Asian American Journal of Psychology © 2017 American Psychological Association

2017, Vol. 8, No. 1, 43–55 1948-1985/17/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/aap0000068

Losing Kapwa: Colonial Legacies and the Filipino American Family

E. J. R. David Dinghy Kristine B. Sharma

University of Alaska Anchorage University of Alaska Fairbanks

Jessica Petalio
University of Alaska Anchorage

Largely due to their colonial past and neocolonial present, Filipinos have been receiving certain messages for
generations regarding their heritage and the Western culture, and have been facing constant tensions and
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

struggles between the Filipino and the Western, and the individual and the collective. This constant push-pull
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

between Filipino and Western cultural values shape and are reflected in Filipinos’ daily lives, interactions with
each other, and interactions with the rest of the world. To this end, this article discusses a wide range of factors
pertinent to Filipino Americans—from immigration, family structure, and values, to parenting, gender roles,
and intergenerational issues—to convey that these factors need to be understood in the context of colonialism,
its legacies, and its contemporary implications when conceptualizing Filipinos Americans’ experiences. We
also provide a discussion of Filipino values that go “beyond the surface” as we talk about the core Filipino
value of kapwa, and how ethnic identity, acculturation, and cultural conflicts among and between Filipinos
need to be conceptualized through kapwa. Then, we discuss how colonialism and its most insidious
legacy— colonial mentality—may influence kapwa, acculturation, ethnic identity, and Filipino American
families. We end with some recommendations for researchers and service providers, with the hope that a
historically informed and sociopolitically contextualized understanding of Filipino Americans will be helpful
to those who work with this population.

What is the public significance of this article?

This article provides an overview of Filipino American families, and argues that the experiences of
Filipino American families cannot be accurately understood outside the context colonialism and its
most insidious legacy— colonial mentality. The article presents a framework for how colonialism and
continued oppression may have damaged the core Filipino value of kapwa, which has deep and
widespread implications on Filipino Americans and their families.

Keywords: Filipino, internalized oppression, colonial mentality, kapwa, acculturation

Although largely unknown by the general public, there are 3.5
million people of Filipino descent in the U.S. (Hoeffel, Rastogi,
Kim, & Shahid, 2012), making this country the most Filipino-
populated region in the world outside of the Philippines. This fact,
along with many sociocultural (e.g., Christianity and English pro-
ficiency), educational (e.g., Americanized schools in the Philip-
pines), and psychological (e.g., equating lighter skin with attrac-
tiveness) characteristics of Filipinos, are largely due to their
colonial past and neocolonial present (David, 2013; Root, 1997;
Strobel, 2001). Indeed, even the fact that Filipinos have been in
E. J. R. David, Joint PhD Program in Clinical-Community Psychology,
University of Alaska Anchorage; Dinghy Kristine B. Sharma, Joint PhD
Program in Clinical-Community Psychology, University of Alaska Fair-
banks; Jessica Petalio, Joint PhD Program in Clinical-Community Psychol-
ogy, University of Alaska Anchorage.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to
E. J. R. David, Joint PhD Program in Clinical-Community Psychology,
University of Alaska Anchorage, 3211 Providence Drive, Anchorage,
AK 99508. E-mail: ejrdavid@uaa.alaska.edu
these lands (i.e., what is now California) since 1587—long before
the “United States” existed—was because Spanish colonizers
brought Filipino slaves to Mexico (Borah, 1995). With such a
colonized history and their oppressed contemporary reality (e.g.,
99% of Filipino Americans experienced racism recently; Alvarez
& Juang, 2010), Filipinos have been facing tensions between the
traditional and the modern, the Filipino and the Western, and the
individual and the collective (David & Nadal, 2013; Nadal, 2011;
Root, 2005). These conflicts and tensions shape and are reflected
in Filipinos’ daily lives, interactions with each other, and interac-
tions with the rest of the world. Therefore, one cannot completely
understand Filipinos and their families without understanding their
colonized past and neocolonial modern-day realities. To this end,
this paper will discuss a wide range of factors pertinent to Filipino
Americans—from immigration, family structure, and values to
parenting, gender roles, and intergenerational issues—to convey
that these factors need to be understood in the context of colonial-
ism, its legacies, and its contemporary implications when concep-
tualizing Filipino Americans’ experiences.
After summarizing Filipinos’ colonial and immigration history,
we will provide a basic description of typical Filipino American

43
 44 DAVID, SHARMA, AND PETALIO
families. Similar to existing literature, this profile will show how
Filipino cultural values permeate all facets of Filipino American
families, and how challenges to ethnic identity—and related cul-
tural differences and conflicts between Filipino and American
values—may lead to distress for family members. What makes the
current article different from existing literature on Filipino Amer-
ican family values, however, is that we go deeper and beyond
simply labeling Filipinos as collectivistic. Instead, our discussion
centers the indigenous and core value known as kapwa—a world-
view wherein the self is not distinguished from others (Enriquez,
1994). Kapwa is the unity of the “self” and “others,” a recognition of
a shared identity, an inner self that makes one connected with and
equal to others (Enriquez, 1994). This core value drives Filipino
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
culture that typically emphasizes relatedness, social belonging, and
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
harmony (Markus & Kitayama, 1991; Triandis, 2001) – collectivistic
tendencies that are often contrasted against the individualistic values
emphasized in American culture. Then, after presenting kapwa, we
will discuss how colonialism and its most insidious legacy— colonial
mentality—may influence kapwa, acculturation, ethnic identity, and
Filipino family interactions. We end with some recommendations for
researchers and service providers, with the hope that a historically
informed and sociopolitically contextualized understanding of Fili-
pino American families—such as the one presented here—will com-
plement existing literature (e.g., Root, 2005; Santos & Chan, 2011)
and be helpful to those who work with this population. Let us begin
with an overview of Filipinos’ colonial and immigration history.
Colonial and Immigration History
The indigenous peoples of the islands that are now collectively
known as the Philippines had diverse, rich, vibrant, and complex
cultures with developed systems of governments, spiritual beliefs,
values, and worldviews reflected in their oral and written tradi-
tions, songs, and dances prior to the arrival of Spanish colonizers
in 1521 (Agoncillo, 1974). Under Spain’s three centuries of tyran-
nical rule, the indigenous inhabitants experienced brutality and
injustice, as their worldviews and practices were systematically
replaced by Western ways (David, 2013). Perhaps the best exam-
ple of this is the propagation of Catholicism and its values,
traditions, and rituals. Presently, 85% of Filipinos today are Ro-
man Catholic (Santos & Chan, 2011), and many of their parenting
practices (e.g., roles of men and women) and social beliefs (e.g.,
sexual activity) today are influenced by the religion’s conservative
and patriarchic values and teachings.
America’s long and complex relationship with the Philippines
began after it bought the Philippines from Spain during the Treaty
of Paris in 1898, resulting in a Philippines–U.S. war that lasted
until 1913. After millions of casualties (mostly Filipinos) and
spending millions of dollars, the U.S. successfully colonized the
Philippines and eventually embarked on a policy of “benevolent
assimilation” that aimed to transform the Philippines’ political,
educational, social, and economic institutions after America’s im-
age (Abueva, 1976). Middle-class and educated Filipinos were
provided scholarships to pursue higher education in the U.S. to
produce civil servants molded with American ideals and values.
Additionally, with the growing labor demands in the U.S. before
the Great Depression, the American government actively recruited
mostly Filipino men to work in plantations in Hawaii, farms in the
West Coast, and fish canneries in Alaska who were lured by
dreams of America life and prosperity (Borah, 1995). Soon after,
ideas of American superiority and civilization started to permeate
the Filipino consciousness, along with the development of the
historical myth that the U.S. rescued Filipinos from Spain. This
narrative contributes to Filipinos’ sense of indebtedness to and
affinity with the U.S.
As the Philippines transitioned toward independence by 1946,
the U.S. maintained strong ties to the country. Meanwhile, the
status of Filipinos in the U.S. was reclassified from colonial
subjects to aliens leading to restrictions in leasing and owning
property, halted reunification processes with families in the Phil-
ippines, and the creation of the U.S. Repatriation Act. With the
economic recession, as well as the anti-Asian and nativism senti-
ments that was prevalent at the time, the U.S. government paid for
Filipinos’ one-way travel costs to encourage them to return to the
Philippines (Le, 2014). Despite this unwelcoming U.S. attitude
toward Filipinos, thousands of Filipinos still served on behalf of
the U.S. in World War II and many more Filipino civilians actively
involved themselves in various mobilization efforts during the war,
leading to the U.S. government amendment of the Nationality Act
of 1940 that granted U.S. citizenship to thousands of Filipinos who
served in the war (Le, 2014). After World War II, there was a
dramatic increase in numbers of Filipinos in America through two
chain systems of migration that prioritized priority the reunifica-
tion of families, and also encouraged occupational migration to fill
the need for certain professions in the U.S. (Sicat, 2012), spurring
a “cycle of chain immigration and sponsorship” among Filipinos
and their families in the Philippines (Le, 2014). As a result, the
Filipino immigrant population in the U.S. dramatically increased
from less than 350,000 in 1970 (Terrazas, 2008) to 1.8 million in
2010 (Hoeffel, Rastogi, Kim, & Shahid, 2012).
