significant gender differences in familial iden-
tity: girls, M¼4.31, SD ¼.62; boys, M¼4.18,
SD ¼.69. There were neither gender differences in
levels of Bulgarian (girls M¼3.74, SD ¼.76 vs.
boys M¼3.77, SD ¼.79) and religious identity
(girls M¼3.28, SD ¼.87 vs. boys M¼3.30,
SD ¼.88) nor a gender by group interaction
effect on collective identity.
Collective identity and wellbeing
To test our third hypothesis (that Roma would
have lower wellbeing scores than Bulgarian ado-
lescents), a MANOVA with group (two levels) as
the independent variable and the two wellbeing
scales (SWLS and PA) as dependent variables was
performed. A significant main multivariate effect
of group was found, Wilks’ lambda ¼.96, F(1,
605) ¼11.34, p5.001, Z
2
¼.036. Consistent with
the classification of Roma youth belonging to a
severely discriminated minority group, there were
pronounced group differences in wellbeing, with
Roma youth scoring significantly lower on satis-
faction with life, F(1, 605) ¼18.00, p5.001,
2
¼.029. No significant differences between
Roma and Bulgarian groups were found for
positive affect, F(1, 605) ¼.928, p¼.336,
2
¼.002 (see Table 1).
Finally, our fourth research question concerned
the relation between collective identity and well-
being of Roma and Bulgarian youth. We suggested
that the relations among the concepts would be
structurally identical across the groups (although
there are mean-level differences). The model
designed to test this hypothesis included direct
paths between collective identity and wellbeing;
crosscultural invariance of the relations was tested
in a multigroup (Bulgarian and Roma) compar-
ison, performed in AMOS (Arbuckle, 2009). We
implemented a path model with Bulgarian, famil-
ial, and religious components as antecedent vari-
ables (indicators of the latent variable) and
wellbeing as the outcome variable (composite
score of the standardized average scores of
SWLS and PA scales). The configural invariance
model showed a good fit (see Table 2). We then
tested the measurement weights model in two
steps. The first constrained the factor loadings of
the three identity measures to be equal in the two
groups; this model also showed a good fit. The
second measurement weights model added an
invariance constraint to the path from collective
identity to wellbeing. Invariance of this path was
tested separately, as it is crucial in our reasoning of
invariance of the relationship of invariance and
wellbeing. This model showed a good fit: w
2
(15,
N¼606) ¼8.65, p4.124, RMSEA ¼.035,
CFI ¼.995, TLI ¼.987, and AGFI ¼.972
(Table 2). More restrictive models showed a
slightly less favorable fit (notably because of the
rise in RMSEA value). So we retained the second
measurement weights model as the most restrictive
model with a good fit. The model assesses the
stability of all relations among groups, and
retaining it as the best fit implies that our latent
variable of collective identity has the same
relationship with wellbeing in the two ethnic
groups. As can be seen in Figure 1, Bulgarian,
familial, and religious identity were positively and
significantly related to wellbeing. The parameters
of collective identity and wellbeing were all
statistically significant and related to wellbeing in
a similar fashion for Roma and Bulgarian groups,
confirming our expectations.
DISCUSSION
The aims of this study were twofold, namely (1) to
examine collective identity and its relation to
Roma and Bulgarian adolescents’ wellbeing and
(2) to identify associations of Bulgarian, religious,
and familial identity domains with age and gender.
We obtained four important results. First, Roma
adolescents endorsed a stronger religious identity
than their mainstream Bulgarian counterparts.
Second, there was an age-related increase of
collective identity in both minority and majority
groups. Third, Roma youth showed significantly
lower levels of wellbeing than their Bulgarian
peers. Finally, all three components of collective
identity (mainstream, familial, and religious) were
positively related to wellbeing in both ethnic
groups.
Ethnic group differences in collective
identity
Our findings regarding the first research question
dealing with differences in identity domains show
that adolescents’ ethnic background shapes their
collective identity. Bulgarian majority youth
report weaker religious identity than Roma
minority youth, which is consistent with our
predictions and prior work documenting centrality
of religion in minority youth, as well as the
ROMA ADOLESCENTS IN BULGARIA 7
Downloaded by [Tilburg University] at 07:17 25 May 2012
generally low religious group identification among
the mainstream Bulgarian population (Dimitrova
et al., 2012; Kanev, 2002). Previous work among
ethnic minority youth in other European countries
has provided support for the centrality of religion
for youth in communities with a strong religious
tradition (Saroglou & Galand, 2004; Verkuyten &
Yildiz, 2009); our results extend these findings to
the Roma minority group in Bulgaria. Roma
youth seem to emphasize their religious identity
as an additional social identification and source of
strength in the face of social discrimination and
threat.
