Kunst, J. R. (2021) Are we facing a “causality crisis” in acculturation research? The need for a methodolo

The paper, in plain language

A definition the methods don't honour

Every major acculturation model speaks the language of change, process and consequence — causal language. But the field runs overwhelmingly on cross-sectional self-report surveys, which cannot carry that weight. In this single-authored editorial, invited as an International Academy for Intercultural Research award paper, I argue that central theories, the integration hypothesis foremost, presuppose causal relations they have never robustly demonstrated.

The argument and the pushback

The piece connects the weak and heterogeneous meta-analytic evidence for the integration hypothesis to this design problem and recommends a methodological (r)evolution built primarily on experimental and longitudinal work. It drew a published rebuttal from Dmitry Grigoryev and John Berry — the architect of the dominant framework — who counter that acculturation models are structural rather than causal and that heterogeneity across diverse groups is a feature, not a defect. I read that exchange as the point: the field is now arguing about its evidentiary standards in the open.

Why it matters

Integration policies affecting millions rest on this literature; whether its correlations reflect causation is not an academic nicety. The critique animates my subsequent work — the longitudinal meta-analyses, the heterogeneity rejoinder, and the cultural-evolution framework that specifies mechanisms one could actually test. This summary draws on the paper's abstract and the published rebuttal's characterization of it, as the full text remains behind access barriers.