See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/233093957

An examination of the validity of the Subjective Vitality Questionnaire

Article  in  Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development · February 2009

DOI: 10.1080/01434630802369452

CITATIONS READS

41 516

3 authors, including:

Valerie Barker Howard NOTE: SCOtton is not the co-author Giles

San Diego State University University of California, Santa Barbara
32 PUBLICATIONS   773 CITATIONS    339 PUBLICATIONS   11,499 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Culture and Intergenerational Communication View project

communication accommodation theory, language attitudes, comm & aging, police-community relations, intergroup comm & dance...and dress styles View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Howard NOTE: SCOtton is not the co-author Giles on 12 September 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 AUTHOR’S QUERY SHEET
Author(s): J.R. Abrams et al. RMMM 337112
Article title:
Article no:

Dear Author

The following queries have arisen during the editing of your manuscript and
are identified on the proofs. Unless advised otherwise, please submit all
corrections using the CATS online correction form.

F
AQ1 Please provide full reference details for [Ytsma, Viladot, and Giles

O
(1985)].
AQ2 Please check the value in Table [1].

O
PR
D
TE
EC
R
R
O
C
N
U
 Y:/Taylor & Francis/RMMM/Articles/RMMM337112/RMMM337112.3d[x] Friday 28th November 2008 21:26:3 Ce: Dj

Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development

Vol. 00, No. 0, Month 2008, 1
14

An examination of the validity of the Subjective Vitality Questionnaire

Jessica R. Abramsa*, Valerie Barkerb, and Howard Gilesc
a
Department of Communication Studies, California State University, Long Beach, USA;
b
Department of Communication, California State University, San Diego, USA; cDepartment of
5 Communication, University of California, Santa Barbara, USA
(Received 18 April 2008; final version received 08 July 2008)

F
The concept of group vitality was developed over 30 years ago to assist in

O
understanding of power relations between language groups. However, vitality has
also been an important consideration when attempting to understand intergroup
10 relations more generally. Vitality researchers distinguish subjective vitality from

O
objective vitality. This study focuses on subjective vitality. Specifically, the paper
examines the validity of the Subjective Vitality Questionnaire (SVQ), the

PR
instrument frequently utilised to quantitatively assess vitality perceptions. Data
collected in the USA from three ethnic groups (African Americans, Asian
15 Americans and Hispanic Americans) who rated the vitalities of Caucasian,
African, and Hispanic Americans, were analysed using both first-order con-
firmatory factor analysis and exploratory factor analysis. Both types of analysis
failed to uncover the underlying factor structure of status, demography, and
D
institutional support proposed by vitality researchers. Although the factors could
20 not be validated, when the SVQ was analysed as a unidimensional measure, it
TE
posted strong reliability. The discussion offers suggestions on how to improve the
SVQ in future research.
Keywords: ethnolinguistic vitality; subjective vitality; status; demography;
institutional support; African Americans; Hispanic Americans; Asian Americans
EC

25 Introduction
Ethnolinguistic vitality was introduced by Giles, Bourhis, and Taylor (1977) as an
R

attempt to understand the complexity of intergroup relations between linguistic

groups. Reasoning that intergroup relations do not occur in a vacuum, they
R

contended that there were three-related sociostructural factors that influence group
30 vitality, specifically, the group’s status, demographic indicators and level of institu-
O

tional support. Giles, Bourhis, and Taylor (1977) claimed that vitality can be
evaluated both objectively and subjectively. In other words, a group’s status,
C

demography, and institutional support can be measured by actual statistics or by

individuals’ perceptions. With regard to the latter, group members may perceive that
N

35 they have less social status (relative to outgroup members) than the quantitative/
objective data suggest. Subsequently, vitality researchers constructed the ‘Subjective
U

Vitality Questionnaire’ (SVQ) (Bourhis, Giles, and Rosenthal 1981) as a measure-

ment instrument.

*Corresponding author. Email: jabrams@csulb.edu

ISSN 0143-4632 print/ISSN 1747-7557 online

# 2008 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/01434630802369452
http://www.informaworld.com
 Y:/Taylor & Francis/RMMM/Articles/RMMM337112/RMMM337112.3d[x] Friday 28th November 2008 21:26:3

2 J.R. Abrams et al.

Over the years, research has clearly demonstrated the relevance of vitality to the
40 intergroup arena, however, interest in how subjective vitality is measured has been
sparse. With this in mind, the present investigation focuses on the psychometric
properties of the SVQ (for an alternative measure see Allard and Landry 1986). The
focus on subjective vitality is significant because vitality researchers claim that
‘subjective vitality data may provide advance indication that a particular minority
45 group is to mobilise in an ethnic revival phase not otherwise foreseeable solely on the
basis of ‘‘objective’’ vitality information’ (Bourhis, Giles, and Rosenthal 1981, 147).
As well, Giles (2001, 1) stated more recently that ‘the real intent, and challenge, of the
vitality framework was, however to provide a subjective assessment of how members
of ethnic collectivities judged societal conditions impinging on their own and relevant
50 outgroups’.
Since vitality was originally conceived to understand the use of language, the

F
literature is replete with examinations of perceptions of ethnolinguistic vitality in the

O
USA (e.g. Barker et al. 2001; Gao, Schmidt, and Gudykunst 1994; Kristiansen,
Harwood, and Giles 1991), as well as around the world (e.g. Ellinger 2000; Yagmur,
de Bot, and Korzilius 1999). Research suggests that subjective vitality perceptions