The comparison of Roma and Bulgarian ado-
lescents’ Bulgarian and familial identities warrants
further inspection. Even though these adolescents
belong to two substantially different ethnic com-
munities, and occupy very different socioeconomic
positions within the mainstream society, and
although our expectation regarding differences in
religious identity was met, there were no group
differences in Bulgarian and familial identity.
Similar findings have been reported in a sample
of Roman Catholic minority adolescents living in
border regions of Ireland with regard to their Irish
identity (Stevenson & Muldoon, 2010).
Results from discursive analyses revealed that
minority adolescents proactively claimed their
mainstream identity. The authors discuss these
findings in light of contextual effects on identity
formation in minority adolescents such that a
strong mainstream identity may also reflect the
intensity of immersion into the dominant culture.
On the other hand, a considerable body of research
shows that mainstream identity is often weak when
members of minority groups attach themselves to
their ethnic community as a reaction to pressures
to assimilate into the dominant culture (Phinney
et al., 2001). It has also been found that main-
stream identity is lower for immigrant minority
groups and largely independent from their ethnic
identity (Devos et al., 2010). The Roma belong to
an indigenous group with unique characteristics;
they are a minority in Bulgaria as well as in many
other European countries but do not have another
country with which they or their families associate.
It could thus also be that their identification with
the mainstream context does not involve a
comparison between Roma and Bulgarian cul-
tures. Roma youth could generally be expected to
embrace the Bulgarian culture less than the Roma
culture, particularly in light of evidence suggesting
that ethnic identity is clearly pronounced in
marginalized ethnic minority groups. One expla-
nation for finding similar levels of Bulgarian
identity endorsement among groups could be
that a strong identification with the host culture
is related to positive adjustment outcomes when
.94
.71*** .25***
.74***
Bulgarian
Religious
Familial Wellbeing
Collective
Identity
Figure 1. Path model of collective identity and wellbeing of Roma and Bulgarian adolescents. The loading of ethnic identity was fixed
at a value of 1 in the unstandardized solution model. ***p5.001.
TABLE 2
Fit indices of multigroup of collective identity and wellbeing model for Roma and Bulgarian adolescents
Model
2
(df) GFI AGFI TLI CFI RMSEA
Unconstrained 5.07 (2) .996 .958 .973 .996 .050
Measurement weights: Invariance of factor loadings 6.32 (4) .995 .974 .990 .997 .031
Measurement weights: Invariance of factor loadings and path from identity to wellbeing 8.65 (5) .993 .972 .987 .995 .035
Structural residuals 14.19 (6) .988 .961 .976 .988 .048
Measurement residuals 23.32 (11) .981 .965 .981 .982 .043
Italic type indicates the most restrictive model with a good fit.
8 DIMITROVA ET AL.
Downloaded by [Tilburg University] at 07:17 25 May 2012
there is a pressure to assimilate into that culture
(Phinney & Devich-Navarro, 1997). Moreover,
there is evidence from various European countries
that Roma identity is more oriented to their
specific group (more so than to Roma in general)
and that national identity tends to be strong in
Roma groups, notably in Eastern Europe
(Marushiakova & Popov, 2010): ‘‘the awareness
of belonging to a respective nation-state among
the Roma in Central, Eastern and South-Eastern
Europe, is more pronounced (compared to the
Gypsies/Roma in Western Europe or in other
parts of the world) and occupies a central place in
the general structure of their identity’’ (p. 43). It is
an interesting suggestion for future studies to
include a dedicated measure of Roma ethnic
identity so that the expected stronger identification
with Roma identity than with Bulgarian identity
can be confirmed. It may also be argued that
perceived discrimination and negative stereotypes
strengthen a perception of incompatibility between
ethnic and mainstream identities, which in turn
may lead to difficulties in integrating both
identities into a cohesive sense of self for minority
youth (Huynh, Devos, & Smalarz, 2011).
