LITUANUS LITHUANIAN QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ARTS AND SCIENCES   Volume 28, No.3 - Fall 1982 Editor of this issue: Antanas Klimas ISSN 0024-5089 Copyright © 1982 LITUANUS Foundation, Inc.

ETHNIC IDENTIFICATION:
A STUDY OF SECOND-GENERATION LITHUANIANS' RETENTION OF CULTURE

VIRGA JELIONIS 
Hofstra University

THE ROLE OR ETHNIC IDENTITY IN IDENTITY FORMATION.

Considerable attention has been focused recently upon the resurgence of white ethnic consciousness in movements across North America. This revival of cultural heritage and ethnogenesis may be in direct reaction to the complexion of pluralism modern society has taken on. (Dashefsky, 1976; Lambert, 1972). As we have witnessed the questioning of many social network foundations during the last decade, such as the nuclear family and the Church, the themes of alienation and anomie often surfaced. This manifests itself in individuals' sense of meaninglessness and low grasp of self-identity.

In the process of identity formation an individual draws into both a collective and a self-identity. A sense of collective identity provides foundations for a self-identity. As Klapp states:

"... a collective identity search is symptomatic of the fact that some modern social systems deprive people of psychological 'payoffs', the lack of which, expressed by terms such as alienation, meaninglessness, identity problem, motivates a mass groping for activities and symbols with which to restore or find new identity."

(Klapp, 1969, p. vii)

He goes on to explore the question . . .

"Who am I? If an individual's social context is unreliable, it follows that he cannot say anything legitimately and reliably about himself... In short, identity rests far more upon satisfaction to self and others — a pragmatic relationship — than it does either upon actual qualities of a person or the physical circumstances in which one is placed . . . (an) identity problem is almost always associated with unsatisfactory 'feedback' from others."

(Klapp, 1969, p. vii)

The formation of identity during the period of primary socialization draws alongside the development of one's ethnic identity. Banks views the benefits in this way: "Identification with and membership in an ethnic group serves many useful functions. The ethnic group provides a network of preferred individual and institutional associations through which primary group relationships are established and personalities are developed. It serves psychologically as a source of self-identification for individuals. It provides a cultural screen through which national cultural patterns of behavior and the value systems of other groups are screened, assessed and assigned meaning." (Banks, 1978, p. 243.)

An arrival at an ethnic identity however for the second generation is fraught with many difficulties. The country of one's birth and one's country of ethnic origin may pose contradictions to the individual. If he is to reconcile such images of himself within his social arena, he may have to do so while creating an 'ethnic identity' which is totally unique. It is my objective in this paper to draw upon a definition of an ethnic identity through a measure of ethnic identification. The group in question is that of second-generation Lithuanians. By exploring the degree of attachment to culture, I will try to examine the retention of culture in two groups: Lithuanian-Canadians residing in Montreal, Quebec, and Lithuanian-Americans residing in Chicago, Illinois. This study was designed to investigate cultural attachment of these two groups of second-generation Lithuanians while focusing on the somewhat different nature of the communities. A short description of the makeup of these two communities will provide a picture of their development.

SUBJECTS

A total of twenty-two subjects participated in this study: an even division of eleven subjects per group (Montreal and Chicago). Selection of the subjects was made through the author's contact with Lithuanian organizations in both cities. In Chicago the questionnaire was distributed to individuals gathered at a meeting hall in the heart of the Lithuanian community. In Montreal the author attended a practice session of the Lithuanian folk dancing ensemble and distributed the questionnaires to the individuals present. In both cases the objective was to make a selection of subjects based upon their recognized interest in the Lithuanian community. This being established, the age range for inclusion into the category of second-generation Lithuanians was set for 18-30 years. Individuals over thirty were most likely to have been born in Germany during the emigration period following Soviet annexation of Lithuania in 1940. For this reason these individuals do not qualify as second-generation Lithuanian-Canadians or Americans, due to place of birth.

The ratio of males to females within the Montreal group was eight to four. Their ages ranged from eighteen to twenty-one, with a mean age of 19.8 years. These subjects were all college or university students.

The ratio of males to females within the Chicago group was seven to four. Their ages ranged from twenty-two to twenty-nine, with a mean age of 25.0 years. All were university graduates or currently enrolled in university.