O
55
influence language acquisition and bilingual development on the part of subordinate
groups’ (see also Cenoz and Valencia 1993; Clachar 1997; Clément 1980; Garrett,

PR
Giles, and Coupland 1989; Giles and Byrne 1982; Hamers and Blanc 1982, 1989;
Landry and Allard 1991, 1992, 1994a) and subordinate groups’ language main-
60 tenance and loss (e.g. Giles, Leets, and Coupland 1990; Landry and Bourhis, 1997;
Leets and Giles 1995; Yagmur, de Bot, and Korzilius 1999). Vitality is not static, but
D
rather a malleable social construction that is affected by social group membership,
context, and sociopolitical circumstances. Moreover, consistent with vitality
researchers’ predictions, the more vitality individuals consider their social group to
TE
65 possess, the more likely they will invest their energies in preserving the ingroup’s
identity, activities, and influences (see also Landry and Bourhis 1997; Leets and Giles
1995; Sachdev and Bourhis 1993).
EC

As vitality assessments can have major repercussions for the intergroup setting, it
is not surprising that vitality has developed from a major concept of ethnolinguistic
70 identity theory (e.g. Giles and Johnson 1987) to an evolving theory in its own right
(Harwood, Giles, and Bourhis 1994) and has been used to account for intergroup
R

behaviour across a range of settings (see Abrams 2008; Barker and Giles 2002; Giles
et al. 2000; Florack and Piontkowski 1997; Harwood et al. 1994; Kramarae 1981;
R

Mays et al. 1992). Therefore, given vitality researchers’ concentration on subjective

75 assessments of vitality, and the significance of vitality to intergroup relations, a
O

concentrated effort to examine the SVQ is important. Here, SVQ data from three
ethnic groups in the USA will be factor analysed and compared. Based on results
C

from the analyses, suggestions for a revised measurement of subjective vitality will be
offered. First though, a more detailed description and discussion of the theoretical
N

80 underpinnings and research findings with regard to intergroup vitality are necessary.
U

Vitality
Based on the premise of social identity theory (SIT; Tajfel and Turner 1979, 1986),
which contends that individuals strive for positive group identity, ethnolinguistic
vitality relates to the social comparison process language group members use to
85 determine their place in the linguistic group pecking order. By examining their
 Y:/Taylor & Francis/RMMM/Articles/RMMM337112/RMMM337112.3d[x] Friday 28th November 2008 21:26:3

Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 3

position in a particular context, whether it is in relation to status, demography, or

institutional support, group members are able to gauge how they fare in comparison
to relative outgroups (see Figure 1). Status consists of four variables that pertain to
the prestige of the group. Economic status encompasses the degree of control that a
90 group has gained over its economic life. Social status describes the degree of esteem a
group affords itself. Sociohistorical status addresses whether the group has a prideful
or shameful past. Language status refers to the prestige of a group’s language and
culture. A group possesses high status if it has economic control over its destiny,
consensually high collective-esteem, and pride in its past.
95 Demography comprises the distribution and sheer number of group members
(Giles, Bourhis, and Taylor 1977). Eight variables contribute to the demographic
vitality of a group. Group distribution is the numeric concentration of group members

F
in a particular territory, country, or region, their proportion relative to outgroup
members, and whether the group occupies its own traditional or national homeland.

O
100 Number factors refer to the absolute number of group members, a group’s birth rate in
relation to the outgroup(s), the extent to which mixed-marriages between ingroups

O
and outgroups take place, and whether large numbers immigrate to or emigrate from
the group. Guided by the notion of strength in numbers, large groups possess more

PR
vitality.
105 Institutional support means the degree to which a group has gained formal and
informal representation in the various institutions of a nation, region, or community,
namely government, industry, mass media, education, religious, political, and cultural
domains (Giles, Bourhis, and Taylor 1977). Groups that have both formal and
D
informal support have considerable leverage, and hence, high vitality.
110 The more strength members of a group have on each of the three dimensions, the
TE
more vitality they are considered to possess (Kraemer 1992; Landry, Allard, and
Theberge 1991). According to Giles, Bourhis, and Taylor (1977), a group’s strengths
EC
R
R
O
C
N
U

Figure 1. The vitality construct. Source: Bourhis, Giles, and Rosenthal (1981).
 Y:/Taylor & Francis/RMMM/Articles/RMMM337112/RMMM337112.3d[x] Friday 28th November 2008 21:26:4

4 J.R. Abrams et al.

on each of the three domains can be assessed so as to provide a classification of low,

medium, or high vitality. Groups with high vitality are likely to prosper and flourish,
115 whereas groups with low vitality are likely to atrophy, and ultimately disappear as
distinct entities (Giles and Johnson 1981).

Subjective Vitality Questionnaire (SVQ)

Although research has established the heuristic value of vitality as a concept, explicit
attention has yet to be paid to the SVQ’s success in measuring it (see the debate,
120 Husband and Khan 1982; Johnson, Giles, and Bourhis 1983). Perhaps, the SVQ has
not been examined in detail because in one of the first attempts to validate the
measure, the researchers were able to confirm the posited structure fairly convin-
cingly albeit with four factors. Specifically, when Giles, Rosenthal, and Young (1985)

F
investigated vitality by looking at Greek, Australians and Anglo Australians, four

O
125 factors emerged from the data (institutional support and power, demography I,
status, and demography II). Since these results provided a relatively strong validation
for the SVQ, there was little reason to challenge or reconsider the measure. Now that

O
more than two decades have past, numerous studies utilising the SVQ have resulted in
a variety of outcomes that make it pertinent to revisit the measure and critically