This deep colonial history between the Philippines and the U.S.
contributes to a highly westernized modern day Philippines, which
influences the annual influx of Filipinos to the U.S. For example,
English is used in Philippine schools, government, and other
contexts (e.g., courts, business), conveying that English is superior
to indigenous Filipino languages (e.g., Strobel, 2001). Filipino
schools (e.g., nursing programs) are designed to meet the needs,
certifications, and cultural mores of the U.S. making it the norm
for Filipinos to dream for and work toward jobs in America (Choy,
2003). The maintenance of U.S. military bases in the Philippines
until 1992 and the continued presence of U.S. soldiers in the
Philippines to train Filipino soldiers sends the message that Fili-
pinos cannot protect themselves and still need the U.S. (e.g.,
David, 2013; Ignacio, de la Cruz, Emmanuel, & Toribio, 2004).
The abundance of skin bleaching products and skin-whitening
clinics in the Philippines (e.g., David, 2013) is evidence that the
masses may have accepted the notion that Filipino physical char-
acteristics are not as desirable as European physical traits. The
discrimination against, and low regard of, non-Christians, non-
Urban, and non-Westernized Filipinos send the message that the
more Western you look, think, and behave, the better off and more
accepted you will be (e.g., David, 2013). These ubiquitous inferi-
orizing messages in modern day Philippines, have their roots in
colonialism. Thus, the large annual numbers of Filipinos coming
into America (approximately 40,000 per year; Zong & Batalova,
2016) is not surprising because many Filipinos may already have
a grandiose perception of the U.S., a perception that has been
 KAPWA AND THE FILIPINO AMERICAN FAMILY
shaped by colonialism and a highly-Westernized postcolonial cli-
mate. As Rodriguez (1997) stated:
Colonialism (and its legacies) has fostered a perception that . . . the
U.S. is . . . a highly sophisticated society (and culture) . . . adults
dream of going to the U.S. as if longing to be reunited with a long-lost
parent . . . children dream of becoming Americans in the hope that
they will finally be able to live in Disney’s Kingdom . . . For many
Filipinos, coming to America means the fulfillment of a lifelong
dream. . . . (pp. 317–318)
Such a colonial history, postcolonial modern reality, and result-
ing widespread colonial mentality (i.e., Western ⫽ superior and
Filipino ⫽ inferior; David, 2013) is why the “voluntary immi-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
grant” narrative—wherein individuals “choose” to leave for better
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
opportunities in America and that this “choice” is not forced by
Western societies or people (Ogbu & Simons, 1998)—is not ac-
curate for Filipinos. Indeed, David and Nadal (2013) found that
almost every Filipino immigrant (96%) experienced Filipino eth-
nic and cultural denigration that reflects colonial mentality in the
Philippines before moving to the U.S. Thus, ever since the first
Filipino in North America (as slaves aboard Spanish ships) to the
early 1900s (as U.S. colonial subjects and laborers) and to now
(colonial mentality and Westernized Philippines), Filipino pres-
ence and immigration in this land has been influenced by colo-
nialism and its legacies.
Basic Profile of the Typical Filipino Family
Family Structure and Kinship
United States colonialism, the long history of Filipinos in Amer-
ica, and the immigration laws discussed in the previous section
provide insight as to why many Filipino Americans today have
their nuclear, immediate, and extended families living with them,
making it common for Filipino Americans to have multiple-
generation households. Despite this, many Filipino Americans still
have nuclear, immediate, or extended family in the Philippines.
Thus, in addition to typical forms of family (i.e., nuclear, imme-
diate, and extended), many Filipino Americans may have trans-
national families—wherein they stay in close contact with family
in the Philippines or still maintain familial obligations to them
(e.g., sending monthly “allowances,” paying for a niece’s school
tuition, paying for a cousin’s household bills). When a transna-
tional family involves marital separation (i.e., a spouse lives in the
Philippines while the other lives in America), multiple families in
different countries may come about because of loneliness and
economic reasons (Root, 2005). Other family types that are be-
coming common in the community are: interracial marriages—
Filipinos Americans have one of the highest rates of interracial
marriages among all Asian groups (Kitano, Fujino, & Sato, 1998);
correspondence marriages— usually involving Filipinas in the
Philippines with non-Filipino (mostly White) husbands in another
country (Ordoñez, 1997); lesbian and gay couples and families—
which raises significant challenges due to the strong Catholic
influence among Filipinos (Nadal, 2011); and undocumented
families—when parents or entire families come to America
through legal and illegal means and decide to overstay (Montoya,
1997).
45
The Filipino definition of “family” is also different in that the
Filipino kinship system does not follow European standards that
differentiate between first and second cousins, cousins twice re-
moved, and others. Instead, Filipino kinship goes by generation.
For example: a person’s parents’ siblings and cousins are the
person’s aunts or uncles; a person’s cousins’ children are the
person’s nieces or nephews; and a person’s nieces’ or nephews’
children are the person’s grandchildren. This kinship system re-
flects the value of having strong and close connections with each
other, especially family, in that there is literally no room in this
kinship system to have a “distant” family or relative. In addition to
extended family being included in their definition of family, many
Filipinos further add to their families through baptismal and wed-
ding godparents (ninong and ninang), and through tribal, clan, or
regional connections. One of the author’s (E.J.R.D.) “cousins”
(their parents are good friends and E.J.R.D. is the godfather of her
nephew)—a Filipina American who is married to a European
American man, with whom she has mixed children— captured this
kinship system very well when she stated:
My kids try to break it down using European standards and get
confused. I tell them there are a few things to remember in our
family—there’s no such thing as ‘distant’ and ‘blood-related’ has very
little meaning. And ‘the bigger, the better!’
Thus, Filipinos typically have a very large familial system—in
America and the Philippines—that they rely on for emotional and
material support, and to which they also primarily commit and feel
a sense of obligation (utang na loob or sense of indebtedness to the
family because of everything they have done for the person).
Because of the strong presence and influence of family in many
Filipinos’ lives, family often becomes a strong and salient com-
ponent of their personal identity (Cimmarusti, 1996; Nadal, 2011)
and highly influential to their mental health and psychological
well-being (Root, 2005).
Family Values and Expectations
Regardless of family type and kinship definition, Filipino fam-
ilies typically emphasize respect for elders (not just for grandfathers—
lolo, lelong; or grandmothers—lola, lelang, but to anyone older
including parents, aunts and uncles, and kuya, manoy or manong—
older brother or male cousin and ate, manang, or manoy— older
sister or female cousin), loyalty and obligation to the family, and
dependence upon the family (Agbayani-Siewart, 1994; Posadas,
1999). Many Filipino families are authoritarian (Santos, 1983) and
the power of authority flows from the oldest to the youngest. The
youngest (or bunso) usually have the least authority while also
being pampered, babied, or spoiled—which is a way to foster
dependence on the family (Agbayani-Siewart & Enrile, 2003;
Guthrie & Jacobs, 1966; Salvador, Omizo, & Kim, 1997). The
insertion of terms such as “po” or “opo” when talking to any
authority figure—including older siblings and cousins—is a re-
flection of this value for respecting elders (Root, 2005). The power
of authority given to older children, however, often comes with an
expectation to help with household chores and the responsibility of
attending to younger ones. This may present some conflicts for
older children who might be developing a stronger sense of au-
tonomy and independence (Agbayani-Siewart, 1994), and who
might want to do other things such as “hang-out” with their peers
 46 DAVID, SHARMA, AND PETALIO
rather than take care of their younger relatives. Such a situation is
an opportunity to foster and test yet another Filipino value called
pakikisama or group solidarity. Pakikisama has been described as
“. . . maintaining good feelings in all personal interactions and
getting along with others at all costs,” which may include yielding
to group (or family) desires even if it contradicts one’s own, just
to avoid open displays of conflict and stressful confrontations
(Santos & Chan, 2011, p. 335). Thus, asking older children to
prioritize family over one’s personal desires (and prioritize family
over friends) is a way to harness pakikisama, familial commitment
and loyalty, and obligation to the family even at young ages.
Another example of this is when
children are raised . . . to bear in mind the sacrifices their parents made
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
to give them a ‘better’ life. Thus, (children) experience a lifelong debt
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
of gratitude (utang na loob) . . . which serves to further strengthen
binding relationships of love, loyalty, respect, and obedience. (Santos
& Chan, 2011, p. 334)
This strong commitment, sense of obligation, and dependency on
the family—as well as the practice of prioritizing the family’s
needs over one’s own—may continue through adulthood, which is
why it is common for many Filipino adults to still live with their
parents even after they have families of their own, or to take in
their elderly parents and care for them (Santos & Chan, 2011).
Taking care of elderly parents may also be seen as one way to
show gratitude and repay one’s utang na loob, and those who do
this (including spouses) are admired for holding such a value and
being “good people.” The admiration of such folks, in turn, rein-
forces such behaviors for the following generations.
While parenting is mostly done by parents, responsibility is also
often shared by other elders. This style of parenting reflects the
values for respect, loyalty, sense of obligation, and interdepen-
dence. Children are often punished or reprimanded for not listen-
ing or not obeying elders, which is seen as disrespectful and
bringing shame (hiya) to the parents and family. Though physical
punishments may still be used, the shaping of desirable behaviors
and the elimination of unacceptable ones also often “take the form
of embarrassment (or shaming) through teasing, derogatory re-
marks, and gossip” (Agbayani-Siewart & Enrile, 2003, p. 238).
Desirable behaviors may also be attained through indirect com-
ments or behaviors such as nagpaparinig—when one talks in
general about admirable or unacceptable behaviors that one hopes
for the other person to do or not do. For example, if a father wants
his son to finish a plate of food, the father might say to the mother:
“Yesterday when we were at a restaurant, I saw this little girl
sitting quietly and eating well, finishing everything in her plate
without making a mess or throwing a fit. What a good kid!” or
“When I saw little Anna throw a fit yesterday and not finish her
food, it really hurt me and broke my heart.” These statements are
said in the presence of the child so that the child can easily and
clearly hear and receive the message being conveyed. This
“milder” way of shaping behavior still privately activates a sense
of hiya (shame) within the child while also avoiding public con-
frontation or conflict in order to maintain smooth and positive
interpersonal relations.