MEASURING INSTRUMENT

The questionnaire administered to the subjects was designed specifically for this study. The nature of the investigation was to determine the worth of the Lithuanian culture for the two respondent groups. Therefore the nature of the questions focused on all aspects of Lithuanian culture: family, customs, degree of nationalistic spirit, language, religion, and relationships with peer groups. Reference to similar ethnic identification questionnaires was made in the design of this particular questionnaire (McCormick and Balla, 1973; Musonis, unpublished).

Each subject was presented with a range of statements concerning how specific spheres of Lithuanian culture affect his/her life personally. The subject was asked to indicate at which point on a six point scale of satisfaction/dissatisfaction he/she found himself to fall. Other questions indicated Yes or No responses.

The areas to be covered may be categorized by these themes:

A. General Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction with Social/Cultural Life

    Question: A (see Results section and Appendix) 

B. Involvement Status in the Community

    Questions: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 14, 17 

C. Future Family Plans

    Question: 12 

D. Faith and Views on Religion and the Church

    Questions: 27, 28 

E. Views on Lithuania and Nationalism

    Questions: 6, 8, 13, 18, 19, 21, 31 

F. Peer Relationships

    Questions: 9, 16, 20, 22 

G. Customs and Traditions

    Questions: 23, 24, 25, 26, 30 

H. Lithuanian Education and Language

    Questions: 10, 11, 15, 29

THE MONTREAL COMMUNITY

There is a Lithuanian population of approximately two thousand in Montreal. The two Catholic parishes, one in Ville LaSalle and the older parish in Montreal, are the hubs of Lithuanian social and cultural activities. Aušros Vartų parish in Ville LaSalle was established after the Second World War when the number of immigrants had increased rapidly. The parish encompasses such organizations as the choir, scouts, Ateitis-students, Sports Club "Tauras", tertiaries, the Living Rosary Society, St. Ann's Society, Confraternity of Mary, the Lithuanian Canadian Women's Society, and others. The parish also sponsors a Lithuanian Saturday school which had an enrollment of forty-two during the 1980-81 school year. The greatest concentration of Lithuanians resides within the general vicinity of the parish, although there is no designated Lithuanian neighborhood as such.

THE CHICAGO COMMUNITY

The Chicago community boasts the largest Lithuanian population abroad, approximately ten thousand in number. There are six Roman Catholic parishes in the city itself. The hub of the Lithuanian cultural center is the Jesuit chapel and Lithuanian Youth Center. Through the center many clubs and organizations plan their activities. Chicago boasts of: ten Lithuanian Saturday schools, the Lithuanian Pedagogical Institute, scout organizations, approximately a dozen folk dancing groups, the Lithuanian Youth Organization headquarters, two daily newspapers, numerous journals and periodicals, sports clubs, choirs, and many other organizations and societies.

The Marquette Park area, on Chicago's southwest side, has been a long-time predominantly Lithuanian residential area. It was renamed Lithuanian Plaza in 1975 by Chicago's Mayor Richard Daley. It is a tribute to the hard-working immigrants who have developed the cultural spirit of the community so that it now rests as an ethnic showplace, to its residents and tourists alike. The main street through Lithuanian Plaza boasts of five Lithuanian restaurants, eleven bars/taverns, six delicatessens and various other stores, boutiques and a medical center. The Lithuanian community's efforts to leave a distinctive cultural mark upon the city of Chicago have not been discontinued.

RESULTS

                            1. entirely satisfied

                            2. mostly satisfied

                            3. somewhat satisfied

                            4. somewhat dissatisfied

                            5. mostly dissatisfied

                            6. entirely dissatisfied

Some people seem to be quite happy and satisfied with their social/cultural lives while others seem quite unhappy and dissatisfied. Suppose that a person who is entirely satisfied with social and cultural life would be at the top of the above scale and a person who is extremely dissatisfied with his life would be at the bottom of the scale.

Where would you put yourself on the scale at the present stage of your life in terms of how satisfied or dissatisfied you are with your own social and cultural life?

                            1. entirely agree

                            2. mostly agree

                            3. somewhat agree

                            4. somewhat disagree

                            5. mostly disagree

                            6. entirely disagree

Having a recognized place in my ethnic community is important to me.   

I derive a great deal of satisfaction from my involvement in my ethnic community.