PR
130 examine its psychometric properties.
Close inspection of the literature reveals that researchers rarely examine the
underlying structure of the data when using the SVQ. In cases where this has
happened, some weaknesses emerge. First, when researchers have examined the
D
validity of the SVQ, they have not consistently been able to confirm a three-factor
135 solution. For example, when Currie and Hogg (1994) factor analysed their data on
social adaptation among Vietnamese refugees in Australia using the SVQ, a six-
TE
factor solution emerged. However, three of the six were indistinct and contributed
minimally to the total variance, and therefore, what remained was a three-factor
solution. Importantly, the remaining factor structure did not confirm the three
EC

140 separate vitality factors. In their words, the factors reflect: (1) political and economic
vitality; (2) language vitality; and (3) cultural and religious vitality rather than the
expected vitality factors of status, demography, and institutional support. Similarly,
in their work using the SVQ to address relative vitality, Kraemer, Olshtain, and
R

Badier’s (1994) factor analysis produced a four-factor solution (although the fourth
145 factor only comprised one item). Their data produced two status factors, group status
R

and language/cultural status factor, and a demography factor.

Some research attests to the reliability of the SVQ without first examining the
O

validity. For example, in their investigation of the relationship between ethnolinguis-

tic vitality and second language proficiency, Labrie and Clément (1986, 279) report
C

150 that the ‘internal consistency reliability coefficients obtained for the perceived vitality
scales support the reliability of the corresponding construct’. However, since only one
N

Cronbach alpha (0.85) is reported and the intercorrelations between subscales are
described rather than subscale reliabilities, the data do not appear to have been factor
U

analysed. In other words, the underlying structure of the data was not validated.
155 Failure to confirm the three factors appears to be somewhat common when using
the SVQ (see Allard and Landry 1994; Clément 1986; Ytsma, Viladot, and Giles
AQ1 1985). Indeed, in commenting on the structure of the vitality construct, Sachdev and
Bourhis (1993, 39) stated that even ‘after fifteen years of vitality research only a few
studies have assessed the factorial structure of subjective vitality’. One exception is
 Y:/Taylor & Francis/RMMM/Articles/RMMM337112/RMMM337112.3d[x] Friday 28th November 2008 21:26:4

Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 5

160 Willemyns, Pittam, and Gallois’s (1993, 494) examination of perceived ethnolinguis-
tic vitality of Vietnamese and English in Australia. Using confirmatory factor
analysis (CFA), they were able to validate the three indicators of vitality. However,
several items posted low loadings, and more important only 12 of the 19 items on the
SVQ were included and analysed. Given that the researchers handpicked the 12
165 items, the outcome is not particularly surprising. Even so, they acknowledge that
‘some variables clearly worked better than others . . . Part of this problem is probably
due to unreliability in the measures. . .’.
A related shortcoming of the SVQ is that the items do not consistently load on
their intended factor (Hogg, d’Agata, and Abrams 1989; Kraemer, Olshtain, and
170 Badier 1994). For instance, Currie and Hogg (1994) found that items designated to
load on specific factors, loaded on other factors, and some items had multiple
loadings on factors (e.g. education and mass media). And, although the overall

F
reliability for the entire 21-item scale was convincing (Cronbach’s Alpha 0.88; see

O
also Giles et al. 2000; Harwood et al. 1994; Ytsma, Viladot, and Giles 1994), the
175 reliability of the three subscales was low (0.59, 0.65, and 0.71). In reaction to their
trouble validating SVQ, Landry and Allard (1994b) remarked that it was difficult to

O
untangle the three factors. This is possibly why many researchers who used the SVQ
have analysed the items separately rather than multidimensionally, as originally

PR
constructed (e.g. Gibbons and Ashcroft 1995; Giles, Rosenthal, and Young 1985;
180 Karahan 2004; Yagmur and Kroon 2003; Young, Giles, and Pierson 1986). After
Bourhis and Sachdev (1984, 124) analysed their data in this manner, they concluded
that ‘more basic empirical work remains to be done to establish the internal and
D
external validity of the Subjective Vitality Questionnaire’.
There is little doubt that the SVQ has contributed to the understanding of
intergroup relations and that the three factors
status, demography, and institutional
TE
185
support
are conceptually robust because the essence of the original conceptualisa-
tion has been widely supported by research. Still, research using the SVQ clearly
reveals some ambiguities with regard to operationalisation in particular, whether the
EC

SVQ can effectively uncover three dimensions with the expected items loading on
190 them. Although, some researchers were able to uncover a factor solution using the
SVQ, to date no empirical evidence truly validates the three-factor solution. The
present study then represents a definitive attempt to validate the SVQ. Specifically,
R

the vitality perceptions of three ethnic groups in the USA were investigated using the
SVQ.
R
O

195 Method
Two versions (items were reverse ordered to avoid response fatigue) of an 83-item
C

questionnaire were administered to undergraduate students (all US citizens)

enrolled in communication courses at universities and community colleges in
N

Southern California. Some of the data from the questionnaire have been previously
200 published. The sample reflects self-identified African Americans’ (n154; age range
U

16
38, M22.17, SD6.18; 63% female), Hispanic Americans’ (n 162; age

range18
41, M20.7, SD4.10, 73.5% female), and Asian Americans’ (n114;
age range17
49, M20.9, SD4.28; 58% female) perceptions of subjective vitality
of Caucasians, African Americans, and Hispanic Americans in the USA.1 Some
205 students earned course credit for their involvement. Participation was voluntary,
and responses were anonymous.
 Y:/Taylor & Francis/RMMM/Articles/RMMM337112/RMMM337112.3d[x] Friday 28th November 2008 21:26:4

