Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
2
.027. As expected, overall collective identity
was stronger in older participants in both groups
signified by the separate identity variables:
Bulgarian, F(1, 558) 14.02, p 5.001,
2
.025,
religious, F(1, 558) 10.39, p 5.001,
2
.019,
6 DIMITROVA ET AL.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
[
T
i
l
b
u
r
g
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]
a
t
0
7
:
1
7
2
5
M
a
y
2
0
1
2
and familial identity, F(1, 558) 6.73, p 5.01,
2
.012.
As to differences in collective identity for boys
and girls, the results did not show significant
gender effects. Contrary to predictions, there were
no significant gender differences in familial iden-
tity: girls, M4.31, SD.62; boys, M4.18,
SD.69. There were neither gender differences in
levels of Bulgarian (girls M3.74, SD.76 vs.
boys M3.77, SD.79) and religious identity
(girls M3.28, SD.87 vs. boys M3.30,
SD.88) nor a gender by group interaction
effect on collective identity.
Collective identity and wellbeing
To test our third hypothesis (that Roma would
have lower wellbeing scores than Bulgarian ado-
lescents), a MANOVA with group (two levels) as
the independent variable and the two wellbeing
scales (SWLS and PA) as dependent variables was
performed. A significant main multivariate effect
of group was found, Wilks lambda .96, F(1,
605) 11.34, p 5.001, Z
2
.036. Consistent with
the classification of Roma youth belonging to a
severely discriminated minority group, there were
pronounced group differences in wellbeing, with
Roma youth scoring significantly lower on satis-
faction with life, F(1, 605) 18.00, p 5.001,
2
.029. No significant differences between
Roma and Bulgarian groups were found for
positive affect, F(1, 605) .928, p .336,
2
.002 (see Table 1).
Finally, our fourth research question concerned
the relation between collective identity and well-
being of Roma and Bulgarian youth. We suggested
that the relations among the concepts would be
structurally identical across the groups (although
there are mean-level differences). The model
designed to test this hypothesis included direct
paths between collective identity and wellbeing;
crosscultural invariance of the relations was tested
in a multigroup (Bulgarian and Roma) compar-
ison, performed in AMOS (Arbuckle, 2009). We
implemented a path model with Bulgarian, famil-
ial, and religious components as antecedent vari-
ables (indicators of the latent variable) and
wellbeing as the outcome variable (composite
score of the standardized average scores of
SWLS and PA scales). The configural invariance
model showed a good fit (see Table 2). We then
tested the measurement weights model in two
steps. The first constrained the factor loadings of
the three identity measures to be equal in the two
groups; this model also showed a good fit. The
second measurement weights model added an
invariance constraint to the path from collective
identity to wellbeing. Invariance of this path was
tested separately, as it is crucial in our reasoning of
invariance of the relationship of invariance and
wellbeing. This model showed a good fit: w
2
(15,
N606) 8.65, p 4.124, RMSEA.035,
CFI .995, TLI .987, and AGFI .972
(Table 2). More restrictive models showed a
slightly less favorable fit (notably because of the
rise in RMSEA value). So we retained the second
measurement weights model as the most restrictive
model with a good fit. The model assesses the
stability of all relations among groups, and
retaining it as the best fit implies that our latent
variable of collective identity has the same
relationship with wellbeing in the two ethnic
groups. As can be seen in Figure 1, Bulgarian,
familial, and religious identity were positively and
significantly related to wellbeing. The parameters
of collective identity and wellbeing were all
statistically significant and related to wellbeing in
a similar fashion for Roma and Bulgarian groups,
confirming our expectations.
DISCUSSION
The aims of this study were twofold, namely (1) to
examine collective identity and its relation to
Roma and Bulgarian adolescents wellbeing and
(2) to identify associations of Bulgarian, religious,
and familial identity domains with age and gender.
We obtained four important results. First, Roma
adolescents endorsed a stronger religious identity
than their mainstream Bulgarian counterparts.