Collective identity, age, and gender
In line with our second prediction and prior
research (French et al., 2006; Phinney, 1990;
Stoppa & Lefkowitz, 2010), collective identity is
more established in older than in younger adoles-
cents. This was found for mainstream, religious,
and familial identity. In accordance with previous
research, these findings suggest an increased
importance and involvement in issues related to a
youth’s Bulgarian, religious, and family environ-
ment with age (see also Aryee & Luk, 1996;
Georgas et al., 1996). In addition, our results
reveal that for the familial identity domain, gender
does not make a difference. On average, familial
identity salience was similar for girls and boys,
which does not conform to our expectations. As
well, no overall gender effects were found for
mainstream and religious identity. It thus seems
that the underlying process of establishing identity
is similar for boys and girls. The finding of similar
levels of endorsement of familial but also main-
stream Bulgarian identity of Roma and Bulgarian
youth may reflect current contextual characteris-
tics of the Roma minority. Recent reports provide
evidence for a number of positive trends in the
Bulgarian Roma population due to growing Roma
emancipation, leading to an increase in educa-
tional levels, computer literacy, and the ability of
young Roma youth to speak at least one European
language (United Nations Development
Programme, 2005). Similarities in levels of ethnic
and familial identity in our study may be
associated with an overall improved social stand-
ing. In line with this, ethnic background was not
associated with gender differences in collective
identity. No interaction of gender and culture was
found for ethnic and religious identity as well as
familial identity. In contrast to our prediction and
the overall gender effects in familial identity, no
significant differences emerged between Roma and
Bulgarian girls. Although the Roma community is
characterized by extended families (Durst, 2002),
Roma and Bulgarian girls reported similar levels
of familial identity. It is important to recognize
that, while sharing many adversities, Roma com-
munities in Bulgaria may vary substantially
according to their geographical location.
Members of the Roma community inhabiting
small urban areas are well represented in local
occupational and social contexts, but not in major
cities and particularly not in the capital Sofia. One
possible explanation for the similarity on levels of
familial identity between Roma and Bulgarian
girls is that the contemporary processes that shape
the dynamics of the Roma family include a
migration to urban settings in search for better
job opportunities (Ringold, 2000). In the context
in which our data were collected, the Roma
community was visible and socially engaged.
Roma women in particular have created local
organizations to improve the social situation of
their community by promoting literacy, health
services, and adequate housing (Roma Network,
2011). Recent reports also highlighted the increas-
ing engagement of the Roma minority in Bulgaria
in the public sphere: Roma become increasingly
involved in educational, social and political
activities (United Nations Development
Programme, 2005). Such a process of emancipa-
tion may lead to more flexibility in familial roles
within the Roma family, which in turn may be
responsible for the observed similarities between
Roma and Bulgarian girls.
Collective identity and wellbeing
We found support for our hypothesis that
psychological wellbeing is related to ethnic group
membership. Lower levels of satisfaction with life
were observed for the Roma minority compared
to their Bulgarian mainstream peers. Results
were also consistent with our expectation that
adolescents who felt particularly connected to
ROMA ADOLESCENTS IN BULGARIA 9
Downloaded by [Tilburg University] at 07:17 25 May 2012
their ethnic, religious, and familial identity would
exhibit greater wellbeing—irrespective of ethnic
group membership. These results extend prior
findings on the association between collective
identity and psychological wellbeing (Abbotts,
Williams, Sweeting, & West, 2004; Schwartz,
Zamboanga, Weisskirch, & Rodriguez, 2009) to
Roma and Bulgarian youth, indicating that a
positive ethnic, familial, and religious identity
bolsters their positive psychological outcomes.
This finding is particularly intriguing in light of
differences in social status and the general intol-
erance toward the Roma community within the
mainstream context. As far as Bulgarian identity is
concerned, Bulgarian and Roma youth seem to
share a common connection with the mainstream
context. Our results show that independently of
the severe discrimination and segregation of their
community, Roma youth experience greater well-
being the more strongly they identify with the
mainstream context. Such evidence points out to
the importance of resources for the Roma youth
related to their mainstream Bulgarian context,
which can have a positive influence for their
psychological outcomes. Possibly, as a protective
reaction to experienced threat and discrimination,
Roma youth strengthen interaction and ties with
the Bulgarian context, which fosters beneficial
effects for their identity and wellbeing.
Finally, our study aimed at documenting bene-
ficial sources for Roma youth. The positive
influence collective identity has on Roma youth
has meaningful implications for community and
school programs that could be tailored to improve
their wellbeing. It is clear that early initiatives to
prevent the onset and aggravation of psychological
problems should focus on the most vulnerable
groups such as the Roma. Our study suggests that
particular attention should be paid to ethnic,
familial, and religious resources in youth’s social
life because they are related to psychological
wellbeing. For example, interventions and policies
could include opportunities for the Roma to enact
their ethnic and collective identity (e.g., their
customs and traditions), as higher levels of
collective identity are associated with an improved
sense of wellbeing.
LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
The present findings reveal the importance of
collective identity for the wellbeing of Bulgarian
mainstream and Roma minority adolescents, the
latter being a minority hardly investigated in
prior research. While novel in its focus on Roma
youth, this study has some shortcomings that need
to be mentioned in order to promote future
research. First, it would be useful to test the
impact of discrimination and segregation more
directly, as these can have a crucial influence on
identity and wellbeing. Second, our model could
be subjected to further tests with other ethnic
minority groups, and at other developmental
stages. Related to that, a limitation of our study
is that, due to the cross-sectional nature of our
data, statements about causality are unwarranted:
A longitudinal design would be more appropriate
to examine the extent to which differences in
collective identity are linked to changes in adoles-
cents’ development. Future research exploring
these processes in longitudinal models is needed
to draw firmer conclusions.
Another potential shortcoming regards the
comparability of our samples. Although we
collected data on the participants’ geographical
location and demographic characteristics, our lack
of other important demographic information,
specifically for the Roma group (e.g., family
composition) provides us with an incomplete
insight into the characteristics of the samples. In
addition, we did not capture how Roma minorities
from bigger cities experience identity and wellbeing
issues, which may be quite different from the small
rural area in South and Central Bulgaria where
our study was conducted. Future research should
therefore consider specific local characteristics and
institutional policies, which can vary considerably
among regions and might influence a youth’s
experience of collective identity and wellbeing.
Based on these limitations, the results should be
interpreted with some caution with respect to the
dissimilarity in demographic status across samples
and to each sample’s representativeness.
Nevertheless, we are convinced that it remains
extremely important to pay close attention to the
Roma minority population’s wellbeing. Finally,
while self-report measures are a very good tool to
inquire about the views the adolescents themselves
hold, future investigations are needed that include
multiple informants on Roma youth’s wellbeing,
such as teachers and parents.
In conclusion, our results advocate the impor-
tance of multiple identifications and their relations
to wellbeing of youth irrespective of ethnic and
social differences between Roma minority
and Bulgarian mainstream youth. The findings
and implications of this study are not only relevant
to understanding Roma adolescents’ collective
identity processes but can also advance our
understanding of mainstream, religious, and
family factors related to wellbeing and adjustment
10 DIMITROVA ET AL.
Downloaded by [Tilburg University] at 07:17 25 May 2012
of other, similarly underrepresented minority
groups across Europe.
Manuscript received November 2011
Revised manuscript accepted March 2012
First published online April 2012
REFERENCES
Abbotts, J. E., Williams, R. G. A., Sweeting, H. N., &
West, P. B. (2004). Is going to church good or bad for
you? Denomination, attendance and mental health of
children in West Scotland. Social Science and
Medicine, 58, 645–656.
Amnesty International. (2007). Europe: Discrimination
against Roma. Retrieved September 30, 2011 from
www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/EUR01/012/2007
Arbuckle, J. (2009). Amos 19. Crawfordville, FL:
AMOS Development Corporation.
Arnett, J. J., & Jensen, L. A. (2002). A congregation of
one: Individualized religious beliefs among emerging
adults. Journal of Adolescent Research, 17, 451–467.
Aryee, S., & Luk, V. (1996). Balancing two major parts
of adult life experience: Work and family identity
among dual-earner couples. Human Relations, 49,
465–487.
Ashmore, R. D., Deaux, K., & McLaughlin-Volpe, T.
(2004). An organizing framework for collective
identity: Articulation and significance of multidimen-
sionality. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 80–114.
Bagger, J., Li, A., & Gutek, B. (2008). How much do
you value your family and does it matter? The joint
effects of family identity salience, family-interference
with work, and gender. Human Relations, 6, 187–211.
Bartkowski, J. P., Xu, X., & Levin, M. L. (2008).
Religion and child development: Evidence from the
Early Childhood Longitudinal Study. Social Science
Research, 37, 18–36.
Devos, T., Gavin, K., & Quintana, F. Q. (2010). Say
‘‘Adios’’ to the American dream? The interplay
between ethnic and national identity among Latino
and Caucasian Americans. Cultural Diversity and
Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16, 37–49.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S.
(1985). The Satisfaction with Life Scale. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.