6 J.R. Abrams et al.

Perceptions of group vitality

The SVQ (Bourhis, Giles, and Rosenthal 1981) items were modified to reflect ethnic
and racial groups for this study. For example, the item ‘How well-represented are the
210 following languages in Melbourne mass media (e.g. TV, radio, newspapers)’ on
the original SVQ was changed to ‘How well-represented are the following groups
in the U.S. mass media (e.g. TV, radio, newspapers)’. Participants answered questions
regarding their perceptions of status, demography, and institutional support for all
three ethnic groups (African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Caucasians).
215 Items (except the estimated percentage population question) were closed-ended and
asked participants to respond on a seven-point Likert-like measure. The order in
which the ethnic groups appeared was counterbalanced to avoid a response set.

F
Factor analyses

O
The approach was two pronged. First, for each of the ethnic groups (African
220 Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans), a first-order CFA of the

O
vitality measures (using structural equation modeling) was undertaken for all three
groups assessed in the questionnaire (African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and

PR
Caucasians). CFA is used to determine if the number of factors and their indicator
variables conform to a priori expectations. That is, it is used to determine if measures
225 created to represent latent variables (the three factors associated with vitality) load
together appropriately and that the three dimensions are related (as would be
expected in this case). This is sometimes referred to as a measurement model because
D
the goal is to assess the value or otherwise of the measures used as indicators of latent
(unmeasured) variables. The model is then evaluated using goodness-of-fit measures.
TE
230 Next, in order to assess if the indicators would load as expected when they were
free to load on any factor, exploratory factor analyses (EFA) were conducted of the
ethnic groups’ (African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans)
EC

vitality perceptions of African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Caucasians.

EFA is used to find a latent structure of observed variables by uncovering the
235 underlying common structure (Park, Dailey, and Lemus 2002). Three EFAs were
conducted for each ethnic group, where the number of factors retained were those
R

posting eigen values of greater than one. Maximum likelihood was chosen as the
means of extraction to allow for optimal goodness-of-fit (Costello and Osborne 2005;
R

Park, Dailey, and Lemus 2002). And finally, direct oblimin as an oblique method of
240 rotation was employed because of the assumption that the factors were likely to be
O

correlated (Costello and Osborne 2005). As suggested by Tabachnick and Fidell

(2001) as a rule of thumb for minimum loading, 0.32 was specified in all cases.
C

Results
N

Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) (African American, Hispanic American, and

245 Asian American Data)
U

A total of nine CFAs were conducted of the ethnic groups’ (African Americans,
Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans) vitality perceptions of African Amer-
icans, Hispanic Americans, and Caucasians. Only two of the nine CFAs owned
indicators that loaded on their factors as expected and posted even acceptable fit
250 (African American vitality assessments of African Americans and Hispanic American
 Y:/Taylor & Francis/RMMM/Articles/RMMM337112/RMMM337112.3d[x] Friday 28th November 2008 21:26:4

Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 7

vitality assessments of African Americans). That said, these models showed that the
relationship between perceptions about status and perceptions of institutional
support was exceptionally strong (standardised regression coefficients 0.99, 0.95,
respectively), a pattern closely mirrored in the remaining models. This suggests that
255 these factors were not discrete; in other words, they overlapped to such an extent that
they were almost collinear. With regard to the remaining seven CFAs, their most
common shortcoming was that many or all of the demography indictors did not load
at all on that factor. All of the coefficients relating to each confirmatory model are
shown in Table 1, and the goodness-of-fit statistics are shown in Table 2.

260 Exploratory factor analyses (EFAs) (African American, Hispanic American, and

F
Asian American Data)
As in the case of the CFAs, nine EFAs were conducted
three for each of the three

O
ethnic groups in the sample: African Americans’, Hispanic Americans’, and Asian
Americans’ vitality perceptions of African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and

O
265 Caucasians. The results indicated that the percentage of variance accounted for
ranged from 40 to 54%, and the number of factors produced ranged from four to five,

PR
with five being the most common. One factor model converged after only six
iterations, other models needed several more (in one case 23), and two models failed
to converge after 25 iterations (African Americans’ assessments of Hispanic
270 Americans’ vitality and Asian Americans’ assessments of African Americans’
vitality). Obviously, the failure to produce a pattern matrix within these data is
D
problematic. In the pattern matrixes that did result, the outcomes partially mirrored
the findings from the CFAs: the three-factor structure could not be confirmed; many
TE
items did not consistently load on their appropriate factor (as shown in Figure 1) and
275 some items split-loaded, loaded negatively on the factors, or did not load on any
factor.2 These outcomes and their implications are addressed in more detail in the
EC

discussion section.

Discussion
R

The original intention of the SVQ was to provide a means of measuring subjective
280 linguistic group vitality perceptions with regard to demographic indicators, status,
R

and institutional support. However, since its inception, this instrument has been used
in a variety of intergroup contexts to assess social comparison processes in relation to
O

group vitality. The goal here has been to assess and discuss the validity of the SVQ.
After analysing responses to the SVQ from participants of a variety of ethnic
backgrounds, the three factors
status, demography, and institutional support

C

285
could not be validated. Specifically, in an effort to identify the vitality structure (see
Figure 1), the data were factor analysed using two methods. First, CFAs for each
N

sample were conducted in an attempt to confirm the expected factor structure. The
two most common outcomes from these factor analyses were that the demographic
U

290 indicators did not load together (See Table 1) and that when the status and
institutional support indicators did load significantly, the resulting factors often
appeared to be collinear. In short, this suggests that these SVQ items were not
measuring discrete latent variables but essentially provided a unidimensional measure
of overall vitality perceptions.
 8

Y:/Taylor & Francis/RMMM/Articles/RMMM337112/RMMM337112.3d[x] Friday 28th November 2008 21:26:5

Table 1. Confirmatory factor analysis: standardized regression weights.