Second, there was an age-related increase of
collective identity in both minority and majority
groups. Third, Roma youth showed significantly
lower levels of wellbeing than their Bulgarian
peers. Finally, all three components of collective
identity (mainstream, familial, and religious) were
positively related to wellbeing in both ethnic
groups.
Ethnic group differences in collective
identity
Our findings regarding the first research question
dealing with differences in identity domains show
that adolescents ethnic background shapes their
collective identity. Bulgarian majority youth
report weaker religious identity than Roma
minority youth, which is consistent with our
predictions and prior work documenting centrality
of religion in minority youth, as well as the
ROMA ADOLESCENTS IN BULGARIA 7
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
[
T
i
l
b
u
r
g
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]
a
t
0
7
:
1
7
2
5
M
a
y
2
0
1
2
generally low religious group identification among
the mainstream Bulgarian population (Dimitrova
et al., 2012; Kanev, 2002). Previous work among
ethnic minority youth in other European countries
has provided support for the centrality of religion
for youth in communities with a strong religious
tradition (Saroglou & Galand, 2004; Verkuyten &
Yildiz, 2009); our results extend these findings to
the Roma minority group in Bulgaria. Roma
youth seem to emphasize their religious identity
as an additional social identification and source of
strength in the face of social discrimination and
threat.
The comparison of Roma and Bulgarian ado-
lescents Bulgarian and familial identities warrants
further inspection. Even though these adolescents
belong to two substantially different ethnic com-
munities, and occupy very different socioeconomic
positions within the mainstream society, and
although our expectation regarding differences in
religious identity was met, there were no group
differences in Bulgarian and familial identity.
Similar findings have been reported in a sample
of Roman Catholic minority adolescents living in
border regions of Ireland with regard to their Irish
identity (Stevenson & Muldoon, 2010).
Results from discursive analyses revealed that
minority adolescents proactively claimed their
mainstream identity. The authors discuss these
findings in light of contextual effects on identity
formation in minority adolescents such that a
strong mainstream identity may also reflect the
intensity of immersion into the dominant culture.
On the other hand, a considerable body of research
shows that mainstream identity is often weak when
members of minority groups attach themselves to
their ethnic community as a reaction to pressures
to assimilate into the dominant culture (Phinney
et al., 2001). It has also been found that main-
stream identity is lower for immigrant minority
groups and largely independent from their ethnic
identity (Devos et al., 2010). The Roma belong to
an indigenous group with unique characteristics;
they are a minority in Bulgaria as well as in many
other European countries but do not have another
country with which they or their families associate.
It could thus also be that their identification with
the mainstream context does not involve a
comparison between Roma and Bulgarian cul-
tures. Roma youth could generally be expected to
embrace the Bulgarian culture less than the Roma
culture, particularly in light of evidence suggesting
that ethnic identity is clearly pronounced in
marginalized ethnic minority groups. One expla-
nation for finding similar levels of Bulgarian
identity endorsement among groups could be
that a strong identification with the host culture
is related to positive adjustment outcomes when
.94
.71*** .25***
.74***
Bulgarian
Religious
Familial
Wellbeing
Collective
Identity
Figure 1. Path model of collective identity and wellbeing of Roma and Bulgarian adolescents. The loading of ethnic identity was fixed
at a value of 1 in the unstandardized solution model. ***p 5.001.
TABLE 2
Fit indices of multigroup of collective identity and wellbeing model for Roma and Bulgarian adolescents
Model
2
(df) GFI AGFI TLI CFI RMSEA
Unconstrained 5.07 (2) .996 .958 .973 .996 .050
Measurement weights: Invariance of factor loadings 6.32 (4) .995 .974 .990 .997 .031
Measurement weights: Invariance of factor loadings and path from identity to wellbeing 8.65 (5) .993 .972 .987 .995 .035
Structural residuals 14.19 (6) .988 .961 .976 .988 .048
Measurement residuals 23.32 (11) .981 .965 .981 .982 .043
Italic type indicates the most restrictive model with a good fit.