 

1	2	3	4	5	6
__________________________________________________________________________________
27%	27%	19%	9%	9%	9%	(C)
45%	9%	9%	-	-	-	(M)

I feel good about myself when I think of my involvement in my ethnic community.

I gain feelings of self-worth from the position I occupy in my ethnic community.

I feel most satisfied when I am engaged in social activities with other Lithuanians.

I am interested in the future of the Lithuanian homeland.

I feel most satisfied when I am engaged in activities within the Lithuanian community.

 I feel it is important that Lithuanian-(Americans/Canadians) visit Lithuania at least once in their lifetime.

I feel most satisfied when I am in the circle of my Lithuanian friends.

I feel it is important that Lithuanian-(American/Canadian-an) children attend Saturday school.

I feel it is important that Lithuanian-(Americans/Canadians) respect their parents' wishes to speak Lithuanian in their parents' home.

I would want my children to be raised in a Lithuanian environment (i.e. attend Lithuanian school, speak Lithuanian in the home, socialize with other Lithuanians, participate in Lithuanian organizations and clubs, etc.)

It is important for Lithuanian-(Americans/Canadians) to stay together as a closely-knit group for the purpose of keeping the culture alive and growing outside the homeland.

Those Lithuanian-(Americans/Canadians) who move away from involvement in the Lithuanian community are less respected by other Lithuanians than those who stay within.

Lithuanian-(Americans/Canadians) should speak Lithuanian amongst themselves.

Lithuanian-(Americans/Canadians) should socialize as much as possible with members of their own ethnic group.

In order to keep the Lithuanian culture alive in North America Lithuanian-(Americans/Canadians) should participate as fully as possible in their own cultural community.

It is important that other (Americans/Canadians) be made aware of the Lithuanians' fight for freedom for their homeland.

To be a Lithuanian-fAmerican/Canadian) means to carry responsibility to be politically active in the fight for Lithuania's freedom.

I feel "left out" when I am in circles other than my Lithuanian circle of acquaintances.

I have a duty to educate others about the Lithuanian culture.

Of those people whom you would call your friends what proportion are Lithuanian?

I always celebrate Christmas Eve Supper (Lith. Kūčios) with my family.

I always celebrate Lithuanian Independence Day (February 16th).

I celebrate February 16th by attending a Lithuanian function.

I always celebrate Easter with my family. 

I attend Mass at a Lithuanian church:

I attend Mass at a Lithuanian church only as an obligation I am fulfilling for my parents.

Lithuanians should make themselves known by their Lithuanian names in all of their non-Lithuanian environments.

I believe the family is important in keeping our culture alive.

A am very conscious of, or preoccupied with, my nationality.

The results of this study indicate that overall, second-generation Lithuanian-Americans and Canadians view their culture, their faith and themselves quite seriously. The majority of the respondents expressed an overall general satisfaction with the state of their social and cultural lives. They value their degree of participation in the Lithuanian community; there were few exceptions to those holding this view — that the ethnic community was an integral part of their lives. It may be hypothesized from an analysis of the Chicago sample that many of these subjects feel this way because they have the ability to freely choose their involvement level within the community; the mean age (25.0 years) and completion of years of study of these respondents indicate that many may be functioning as self-sufficient members of the community. In the Montreal sample on the other hand, the mean age (19.8 years) and the fact that all are college or university students may point to a picture of greater parental influence in their lives yet (i.e. less degree of self-sufficiency).

A significant majority (over 80% of respondents in both groups) indicated a preference for a social life involving other Lithuanians. This may lead to speculation that the Lithuanian community is a focal part of their lives. If this is the case, it is interesting to note the respondents' views on nationalism and the future of the Lithuanian homeland.

Their responses form a picture of a positive outlook toward nationalistic concerns. The majority of the respondents feel a responsibility to maintain the nationalistic spirit of their parents. They also believe that they have a responsibility to inform others of the ongoing fight for Lithuania's freedom. It is a significant finding that the second-generation's response is strong toward nationalistic duty. Again, the contrast in age between the two groups appears to have no bearing on the strength of nationalistic conviction, once an individual has removed himself from direct influence by parents and educational institutions within the community.

The respondents' views on maintaining a strong cultural commitment shows itself in their present lives. However, there appears to be some ambivalence about opinions of those Lithuanians who move away from involvement in the community. Considering the strength of nationalistic conviction earlier expressed, it appears that this may be more of a personal conviction and that second-generation Lithuanians may see less of a united group effort toward nationalistic preservation than their parents. This may somewhat explain some degree of the Chicago respondents' ambivalence toward raising their children in a Lithuanian environment. (Over a quarter of these respondents did not agree with strict Lithuanian child-rearing practices.)