J.R. Abrams et al.

U Regression weights
N African Americans Hispanic Americans Asian Americans

Latent variable indicators AA Hispanic Caucasian AA Hispanic Caucasian AA Hispanic Caucasian

Demography
C
Emigrate
Immigrate
O 0.29
0.31
(n.s.)
0.31
(n.s.)
(n.s.)
0.46
0.21
0.47
0.24
(n.s.)
(n.s.)
(n.s.)
(n.s.)
0.29
(n.s.)
(n.s.)
(n.s.)
Minority/majority 0.61
R (n.s.) (n.s.) 0.52 0.62 (n.s.) (n.s.) 0.21 (n.s.)
Birth rate dec/increasing 0.48 (n.s.) (n.s.) 0.21 (n.s.) (n.s.) (n.s.) 0.82 (n.s.)
Percentage population 0.46 R 0.50 (n.s.) 0.31 0.61 (n.s.) (n.s.) (n.s.) (n.s.)
Marry in/out (n.s.) (n.s.) (n.s.) 0.24 (n.s.) (n.s.) (n.s.) (n.s.) (n.s.)
Status EC
Proud heritage 0.29 (n.s.) (n.s.) 0.27 (n.s.) 0.23 0.50 0.34 (n.s.)
Respected 0.74 (n.s.) (n.s.) 0.60 (n.s.) 0.70 0.54 0.55 (n.s.)
Wealth 0.72 (n.s.) (n.s.) 0.64 (n.s.) 0.75 0.60 0.78 (n.s.)
Active 0.60 (n.s.) (n.s.) 0.66 (n.s.) 0.31 0.66 0.56 (n.s.)
Future 0.57 (n.s.) (n.s.)
TE 0.47 (n.s.) 0.38 0.59 0.47 (n.s.)
Institutional support
Business 0.77 0.66 0.70 0.73 0.64 0.64 0.73 0.72 0.61
Economy 0.84 0.82 0.81 0.78 0.88 0.88 0.69 0.77 0.87
Culture 0.47 0.27 0.33 D 0.51 0.45 0.30 0.49 0.50 0.34
Government 0.72 0.64 0.58 0.67 0.58 0.69 0.66 0.61 0.72
Media 0.61 0.55 0.51 0.58 0.53 0.49 0.45 0.34 0.65
AQ2 Politics 0.77 0.77 0.73 0.74 PR 0.79 0.78 0.71 0.79 0.73

O
O
F
295 Y:/Taylor & Francis/RMMM/Articles/RMMM337112/RMMM337112.3d[x] Friday 28th November 2008 21:26:5

Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 9

Table 2. Confirmatory factor analysis: goodness of fit statistics.

Models CMIN CFI TLI RMSEA

AA participants
African American* 1.96 0.98 0.98 0.079
Hispanic 2.92 0.97 0.96 0.112
Caucasian 2.40 0.98 0.98 0.100
Hispanic participants
African American* 1.82 0.99 0.98 0.071
Hispanic* 1.74 0.99 0.99 0.068
Caucasian 2.42 0.98 0.98 0.094
Asian participants
African American 2.94 0.96 0.95 0.131
Hispanic 2.23 0.97 0.96 0.104

F
Caucasian 2.41 0.97 0.97 0.112

O
*Acceptable fit.

The literature indicates precedence for treating vitality as a unidimensional

O
construct. For instance, in defending their decision to pool all items to form a
composite vitality scale, Pittam, Gallois, and Willemyns (1991, 453) asserted that ‘as

PR
originally conceived, the SVQ comprised a unidimensional scale with three aspects:
status, institutional support and demography’. Consistent with previous research, the
300 unidimensional index (with one item deleted
estimate the percentage of a particular
population) in the current data produced solid reliability estimates (ranging from
D
0.73 to 0.88).
The second set of factor analyses was exploratory; that is, the data were not
constrained to the original three factors. Instead, the goal was to see if the three
TE
305 factors would result when the SVQ items were allowed to load on any factor. Once
again, the outcome from these analyses failed to uncover the expected three-factor
structure. In the cases where the factor analyses did converge, typically there were five
EC

factors with only one or two having any real meaning. There were a number of other
trends in the data.
310 First, the items that asked about perceptions regarding group strength in the
present and then in the future were strongly related in all seven of the final models.
R

Clearly, these items may well hold the key to obtaining an overall sense of perceptions
of group vitality. Indeed in a future version of the SVQ, this could form an added
R

dimension. Second, on all except one of the EFAs that converged, three items always
315 loaded together. Specifically, the items that addressed economic and business control,
O

political control, and wealth consistently loaded across all groups (see also Barker and
Giles 2002). Obviously, these items should play a key role in future iterations of the
C

SVQ. Nevertheless, it should be noted that according to the SVQ, economic and
business control, and political control represent institutional support, whereas wealth
N

320 represents status.