Dimitrova, R., Chasiotis, A., Bender, M., & van de
Vijver, F. J. R. (2012). Collective identity and well-
being of mainstream and minority adolescents in
Bulgaria. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Durst, J. (2002). Fertility and childbearing practices
among poor gypsy women in Hungary: The intersec-
tions of class, race and gender. Communist and Post-
Communist Studies, 35, 457–474.
Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York,
NY: Norton.
European Commission Report (2004). The situation of
Roma in an enlarged Europe. Brussels, Belgium:
European Commission.
European Parliament Resolution (2008). A European
strategy on the Roma. Retrieved September 31, 2011
from www.eur-lex.europa.eu.
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights
(2010). Addressing the Roma issue in the EU.
Retrieved September 31, 2011 from www.fra.euro-
pa.eu/fraWebsite/roma/roma_en.htm
French, S. E., Seidman, E., Allen, L., & Aber, J. L.
(2006). The development of ethnic identity during
adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 42, 1–10.
Fuligni, A. J., & Flook, L. (2005). A social identity
approach to ethnic differences in family relationships
during adolescence. In R. Kail (Ed.), Advances in
child development and behavior (pp. 125–152). San
Diego, CA: Elsevier.
Furrow, J. L., King, P. E., & White, K. (2004). Religion
and positive youth development: Identity, meaning,
and prosocial concerns. Applied Developmental
Science, 8, 17–26.
Georgas, J., Berry, J. W., Shaw, A., Christakopoulou,
S., & Mylonas, K. (1996). Acculturation of Greek
family values. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,
27, 329–338.
Gerganov, E., Varbanova, S., & Kyuchukov, H. (2005).
School adaptation of Roma children. Intercultural
Education, 16, 495–551.
Huynh, Q.-L., Devos, T., & Smalarz, L. (2011).
Perpetual foreigner in one’s own land: Potential
implications for identity and psychological adjust-
ment. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 30,
133–162.
Jasinskaja-Lahti, I., Liebkind, K., & Solheim, E. (2009).
To identify or not to identify? National disidentifica-
tion as an alternative reaction to perceived ethnic
discrimination. Applied Psychology, 58, 105–128.
Jaspal, R., & Cinnirella, M. (2010). Coping with
potentially incompatible identities: Accounts of
religious, ethnic, and sexual identities from British
Pakistani men who identify as Muslim and gay.
British Journal of Social Psychology, 49, 849–870.
Kanev, P. (2002). Religion in Bulgaria after 1989:
Historical and socio-cultural aspects. South East
Europe Review for Labour and Social Affairs, 1,
75–95.
Kiang, L., Yip, T., & Fuligni, A. J. (2008). Multiple
social identities and adjustment in young adults from
ethnically diverse backgrounds. Journal of Research
on Adolescence, 18, 643–670.
King, P. E., Furrow, J. L., & Roth, N. H. (2002). The
influence of families and peers on adolescent reli-
giousness. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 21,
109–120.
King, V., Elder Jr, G. H., & Whitbeck, L. B. (1997).
Religious involvement among rural youth: An
ecological and life course perspective. Journal of
Research on Adolescence, 7, 431–456.
Lee, J. J. (2003). Religion and college attendance:
Change among students. Review of Higher
Education, 25, 369–384.
Loek, H., & Petterson, T. (2002). Religion and social
capital in contemporary Europe. Results from the
1999/2000 European Values Study. In D. O. Moberg,
& R. L. Piedemont (Eds.), Research in the social
scientific study of religion. Leiden, The Netherlands:
Brill.
Lopez, A. B., Huynh, V. W., & Fuligni, A. J. (2011). A
longitudinal study of religious identity and participa-
tion during adolescence. Child Development, 82,
1297–1309.
Marushiakova, E., & Popov, V. (2010). Roma identities
in Central, South-Eastern and Eastern Europe.
In H. Kyuchukov, & I. Hancock (Eds.), Roma
ROMA ADOLESCENTS IN BULGARIA 11
Downloaded by [Tilburg University] at 07:17 25 May 2012
identity (pp. 39–52). Prague, Czech Republic: NGO
Slovo 21.
Oakes, J. M., & Ross, P. H. (2003). The measurement of
SES in health research: Current practice and steps
toward a new approach. Social Science & Medicine,
56, 769–784.
Open Society Institute (OSI) (2007). Equal access to
quality education for Roma: Bulgaria. New York,
NY: OSI Press.
Phinney, J. S. (1989). Stages of ethnic identity develop-
ment in minority group adolescents. Journal of Early
Adolescence, 9, 34–49.
