JurnalPost.com - Indonesia grows through a diversity that is deeply woven into daily life. Differences in language, customs, beliefs, and communication styles are inherent to social interaction. However, living amidst such diversity does not automatically mean that everyone understands these differences.
Imagine a student from North Sumatra who has just moved to Central Java to pursue their education. In the first few weeks of classes, they begin to notice differences in how they communicate with their peers.
When inviting someone to eat together, they receive the reply, "Maybe later." To them, this answer feels vague and lacks certainty. Similarly, when expressing an opinion directly, some of their friends perceive their speaking style as too harsh.
Meanwhile, friends accustomed to more subtle communication feel uncomfortable with such a direct style. Yet, neither party intends to offend or belittle the other.
This situation illustrates that misunderstandings do not always stem from hostility. Sometimes, the issue originates from a lack of awareness regarding the habits and cultural values of others.
Such events occur in campus life, workplaces, communities, and even within families. In the digital space, differences that should be opportunities for mutual discovery often devolve into debates fueled by prejudice.
Indonesia holds the motto Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Unity in Diversity), derived from the Kakawin Sutasoma by Mpu Tantular. The motto carries a message of unity amidst difference. However, the value of unity is not enough if it is merely memorized or recited in ceremonial activities.
Diversity requires understanding, awareness, and concrete action so that it does not remain a mere symbol. It is in this context that multicultural psychology plays a crucial role.
Multicultural psychology examines how cultural backgrounds influence how humans think, feel, behave, and build social relationships. This approach helps explain why individuals may view the same action differently despite facing the same situation.
Culture Shapes How Humans Think and Communicate
Every individual grows up in a social environment with specific values and habits. From a young age, a person learns how to speak, show respect, express disagreement, and make decisions through interactions with family and society.
Markus and Kitayama (1991) explain two concepts of self-orientation, namely the independent self and the interdependent self.
The independent self orientation emphasizes autonomy, uniqueness, and individual freedom in making choices. Meanwhile, the interdependent self places greater emphasis on social relationships, interconnectedness with others, and the importance of maintaining group harmony.
These differing orientations can influence communication patterns in daily life.
For example, in some Javanese cultural environments, expressing opinions indirectly can be a way to protect others' feelings. Conversely, in environments accustomed to direct communication, openness is often viewed as a form of honesty.
Neither approach can be immediately judged as better or worse. Each holds meaning within its specific cultural context. Furthermore, not all individuals from the same cultural group share identical communication styles.
Problems arise when someone uses their own cultural standards to judge the behavior of others.
A firm speaking style may be considered impolite, while cautious communication may be misinterpreted as being closed off. Such judgments have the potential to create social distance if not accompanied by a desire to understand.
Henrich, Heine, and Norenzayan (2010) also remind us that many psychological findings to date have been developed based on research on Western societies. Therefore, their application to societies with different cultural backgrounds must consider local social contexts.
For Indonesia, this perspective is a compelling reason to continue developing psychological studies that account for local cultural diversity.
Pride in Identity Does Not Require Belittling Other Groups
Cultural identity is an essential part of human life. One can feel proud of their regional language, family traditions, religion, or the community in which they grew up.
Such pride is not inherently wrong. Group identity can provide a sense of belonging, social support, and self-esteem.
In social identity theory, Tajfel and Turner (1979) explain that part of an individual's self-concept is formed through their membership in social groups.
However, a strong attachment to one's own group can also lead to a tendency to differentiate one's own group from others.
When this differentiation is accompanied by negative judgments, pride can evolve into prejudice, discrimination, and even conflict.
This situation is easily encountered when someone assumes their regional culture is the most polite, their group is the most superior, or that the habits of other communities are inferior to their own.
Yet, maintaining one's identity does not require rejecting the identity of others.
Gaertner and Dovidio (2000) introduced the concept of common ingroup identity, an approach that encourages different groups to see themselves as part of a broader, shared identity.
In national life, the identity of being an Indonesian citizen can serve as a meeting ground for various cultural, ethnic, and religious identities.
In line with this, Verkuyten (2005) discusses how ethnic identity and intergroup relations are formed in diverse societies. Ethnic and national identities do not have to be positioned as mutually exclusive.
