To assimilate or not to assimilate-- a psychologist's thoughts about acculturation

Donald Winnicott

Donald Winnicott stipulated the presence of a 'true self'.  Our true selves are, according to Winnicott, the most spontaneous and authentic parts of who we are.   His idea was not a new one, and it even dates back to the Danish philosopher, Kierkegaard who referenced 'the self which truly is'.  If there is a 'true self', then how does this concept fit in with the process of acculturation and assimilation?  For those of us who are immigrants to another country, is it possible to try and fit in, while maintaining a semblance of authenticity?

To begin this exploration, I will share a personal failure:  After six years of living in Denmark jeg er stadig ikke flyende på dansk.  I chalk this up to a few things including age, perfectionism, and also the fact that most of my workdays are conducted in English.  When I moved to Denmark, I had high aspirations about mastering a second language.  Like most immigrants to Denmark, I enrolled in the free Danish classes and set myself to the task of learning how to pronounce vowels whose sounds I could not discriminate.  I failed miserably and even four years into my relocation to Denmark, could barely understand anyone who spoke to me.    Eventually, after a lot of hard work, I could understand people speaking to me but I still have to be able to hear them perfectly and see their lips move.  Danish, as a language, has humbled me.

Learning Danish is just one of the most obvious and noticeable ways one can try to assimilate.  Of course there are others-- I know people in my position who quickly switched to neutral tones in their attire.  Others learned how to make a flæske steg.  My opinion about how much effort one should put into integration has changed over the years.


I have seen people who were very good assimilators and others who weren't so good and I am not convinced it is necessarily the healthier thing to do, always, to 'fit in'.   If there truly is such a notion as Donald Winnicott's 'true self', then it makes some sense that parts of any given culture would resound with any given individual and other parts would not.  By extension, I think that means that there are also parts of the culture into which you were born that both would and would not ring true to your identity.  I have come around to the belief, however that, psychologically speaking, there is something sturdy and resilient about holding onto parts of yourself despite enormous pressure to do otherwise.

Anecdotally, in my practice, I have seen some people really try and fit in who became resentful and depressed.    On the other hand, you might ask, isn’t integration the respectful thing to try and do?

If I back up from Psychology and think about integration and assimilation from a more sociopolitical perspective, aren’t the nationalists of every country waging a losing battle?  We live in a global economy.  With the internet and inexpensive transportation, doesn’t our future hold more people in mixed cultural marriages and children who come from more than one culture?  Does it make logical sense, or is it just a romantic fancy to try and hold onto specific customs and traditions?  To be clear, I am equally skeptical about traditionalists from my own country as I am about the nationalists in Denmark.  It just seems to me that humans of the world could use a good lesson in embracing diversity if we are to co-inhabit a peaceful future world.  I am heartened that a certain percentage of the expat and immigrant community has started calling themselves 'world citizens', highlighting their loyalty first to the world, and second to the nation into which they were born.

My decidedly un-Danish sock drawer

Refocusing on the individual, of course., there is no ‘right answer’ in terms of how much one should try to integrate.  I can only share with you the conclusions I have come to which is that I have decided to continue working on my Danish pronunciation and comprehension.   But in the meantime, I’m just going continue the lifelong quest to be, in the words of Donald Winnicott, my 'true self'.  In my case, that is someone who is a mix of Latina-US, Germanic-US, and now Danish cultures.  

Meanderings about telepsychology-- Two things I have learned

I started doing telepsychology several years ago, before most people were using teleconferencing or other forms of online psychotherapy.  I am a devout technophile and admittedly like to incorporate technology into my life in whatever ways I can.  I have also had the opportunity to conduct some research online that examined virtual reality therapy and also the way people form relationships online.  I am a virtual positivist and have high hopes that technology, for all of its downfalls, will ultimately continue to advance the human race.   I thus projected that, a virtual means of therapy provision would become quite popular in my practice, if I offered it.  I assumed that, for people who sought out therapy, many individuals are busy and would like to avoid transit time to and from a therapist's office.

I began offering online therapy-- more specifically, therapy via videoconferencing, when I opened my practice in Copenhagen in 2014.  To my surprise, almost no one seemed interested.  The only clients who were keen about distance therapy were those who were moving away and who wished to maintain a therapeutic relationship via videoconferencing.  Even my busiest clients-- high achieving professionals who worked long days and weekends, still preferred to come into the office.  I would offer the option, but nearly everyone turned it down.  Interestingly, when clients have moved away and we have continued our work together, virtually, most of the time they said the sessions were 'fine' and didn't complain about the quality compared to our in-person previous sessions.  However, they still preferred the in person sessions.

Another thing I found surprising is how dissatisfied I was with videoconferencing.  I'm a long time user, as I said above, of technology.  I have sustained long-term relations for years nearly only with Skype and related services.  But still, following every provision of online service, I felt 'skeptical' that it was helpful and oddly less gratified than usual.  It has surprised me that I also prefer in person counseling to videoconferencing.

The data supporting the use of videoconferencing and other forms of virtual psychotherapy continues to look promising.  There is quite a bit of research, these days, about the effectiveness of distance therapy.  Most supports teletherapy as being as effective as in-person therapy.  This is good news for many reasons;  Telepsychology allows people in rural communities to receive proper psychological care, for example.  However, it seems, from the research and from my observations, that while telepsychology is effective, it probably is not going to replace in-person sessions anytime soon, simply because people seem to prefer the precence of a real-life office and psychologist.

What are your thoughts about online versus offline therapy?  Do you know what you would/do prefer and why?

Psychological scientists could be their own worst enemies

Stanley Milgram's famous obedience study has been recently found to have had serious flaws

Some political pundits have noted that we now live in a 'post fact' society where the brash assertions of politicians are given the same weight as scientifically backed facts.  Kellyanne Conway, advisor to US president Donald Trump famously referred to the phenomenon of an 'alternative fact'.  Also famously, despite the fact that most scientists argue that climate change is real, there exists a vocal number of politicians who deny it is so.

This is why it is particularly disheartening when science fails us.  Scientists who fabricate data, and journals who only publish 'positive' results.  Like everything, science has been compromised by the capitalism of rewarding the results that have the highest consumer demand.  New review processes need to emerge that reward the rigor with which the study was conducted regardless of the results.  New processes also need to emerge that retain professors to universities also based on scientific rigor rather than number of publication notches they can carve on their belts.  We, as Psychologists, need to hold ourselves accountable for the data we present to the public.  They should expect no less.