Phinney, J. S. (1990). Ethnic identity in adolescents and
adults: Review of research. Psychological Bulettin,
108, 499–514.
Phinney, J. S., Berry, J. W., Vedder, P., & Liebkind, K.
(2006). The acculturation experience: Attitudes,
identities and behaviors of immigrant youth. In J.
W. Berry et al. (Eds.), Immigrant youth in cultural
transition: Acculturation, identity, and adaptation
across national contexts (pp. 71–116). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Phinney, J. S., & Devich-Navarro, M. (1997). Variations
in bicultural identification among African American
and Mexican American adolescents. Journal of
Research on Adolescence, 7, 3–32.
Phinney, J. S., Horenczyk, G., Liebkind, K., & Vedder,
P. (2001). Ethnic identity, immigration, and well-
being: An interactional perspective. Journal of Social
Issues, 57, 493–510.
Phinney, J. S., & Ong, A. D. (2007). Conceptualization
and measurement of ethnic identity: Current status
and future directions. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 54, 271–281.
Rechel, B. (2008). The long way back to Europe:
Minority protection in Bulgaria. Stuttgart, Germany:
Ibidem Verlag.
Rechel, B., Blackburn, C. M., Spencer, N. J., & Rechel,
B. (2009). Access to health care for Roma children in
Central and Eastern Europe: Findings from a
qualitative study in Bulgaria. International Journal
for Equity in Health, 8, 8–24.
Ringold, D. (2000). Roma and the transition in central
and Eastern Europe: Trends and challenges.
Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Roma Network (2011). Roma organizations in Bulgaria.
Retrieved October 12, 2011 from
www.romanetwork.bg
Saroglou, V., & Galand, P. (2004). Identities, values,
and religion: A study among Muslim, other immi-
grant, and native Belgian young adults after the 9/11
attacks. Identity, 4, 97–132.
Shavers, V. L. (1997). Measurement of socioeconomic
status in health disparities research. Journal of the
National Medical Association, 99, 1013–1023.
Schwartz, S. J., Zamboanga, B. L., Weisskirch, R. S., &
Rodriguez, L. (2009). The relationships of personal
and ethnic identity exploration to indices of adaptive
and maladaptive psychosocial functioning.
International Journal of Behavioral Development, 33,
131–144.
Smith, T. B., & Silva, L. (2011). Ethnic identity and
personal well-being of people of color: A
meta-analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58,
42–60.
Stevenson, C., & Muldoon, O. T. (2010). Socio-political
context and accounts of national identity in adoles-
cence. British Journal of Social Psychology, 49,
583–599.
Stoppa, T. M., & Lefkowitz, E. S. (2010). Longitudinal
changes in religiosity among emerging adult college
students. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20,
23–38.
United Nations Development Programme (2005). Faces
of poverty, faces of hope: Vulnerability profiles of
Roma population in decade of Roma inclusion
countries. New York, NY: UNDP.
Vassilev, R. (2004). The Roma of Bulgaria: A pariah
minority. Global Review of Ethnopolitics, 3, 40–51.
Verkuyten, M. (2005). The social psychology of ethnic
identity. London, UK: Psychology Press.
Verkuyten, M. (2007). Religious group identification
and inter-religious relations: A study among Turkish-
Dutch Muslims. Group Processes & Intergroup
Relations, 10, 341–357.
Verkuyten, M. (2008). Life satisfaction among ethnic
minorities: The role of discrimination and group
identification. Social Indicators Research, 89,
391–404.
Verkuyten, M., & Yildiz, A. A. (2009). Muslim
immigrants and religious group feelings: Self-identi-
fication and attitudes among Sunni and Alevi
Turkish-Dutch. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 32,
1121–1142.
Vermeersch, P., & Ram, M. H. (2009). The Roma.
In B. Rechel (Ed.), Minority rights in Central
and Eastern Europe (pp. 61–73). London, UK:
Routledge.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988).
Development and validation of brief measures of
positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54,
1063–1070.
Yip, T., & Fuligni, A. J. (2002). Daily variation in ethnic
identity, ethnic behaviors, and psychological well-
being among American adolescents of Chinese
descent. Child Development, 73, 1557–1572.
Zeman, C. L., Depken, D. E., & Senchina, D. S. (2010).
Roma health issues: A review of the literature and
discussion. Ethnicity and Health, 8, 223–249.
12 DIMITROVA ET AL.
Downloaded by [Tilburg University] at 07:17 25 May 2012