8 DIMITROVA ET AL.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
[
T
i
l
b
u
r
g
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]
a
t
0
7
:
1
7
2
5
M
a
y
2
0
1
2
there is a pressure to assimilate into that culture
(Phinney & Devich-Navarro, 1997). Moreover,
there is evidence from various European countries
that Roma identity is more oriented to their
specific group (more so than to Roma in general)
and that national identity tends to be strong in
Roma groups, notably in Eastern Europe
(Marushiakova & Popov, 2010): the awareness
of belonging to a respective nation-state among
the Roma in Central, Eastern and South-Eastern
Europe, is more pronounced (compared to the
Gypsies/Roma in Western Europe or in other
parts of the world) and occupies a central place in
the general structure of their identity (p. 43). It is
an interesting suggestion for future studies to
include a dedicated measure of Roma ethnic
identity so that the expected stronger identification
with Roma identity than with Bulgarian identity
can be confirmed. It may also be argued that
perceived discrimination and negative stereotypes
strengthen a perception of incompatibility between
ethnic and mainstream identities, which in turn
may lead to difficulties in integrating both
identities into a cohesive sense of self for minority
youth (Huynh, Devos, & Smalarz, 2011).
Collective identity, age, and gender
In line with our second prediction and prior
research (French et al., 2006; Phinney, 1990;
Stoppa & Lefkowitz, 2010), collective identity is
more established in older than in younger adoles-
cents. This was found for mainstream, religious,
and familial identity. In accordance with previous
research, these findings suggest an increased
importance and involvement in issues related to a
youths Bulgarian, religious, and family environ-
ment with age (see also Aryee & Luk, 1996;
Georgas et al., 1996). In addition, our results
reveal that for the familial identity domain, gender
does not make a difference. On average, familial
identity salience was similar for girls and boys,
which does not conform to our expectations. As
well, no overall gender effects were found for
mainstream and religious identity. It thus seems
that the underlying process of establishing identity
is similar for boys and girls. The finding of similar
levels of endorsement of familial but also main-
stream Bulgarian identity of Roma and Bulgarian
youth may reflect current contextual characteris-
tics of the Roma minority. Recent reports provide
evidence for a number of positive trends in the
Bulgarian Roma population due to growing Roma
emancipation, leading to an increase in educa-
tional levels, computer literacy, and the ability of
young Roma youth to speak at least one European
language (United Nations Development
Programme, 2005). Similarities in levels of ethnic
and familial identity in our study may be
associated with an overall improved social stand-
ing. In line with this, ethnic background was not
associated with gender differences in collective
identity. No interaction of gender and culture was
found for ethnic and religious identity as well as
familial identity. In contrast to our prediction and
the overall gender effects in familial identity, no
significant differences emerged between Roma and
Bulgarian girls. Although the Roma community is
characterized by extended families (Durst, 2002),
Roma and Bulgarian girls reported similar levels
of familial identity. It is important to recognize
that, while sharing many adversities, Roma com-
munities in Bulgaria may vary substantially
according to their geographical location.
Members of the Roma community inhabiting
small urban areas are well represented in local
occupational and social contexts, but not in major
cities and particularly not in the capital Sofia. One
possible explanation for the similarity on levels of
familial identity between Roma and Bulgarian
girls is that the contemporary processes that shape
the dynamics of the Roma family include a
migration to urban settings in search for better
job opportunities (Ringold, 2000). In the context
in which our data were collected, the Roma
community was visible and socially engaged.
Roma women in particular have created local
organizations to improve the social situation of
their community by promoting literacy, health
services, and adequate housing (Roma Network,
2011). Recent reports also highlighted the increas-
ing engagement of the Roma minority in Bulgaria
in the public sphere: Roma become increasingly
involved in educational, social and political
activities (United Nations Development
Programme, 2005). Such a process of emancipa-
tion may lead to more flexibility in familial roles
within the Roma family, which in turn may be
responsible for the observed similarities between
Roma and Bulgarian girls.