Third, further evidence suggests that the status and institutional support factors
U

should be reconsidered because they appear to be similar. Specifically, in four out of the
resulting seven models, status and institutional support items loaded on the same factor
suggesting that these two concepts (as measured by the SVQ) were highly correlated
325 (see also, Husband and Khan 1982). In Giles, Bourhis, and Taylor (1977, 310) original
discussion of the variables underlying the three factors, they claim that the individual
variables themselves are not ‘necessarily mutually exclusive’. If, as vitality researchers
 Y:/Taylor & Francis/RMMM/Articles/RMMM337112/RMMM337112.3d[x] Friday 28th November 2008 21:26:5

10 J.R. Abrams et al.

suggest, the variables underlying the three-factor structure are not mutually exclusive,
then the variables should not load discretely on the three factors. However, the current
330 data indicate they are too similar as measured by the SVQ. For example, the item ‘How
well represented are the following groups in business institutions in the U.S.’ can
possibly reflect both status and institutional support. That is, if a social group is well
represented in business, then it also probably has status. This same argument applies for
other institutions as well. For instance, the social group that controls media, an
335 important institution in most societies, arguably has status. Future research could
attempt to conceptually differentiate status from institutional support.
Future research should also examine the language used to operationalise the
institutional support items. For example, several items that should load on the
institutional support factor are phrased as ‘How well represented . . .’ While this
language is intended to signify institutional support, the language can just as easily

F
340
reflect status or demography (see also Landry and Allard 1994b). In fact, in almost

O
every analysis conducted on the present data, every item that began with ‘How well
represented . . .’ loaded on the first factor, which was most reflective of group status.
The one exception was the item, ‘How well represented are the following groups in

O
345 the cultural life of the U.S. (e.g. festivals, concerts, art exhibitions)’, which frequently
split-loaded on the factors. Instead of asking ‘how well represented’ are groups in the

PR
mass media, the item could ask ‘What kind of support does the group have from
mass media’ or ‘How often does the group appear in mass media’. Similarly, the item
that asks ‘How well represented are groups in the cultural life’ could be changed by
350 asking ‘How well supported are groups in the cultural life’. D
And finally, as in the EFAs, the demographic indicators did not load together in
any of the models; in fact, one would describe them as being all over the conceptual
map. For example, the analysis indicates that the item that asks participants to write
TE
in ‘What percentage of the population is made up of a group’ lacks reliability.
355 Because participants have a difficult time estimating the size of a group, the answers
they give vary greatly. This item would probably be better constructed as a closed-
EC

ended question. The items ‘Estimate the birth rates of the following groups in the
U.S.’ and ‘To what extent do the following groups in the U.S. marry only within their
own group’ frequently loaded on the other factors. The two items that more
360 consistently loaded together that are reflective of demography are ‘How many of the
R

following groups immigrate into the U.S. each year’ and ‘How many of the following
groups emigrate from the U.S. to other countries each year’. While the language of
R

these two items could be simplified for participants who may not know the definition
of immigrate and emigrate (e.g. ‘How many of the following groups come from
O

365 another country to live each year’ and ‘How many of the following groups leave the
country to live in other countries each year’), they seem to tap into something more
C

indicative of social comparison concerns. This is consistent with the Barker and Giles
(2002) finding that Anglo Americans’ belief that Latinos are increasing in numbers
N

predicted their support for English-only policies. It seems important then to revisit
370 the demographic dimension in terms of face validity.
U

Conclusion
This study underscores the value of vitality in understanding intergroup relations.
Clearly, the concept has strong predictive and explanatory power, as well as heuristic
value. Even so, researchers wishing to measure subjective vitality using the SVQ
 Y:/Taylor & Francis/RMMM/Articles/RMMM337112/RMMM337112.3d[x] Friday 28th November 2008 21:26:5

Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 11

375 should be aware of its shortcomings (and maybe engage group-focused discussions
before finalising it in any one intergroup setting). Still, our analysis indicates that
(with the exception of one demographic item), the SVQ is reliable when measuring
subjective vitality unidimensionally. And, although the focus of the present study has
been on the validity of measuring subjective vitality quantitatively, researchers should
380 continue invoking the tripartite conceptual structure when conducting objective
analyses of intergroup settings or assessing vitality with qualitative methods (Bourhis
2008; Komondouros and McEntee-Atalianis 2007; Sayahi 2005). Our hope is that
this paper initiates the discussion about the psychometric properties of a valuable
construct.

385 Notes

F
1. These ethnic groups were selected because they include both minority and majority groups.
Importantly, we do not believe that the groups themselves are of importance for the focus

O
of this particular study. Any intercultural comparison could fulfill the aim of the
examination.

O
390 2. Space precluded inclusion of the tables summarising the results of the EFAs. Interested
readers should obtain these from the first author.

PR
References
Abrams, J.R. 2008. African Americans’ television activity: Is it related to perceptions of
outgroup vitality? Howard Journal of Communications 19: 1
18.
395 Allard, R., and R. Landry. 1986. Subjective ethnolinguistic vitality viewed as a belief system.
D
Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 7: 1
12.
Allard, R., and R. Landry. 1994. Subjective ethnolinguistic vitality: A comparison of two
measures. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 108: 117
44.
TE
Barker, V., and H. Giles. 2002. Who supports the English-only movement? Evidence for
400 misconceptions about Latino group vitality. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural
Development 23: 353
70.
Barker, V., H. Giles, K. Noels, J. Duck, M. Hecht, and R. Clément. 2001. The English-only
EC

movement: A communication analysis of changing perceptions of language vitality. Journal

of Communication 51: 3
37.
405 Bourhis, R.Y., ed., 2008. The vitality of the English-speaking communities of Quebec: From
community decline to revival. Montréal, QC: CEETUM, Université de Montréal.
Bourhis, R.Y., H. Giles, and D. Rosenthal. 1981. Notes on the construction of a ‘subjective
R

vitality questionnaire’ for ethnolinguistic groups. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural

Development 2: 144
55.
R

410 Bourhis, R.Y., and I. Sachdev. 1984. Vitality perceptions and language attitudes: Some
Canadian data. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 3: 97
126.
Cenoz, J., and J.F. Valencia. 1993. Ethnolinguistic vitality, social networks and motivation in
O

second language acquisition: Some data from Basque Country. Language, Culture, and
Curriculum 6: 113
27.
C

415 Clachar, A. 1997. Ethnolinguistic identity and Spanish proficiency in a paradoxical situation:
The case of Puerto Rican return immigrants. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural
Development 18: 107
24.
N

Clément, R. 1980. Ethnicity, contact and communicative competence in a second language. In

Language: Social psychological perspectives, ed. H. Giles, W.P. Robinson, and P.M. Smith,
U

420 147
54. Oxford: Pergamon.

Clément, R. 1986. Second language proficiency and acculturation: An investigation of the
effects of language status and individual characteristics. Journal of Language and Social
Psychology 5: 271
90.
Costello, A.B., and J.W. Osborne. 2005. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four
425 recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research
and Evaluation 7: 1
9.
 Y:/Taylor & Francis/RMMM/Articles/RMMM337112/RMMM337112.3d[x] Friday 28th November 2008 21:26:6

12 J.R. Abrams et al.

Currie, M., and M.A. Hogg. 1994. Subjective ethnolinguistic vitality and social adaptation
among Vietnamese refugees in Australia. International Journal of the Sociology of
Language 108: 97
115.
430 Ellinger, B. 2000. The relationship between ethnolinguistic identity and English language
achievement for native Russian speakers and native Hebrew speakers in Israel. Journal of
Multilingual and Multicultural Development 21: 292
307.
Florack, A., and U. Piontkowski. 1997. Identification and perceived vitality: The Dutch and
the Germans in the European Union. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Develop-
435 ment 18: 349
63.
Gao, G., K.L. Schmidt, and W.B. Gudykunst. 1994. Strength of ethnic identity and
perceptions of ethnolinguistic vitality among Mexican Americans. Hispanic Journal of
Behavioral Sciences 16: 332
41.
Garrett, F., H. Giles, and N. Coupland. 1989. The contexts of language learning: Extending
440 the intergroup model of second language acquisition. In Language, communication, and
culture: Current directions, ed. S. Ting-Toomey and F. Korzenny, 201
20. Newbury Park,

F
CA: Sage.
Gibbons, J., and L. Ashcroft. 1995. Multiculturalism and language shift: A subjective vitality

O
questionnaire study of Sydney Italians. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural
445 Development 16: 281
99.
Giles, H. 2001. Ethnolinguistic vitality. In Concise encyclopaedia of sociolinguistics, ed. R.

O
Mesthrie, 472
3. Oxford: Elsevier.
Giles, H., R.Y. Bourhis, and D.M. Taylor. 1977. Towards a theory of language in ethnic

PR
grouprelations. In Language, ethnicity, and intergroup relations, ed. H. Giles, 307
48.
450 London: Academic Press.
Giles, H., and J.L. Byrne. 1982. An intergroup approach to second language acquisition.
Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 3: 17
40.
Giles, H., and P. Johnson. 1981. The role of language in ethnic group relations. In Intergroup
behavior, ed. J. Turner and H. Giles, 199
243. Oxford: Blackwell. D
455 Giles, H., and P. Johnson. 1987. Ethnolinguistic identity theory: A social psychological
approach to language maintenance. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 68:
TE
69
99.
Giles, H., L. Leets, and N. Coupland. 1990. Minority language group status: A theoretical
conspexus. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 11: 37
56.
460 Giles, H., K. Noels, H. Ota, S.H. Ng, C. Gallois, E.B. Ryan, A. Williams et al. 2000. Age
EC

vitality across eleven nations. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 21:
308
23.
Giles, H., D. Rosenthal, and L. Young. 1985. Perceived ethnolinguistic vitality: The Anglo-and
Greek-Australian setting. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 6: 253
69.
465 Hamers, J., and M. Blanc. 1982. Towards a social psychological model of bilingual
R

development. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 1: 29
49.

Hamers, J., and M. Blanc. 1989. Bilinguality and bilingualism. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
R

Harwood, J., H. Giles, and R.Y. Bourhis. 1994. The genesis of vitality theory: Historical
470 patterns and discoursal dimensions. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 108:
O

167
206.
Harwood, J., H. Giles, H.D. Pierson, R. Clément, and S. Fox. 1994. Vitality perceptions of age
categories in California and Hong Kong. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural
C

Development 15: 311
8.