Filipinos’ collectivism is typically seen through the values we
have previously discussed (i.e., hiya, utang na loob, and pakiki-
sama). To an outsider, emphasis on these accommodative values
could perpetuate a distorted image of a submissive Filipino (Yacat,
2013). For example, the element of reciprocity promoted in the
value of utang na loob may promote a sense of obligation and can
be used to maintain the image of colonizers as benefactors (Pe-Pua
& Protacio-Marcelino, 2000; Yacat, 2013). Scholars (Pe-Pua &
Protacio-Marcelino, 2000) clarify that utang na loob has some
parallels to “gratitude or solidarity,” but is also multilayered with
emotional, cognitive, and social responsibility components
(Rungduin et al., 2016). Acknowledging receiving good will from
another is important for both beneficiary and benefactor and re-
payment of such good will may be indirect or direct to the
benefactor. It is seen as a communal trait for benefactor and
beneficiary because there is a “collaborative expectation” that
doing good deeds for a person will bring out a beneficiary’s
goodness and that he or she in turn will engage in prosocial
behaviors as part of the community. To illustrate, a beneficiary has
no absolute and immediate obligation to return the favor received
in his lifetime but there is an assurance that that one’s heirs will
honor and respect this obligation to the benefactor and/or commu-
nity (Pe-Pua & Protacio-Marcelino, 2000). Thus, utang na loob
“binds a person to his or her home community or home country”
and can explain why majority of immigrant Filipinos continue to
maintain strong ties with their homeland (Pe-Pua & Protacio-
Marcelino, 2000, p. 56).
Socialization and Gender Roles
Due to Spanish influence of machismo culture (male superiority
over females), Filipino culture is considered a patriarchal society
(Nadal, 2011). Despite the influence of machismo culture, respect
for and high regard of women remains to be a strong cultural value
for Filipinos (Root, 2005). This belief is rooted in an indigenous
value that has continued to persist despite centuries of colonialism.
Just like the males, indigenous Filipinas were allowed to become
chiefs of their tribe and women in general were regarded as
community leaders, healers, or priestesses such as the babaylan
(Agoncillo, 1974; Strobel, 2001). Today, Filipinas play a vital role
in maintaining family closeness, particularly by continuing family
and cultural rituals and traditions (Espiritu, 2003). In a typical
family, although the father is considered the main authority figure
in the family, the wife also has considerable influence in decision-
making, contributes to the family income, and is often in charge of
managing the family’s finances (Santos & Chan, 2011). Aside
from being typically socialized to be the family’s caregiver, many
Filipino women are raised in a culture where beauty and intelli-
gence are both highly emphasized and valued (Root, 2005). Of-
tentimes, daughters are not only socialized to be “beautiful” in
stereotypical ways or to adhere to marianismo gender roles—a
Spanish influence that promotes feminine purity, moral strength,
and virginity— but are also encouraged, sometimes even more so
than sons, to become leaders in education, industry, and govern-
ment (David, 2013). An example of this interesting paradox is the
fact that Filipinos in the Philippines and America place so much
importance on “beauty” pageants, while at the same time the
Philippines has already elected two women presidents.
Despite these successes, the idealized view of a Filipina as being
family oriented, chaste, and subservient is often regarded by par-
ents and elders as a signifier of cultural and ethnic pride, as
Filipinas are expected to be morally and culturally different than
their more independent, “liberal,” or “loose” American women
 KAPWA AND THE FILIPINO AMERICAN FAMILY
counterparts (Espiritu, 2003; Mahalingam, Balan, & Haritatos,
2008). This idealized Filipina femininity—in combination with the
machismo culture passed on by Spanish colonizers— can be a
source of parent– child and intergenerational conflict as female
children feel the gender inequality and see that their parents
enforce more control and stricter rules over their dating life,
mobility, and sense of autonomy (Espiritu, 2003). Parent disap-
proval can be used as a form of control when female children are
labeled as “not decent Filipina” or have become too Americanized,
accusations that can be psychologically damaging. For instance, in
a 1995 study conducted in San Diego high schools, it was found
that female Filipino students have the highest rates of seriously
considering or attempting suicide among all racial groups (Es-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
piritu, 2003). Furthermore, this idealized gender also restrict ex-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
pression of other forms of sexualities within the Filipino commu-
nity (gay, lesbians, bisexual, transgender) while reinforcing the
male privilege (Mahalingam, Balan, & Haritatos, 2008).
These demeaning and inferiorizing stereotypes about Filipinas
continue to persist today, contributing to the negative view that all
Filipinas are perfect “mail-order brides” because of their submis-
siveness and obedience (Espiritu, 2003). Such stereotypes also
developed from the extensive colonial rule and military presence
of the U.S. in the Philippines. Specifically, the long presence of
U.S. of military bases in the Philippines both promoted the sex-
industry in the country and created the racialized and objectified
perception of Filipinas as sexual commodities (Espiritu, 2003).
Such a military history and demeaning stereotypes about Asian
women—specifically Filipinas— contribute to high rates of inter-
racial marriages (or at least interracial romantic relationships)
between Filipinas and White American men. Indeed, research
shows that Asian women tend to intermarry more than Asian men
and that this gender difference is due to: (a) the presence of mainly
male U.S. military personnel in Asian countries (e.g., Philippines
and Vietnam); and (b) subjective factors that influence partner
choice such as gender roles and stereotypes, as well as notions of
attractiveness of different racial groups (Lee & Boyd, 2007).
Interracial marriage is steadily increasing in America and is
considered both an indicator and process of racial equality (Fu,
2008). It should be noted that historically, however, the U.S. did
not welcome Asians and passed racist immigration laws in the 19th
and early 20th centuries to severely exclude them (Lee & Boyd,
2007). With the antimiscegenation law, for instance, interracial
unions were not only met with social disapproval but was prohib-
ited and criminalized until 1967 (Uba, 1994). Today, with the
growing social diversity in the U.S., interracial relationships have
become more common and acceptable, with Filipinos having one
of the highest rates of interracial marriages— especially the rate of
marrying a White person—among all Asian ethnic groups (Le,
2009). Factors that contribute to this occurrence include the long
history that Filipinos have with America, as well as certain cultural
ties such as the English language and the Christian faith (Lee &
Boyd, 2007). This trend somewhat supports the view that inter-
marriage can be considered as a sign of assimilation of the minor-
ity group, as social distance between racial and ethnic groups are
reduced, resulting in a new identity for the offspring of such unions
wherein a blending of cultures arise (Lee & Boyd, 2007). For
multiracial families with Filipino and American heritage, the chal-
lenges, confusions, and conflicts brought about by contrasting
cultural values (e.g., independence vs. interdependence), cultural
47
and ethnic stereotypes (e.g., Filipinos are inferior to Whites; Fili-
pinas need to fulfill submissive and subversive role), and power
dynamics (the U.S. is “first-world” whereas the Philippines is a
“third world” that had to be “civilized” or helped) may be more of
a salient issue between the parents, and between the parents and
their children.
Intergenerational and Cultural Conflicts
It is clear that there is a radical difference between Filipino and
mainstream American family values. As discussed, traditional
Filipino families often encourage dependency on each other
(Agbayani-Siewart, 1994), loyalty to, and solidarity with the fam-
ily (Salvador, Omizo, & Kim, 1997). Cooperation and interdepen-
dence among family members are stressed, encouraged, and pre-
ferred over individualism and independence, which are the values
typically stressed or emphasized by mainstream American families
(Agbayani-Siewart, 1994). The conflicts and distress that are often
created within Filipino families by this clear contrast between
Filipino and mainstream American culture is a phenomenon that is
abundantly studied and discussed in the existing literature. In
general, we have learned that acceptance from friends/peers who
either grew up living the Western way, or who have adopted the
Western way, may be difficult to achieve without being assimi-
lated with mainstream American culture. Indeed, immigrants typ-
ically experience pressure from the mainstream culture to abandon
their identity and to assimilate into the mainstream culture in order
to “fit-in,” and such pressure from the mainstream culture nega-
tively affects life satisfaction among immigrants or those who are
not assimilated (Roccas, Horenczyk, & Schwartz, 2000). Thus,
low assimilation levels among Filipino youths may hinder them
from acquiring the peer acceptance they want, and in turn, con-
tribute to their distress. For example, Chan (1999) found that
Filipino adolescent immigrants to the U.S. who have not assimi-
lated experienced higher levels of psychological distress than
U.S.-born or highly assimilated Filipino Americans. Davis (1995)
also found that low assimilation levels were associated with higher
depression levels and suicidal ideations; and Wong (2001) found
that low adaptation to the mainstream culture was a good predictor
of depression.
On the other hand, being assimilated to the mainstream culture
does not necessarily mean absence of difficulties. Indeed, some
literature on the “immigrant paradox” suggest that newer immi-
grants who are still strongly connected to their heritage culture
seem to have better outcomes compared to their more assimilated
counterparts (e.g., Alegria et al., 2008). One potential source of
distress for highly assimilated adolescents is intrafamilial relation-
ships; cultural conflicts may arise between the youths’ westernized
values and the traditional beliefs of their parents or other relatives.