One can still love their home region while simultaneously possessing a sense of responsibility toward national unity.
Thus, Bhinneka Tunggal Ika is not an invitation to homogenize the entire society. Its strength lies in the ability to build togetherness without erasing individual identities.
Reducing Prejudice through Meaningful Encounters
One of the greatest challenges in a multicultural society is prejudice.
Prejudice often forms before someone truly knows the individual or group they are judging. Information from family environments, generational stories, limited experiences, and social media content can influence how one views other groups.
As a result, stereotypes easily develop into perceived truths, even when they are not supported by adequate experience or evidence.
Allport (1954), through the contact hypothesis, explains that intergroup interaction has the potential to reduce prejudice, especially when supported by conditions such as equal status, common goals, cooperation, and institutional support.
This idea later gained support through a meta-analysis by Pettigrew and Tropp (2006), which found a correlation between intergroup contact and lower levels of prejudice.
These findings indicate that the mere presence of different groups in one environment is not necessarily enough to build understanding.
Students from various regions, for example, may study at the same campus but still limit their social circles to friends with similar backgrounds.
Conversely, group activities involving students from diverse cultures can open opportunities to get to know one another, exchange experiences, and understand different perspectives.
Through cooperation, one no longer merely knows other groups based on stereotypes, but through the experience of interacting with individuals directly.
Therefore, efforts to nurture diversity must provide space for meaningful encounters, rather than just placing different groups in the same location.
Migration, Cultural Adjustment, and Often Unconscious Discrimination
Societal mobility makes intercultural encounters increasingly frequent. Education, work, marriage, and relocation bring individuals into environments with social values that may differ from their places of origin.
This adjustment process can be understood through the concept of acculturation.
Berry (1997) proposed four acculturation strategies: integration, assimilation, separation, and marginalization.
Integration occurs when an individual maintains their original cultural identity while building relationships with the new culture. Assimilation emphasizes adjustment to the new culture, while separation describes the tendency to maintain the original culture with limited involvement in the new environment.
Meanwhile, marginalization relates to a weak connection to both the original culture and the broader society.
In many contexts, integration is associated with better psychological adjustment, although the results are also influenced by societal acceptance and the social conditions the individual faces.
A migrant student, for example, does not need to abandon their regional language or family traditions to be accepted in a campus environment. They can maintain that identity while learning the habits of the local community.
However, the adjustment process does not always run smoothly. There are times when one faces treatment that seems simple but creates a feeling of not being accepted.
In psychological studies, this phenomenon can be discussed through the concept of microaggression or microaggressions.
Sue and colleagues (2007) define microaggressions as forms of insults, belittlement, or negative messages that can occur in daily interactions, including when the perpetrator is unaware of the impact of their words.
For example, the comment, "Wow, your Indonesian is so good," directed at someone simply because they are from a certain region, may sound like a compliment.
However, in certain contexts, that comment can also create the impression that the person is viewed as an outsider who does not fully belong to the same community.
The impact of a comment must certainly be understood based on the context and the recipient's experience. Nevertheless, this example reminds us that a remark considered normal by one person may not be received with the same meaning by another.
Therefore, cultural sensitivity is not only about the ability to respect different traditions but also the willingness to evaluate how we speak to and treat others.
Building Multicultural Sensitivity in Daily Life
The ability to understand cultural differences is not something that appears automatically. This sensitivity can be learned and developed through experience, education, and self-reflection.
Bennett (1986) explains the development of intercultural sensitivity through stages that move from an ethnocentric worldview toward an ethnorelative perspective.
In an ethnocentric orientation, one tends to view their own culture as the center of judgment. Meanwhile, an ethnorelative perspective encourages individuals to understand that social behaviors and values need to be viewed within their cultural context.
This understanding becomes the foundation for building several concrete steps in community life.
First, normalize cross-cultural cooperation in educational environments.
Schools and universities have a strategic role in bringing together individuals from various backgrounds.
Collaborative learning can be designed by involving participants from different social groups. Through these activities, students learn to solve problems together without making identity differences an obstacle.
Educators also need to create learning environments that provide equal opportunities to all students.
Second, develop culturally sensitive counseling and health services.