A significant majority of respondents (90%) believe that they have a responsibility to inform their North American countrymen of the fight for Lithuania's freedom. This response, as an indication of a mission in life that second-generation Lithuanians believe in, points to a positive future for Lithuanian nationalism, be it more on a personal basis rather than their parents' united group effort. A recommendation for leaders of Lithuanian communities may be that of working to help instill pride in the second-generation's ethnic heritage which will carry over in contacts with non-Lithuanians. This point in discussion may be made in reference to cultural assistance programs supported by the government. For example, in Canada the Prime Minister's statement to the House of Commons (press release, 1971) indicates such a policy of support: "In implementing a policy of multiculturalism within a bilingual framework the Government will provide support in four ways . . . First, resources permitting, the government will seek to assist all Canadian cultural groups that have demonstrated a desire and effort to continue to develop, a capacity to grow and contribute to Canada, and a clear need for assistance, the small and weak groups no less than the strong and highly organized." (Office of the Prime Minister, 1971)

We can see then that Canada's policy-makers have for years been guided by the notion of working toward a strength of cultural diversity as contributing to the cultural kaleidoscope of Canada. And ethnic group preservation is dependent on ethnic honor preservation. A pluralistic society threatens ethnic honor — ethnic groups need to be maintained in strength if ethnic honor is to be sustained. (Bottomley, 1976)

A great portion of ethnic solidarity is drawn through ties to customs and traditions. The majority of respondents (a significantly greater proportion in the Montreal group) celebrated Lithuanian holidays with their families. The preservation of such traditions is a focal point of ethnic consciousness. Again the greater involvement of the Montreal respondents in these practices may indicate more parental influence while children are still living at home. As to their observation of religious holidays, the ;respondents again showed a division between the two groups. Stricter observation of these holidays was noted within the Montreal group — again parental influence may be a factor.

There appeared strong agreement among the respondents that their Lithuanian names be used outside the Lithuanian community. This may point to a preservation of ethnic honor again on a personal basis.

The contrast in mean age of respondents between the two groups (25.0 = Chicago; 19.8 = Montreal) may indicate that several factors were operating in the selection of involvement level within the cultural milieu. The Chicago group, falling within an older age range, is also set within a culturally more cohesive environment (see community description section). Following the description of the Chicago community, it is easy enough to note that the variety of social involvement opportunities within the community itself is greater than any similar opportunity for involvement in the Montreal community. Chicago's Lithuanian Plaza' neighborhood affords the second-generation Lithuanian with opportunities to fully immerse himself in the stream of cultural life. This he may do by selecting all his social activities to revolve within the Lithuanian community (political, religious organizations, folk ensembles, opera choirs, etc.). He need not even venture out of the community to find night time entertainment with the Lithuanian bars, playhouses and restaurants nearby. It is the existence of these purely social meeting places that allows the Chicago-Lithuanian to melt and interact with others of varying community-involvement status. Such is not the case in Montreal, as there is no common meeting-place for Lithuanians other than Aušros Vartų parish hall in Ville LaSalle, Quebec. The parish hall serves as the meeting site for all Lithuanian functions — but this must bear mention that organizational involvement interest is most usually the prerequisite for attendance at these functions. A peripheral involvement status is more difficult to achieve under these circumstances. In Chicago however, the range of involvement varies from the member who belongs to many clubs and organizations to the occasional frequenter of the bars and restaurants, who maintains his ties to the community by 'capturing the flavor of the culture' every now and then. The social environment in Chicago therefore affords the Lithuanian-American who has completed his Saturday school education the opportunity to drift in and out of the cultural milieu. It is interesting to note then at this point the many similar responses of both groups in this study, given the difference in age and involvement status. It would have proved of significant worth to have measured actual community involvement status (i.e. membership in clubs, organizations) of both groups. With the results obtained, we can only surmise that some proportion of the Chicago respondents may be peripheral community members. The Montreal group, as has already been noted, was self-selected as they were members of the folk dance ensemble at the time of the study. It would be interesting to note if any difference would exist within this (Montreal) group's response patterns at a later age. Some results may already indicate Lithuanian-Canadians, upon completion of Lithuanian studies in Montreal, do show a tendency to drift away from any type of community involvement. (Lukoševičius, 1974) Some speculation on the opportunity for non-organizational involvement in Montreal may be in order: does the lack of social meeting places in the Montreal community contribute to a general attitude of disinterest in organized involvement?