As mentioned earlier, Filipino youths often face pressure from the
mainstream to assimilate. Thus, adapting to and accepting the
mainstream society’s cultural beliefs and values seem necessary to
“fit-in.” However, typical American youth often strive for inde-
pendence from their parents and spend large amounts of time with
friends/peers rather than with their families. If Filipino youths
Westernize in this sense, they are in direct contrast against tradi-
tional Filipino values of familial dependency (Agbayani-Siewart,
1994). This and other similar situations that challenge traditional
Filipino family values of obedience, dependence, loyalty, and
 48 DAVID, SHARMA, AND PETALIO
cooperation, bring forth potential conflicts between traditional
parents or other relatives and highly Westernized children, which
can then develop into problems within the family. Such children
might be perceived as bringing shame to the family and might be
accused by parents and other relatives as having no shame (walang
hiya), no gratitude (walang utang na loob), or uncooperative
(walang pakisama).
Liebkind and Jasinskaja-Lahti (2000) reported that strong pa-
rental support and obedience to traditional family values improve
psychological well-being. Highly Westernized Filipinos may not
experience such familial support because of their failure to adhere
to traditional family values, which, in turn, may contribute to their
psychological distress. In other words, their high assimilation
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
levels may lead to conflict with their families, which may nega-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
tively affect familial relationships and familial support that are
necessary for well-being. The survey by the Filipino American
Council of Chicago reported that 33% of their respondents had
experienced parent– child conflicts because of the cultural clash
between Filipino and American values (Cimmarusti, 1996). Heras
and Revilla (1994) also found that mothers of highly assimilated
Filipino American youths, who may no longer adhere to values
such as hiya, utang na loob, and pakikisama, report lower levels of
family satisfaction than mothers of less assimilated Filipino Amer-
ican youths.
Beyond the Surface: Kapwa, Colonial Mentality, and
the Filipino Family
Kapwa as a Core Value and Worldview
Indigenous Filipino psychology founder Virgilio Enriquez
(1994) argued that hiya, pakikisama, and utang na loob are only
surface values, and that although
readily apparent attributes appreciated and exhibited by many Filipi-
nos . . . (they are) a triad whose legs emanate from a single trunk, the
actual core value of the Filipino personality. This core value . . . (is)
kapwa—the essence of being Filipino and the most important value in
the Filipino worldview.
Kapwa can be translated as “fellow being” (kapwa-Tao; En-
riquez, 1994), and refers to one’s unity, connection, or oneness
with other people—regardless of “blood” connection, social status,
wealth, level of education, place of origin, or other factors typi-
cally used to separate or distinguish people. Kapwa is recognizing
that one has a shared inner self with others, and that one is not and
should not be separated from others. Thus, in addition to kapwa
being the core from which typical Filipino values emanate to
influence all aspects of Filipino family life, this strong need for
connection and closeness is what is also driving the kinship system
and very inclusive definition of family. In Enriquez’s words:
A person starts having kapwa . . . because of his (or her) awareness of
shared identity. The ako (ego or self) and the iba sa akin (others) are
one and the same in kapwa psychology: Hindi ako iba sa aking kapwa
(I am no different from others). Once ako starts thinking of himself (or
herself) as separate from kapwa, the Filipino self gets to be individ-
uated in the Western sense and, in effect, denies the status of kapwa
to the other. By the same token, the status of kapwa is also denied to
the self. (p. 45)
Pakiramdam is another concept and value that means “feeling”
or “intuition.” It refers to feeling other people’s needs, desires,
intentions, motivations, moods, emotions, or their other internal
states. It is a shared inner perception, a heightened sense of
awareness and sensitivity, and an ability to be highly sympathetic
or empathetic, making Filipinos with pakiramdam exceptionally
adept at sensing subtle, nonverbal, and invisible cues from other
people (de Guia, 2005). Pakiramdam connects the core value of
kapwa to the surface values. Pakiramdam serves as the processor
or the pivot that allows a person to express kapwa and behave
according to kapwa. If one does not have the ability to feel for
others, then it will be impossible for that person to also have and
display shame (hiya), feel a sense of gratitude (utang na loob), or
put others’ desires ahead of one’s own (pakikisama). The person
may still have kapwa, but it is impossible to appropriately express
kapwa through the surface values without pakiramdam.
Using Enriquez’s example, the best way to make sense of such
a hierarchy in the Filipino value system is to use Filipinos’ under-
standing of what makes a masamang tao (bad person). The traits
of a masamang tao will often include not having or not displaying
the surface values of hiya (walang hiya), utang na loob (walang
utang na loob), and pakikisama (walang pakikisama). To be ac-
cused as someone with such ineptness is a bad thing in the Filipino
worldview. However, being a person who lacks one of the surface
values is still not as bad as someone who is considered to have no
pakiramdam. In turn, not having pakiramdam, which may be
developed and sharpened over time, is not as bad as not having
kapwa. Kapwa is the core, and it is of utmost importance for
someone to recognize that one is not, should not, and cannot be
separated or differentiated from others. Enriquez (1994) explained
it best when he stated:
One argument for the greater importance of kapwa . . . is the shock or
disbelief that the Filipino registers when confronted with one who is
supposedly walang kapwa. If one is walang pakisama, others might
still say ‘He (or she) would eventually learn’ or ‘Let him (or her) be;
that’s his (or her) prerogative.’ If one is walang hiya, others say, ‘His
(or her) parents should teach him (or her) a thing or two.’ If one is
walang utang na loob others might advise, ‘Avoid him (or her).’ But
if one is walang kapwa, people say ‘He (or she) must have reached
rock bottom. Napakasama na niya. He (or she) is the worst. (p. 63)
According to Enriquez (1994), kapwa is the essence and the
foundation of the Filipino value system, and that this core value
determines the extent to which a person is a person or a human
(personhood or pagkatao). Not having kapwa is the worst a person
can be because they have now lost their personhood or pagkatao.
Thus, kapwa is the most important value that Filipinos must
understand, have, and display, as it is what makes a Filipino a
Filipino, and what makes a human a human (pagkatao) in the
Filipino worldview. As Enriquez stated “Without kapwa, one
ceases to be a Filipino. One also ceases to be human” (p. 63). The
center of Figure 1 pictorially represents the relationships between
kapwa, pakiramdam, and the surface values.
Filipino Acculturation and Ethnic Identity
Given that: (a) kapwa is the essence— or the core— of one’s
personhood and what makes a person Filipino; (b) kapwa drives
Filipino values that conflict with mainstream American values;
and (c) these conflicting cultural values create tensions, chal-
 KAPWA AND THE FILIPINO AMERICAN FAMILY
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Figure 1. A conceptual model of the possible effects of colonialism and contemporary oppression on Filipino
Americans’ kapwa, ethnic identity, and acculturation. See the online article for the color version of this figure.
lenges, and distress within Filipino families, kapwa should be
central to any discussion of Filipino acculturation (the process of
adjusting to the influences of two or more cultures) and ethnic
identity (the extent to which people identify with and positively
regard their ethnic group). This is because the extent to which a
person holds kapwa may influence acculturation and ethnic iden-
tity, and vice versa. Filipino families’ culture and lives, therefore,
are influenced by the extent to which family members hold kapwa
and their consequent levels of acculturation and ethnic identity.
Two models of acculturation or ethnic identity are applied to
Filipino Americans: Berry’s (2003) four acculturation strategies of
assimilation (high adherence to dominant culture and low adher-
ence to heritage culture), separation (low adherence to dominant
culture and high adherence to heritage culture), integration (adher-
ence to both), and marginalization (low adherence to both); and
Nadal’s (2004) Pilipino American Identity Development (PAID)
Model on how Filipinos’ experiences (e.g., family socialization,
experiences of racism) may shape their perception and regard of
themselves, other Filipinos, and other groups. The first stage of
PAID is when a person is 2- to 5-years-old, when children are
mostly, if not only, exposed to their parents’ Filipino culture.
Parents may teach children the Filipino culture through food,
values, dances, language, and others. Filipinos in this stage may be
highly enculturated (connected to their heritage) and may hold
either a neutral or positive view of themselves, other Filipinos,
other minority groups, and the dominant White group. In Stage 2,
Filipinos may begin to receive messages about the superiority of
the dominant culture and the inferiorities of their heritage, which
may lead them to hold negative attitudes toward their selves, other
49
Filipinos, and other minority groups, while positively regarding
the dominant White group. Stage 2 may lead to Berry’s concept of
assimilation. Stage 3 is when Filipinos reverse their attitudes and
beliefs to a positive regard of their selves, other Filipinos, and
other minority groups, while holding a negative or suspicious
attitude toward the dominant group. Such a reversal may be
sparked by experiences of racism, or by the realization that Fili-
pinos and other minority groups are historically and contemporar-
ily oppressed. Stage 3 is consistent to what Berry called the
separation strategy of acculturation.
Stage 4 in the PAID model is when Filipinos continue to hold
the same attitudes about themselves, their heritage group, and
different ethnic or cultural groups as in Stage 3, but with a
stronger sense of solidarity with other Asian Americans. This
more positive regard toward and stronger affiliation with other
Asian Americans may come with the realization that there is
strength in numbers when social change is desired, and by the
recognition of the similarities between Filipinos and other
Asian Americans. In Stage 5, however, Filipinos may begin to
regard other Asian Americans with suspicion because of the
realization that Filipinos are often discriminated against or
marginalized by other Asian Americans, and by the recognition
that there are key differences between the Filipino experience
and culture and those of other Asian Americans. Filipinos may
become ethnocentric at this stage, regarding anything Filipino
as better than anything non-Filipino. Finally, in Stage 6, Fili-
pinos’ keep their positive regard of their heritage, but their
regard of other Asian Americans become neutral or accepting
and their regard of the dominant group is that of “selective
 50 DAVID, SHARMA, AND PETALIO
appreciation” (Nadal, 2004). Similar to other ethnic identity
models (e.g., Atkinson, Morten, & Sue, 1998; Phinney, 1992)
and to Berry’s (2003) integration strategy of acculturation, this
last PAID stage is the most ideal and beneficial.