475 Hogg, M., P. d’Agata, and D. Abrams. 1989. Ethnolinguistic betrayal and speaker evaluations
N

among Italian Australians. Genetic. Social and General Psychology Monographs 115:
153
81.
U

Husband, C., and V.S. Khan. 1982. The viability of ethnolinguistic vitality some creative
doubts. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 3: 193
205.
480 Johnson, P., H. Giles, and R.Y. Bourhis. 1983. The viability of ethnolinguistic vitality: A reply
to Husband and Khan. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 4: 255
69.
Karahan, F. 2004. Ethnolinguistic vitality, attitudes, social network and code-switching: The
case of Bosnian-Turks living in Sakarya, Turkey. International Journal of the Sociology of
Language 165: 59
92.
 Y:/Taylor & Francis/RMMM/Articles/RMMM337112/RMMM337112.3d[x] Friday 28th November 2008 21:26:6

Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 13

485 Komondouros, M., and L. McEntee-Atalianis. 2007. Language attitudes, shift and ethno-
linguistic vitality of the Greek Orthodox community in Istanbul. Journal of Multilingual
and Multicultural Development 28: 365
84.
Kraemer, R. 1992. Ethnolinguistic vitality perceptions in Israel in the wake of the Intifada.
Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 13: 482
503.
490 Kraemer, R., E. Olshtain, and S. Badier. 1994. Ethnolinguistic vitality, attitudes, and networks
of linguistic contact: The case of the Israeli Arab minority. International Journal of the
Sociology of Language 108: 79
95.
Kramarae, C. 1981. Women and men speaking. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Kristiansen, T., J. Harwood, and H. Giles. 1991. Ethnolinguistic vitality in ‘‘the Danish capital
495 of America’’. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 12: 421
48.
Labrie, N., and R. Clément. 1986. Ethnolinguistic vitality, self confidence and second language
proficiency: An investigation. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 7:
269
82.
Landry, R., and R. Allard. 1991. Can schools promote additive bilingualism in minority group

F
500 children? In Language, Culture and Cognition: A collection of studies in first and second
language acquisition, ed. L. Malave and G. Duquette, 198
231. Clevedon, UK: Multi-

O
lingual Matters.
Landry, R., and R. Allard. 1992. Ethnolinguistic vitality and the bilingual development of

O
minority and majority group students. In Maintenance and loss of minority languages, ed.
505 W. Fase, K. Jaespaert, and S. Kroon, 223
51. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.
Landry, R., and R. Allard. 1994a. The Acadians of New Brunswick: Demolinguisticrealities

PR
and the vitality of the French language. International Journal of the Sociology of Language
105/106: 187
215.
Landry, R., and R. Allard. 1994b. Diglossia, ethnolinguistic vitality, and language behavior.
510 International Journal of the Sociology of Language 108: 15
42.
Landry, R., R. Allard, and R. Theberge. 1991. School and family French ambiance and the
D
bilingual development of Francophone western Canadians. Canadian Modern Language
Review 47: 878
915.
Landry, R., and R.Y. Bourhis. 1997. Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality: An
TE
515 empirical study. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 16: 23
49.
Leets, L., and H. Giles. 1995. Intergroup cognitions and communication climates: New
dimensions of minority language maintenance. In The state of minority languages:
International perspectives on survival and decline, ed. W. Fase, K. Jaspaert, and S. Kroon,
EC

37
74. Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.

520 Mays, C.M., S.D. Cochran, G. Bellinger Jr, R.G. Smith, N. Henley, M. Daniels, T. Tibbits,
G.D. Victorianne, O.K. Sei, and D.K. Birt. 1992. The language of black gay men’s sexual
behavior: Implications for AIDS risk reduction. Journal of Sex Research 29: 425
34.
R

Park, H.S., R.M. Dailey, and D. Lemus. 2002. The use of exploratory factor analysis and
principal components analysis in communication research. Human Communication
525 Research 28: 562
77.
R

Pittam, J., C. Gallois, and M. Willemyns. 1991. Perceived change in ethnolinguistic vitality by
dominant and minority groups. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 12:
O

449
57.
Sachdev, I., and R.Y. Bourhis. 1993. Ethnolinguistic vitality: Some motivational and cognitiv
530 econsiderations. In Group motivation: Social psychological perspectives, ed. M. Hogg and
C

D. Abrams, 33
51. New York: Harvester-Wheatsheat.

Sayahi, L. 2005. Language and identity among speakers of Spanish in northern Morocco:
N

Between ethnolinguistic vitality and acculturation. Journal of Sociolinguistics 9: 95
107.

Tabachnick, B.G., and L.S. Fidell. 2001. Using multivariate statistics, 4th edn. Boston, MA:
Allyn and Bacon.
U

535
Tajfel, H., and J.C. Turner. 1979. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In The social
psychology of intergroup relations, ed. W.C. Austin and S. Worchel, 33
53. Monterey, CA:
Brooks/Cole.
Tajfel, H., and J.C. Turner. 1986. The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In
540 Psychology of Intergroup Relations, ed. S. Worchel and W.G. Austin, 7
24. Chicago, IL:
Nelson.
 Y:/Taylor & Francis/RMMM/Articles/RMMM337112/RMMM337112.3d[x] Friday 28th November 2008 21:26:6

14 J.R. Abrams et al.

Willemyns, M., J. Pittam, and C. Gallois. 1993. Perceived ethnolinguistic vitality of Vietnamese
and English in Australia: A confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Multilingual and
Multicultural Development 14: 481
97.
545 Yagmur, K., K. de Bot, and H. Korzilius. 1999. Language shift and ethnolinguistic vitality of
Turkish in Australia. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 20: 51
69.
Yagmur, K., and S. Kroon. 2003. Ethnolinguistic vitality perceptions and language
revitalization in Bashkortostan. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 4:
319
36.
550 Young, L., H. Giles, and H. Pierson. 1986. Sociopolitical change and perceived vitality.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations 10: 459
69.
Ytsma, J., M. Viladot, and H. Giles. 1994. Ethnolinguistic vitality and ethnic identity: Some
Catalan and Frisian data. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 108: 63
78.

F
O
O
PR
D
TE
EC
R
R
O
C
N
U

View publication stats