Collective identity and wellbeing
We found support for our hypothesis that
psychological wellbeing is related to ethnic group
membership. Lower levels of satisfaction with life
were observed for the Roma minority compared
to their Bulgarian mainstream peers. Results
were also consistent with our expectation that
adolescents who felt particularly connected to
ROMA ADOLESCENTS IN BULGARIA 9
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
[
T
i
l
b
u
r
g
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]
a
t
0
7
:
1
7
2
5
M
a
y
2
0
1
2
their ethnic, religious, and familial identity would
exhibit greater wellbeingirrespective of ethnic
group membership. These results extend prior
findings on the association between collective
identity and psychological wellbeing (Abbotts,
Williams, Sweeting, & West, 2004; Schwartz,
Zamboanga, Weisskirch, & Rodriguez, 2009) to
Roma and Bulgarian youth, indicating that a
positive ethnic, familial, and religious identity
bolsters their positive psychological outcomes.
This finding is particularly intriguing in light of
differences in social status and the general intol-
erance toward the Roma community within the
mainstream context. As far as Bulgarian identity is
concerned, Bulgarian and Roma youth seem to
share a common connection with the mainstream
context. Our results show that independently of
the severe discrimination and segregation of their
community, Roma youth experience greater well-
being the more strongly they identify with the
mainstream context. Such evidence points out to
the importance of resources for the Roma youth
related to their mainstream Bulgarian context,
which can have a positive influence for their
psychological outcomes. Possibly, as a protective
reaction to experienced threat and discrimination,
Roma youth strengthen interaction and ties with
the Bulgarian context, which fosters beneficial
effects for their identity and wellbeing.
Finally, our study aimed at documenting bene-
ficial sources for Roma youth. The positive
influence collective identity has on Roma youth
has meaningful implications for community and
school programs that could be tailored to improve
their wellbeing. It is clear that early initiatives to
prevent the onset and aggravation of psychological
problems should focus on the most vulnerable
groups such as the Roma. Our study suggests that
particular attention should be paid to ethnic,
familial, and religious resources in youths social
life because they are related to psychological
wellbeing. For example, interventions and policies
could include opportunities for the Roma to enact
their ethnic and collective identity (e.g., their
customs and traditions), as higher levels of
collective identity are associated with an improved
sense of wellbeing.
LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
The present findings reveal the importance of
collective identity for the wellbeing of Bulgarian
mainstream and Roma minority adolescents, the
latter being a minority hardly investigated in
prior research. While novel in its focus on Roma
youth, this study has some shortcomings that need
to be mentioned in order to promote future
research. First, it would be useful to test the
impact of discrimination and segregation more
directly, as these can have a crucial influence on
identity and wellbeing. Second, our model could
be subjected to further tests with other ethnic
minority groups, and at other developmental
stages. Related to that, a limitation of our study
is that, due to the cross-sectional nature of our
data, statements about causality are unwarranted:
A longitudinal design would be more appropriate
to examine the extent to which differences in
collective identity are linked to changes in adoles-
cents development. Future research exploring
these processes in longitudinal models is needed
to draw firmer conclusions.
Another potential shortcoming regards the
comparability of our samples. Although we
collected data on the participants geographical
location and demographic characteristics, our lack
of other important demographic information,
specifically for the Roma group (e.g., family
composition) provides us with an incomplete
insight into the characteristics of the samples. In
addition, we did not capture how Roma minorities
from bigger cities experience identity and wellbeing
issues, which may be quite different from the small
rural area in South and Central Bulgaria where
our study was conducted. Future research should
therefore consider specific local characteristics and
institutional policies, which can vary considerably
among regions and might influence a youths
experience of collective identity and wellbeing.
Based on these limitations, the results should be
interpreted with some caution with respect to the
dissimilarity in demographic status across samples
and to each samples representativeness.
