From undifferentiated to defined: a mixed-methods, data-driven investigation of the acculturation of culturally undifferentiated majority members
A large share of majority-group members say that neither their own culture nor other cultures matter much to them. With Lucille Gibert, Katharina Addington-Lefringhausen and Justine Dandy, I looked inside this 'undifferentiated' group among 316 White British adults and found two orientations: a larger Humanistic one, whose neutrality reflects identification with all of humanity, and a smaller Detached one, for whom culture is not a basis for belonging.
The paper, in plain language
The group that fits no box
Research on how majority-group members acculturate describes two dimensions: maintaining one's heritage culture and adopting elements of other cultures. Again and again, a sizeable group — from 15 to over 50 per cent depending on the context — shows no pronounced preference on either. This undifferentiated pattern sits uneasily in the classic four-strategy model of acculturation, and it is not the same as marginalisation, the rejection of both cultures. What it actually is has remained open: passive indifference, or a neutral kind of tolerance?
How we looked
We screened 1,502 White British adults on Prolific and invited those who scored below the midpoint on both dimensions to a second survey. It measured, among other things, identification with all humanity, views on diversity, political orientation and contact with immigrants, and it asked open questions: what culture means, which cultural groups people feel they belong to, how society should deal with diversity. A latent profile analysis searched for subgroups, and two coders independently coded the written answers. The study was preregistered and exploratory.
Two profiles
The larger, Humanistic profile (242 people) was more politically liberal, identified more strongly with all humanity, had more frequent and more positive contact with immigrants, and supported equity and inclusion more. They also scored higher on adopting other cultures, though still neutral in absolute terms. The smaller, Detached profile (74 people) reported more reflection on cultural identity and somewhat more essentialist views of culture, and more often said that contact with other cultures had not influenced them. They placed themselves in the political centre and judged the consequences of diversity neutrally rather than negatively. The two did not differ in how much they maintained their heritage culture, about half in each said they belonged to no cultural group, and openly negative views on immigration were rare even among the Detached.
What follows, and what does not
Neutrality on a questionnaire can mean different things: a commitment to shared humanity that refuses to rank cultures, or a distance from culture as a category. If the pattern replicates, acculturation models for majority members could distinguish these two orientations instead of one residual box. The caveats are real. This is one country and an online sample; the Detached group is small; the essentialism measure was unreliable; and a stricter statistical criterion would have favoured four profiles rather than two. We present the two profiles as a starting point, not as a definitive taxonomy.