An individual's psychological experience cannot be separated from family values, social habits, beliefs, and how society understands mental health.
Sue, Arredondo, and McDavis (1992) emphasize the importance of multicultural competence in counseling practice.
Professionals need to be aware of potential personal biases, understand the client's background, and adjust their approach to the needs and cultural values of the individual being served.
Approaches that ignore cultural context risk causing misunderstandings and reducing the effectiveness of services.
Third, strengthen spaces for encounter within society.
Indonesia has various social practices that can serve as a means to strengthen intergroup relationships.
Gotong royong (mutual cooperation), pela gandong (a traditional brotherhood bond), and village deliberations are examples of social practices that can support togetherness through cooperation and collective responsibility.
In Indonesian anthropological studies, Koentjaraningrat (2009) provides a foundation for understanding the relationship between culture and the social life of the community.
These values need to be kept alive through activities that involve citizens without distinguishing their backgrounds.
Fourth, build responsibility in communication within the digital space.
Social media allows information to spread rapidly. However, this ease also opens space for the spread of stereotypes, insults, and content that sharpens identity differences.
Before sharing information related to ethnicity, religion, race, or specific groups, the public needs to get into the habit of verifying the source and understanding the context.
Differences of opinion should not be a reason to belittle the dignity of others.
Fifth, start change from self-awareness.
One simple step in building multicultural sensitivity is to refrain from immediately judging habits that feel foreign.
When encountering different behaviors, one can try to understand the reasons and meanings behind them.
Instead of saying that a habit is strange or wrong, questions like "Why is that habit important to them?" can open space for healthier dialogue.
Curiosity, a willingness to listen, and a readiness to correct personal prejudices are essential foundations for building social relationships that respect one another.
Making Bhinneka Tunggal Ika a Practice, Not Just a Slogan
Diversity is a reality that cannot be separated from the life of the Indonesian nation. However, that reality does not automatically produce harmonious social relationships.
Differences can be a source of strength when society has the ability to understand, appreciate, and cooperate. Conversely, without adequate understanding, differences have the potential to become a source of misunderstanding and conflict.
Multicultural psychology provides a scientific foundation for understanding that human behavior is influenced by experience, identity, and the cultural environment in which one grows up.
Through this approach, society is invited to see individuals more holistically, not merely based on the group labels attached to them.
Nurturing Bhinneka Tunggal Ika means giving everyone the opportunity to maintain their identity without losing their sense of belonging to the shared life.
Multiculturalism is not sufficiently realized through passive tolerance. Active engagement is required to learn about other cultures, build equal communication, and reduce prejudice in daily interactions.
Ultimately, unity does not always start with grand steps. Unity can grow from the willingness to listen to others' experiences, understand different perspectives, and work together without questioning someone's origins.
Bhinneka Tunggal Ika will find more tangible meaning when diversity is not only celebrated in symbols and commemorations, but is truly present in how society treats its fellow human beings.
Because being different is not a reason to distance ourselves from one another. It is precisely through those differences that humans have the opportunity to learn, understand, and grow together.
About the Author
Violin Thesalonika is a Master of Science in Psychology student at Soegijapranata Catholic University. Through her writing, she discusses multicultural psychology, cultural diversity, social identity, and the importance of building an attitude of mutual understanding and respect for differences in society.
References
Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.
Bennett, M. J. (1986). A developmental approach to training for intercultural sensitivity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10(2), 179–196.
Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology, 46(1), 5–34.
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. Psychology Press.
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–83.
Koentjaraningrat. (2009). Pengantar ilmu antropologi. Rineka Cipta.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253.
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751–783.
Sue, D. W., Arredondo, P., & McDavis, R. J. (1992). Multicultural counseling competencies and standards: A call to the profession. Journal of Counseling & Development, 70(4), 477–486.
Sue, D. W., Capodilupo, C. M., Torino, G. C., Bucceri, J. M. B., Holder, A. M. B., Nadal, K. L., & Esquilin, M. (2007). Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications for clinical practice. American Psychologist, 62(4), 271–286.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.
Verkuyten, M. (2005). The social psychology of ethnic identity. Psychology Press.
Comments 0
Write a Comment Share your response