The results of this study which indicate that second-generation Lithuanians are concerned with nationalism and the future of Lithuania point to a need for channels for outlet of these convictions in a manner that may be different from the organized political action of their parents.

It appears that there is a significant degree of ethnic identification within these groups of second-generation Lithuanians. Drawing from the introductory discussion of self and collective identity formation, it is interesting to note the position of the second-generation Lithuanian in respect to his social status. The concept of the "marginal man" as put forth by E. V. Stonequist has formed some of the basis of research in ethnic identity. (Stonequist, 1937) Stonequist's definition of the marginal man is seen as ". . . the individual who lives in, or has ties of kinship with, two or more interacting societies between which there exists sufficient incompatibility to render his own adjustment to them difficult or impossible. He does not quite 'belong' or feel at home in either group." (Antonovsky, 1956, p. 58). Stonequist states that "(Children of immigrants) are the meeting point of two streams of culture. To the extent that the two cultures conflict they experience this conflict as a personal problem." (Stonequist, 1937, p. 96)

In this discussion of second-generation Lithuanians' ethnic identification, it appears that there is a high level of self and collective-identification with the ethnic community. The results point to a picture of a cohesiveness in cultural views which may have a bearing on the developmental adjustment process of these individuals. The respondents stated their commitment to, and satisfaction with their ties to the ethnic community. One may exaggerate by over- or under- emphasizing the adjustments required of those who do balance two cultural roles. Questions of interest to explore further would be the following: whether the demands placed on the second-generation necessarily generate conflicts; whether the experience with two cultures possibly broadens and liberalizes the individual, or whether some combination of both outcomes is typical. A speculation in respect to this study would be that, given the different composition of the two respondent groups, results would point to the combination of conflict-resolution and liberalized views on ethnic identification.

LIMITATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

A major consideration when examining the results of this study is the questionnaire designed specifically for this study.

It would have proved useful to expand the personal data section by requesting specific information on community involvement (i.e. to which clubs, organizations do you belong?). This information would provide a clearer picture of participation status and would show concrete results of stated convictions to the culture. Another critical area to explore is that of language retention. An important question to build into such a questionnaire would be that of the circumstances surrounding Lithuanian language usage (i.e. Lithuanian spoken among friends or only with family, pure or with English intrusions, etc.)

Other points for investigation would be the characteristics of the respondents. For example a difference, if any, between male and female responses could be explored. Also, differences in years of education completed could be investigated — characteristics of involvement of those individuals with less education as opposed to those with advanced education. Sample size needs to be expanded for any significant predictions to be made.

CONCLUSIONS

In spite of the limitations mentioned above, there are a number of conclusions stemming from this study. First of all, there is good indication that the efforts of Lithuanian immigrants to raise their children with a keen regard for their culture have paid off. Whatever the actual involvement status of the respondents within the sample group, a picture was formed of relative cohesion and satisfaction of the second-generations' chosen role in the society.

Both groups, despite the difference in number of social meeting places, showed roughly similar cultural appreciation patterns. It would be interesting to follow the development of both communities with the rise of the third generation. Ethnic assimilation patterns may show differences between the two cities as degree of segregation changes. It is again the number of individuals within a cohesively-structured community which support the life of the community. As Lieberson states, ". . . presumably the actual size of the group is a factor influencing the effect which a given degree of segregation could have on ethnic assimilation. Presumably the sheer number of a group as well as their spatial location would influence a group's capacity to support certain institutions and services such as ethnic voluntary associations and stores specializing in ethnic foods and groceries ... If a group was sufficiently large in number it could probably support a given service even if the group was not segregated at all in the city." (Lieberson, 1963, p. 37). It will be interesting to note, as the Lithuanian community in Chicago decentralizes, what effect residence in the outlying areas of Chicago will have on the cultural community, within the third generation.