Colonialism’s Effects on Kapwa, Acculturation, and
Ethnic Identity
Let us now turn to a discussion of how colonialism and its
contemporary legacies (the outer solid circle in Figure 1) may
influence kapwa, acculturation, and ethnic identity. Because of
colonialism’s inferiorization of the Filipino ethnicity and culture,
many Filipinos may have developed colonial mentality (CM; Da-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
vid, 2013). David and Okazaki (2006a) has defined CM (repre-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
sented by the dashed lines in Figure 1) as a specific form of
internalized oppression characterized by a perception of ethnic or
cultural inferiority that “involves an automatic and uncritical re-
jection of anything Filipino and an automatic and uncritical pref-
erence for anything American” (p. 241). Filipinos with CM may
regard Filipino culture, values, and behaviors negatively and may
no longer adhere to Filipino cultural beliefs and traditions. Con-
sequently, they may be more likely to assimilate toward the dom-
inant culture by adopting values that are emphasized in main-
stream American culture such as becoming independent and
perceiving one’s self as separate from others. As Enriquez (1994)
argued, once an individual comes to see one’s self as separated
from others, one ceases to have kapwa. Thus, Filipinos with CM
may not have kapwa, or at least, they may have weakened their
kapwa and are in danger of losing kapwa.
Filipinos who have accepted the alleged inferiority of their
culture, or those who may be ashamed or embarrassed of their
heritage, may begin to perceive kapwa as unnecessary. Indeed,
how can kapwa—a shared sense of self with others, especially
other Filipinos—supposed to be beneficial for someone who al-
ready perceives the Filipino culture and ethnicity as inferior,
shameful, and embarrassing? It makes more sense for those who
hold CM to separate themselves from other Filipinos, because
Filipinos may remind them of their own alleged inferiority, or
associating with Filipinos only maintains their membership to
what they already perceive as an inferior group. Thus, for those
with CM, having kapwa does not make sense, which may lead to
the damaging or eradication of kapwa among such individuals.
Indeed, for those who perceive being Filipino as undesirable,
getting rid of the essence and the core of being Filipino is the most
logical step to escape the inferiorities and undesirabilities of the
Filipino ethnicity and culture. Thus, Filipinos with CM may be
at-risk for losing kapwa, which in turn, makes them more likely to
be assimilated and lose their connection and adherence to the
Filipino culture (David, 2013).
To separate themselves from the inferiority and undesirability of
their heritage, some may begin to discriminate against others who
are perceived to be too Filipino or to be not American enough—
including their own family members. They may also begin to
change how they talk, dress, and behave in ways that are more
consistent with American ideals. They may begin to adhere and
subscribe to American cultural values, beliefs, and practices,
which are in contrast to those of the Filipino culture and world-
view. The practice of CM further separates Filipinos from other
people, especially other Filipinos, further solidifying their adher-
ence to individualistic viewpoints and making them less and less
connected to others; making their kapwa weaker until it is com-
pletely gone. Perceiving one’s self as more Americanized (e.g., I
speak better English; They have funny accents; They’re just a
bunch of FOBs; I have lighter skin than they do; I was born in the
U.S.), and using such characteristics as a way to differentiate or
separate one’s self from others who do not have such American-
ized characteristics, is one way in which one begins to lose kapwa.
By discriminating against others or highlighting how one is dis-
tinguishable or different from others, it is implied that one is better
than or at least different from other people, iba ako sa kanila (I am
different from them), which is in direct opposition to what kapwa
is (hindi ako iba sa aking kapwa; I am no different from my fellow
beings; David, 2013).
Filipinos who have CM and are separating themselves from
others, especially those who are perceived to be too Filipino or
non-Westernized, may not attend Filipino cultural events, gather-
ings, and celebrations or parties with their families. They might not
cooperate, contribute, assist, or participate in family projects or
efforts, and they may begin to perceive such events, celebrations,
gatherings, projects, or efforts as embarrassing, shameful, unnec-
essary, or “too Filipino” despite the fact that their family may
perceive such things as important. Because of their absence, lack
of cooperation, lack of contribution, and disrespect for such things,
these individuals may begin to bring shame to their families
(nakakahiya) or other relatives. Their parents, other relatives, and
friends may start perceiving them as someone who does not have
any gratitude (walang utang na loob) and one who does not know
how to go along with the group (walang pakisama). Thus, Filipinos
with CM may lack hiya, utang na loob, and pakikisama.
According to David (2013), family or friends may start to
express disapproval in very subtle, indirect, and unspoken ways
(nagpaparinig) with the hopes that target individuals will begin to
feel that they are doing something wrong. Individuals may still use
pakiramdam to recognize the concerns and disapproval of the
people who are subtly accusing them of lacking hiya, utang na
loob, and pakikisama. Such accusations and perceptions toward a
person, if maintained over time as the person consistently fails to
use one’s pakiramdam to sense the disapproval of family or
friends—and as the person continues to display behaviors that are
against the values of hiya, utang na loob, and pakikisama— can
lead to the person being perceived as someone without kapwa.
Over time, such a person may be avoided, looked down upon, or
marginalized, and may be called a “coconut” (brown on the out-
side, White in the inside) or “sell-out.” Empirical research supports
such a connection between colonialism’s legacies and accultura-
tion among Filipinos, with higher levels of CM being related to
lower levels of enculturation and higher levels of assimilation
(David, 2008, 2010a; David & Nadal, 2013, David & Okazaki,
2006b). These are some ways in which CM may negatively affect
kapwa, which in turn, may influence the acculturation process of
Filipino Americans.
Let us now turn to a discussion of colonialism’s and kapwa’s
links with ethnic identity, using the PAID model (Nadal, 2004) as
a guide. Filipino parents or elders who have CM and may have
damaged their kapwa may not teach children their native language
because they do not want their children to speak English with an
accent. Parents and relatives with CM may also display to children
their preference for lighter-skinned peoples and/or discriminatory
 KAPWA AND THE FILIPINO AMERICAN FAMILY
attitudes against darker-skinned peoples. Children may also be
exposed to Filipino media where the celebrities are mostly lighter-
skinned folks and hear their parents and other relatives refer to
such celebrities as “beautiful.” Children may also be asked by their
parents or relatives to stay away from the sun so their skins do not
get too dark, or see their parents and other relatives use skin
whitening products. They may hear the desires of relatives in the
Philippines to move to the U.S. to live a “better” life. Parents and
relatives with CM may also display discriminatory attitudes to-
ward other Filipinos who are not very Westernized (FOBs), Fili-
pinos in the Philippines, or anything about the Philippines in
general (e.g., “too much corruption,” “it’s too dirty,” “the pollution
is so bad”). Further, although children who are not yet old enough
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
to attend school may not have much exposure to others outside of
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
their family, they may nevertheless be exposed to such Filipino-
inferiorizing messages through TV, movies, and other forms of
media. Thus, even early in life, Filipinos may already receive
messages from their parents, other relatives, and the outside world
about the assumed superiority and desirability of anything West-
ern, and inferiority and undesirability of anything Filipino. Re-
ceiving such messages consistently from important characters in
one’s life such as parents and other family members may lead to
CM, as familial expression of CM manifestations has been shown
to be related to CM development (David & Okazaki, 2006b).
Having CM, in turn, can negatively affect the ethnic identity
development of young Filipinos.
Data suggest that these experiences are common, as 85%–90%
of Filipino immigrants in the U.S. witnessed their relatives,
friends, and other Filipinos in the Philippines display attitudes and
behaviors that denigrate the Filipino culture and ethnicity (David
& Nadal, 2013). These findings suggest that CM is highly ubiq-
uitous in the Philippines, and that the denigration of the Filipino
ethnicity and culture is commonly experienced by Filipinos in the
Philippines. Thus, Filipinos in the Philippines also receive the
message that anything Western is better than anything Filipino
early in their lives. Also, Filipinos may already regard Filipinos
and other ethnicities in a negative, deprecating, and inferior way,
and regard the dominant White group and their traits in a positive
manner. In other words, because of colonialism’s legacies (West-
ernized Philippines and colonial mentality), Stage 2 of the PAID
model may be Stage 1 for many young Filipinos, even if their
exposure to factors outside their families or exposure to the main-
stream culture that pressure them to assimilate are limited during
their early years. Further, if one perceives oppression and the
resulting assimilation as the natural cost for progress or civilization
(one aspect of CM), then it will be difficult for that person to reach
social and political awakening (Stage 3). That is, a person with CM
will be unlikely to stand up against the discrimination that they,
their group, and other oppressed groups experience (Stage 4) and
achieve ethnocentric realization (Stage 5). With this logic, it will
be difficult for Filipinos to get to the incorporation stage of the
PAID model. Thus, CM and the consequent loss of kapwa may
keep Filipinos from progressing beyond the assimilation to dom-
inant culture stage (Stage 2). Indeed, research shows that CM is
related to lower levels of ethnic identity (David, 2008, 2010a;
David & Okazaki, 2006b). Thus, it seems difficult for Filipinos
with a colonized ethnic identity to escape it or move beyond it, and
such a colonized ethnic identity may last their entire lifetime.
51
In summary, as the entirety of Figure 1 represents, colonialism
and contemporary oppression may lead to CM or internalized
oppression. The extent to which colonialism and contemporary
oppression may affect Filipinos through CM may vary, ranging
from negatively affecting surface values all the way to damaging
the core value of kapwa. The effects of colonialism and its legacies
on Filipino surface and core values may negatively influence
Filipinos’ ethnic identity development and acculturation processes.