Nevertheless, we are convinced that it remains
extremely important to pay close attention to the
Roma minority populations wellbeing. Finally,
while self-report measures are a very good tool to
inquire about the views the adolescents themselves
hold, future investigations are needed that include
multiple informants on Roma youths wellbeing,
such as teachers and parents.
In conclusion, our results advocate the impor-
tance of multiple identifications and their relations
to wellbeing of youth irrespective of ethnic and
social differences between Roma minority
and Bulgarian mainstream youth. The findings
and implications of this study are not only relevant
to understanding Roma adolescents collective
identity processes but can also advance our
understanding of mainstream, religious, and
family factors related to wellbeing and adjustment
10 DIMITROVA ET AL.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
[
T
i
l
b
u
r
g
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]
a
t
0
7
:
1
7
2
5
M
a
y
2
0
1
2
of other, similarly underrepresented minority
groups across Europe.
Manuscript received November 2011
Revised manuscript accepted March 2012
First published online April 2012
REFERENCES
Abbotts, J. E., Williams, R. G. A., Sweeting, H. N., &
West, P. B. (2004). Is going to church good or bad for
you? Denomination, attendance and mental health of
children in West Scotland. Social Science and
Medicine, 58, 645656.
Amnesty International. (2007). Europe: Discrimination
against Roma. Retrieved September 30, 2011 from
www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/EUR01/012/2007
Arbuckle, J. (2009). Amos 19. Crawfordville, FL:
AMOS Development Corporation.
Arnett, J. J., & Jensen, L. A. (2002). A congregation of
one: Individualized religious beliefs among emerging
adults. Journal of Adolescent Research, 17, 451467.
Aryee, S., & Luk, V. (1996). Balancing two major parts
of adult life experience: Work and family identity
among dual-earner couples. Human Relations, 49,
465487.
Ashmore, R. D., Deaux, K., & McLaughlin-Volpe, T.
(2004). An organizing framework for collective
identity: Articulation and significance of multidimen-
sionality. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 80114.
Bagger, J., Li, A., & Gutek, B. (2008). How much do
you value your family and does it matter? The joint
effects of family identity salience, family-interference
with work, and gender. Human Relations, 6, 187211.
Bartkowski, J. P., Xu, X., & Levin, M. L. (2008).
Religion and child development: Evidence from the
Early Childhood Longitudinal Study. Social Science
Research, 37, 1836.
Devos, T., Gavin, K., & Quintana, F. Q. (2010). Say
Adios to the American dream? The interplay
between ethnic and national identity among Latino
and Caucasian Americans. Cultural Diversity and
Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16, 3749.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S.
(1985). The Satisfaction with Life Scale. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 49, 7175.
Dimitrova, R., Chasiotis, A., Bender, M., & van de
Vijver, F. J. R. (2012). Collective identity and well-
being of mainstream and minority adolescents in
Bulgaria. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Durst, J. (2002). Fertility and childbearing practices
among poor gypsy women in Hungary: The intersec-
tions of class, race and gender. Communist and Post-
Communist Studies, 35, 457474.
Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York,
NY: Norton.
European Commission Report (2004). The situation of
Roma in an enlarged Europe. Brussels, Belgium:
European Commission.
European Parliament Resolution (2008). A European
strategy on the Roma. Retrieved September 31, 2011
from www.eur-lex.europa.eu.
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights
(2010). Addressing the Roma issue in the EU.
Retrieved September 31, 2011 from www.fra.euro-
pa.eu/fraWebsite/roma/roma_en.htm
French, S. E., Seidman, E., Allen, L., & Aber, J. L.
(2006). The development of ethnic identity during
adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 42, 110.
Fuligni, A. J., & Flook, L. (2005). A social identity
approach to ethnic differences in family relationships
during adolescence. In R. Kail (Ed.), Advances in
child development and behavior (pp. 125152). San
Diego, CA: Elsevier.