All this leads us to speculate on the nature of ethnic group solidarity in time to come. As much ethnicity research shows us, the passionate cultural survival strategies of the immigrants become diffused with each approaching generation. For instance, immigrants' segregation is viewed as a form of adaptation — necessary for establishment of the community in the new host country, but disappearing with each coming generation's interest in status-seeking outside the immediate community (Lieberson, 1963; Stonequist, 1937). So it is that the nature of ethnic cohesion is predetermined by need and necessarily subject to change. As Schermerhorn states, ". . . ethnic groups are not the natural biological divisions of mankind, but temporary alignments of people created by communication channels . . . Ethnic: groups disappear when consciousness of kind is altered, when people change their self-conceptions." (Schermerhorn, 1974, p. 2)

"Hence, ethnicity is a matter of a double boundary, a boundary from within, maintained by the socialization process, and a boundary from without established by the process of intergroup relations. It is in terms of the relationship between these two boundaries that the differences between ethnicity in Canada and in the U.S. can be most fruitfully compared. 1 would suggest that the basic difference lies in the external boundaries. It is not so much a matter of faster or slower assimilation, and non-assimilation. More significantly it is a matter of how the various ethnic groups are perceived and identified by others in the two societies, but especially how they are perceived and identified by the power-holding, policy-making and influence-exerting bodies of the two societies. Thus the external ethnic boundaries would be reflected in the reasons and rationales behind specific immigration policies, cultural policies, and the like."

(Schermerhorn, 1974, p. 122)

So it is that ethnic cultures cannot merely be 'allowed' to exist for the benefit of ethnic groups themselves. They can only flourish if their fellow countrymen demonstrate an active desire not only to learn about and understand ethnic cultures, but also to internalize at least certain elements of such cultures within the greater society.

REFERENCES

Antonovsky, A. Toward a Refinement of the "Marginal Man" Concept. Social Forces. Vol. 35. Oct. 1956. pp. 57-62. 
Banks. J. Ethnicity in Contemporary American Society. Ethnicity Journal. Vol. 5. 1978. pp. 238-251.
Bottomley. G. Ethnicity and Identity Among Creek-Australians. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology. Vol. 12, No. 2. June 1976. pp. 118-124.
Brittan, A. The privatised world. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1977. 
Canada, Office of the Prime Minister. Statement by the Prime Minister.
House of Commons, October 8. 1971. Ottawa: House of Commons. 1971. 
Cox, D. C. Pluralism in Australia. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology. Vol. 12, No. 2, June 1976, pp. 112-113.
Dashevsky, A. Ethnic Identity in Society. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1976.
Fainhauz, D. Lithuanians in Multi-Ethnic Chicago. Chicago, IL: Lithuanian Library Press, Inc. and Loyola University Press, 1977. 
Gaida, P., Kairys, S., et al. Lithuanians in Canada. Toronto, Ont: Lights Printing and Publishing Co., Ltd. and Time Press Litho Ltd., 1967. 
Gordon, M. Assimilation in American Life. New York; Oxford University Press, 1964. 
Harris, R. M. and Smolicz, J. J. Anglo-Australian Views of Ethnics. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology. Vol. 12, No. 2, June 1976, pp. 148-51. 
Johnston, R. The Concept of the "Marginal Man": A Refinement of the Term. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology. Vol. 12, No. 2, June 1976, pp. 145-147. 
Klapp, J. Collective Search for Identity. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 1969. 
Lambert. W. E. Language, Psychology and Culture. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1972. 
Lieberson, S. Ethnic Patterns in American Cities. New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1963. 
Lukoševičius, l. Lietuvių socialinė veikla organizacijose. (Lithuanian Social Involvement in Organizations.; L. K. M. Akademijos Suvažiavimo Darbai, 1974, Vol. VIII, pp. 289-312. 
McCormick, M. and Balla, D. Self-image Disparity and Attachment to Ethnic Subculture, Journal of Psychology. Vol. 84, 1973, pp. 97-104. 
Musonis, V. Moksleiviu Ateitininkų Charakteristikos Apžvalga. (An Overview of Lithuanian Catholic Students' Society Members.) unpublished research study, Chicago, 1981. (available from: V. Musonis, 10529 S. Kildare. Oak Lawn, IL) 
Schermerhorn, R. A. Ethnicity in the Perspective of the Sociology of Knowledge. Ethnicity Journal. Vol. I, 1974, pp. 1-13. 
Stonequist, E. V. The Marginal Man. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons,1937.