The literature suggest that Filipinos with CM tend to not be
connected with their heritage (low enculturation), are more likely
to assimilate, and are less likely to value and participate in their
heritage culture (low ethnic identity). Assimilation and low encul-
turation and ethnic identity among Filipinos may be due to the loss
of kapwa, which in turn, may be due to colonialism and its
legacies. That is, CM may be negatively influencing Filipinos’
sense of kapwa and adherence to Filipino values, which leads to
assimilation and lower levels of enculturation and ethnic identity.
Partly due to low enculturation and poor ethnic identity, studies
(e.g., David, 2008; David & Okazaki, 2006b) also provide evi-
dence connecting CM with lower levels of life satisfaction, lower
levels of personal and collective self-esteem, and higher levels of
depression, suggesting that colonialism’s legacies continue to in-
fluence the mental health and psychological well-being of Filipi-
nos in America.
Recommendations for Researchers and
Service Providers
Know and Appreciate the Impact of Filipinos’
Colonial Past and Racialized Present
The main thesis of this article is that those of us who work with
Filipinos and their families—whether through research or service
provision—need to know their colonial history and postcolonial or
racialized modern reality, and how such intergenerational and
lived experiences shape how they perceive, feel, and behave to-
ward themselves, their family, the Filipino community and culture,
and the rest of the world. In making this point, we discussed how
the core value of kapwa—and how colonialism and CM may
negatively affect kapwa—needs to be central to our understanding
of Filipino culture and the cultural conflicts between Filipinos,
including members of the same family (e.g., parents and children).
Relatedly, CM and its effects on acculturation, ethnic identity, and
loss of culture also need to be central to our understanding of the
psychological well-being and mental health of Filipino Americans.
Marsella and Kaplan (2003) and Kleinman (1988) cited the
importance of history and context in understanding psychological
experiences, as well as acknowledging the interplay and reciproc-
ity of culture and personal experiences in diagnoses and interven-
tions. Among Filipinos, it is critical that providers are respectful
and cognizant of how indigenous cultural beliefs, and environmen-
tal factors such as colonialism, oppression, and acculturative
stress, are related to the psychological experiences and well-being
of Filipino clients (Iwamasa, 2003). For example, Tsai and
Chentsova-Dutton (2002) noted that most therapies hinge on the
Western assumption that problems reside in the individual and,
thus, emphasize personal agency and autonomy. However, as
discussed previously, this may not always be the case for Filipinos
 52 DAVID, SHARMA, AND PETALIO
because who one is and what one’s psychological experiences are
depend largely on connections (i.e., kapwa), contributions, and
loyalty to the family or community—all of which may be influ-
enced by their historical and contemporary experiences with their
environment. One example of an intervention that addresses CM’s
effects of kapwa is the Filipino American Decolonization Experi-
ence (FADE; David, 2013), which is inspired by decolonization
works (i.e., Halagao, 2004; Strobel, 2001; Tintiango-Cubales,
2009) and combined with cognitive– behavioral therapy compo-
nents.
It should be noted at this point, however, that although we
advocate for contextualizing the Filipino experience in their colo-
nial past and postcolonial present, service providers need to regard
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
CM as an individual-differences variable and to not assume that all
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Filipinos hold CM or regard oppression as a stressor. Further,
given that CM may exist and operate outside of awareness, inten-
tion, or control (David & Okazaki, 2010), some may not even be
aware of or acknowledge that historical colonialism, contemporary
oppression, and/or CM is part of their distress. Again, experiences
of oppression and CM may vary, and the goals and techniques of
services should be tailored to the unique needs of each client.
Nevertheless, providers who keep an eye for CM as potentially
contributing to clients’ concerns may demonstrate a genuine at-
tempt to understand clients’ historical and contemporary sociopo-
litical experiences. Thus, in addition to potentially identifying a
major etiological variable for their clients’ distress, paying atten-
tion to CM and kapwa may also improve rapport and eradicate
cultural mistrust on the part of the Filipino client (David, 2010b).
This positive working alliance may lead to a deeper understanding
of clients’ experiences and better outcomes. In terms of research,
David (2013) has recommended the use of Sikolohiyang Pilipino
methods such as pagtatanung-tanong (asking around), pakikipa-
muhay (living with)— data collection methods that are participa-
tory in nature and equalize power between researchers and partic-
ipants—with Filipino American samples as ways in which we can
use more natural and culturally appropriate data gathering ap-
proaches to “decolonize” research with this community.
Go Beyond the Individual and Help Make
Systemic Changes
In addition to incorporating CM and its effects on kapwa in our
conceptualizations of Filipino mental health and psychological
experiences, researchers and service providers should collaborate
in designing, implementing, and evaluating programs that are
specifically intended to decolonize Filipino mentalities (e.g., Hala-
gao, 2004; Strobel, 2001). Developing culture-specific and cultur-
ally and sociopolitically sensitive interventions may contribute
toward addressing the underutilization of mental health services by
Filipinos. Indeed, studies have found that members of this group
are less comfortable seeking mental health services even compared
with other Asian Americans (Gong, Gage, & Tacata, 2003). This
low rate of help-seeking from professional mental health services
cannot be attributed to lower rates of distress and, as research also
shows that Filipinos experience psychological distress and mental
health concerns just as much, if not more frequently, than other
Asians and other racial groups. Along with stigma, poor service
quality and cultural mistrust may also contribute to Filipinos’
disinterest in seeking mental health services (David, 2010b). For
various minority groups, several efforts have since been imple-
mented to improve services and eradicate cultural mistrust. In the
process, culturally sensitive practices for various minority groups
have gained popularity in research and service settings. However,
there is yet to be a clinical service developed specifically to meet
the cultural and sociopolitical complexities of Filipinos. As one
way to be culturally competent and effective, it is recommended
that researchers and service providers develop interventions that
specifically target CM. Not only may CM-specific interventions
lead to an improved understanding of Filipinos’ experiences, but
they may also improve rapport, reduce cultural mistrust between
service providers and clients, and lead to better therapeutic out-
comes. Such a culture-specific intervention may contribute toward
improving the effectiveness of mental health services for Filipinos,
which in turn, may contribute toward reducing the disparity in
service utilization.
There is also a need to train mental health providers who are
bilingual and culturally competent and that this training should not
be limited to Filipinos who are in the field (Iwamasa, 2003). Given
that Filipino Americans is a large and rapidly growing group (Lee
& Boyd, 2007), the responsibility of providing access to culturally
sensitive, knowledgeable service providers should not rest solely
on Filipinos (Iwamasa, 2003). That is, academic institutions that
are responsible for training service providers must also be account-
able in ensuring that their students and faculty are knowledgeable
and competent to teach about and serve Filipinos (Iwamasa, 2003).
This requires, for example, that professors, counselors, and aca-
demic advisors develop an understanding and appreciation of the
unique experiences of Filipinos (Santos & Chan, 2011). Addition-
ally, utmost care should be taken so that Filipinos are not over-
looked within the very broad group of “Asians” in terms of the
provision of institutional support through funding, scholarship,
research, services, and other opportunities. Further, efforts should
be made so that academic settings are perceived as safe venues for
them to express their concerns as well as receive and provide
support to one another (Nadal, Pituc, Johnston, & Esparrago,
2010). Nadal Pituc, Johnston, and Esparrago (2010) also found that
most Filipino American students felt that institutional support is
lacking in terms of providing scholarship and financial aid oppor-
tunities for them. As an underrepresented group, they felt that their
needs are often overlooked by colleges and universities and they
report experiencing individual, institutional, and cultural forms of
racial microaggressions (Nadal et al., 2010).
Filipinos Are Not Model Minorities
Researchers and service providers also need to appreciate the
nuances of the Filipino American experience. Because of the
model minority myth about Asian Americans (e.g., Li & Wang,
2008), Filipino Americans are often “forgotten” (Cordova, 1983)
and, if remembered, are simplistically perceived to be model
minorities just like other Asian Americans in that they suffer less
and are able to thrive better economically, academically, and
psychosocially (David, 2013; Iwamasa, 2003; Mahalingam, Balan,
& Haritatos, 2008; Nadal, 2011). From an economic standpoint,
data may indicate that Filipino Americans have higher median
income compared to other racial groups (Victoria, 2007). This
assumption, however, fails to take into account that this is often a
combined income of two or more people working in the family.
 KAPWA AND THE FILIPINO AMERICAN FAMILY
Also, although it is common to find Filipino Americans holding
two or more jobs that creates the perception of financial stability
and success, a closer examination would reveal that majority of
Filipinos who are highly trained in the fields of engineering,
medicine, and business are actually working in different and
lower-paying jobs, requiring them to find supplemental sources of
income and additional employment just to make ends meet. In-
deed, having additional employment masks the glass ceiling effect
that Filipinos encounter in the workforce (Santos & Chan, 2011).
Further, it should be noted that most Filipinos are concentrated in
metropolitan areas (e.g., California, New York, Hawaii) where
wages as well as the standard cost of living are higher (Victoria,
2007).
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
In education, Filipinos may be perceived to be doing well. This,
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
however, does not take into account whether these educational
successes were acquired in their home country or upon migrating
to their new host country. Also, despite their high level of educa-
tion, they may still not be in the same level of income status
compared to their peers for their current occupation (Nadal et al.,
2010). Further, research indicates that the high school dropout rate
among Filipino immigrants are increasing and the college admis-
sion rate of second or later generation Filipino Americans are
decreasing (Nadal et al., 2010), suggesting that they are struggling
and needing support in educational settings. The model minority
myth and the ethnic glossing of “Asian Americans” obscure these
challenges and may instead perpetuate “victim blaming” for un-
derachieving Filipino students (Li, 2005).