Furrow, J. L., King, P. E., & White, K. (2004). Religion
and positive youth development: Identity, meaning,
and prosocial concerns. Applied Developmental
Science, 8, 1726.
Georgas, J., Berry, J. W., Shaw, A., Christakopoulou,
S., & Mylonas, K. (1996). Acculturation of Greek
family values. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,
27, 329338.
Gerganov, E., Varbanova, S., & Kyuchukov, H. (2005).
School adaptation of Roma children. Intercultural
Education, 16, 495551.
Huynh, Q.-L., Devos, T., & Smalarz, L. (2011).
Perpetual foreigner in ones own land: Potential
implications for identity and psychological adjust-
ment. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 30,
133162.
Jasinskaja-Lahti, I., Liebkind, K., & Solheim, E. (2009).
To identify or not to identify? National disidentifica-
tion as an alternative reaction to perceived ethnic
discrimination. Applied Psychology, 58, 105128.
Jaspal, R., & Cinnirella, M. (2010). Coping with
potentially incompatible identities: Accounts of
religious, ethnic, and sexual identities from British
Pakistani men who identify as Muslim and gay.
British Journal of Social Psychology, 49, 849870.
Kanev, P. (2002). Religion in Bulgaria after 1989:
Historical and socio-cultural aspects. South East
Europe Review for Labour and Social Affairs, 1,
7595.
Kiang, L., Yip, T., & Fuligni, A. J. (2008). Multiple
social identities and adjustment in young adults from
ethnically diverse backgrounds. Journal of Research
on Adolescence, 18, 643670.
King, P. E., Furrow, J. L., & Roth, N. H. (2002). The
influence of families and peers on adolescent reli-
giousness. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 21,
109120.
King, V., Elder Jr, G. H., & Whitbeck, L. B. (1997).
Religious involvement among rural youth: An
ecological and life course perspective. Journal of
Research on Adolescence, 7, 431456.
Lee, J. J. (2003). Religion and college attendance:
Change among students. Review of Higher
Education, 25, 369384.
Loek, H., & Petterson, T. (2002). Religion and social
capital in contemporary Europe. Results from the
1999/2000 European Values Study. In D. O. Moberg,
& R. L. Piedemont (Eds.), Research in the social
scientific study of religion. Leiden, The Netherlands:
Brill.
Lopez, A. B., Huynh, V. W., & Fuligni, A. J. (2011). A
longitudinal study of religious identity and participa-
tion during adolescence. Child Development, 82,
12971309.
Marushiakova, E., & Popov, V. (2010). Roma identities
in Central, South-Eastern and Eastern Europe.
In H. Kyuchukov, & I. Hancock (Eds.), Roma
ROMA ADOLESCENTS IN BULGARIA 11
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
[
T
i
l
b
u
r
g
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]
a
t
0
7
:
1
7
2
5
M
a
y
2
0
1
2
identity (pp. 3952). Prague, Czech Republic: NGO
Slovo 21.
Oakes, J. M., & Ross, P. H. (2003). The measurement of
SES in health research: Current practice and steps
toward a new approach. Social Science & Medicine,
56, 769784.
Open Society Institute (OSI) (2007). Equal access to
quality education for Roma: Bulgaria. New York,
NY: OSI Press.
Phinney, J. S. (1989). Stages of ethnic identity develop-
ment in minority group adolescents. Journal of Early
Adolescence, 9, 3449.
Phinney, J. S. (1990). Ethnic identity in adolescents and
adults: Review of research. Psychological Bulettin,
108, 499514.
Phinney, J. S., Berry, J. W., Vedder, P., & Liebkind, K.
(2006). The acculturation experience: Attitudes,
identities and behaviors of immigrant youth. In J.
W. Berry et al. (Eds.), Immigrant youth in cultural
transition: Acculturation, identity, and adaptation
across national contexts (pp. 71116). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Phinney, J. S., & Devich-Navarro, M. (1997). Variations
in bicultural identification among African American
and Mexican American adolescents. Journal of
Research on Adolescence, 7, 332.
