Racial/Ethnic Identity Associated with Major Depression Differently in Subgroup Asian Americans Nationwide

Objectives and Purpose: Social identity theory proposes that racial/ethnic identity (REI) protects minorities. However, cultural psychologists, in their identity management framework, also pointed to the undesirable influence of negatively evaluated social identity for minorities in line with discrimination. Evidence has demonstrated the protection of REI for African Americans, Latino Americans, and Native Americans. Few studies, however, have examined whether such an identity is the consistent protective factor for major Asian American subgroups nationwide. The purpose of this study was to explore the influences of their racial/ethnic identity on major depressive disorder in these subgroups, using the first national database on mental health. Based on their distinct cultural backgrounds, including varied immigration stressors, we hypothesized inter-group differences in the impact of subcultural identity on major depressive disorder (MDD), above and beyond the influences of existing predictors such as demographics, discrimination, and acculturation factors. Methods: Using the first national representative survey data from the National Latino and Asian American Study (NLAAS), we explored the varying effects of racial/ethnic identity, alongside known protectors (social support and religious attendance) in three major AA subgroups. Three hierarchical logistic regression models were conducted for Chinese, Filipino, and Vietnamese Americans, respectively, to evaluate the independent effect of racial/ethnic identity on major depression, controlling for known demographic and acculturation predictors. Results: Our further analyses found that Chinese are more likely to suffer from MDD (5.3%), followed by Filipinos (4.3%) and Vietnamese (3.3%). Levels of REI ranged from lowest among Filipinos (m_F=3.16) to the highest among Vietnamese (m_V =3.55). Despite small mean differences, rates of all three groups were statistically different from each other. Multivariate analyses showed an association of Racial/Ethnic Identity and being US-Born with an increased likelihood of major depression in Chinese. Social Support was related to the reduced likelihood of depression. Further, REI also moderated the detrimental impact of discrimination for Chinese. In Filipinos, Racial/Ethnic Identity and English Proficiency were inversely linked with major depression, whereas higher levels of Education, Years in the US and Discrimination predicted the greater likelihood. In Vietnamese, Religious Attendance and Social Support reduced the likelihood of major depression. Conclusion and Implications: Echoing Sue et al.’s (2012) call for investigating AA heterogeneity, this study expands the literature on differential associations of subgroup REIs and their mental health. Our findings reveal a more complex picture regarding the role of REI rather than reinforcing a consistently protective role in all Asian Americans. The findings for Filipinos add new evidence to previous research for other racial/ethnic minorities who also collectively experienced cross-cultural conflicts and discrimination. The findings for Chinese challenge the assumption of social identity theory but support an aspect in identity management framework, regarding the internalized inferiority associated with negatively valued REI in the society. The differential findings should have some implications for social work services for these subgroup AAs and deserve more in-depth investigation in the future.