Psychosocially, even highly educated and assimilated Filipinos
still struggle with racism, sexism, and other forms of discrimina-
tion (Santos & Chan, 2011). Indeed, Filipinos experience oppres-
sion very frequently with 99% experiencing racism within the past
year (Alvarez & Juang, 2010). Filipinos also experience a more
subtle and more modern form of racism called racial microaggres-
sions (Nadal, Escobar, Prado, David, & Haynes, 2012), which are
common acts that send subtle messages of racism to groups and
individuals. Racial microaggressions are often unconscious and
unintentional, but may be just as psychologically damaging as
blatant forms of racism (Sue, 2010). For Filipino Americans, some
forms of microaggressions they experience include being treated
like a second-class citizen (e.g., being given substandard service or
attention compared with others), assuming that Filipinos are devi-
ant in some way (e.g., such as when others assume that a Filipino
is a criminal, gang member, or is up to no good), and assuming that
Filipinos are of inferior status or intellect (e.g., such as when
Filipino-trained professionals are treated as not being as good as
others). Those who experience microaggressions report that they
feel intense negative emotions such as anger, fear, belittlement,
rage, frustration, and alienation because of such events (Nadal et
al., 2012).
These findings make the Filipino experience—and the social
problems they face—similar to other American racial minority
groups. Indeed, the literature on other groups such as African
Americans, Alaska Natives, American Indians, and Indigenous
Canadians suggest that internalized oppression is related to do-
mestic violence and other violent crimes, substance use and abuse,
school dropouts, and high-risk behaviors that may lead to sexually
transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies (e.g., Duran &
Duran, 1995; McBride, 2003; Tatum, 1994). Interestingly, findings
from Filipino-focused research indicate similar issues such as high
53
rates of eating disorders, unintended pregnancy, HIV/AIDS, sex-
ually transmitted infections, alcohol and drug use (Nadal, 2000),
school dropouts (Nadal et al., 2010), and low rates of college
admission and graduation (Okamura, 1998). High rates of depres-
sion, suicide, incarceration, delinquency, and involvement in gang
violence have also been reported for Filipino adolescents through-
out the U.S. (see Nadal, 2011 for a review). One main similarity
between Filipinos and other racial groups is that they all experi-
enced centuries of historical and contemporary oppression. Given:
(a) the abundance of literature linking low self-esteem to depres-
sion, suicide, gang involvement, poor school performance, alcohol
and other drug use, and high-risk behaviors that may lead to
unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases; (b) the
literature on other groups linking internalized oppression to vari-
ous mental and behavioral health outcomes; and (c) the literature
Filipino CM or internalized oppression to low self-esteem and
more depression symptoms, it is possible that colonialism and its
most insidious legacy—CM—may be contributing to the mental
and behavioral health concerns that are facing Filipino families.
Conclusion
Many individuals from Filipino families— children, adoles-
cents, adults, parents, grandparents, and those who are mixed-
race— have been influenced by certain messages about American
culture and the Filipino culture for centuries. The stark contrast
between American and Filipino cultures, and the accompanying
conflicts and struggles that Filipinos encounter as they navigate
and blend them, have evolved into the complex and multicultural
Filipino family that we have today. These cultural conflicts, bal-
ancing act, blending, and potential loss of culture need to be
understood through the lens of indigenous Filipino worldview—
the lens of kapwa. We have provided a discussion of how Filipi-
nos’ collective and personal experiences of colonialism, its lega-
cies, and ethnic and cultural subjugation in the Philippines and
America may damage kapwa among Filipino individuals and Fil-
ipino families, and how such a loss of kapwa may be related to loss
of culture, loss of identity, and psychological well-being. We hope
that such a historically informed and sociopolitically contextual-
ized presentation of Filipino lives will be helpful to those who
conduct research with, or provide services to, Filipinos Ameri-
cans—a large and growing, but extremely understudied and un-
derserved population.
References
Abueva, J. (1976). Filipino democracy and the American legacy. The
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 428,
114 –133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000271627642800111
Agbayani-Siewart, P. (1994). Filipino American culture and family: Guide-
lines for practitioners. Families in Society, 75, 429 – 438.
Agbayani-Siewart, P., & Enrile, A. V. (2003). Filipino American children
and adolescents. In J. T. Gibbs (Ed.), Children of color: Psychological
interventions with culturally diverse youth (pp. 229 –264). San Fran-
cisco, CA: Wiley.
Agoncillo, T. A. (1974). Introduction to Filipino history. Quezon City,
Philippines: Garotech Publishing.
Alegría, M., Canino, G., Shrout, P. E., Woo, M., Duan, N., Vila, D., . . .
Meng, X.-L. (2008). Prevalence of mental illness in immigrant and
non-immigrant U.S. Latino groups. The American Journal of Psychiatry,
165, 359 –369. http://dx.doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2007.07040704
 54 DAVID, SHARMA, AND PETALIO
Alvarez, A. N., & Juang, L. P. (2010). Filipino Americans and racism: A
multiple mediation model of coping. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
57, 167–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019091
Atkinson, D. R., Morten, G., & Sue, D. W. (1998). Counseling American
minorities: A cross-cultural perspective. Dubuque, IA: Brown.
Berry, J. W. (2003). Conceptual approaches to acculturation. In K. M.
Chun, P. Balls-Organista, & G. Marin (Eds.), Acculturation: Advances
in theory, measurement, and applied research. Washington, DC: Amer-
ican Psychological Association. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10472-004
Borah, E. G. (1995). Filipinos in Umanumos’ California expedition of
1587. Amerasia Journal, 21, 107–118. http://dx.doi.org/10.17953/amer
.21.3.q050756h25525n72
Chan, R. (1999). Social context, adolescent misconduct and psychological
adjustment among Chinese American and Filipino American adoles-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
cents. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Choy, C. C. (2003). Empire of Care: Nursing and migration in Filipino
American history. Durham, NC: Duke University. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1215/9780822384410
Cimmarusti, R. A. (1996). Exploring aspects of Filipino-American fami-
lies. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 22, 205–217. http://dx.doi
.org/10.1111/j.1752-0606.1996.tb00199.x
Cordova, F. (1983). Filipinos: Forgotten Asian Americans. Dubuque, IA:
Kendall/Hunt.
David, E. J. R. (2008). A colonial mentality model of depression for
Filipino Americans. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology,
14, 118 –127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1099-9809.14.2.118
David, E. J. R. (2010a). Testing the validity of the Colonial Mentality
Implicit Association Test (CMIAT) and the interactive effects of covert
and overt colonial mentality on Filipino American mental health. Asian
American Journal of Psychology, 1, 31– 45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
a0018820
David, E. J. R. (2010b). Cultural mistrust and mental health help-seeking
attitudes among Filipino Americans. Asian American Journal of Psy-
chology, 1, 57– 66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0018814
David, E. J. R. (2013). Brown skin, White minds: Filipino/American
postcolonial psychology (with commentaries). Charlotte, NC: Informa-
tion Age Publishing.
David, E. J. R., & Nadal, K. L. N. (2013). The colonial context of the
Filipino American immigration experience. Cultural Diversity and Eth-
nic Minority Psychology, 19, 298 –309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
a0032903
David, E. J. R., & Okazaki, S. (2006a). Colonial mentality: A review and
recommendation for Filipino American psychology. Cultural Diversity
& Ethnic Minority Psychology, 12, 1–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
1099-9809.12.1.1
David, E. J. R., & Okazaki, S. (2006b). The Colonial Mentality Scale for
Filipino Americans: Scale construction and psychological implications.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 241–252. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1037/0022-0167.53.2.241
David, E. J. R., & Okazaki, S. (2010). Activation and automaticity of
colonial mentality. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40, 850 – 887.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00601.x
Davis, W. G. (1995). Level of acculturation of Asian American adolescents
as a predictor of depression and suicidal ideation (California School of
Professional Psychology-Fresno, CA, 1995). Dissertation Abstracts In-
ternational, 56, 2859.
de Guia, K. (2005). Kapwa: The self in the other. Worldviews and lifestyles
of Filipino culture-bearers. Pasig City, Philippines: Anvil Publishing.
Duran, E., & Duran, B. (1995). Native American postcolonial psychology.
Albany, NY: State University of New York.
Enriquez, V. G. (1994). From colonial to liberation psychology: The
Philippine experience. Manila, Philippines: De La Salle University
Press.
Espiritu, Y. L. (2003). Home bound: Filipino American lives across
cultures, communities, and countries. Los Angeles, CA: University of
California Press.
Fu, X. (2008). Interracial marriage and family socio-economic well being:
Equal status exchange or caste status exchange. The Social Science
Journal, 45, 132–155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2007.12.008
Gong, F., Gage, S. L., & Tacata, L. A. (2003). Helpseeking behavior
among Filipino Americans: A cultural analysis of face and language.
Journal of Community Psychology, 31, 469 – 488. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1002/jcop.10063
Guthrie, G., & Jacobs, P. (1966). Child-rearing and personality in the
Philippines. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University.
Halagao, P. E. (2004). Holding up the mirror: The complexity of seeing
your ethnic self in history. Theory and Research in Social Education, 32,
459 – 483. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2004.10473265
Heras, P., & Revilla, L. A. (1994). Acculturation, generational status, and
family environment of Pilipino Americans: A study in cultural adapta-
tion. Family Therapy, 21, 129 –138.