Phinney, J. S., Horenczyk, G., Liebkind, K., & Vedder,
P. (2001). Ethnic identity, immigration, and well-
being: An interactional perspective. Journal of Social
Issues, 57, 493510.
Phinney, J. S., & Ong, A. D. (2007). Conceptualization
and measurement of ethnic identity: Current status
and future directions. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 54, 271281.
Rechel, B. (2008). The long way back to Europe:
Minority protection in Bulgaria. Stuttgart, Germany:
Ibidem Verlag.
Rechel, B., Blackburn, C. M., Spencer, N. J., & Rechel,
B. (2009). Access to health care for Roma children in
Central and Eastern Europe: Findings from a
qualitative study in Bulgaria. International Journal
for Equity in Health, 8, 824.
Ringold, D. (2000). Roma and the transition in central
and Eastern Europe: Trends and challenges.
Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Roma Network (2011). Roma organizations in Bulgaria.
Retrieved October 12, 2011 from
www.romanetwork.bg
Saroglou, V., & Galand, P. (2004). Identities, values,
and religion: A study among Muslim, other immi-
grant, and native Belgian young adults after the 9/11
attacks. Identity, 4, 97132.
Shavers, V. L. (1997). Measurement of socioeconomic
status in health disparities research. Journal of the
National Medical Association, 99, 10131023.
Schwartz, S. J., Zamboanga, B. L., Weisskirch, R. S., &
Rodriguez, L. (2009). The relationships of personal
and ethnic identity exploration to indices of adaptive
and maladaptive psychosocial functioning.
International Journal of Behavioral Development, 33,
131144.
Smith, T. B., & Silva, L. (2011). Ethnic identity and
personal well-being of people of color: A
meta-analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58,
4260.
Stevenson, C., & Muldoon, O. T. (2010). Socio-political
context and accounts of national identity in adoles-
cence. British Journal of Social Psychology, 49,
583599.
Stoppa, T. M., & Lefkowitz, E. S. (2010). Longitudinal
changes in religiosity among emerging adult college
students. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20,
2338.
United Nations Development Programme (2005). Faces
of poverty, faces of hope: Vulnerability profiles of
Roma population in decade of Roma inclusion
countries. New York, NY: UNDP.
Vassilev, R. (2004). The Roma of Bulgaria: A pariah
minority. Global Review of Ethnopolitics, 3, 4051.
Verkuyten, M. (2005). The social psychology of ethnic
identity. London, UK: Psychology Press.
Verkuyten, M. (2007). Religious group identification
and inter-religious relations: A study among Turkish-
Dutch Muslims. Group Processes & Intergroup
Relations, 10, 341357.
Verkuyten, M. (2008). Life satisfaction among ethnic
minorities: The role of discrimination and group
identification. Social Indicators Research, 89,
391404.
Verkuyten, M., & Yildiz, A. A. (2009). Muslim
immigrants and religious group feelings: Self-identi-
fication and attitudes among Sunni and Alevi
Turkish-Dutch. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 32,
11211142.
Vermeersch, P., & Ram, M. H. (2009). The Roma.
In B. Rechel (Ed.), Minority rights in Central
and Eastern Europe (pp. 6173). London, UK:
Routledge.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988).
Development and validation of brief measures of
positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54,
10631070.
Yip, T., & Fuligni, A. J. (2002). Daily variation in ethnic
identity, ethnic behaviors, and psychological well-
being among American adolescents of Chinese
descent. Child Development, 73, 15571572.
Zeman, C. L., Depken, D. E., & Senchina, D. S. (2010).
Roma health issues: A review of the literature and
discussion. Ethnicity and Health, 8, 223249.
12 DIMITROVA ET AL.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
[
T
i
l
b
u
r
g
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]
a
t
0
7
:
1
7
2
5
M
a
y
2
0
1
2