Hoeffel, E. M., Rastogi, S., Kim, M. O., & Shahid, H. (2012). The Asian
population: 2010. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census. Re-
trieved from http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-11
.pdf
Ignacio, A., de la Cruz, E., Emmanuel, J., & Toribio, J. (2004). The
forbidden book: The Philippine-American war in political cartoons. San
Francisco, CA: T’boli Publishing.
Iwamasa, G. (2003). Psychological treatment of ethnic minority popula-
tions. Washington, DC: Council of National Psychological Associations
for the Advancement of Ethnic Minority Interests.
Kitano, H. H. L., Fujino, D. C., & Sato, J. T. (1998). Interracial marriages:
Where are the Asian Americans and where are they going? In L. C. Lee
& N. W. S. Zane (Eds.), Handbook of Asian American psychology (pp.
233–260). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kleinman, A. (1988). Rethinking psychiatry. New York, NY: The Free
Press.
Le, C. N. (2009). Interracial dating and marriage/U.S.-raised. Asian-nation:
The landscape of Asian America. Retrieved from http://www.asian-
nation.org/interracial2.shtml
Le, C. N. (2014). “The 1965 Immigration Act” Asian-Nation: The Land-
scape of Asian America. Retrieved from http://www.asian-nation.org/
1965-immigration-act.shtml
Lee, S., & Boyd, M. (2007). Marrying out: Comparing the marital and
societal integration of Asians in the U.S. and Canada. Social Science
Research, 37, 311–329.
Li, G. (2005.). Other people’s success: Impact of the “model minority
myth” on underachieving Asian students in North America. MSU. Re-
trieved from https://www.msu.edu/~liguo/file/KEDI%20Journal-
Guofang%20Li%202005%5B1%5D.pdf
Li, G., & Wang, L. (2008). Model minority myth revisited: An interdisci-
plinary approach to demystifying Asian American educational experi-
ences. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Liebkind, K., & Jasinskaja-Lahti, I. (2000). Acculturation and psycholog-
ical well-being among immigrant adolescents in Finland: A comparative
study of adolescents from different cultural backgrounds. Journal of
Adolescent Research, 15, 446 – 469. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0743
558400154002
Mahalingam, R., Balan, S., & Haritatos, J. (2008). Engendering immigrant
psychology: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, 59, 326 –336.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9495-2
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications
for cognition, emotion and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224 –
253. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224
Marsella, A., & Kaplan, A. (2003). Cultural considerations for understand-
 KAPWA AND THE FILIPINO AMERICAN FAMILY
ing, assessing, and treating depressive experience and disorder. In M. A.
Reinecke & M. R. Davison, (Eds.), Comparative treatment of depression
(pp. 47–78). New York, NY: Springer Publishing.
McBride, B. A. (2003). Aspects of community healing: Experiences of the
Sault Sainte Marie tribe of Chippewa Indians. American Indian and
Alaska Native Mental Health Research, 11, 67– 83. http://dx.doi.org/10
.5820/aian.1101.2003.67
Montoya, C. A. (1997). Living in the shadows: The undocumented immi-
grant experience of Filipinos. In M. P. P. Root (Ed.), Filipino Ameri-
cans: Transformation and identity (pp. 112–120). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452243177.n8
Nadal, K. L. (2000). F/Pilipino American substance abuse: Sociocultural
factors and methods of treatment. Journal of Alcohol and Drug Educa-
tion, 46, 26 –36.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Nadal, K. L. (2004). Pilipino American identity development model. Jour-
nal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 32, 44 – 61. http://dx
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
.doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2004.tb00360.x
Nadal, K. L. (2011). Filipino American psychology: A handbook of theory,
research, and clinical practice. New York, NY: Wiley. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1002/9781118094747
Nadal, K. L., Escobar, K. M., Prado, G., David, E. J. R., & Haynes, K.
(2012). Racial Microaggressions and the Filipino American Experience:
Recommendations for counseling and development. Journal of Multi-
cultural Counseling and Development, 40, 156 –173. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1002/j.2161-1912.2012.00015.x
Nadal, K. L., Pituc, S., Johnston, M. P., & Esparrago, T. (2010). Over-
coming the model minority myth: Experiences of Filipino American
graduate students. Journal of College Student Development, 51, 694 –
706. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/csd.2010.0023
Ogbu, J. U., & Simons, H. D. (1998). Voluntary and involuntary minori-
ties: A cultural-ecological theory of school performance with some
implications for education. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 29,
155–188. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/aeq.1998.29.2.155
Okamura, J. Y. (1998). Imagining the Filipino American diaspora: Trans-
national relations, identities, and communities. New York, NY: Garland.
Ordoñez, R. Z. (1997). Mail-order brides: An emerging community. In
M. P. P. Root (Ed.), Filipino Americans: Transformation and identity
(pp. 121–142). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Pe-Pua, R., & Protacio-Marcelino, E. A. (2000). Sikolohiyang Pilipino
(Filipino Psychology): A legacy of Virgilio G. Enriquez. Asian Journal
of Social Psychology, 50, 49 –71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-839X
.00054
Phinney, J. (1992). The multigroup ethnic identity measure: A new scale
for use with adolescents and young adults from diverse groups. Journal
of Adolescent Research, 7, 156 –176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
074355489272003
Posadas, B. M. (1999). The new American series: The Filipino Americans.
Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Roccas, S., Horenczyk, G., & Schwartz, S. H. (2000). Acculturation
discrepancies and well-being: The moderating role of conformity. Eu-
ropean Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 323–334. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(200005/06)30:3⬍323::AID-EJSP992⬎3.0.CO;
2-5
Rodriguez, F. I. (1997). Filipino Americans and ecology: New challenges
in the global future. In M. P. P. Root (Ed.), Filipino Americans: Trans-
formation and identity (pp. 316 –323). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://
dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452243177.n22
Root, M. P. P. (1997). Contemporary mixed-heritage Filipino Americans:
Fighting colonized identities. In M. P. P. Root’s (Ed.), Filipino Ameri-
cans: Transformation and identity (pp. 80 –94). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Root, M. P. P. (2005). Filipino families. In M. McGoldrick, J. Giordano, &
N. Garcia-Preto (Eds.), Ethnicity and family therapy (3rd ed., pp. 319 –
331). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
55
Rungduin, T., Rungduin, D. C., Aninacion, J. G., Catindig, R. B., Jr., &
Gallogo, L. S. (2016). The Filipino character strength of utang na loob:
Exploring contextual associations with gratitude. International Journal
of Research Studies in Psychology, 5, 13–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.5861/
ijrsp.2015.1322
Salvador, D. S., Omizo, M. M., & Kim, B. S. K. (1997). Bayanihan:
Providing effective counseling strategies with children of Filipino an-
cestry. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 25, 201–
209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.1997.tb00330.x
Santos, R. A. (1983). The social and emotional development of Filipino-
American children. In G. J. Powell (Ed.), The psychosocial development
of minority group children (pp. 131–146). New York, NY: Brunner/
Mazel.
Santos, R. M., & Chan, S. (2011). Families with Filipino roots. In E. W.
Lynch & M. J. Hanson (Eds.), Developing cross-cultural competence: A
guide for working with children and their families (4th ed., pp. 319 –
356). Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.
Sicat, G. P. (2012). Filipino labor migration. Retrieved from http://www
.econ.upd.edu.ph/perse/?p⫽1583
Strobel, L. M. (2001). Coming full circle: The process of decolonization
among post-1965 Filipino Americans. Quezon City, Philippines: Giraffe
Books.
Sue, D. W. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life: Race, gender, and
sexual orientation. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley and Sons.
Tatum, B. (1994). The colonial model as a theoretical explanation of crime
and delinquency. In A. T. Sulton (Ed.), African American perspectives
on crime, causation, criminal justice administration, and crime preven-
tion (pp. 33–52). Woburn, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Terrazas, A. (2008). Migration Information Source—Filipino Immigrants
in the United States. Retrieved from http://www.migrationinformation
.org/usfocus/display.cfm?ID⫽694
Tintiangco-Cubales, A. (2009). Pin@y Educational Partnerships: A Fili-
pina/o American studies sourcebook: Vol. II. Filipina/o American Iden-
tities, Activism, and Service. Santa Clara, CA: Phoenix Publishing House
International.
Triandis, H. C. (2001). Individualism-collectivism and personality. Journal
of Personality, 69, 907–924. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494
.696169
Tsai, J. L., & Chentsova-Dutton, Y. (2002). Understanding depression
across cultures. In I. Gotlib & C. Hammen (Eds.), Handbook of depres-
sion (pp. 467– 491). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Uba, L. (1994). Asian Americans: Personality patterns, identity, and men-
tal health. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Victoria, N. A. (2007). A⫹ does not mean all Asians: The model minority
myth and implications for higher education. Retrieved from http://www
.uvm.edu/~vtconn/v28/Victoria.pdf
Wong, S. L. (2001). Depression level in inner-city Asian American ado-
lescent: The contributions of cultural orientation and interpersonal rela-
tionships. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, Spe-
cial Issue, 3, 49 – 64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J137v03n03_05
Yacat, J. (2013). Filipino psychology (Sikolohiyang Pilipino). In K. D.
Keith (Ed.), The encyclopedia of cross-cultural psychology (pp. 551–
556). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/
9781118339893.wbeccp224
Zong, J., & Batalova, J. (2016). Frequently requested statistics on immi-
grants and immigration in the United States. Migration Policy Institute.
Retrieved from http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/frequently-
requested-statistics-immigrants-and-immigration-united-states
Received May 2, 2016
Revision received December 3, 2016
Accepted December 22, 2016 䡲