The Influence of Culture, Self-Reported

Multicultural Counseling Competence,

and Shifting Standards of Judgment on
Perceptions of Family Functioning of
White Family Counselors
George V. Gushue, Madonna G. Constantine, and Daniel T. Sciarra

This study examines the perceptions of 163 White family counselors who reported their overall impressions of family
functioning in response to a fictitious case report. On the intake summary, the family was identified as either Latino or
White. Aside from the names used for family members, the cases were identical. Participants assigned significantly
higher (i.e., healthier) ratings to the Latino family as compared with the White family. However, this effect was moderated
by self-reported multicultural counseling knowledge and awareness. Implications of the findings are discussed.

Over the past several decades, the field of counseling has the critical influence of racial and cultural contexts on family
increasingly emphasized the importance of adopting a multi- systems (e.g., Gushue & Sciarra, 1995; Jencius & Duba, 2002;
cultural framework to understand clients, design interventions, Sanchez, 2001; Sciarra, 1999; D. W. Sue & Sue, 2003). With
and train future practitioners (e.g., Ponterotto, Casas, Suzuki, the recognition of the importance of culture, there has been
& Alexander, 2001). It has been noted, for instance, that the growing acknowledgement of the need to train multiculturally
unexamined cultural assumptions of White counselors might competent family practitioners (Constantine, Juby, & Liang,
cause them to view the behaviors and values of members of 2001; Falicov, 1983, 1988, 1995; Goodwin, 1997; Halevy,
other cultural groups as deviant rather than simply different 1998). Much of the recent family literature has highlighted
from their own (e.g., D. W. Sue & Sue, 2003). Such perspec- the myriad ways in which race and culture influence families,
tives could potentially lead them to overdiagnose as patho- both those that are functioning well and those that present for
logical some behaviors that are in fact normative for other mental health treatment (e.g., Boyd-Franklin, 1989; Falicov,
cultural groups (Abreu, 1999; Lopez, 1983; Sciarra, 1999; 1998; McGoldrick, Giordano, & Pearce, 1996). However,
D. Sue, Sue, & Sue, 2003). research on how race or culture may affect counselors in
With the application of multicultural theory to practice, their interactions with families has been less extensive. In the
increasing attention has been given to the development of spe- only empirical study to our knowledge that examined family
cific aspects of multicultural competence (i.e., the knowledge, counselors racial attitudes, Constantine et al. (2001) found a
awareness, and skills that characterize effective multicultural relationship between racism and White racial identity attitudes
helping in applied settings; e.g., Constantine & Ladany, 2000, and self-perceived multicultural competence. The current
2001; D. W. Sue, Arredondo, & McDavis, 1992; D. W. Sue et study addresses the effect of culture on family practitioners.
al., 1998). The multicultural paradigm has had a significant It examines, first, how cultural stereotypes might influence
impact across many of the domains that typify the work of White family counselors perceptions of family functioning
counselors, especially career development (e.g., Flores & and, second, how self-reported multicultural knowledge and
OBrien, 2002; Fouad, 1993; Gomez et al., 2001; Richie et al., awareness might moderate the effect of cultural stereotypes.
1997), mental health (e.g., Aponte & Wohl, 2000; Constantine, An area of particular interest for family counselors has been
2001; Paniagua, 2001), school counseling (e.g., Constantine & the effects of race and culture on family assessment (Gushue,
Gushue, 2003; Sciarra, 2001b, 2004), health (e.g., Hoffman, 1993; Sciarra, 2001a; Tseng & Hsu, 1991). A number of con-
1993; Newcomb et al., 1998), and group counseling (e.g., ceptual models designed to help clinicians incorporate culture
Greeley, Garcia, Kessler, & Gilchrest, 1992; Merta, 1995), into family evaluations have been suggested (e.g., Congress,
to name a few. It comes as no surprise, then, that family 1994; Falicov, 1988; Gushue, 1993; Mailick & Vigilante,
counselors and therapists have also progressively emphasized 1997). In speaking of family assessment, Falicov (1995)
George V. Gushue and Madonna G. Constantine, Department of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, Teachers College, Columbia
University; Daniel T. Sciarra, Department of Counseling, Research, Special Education, and Rehabilitation, Hofstra University. The
authors gratefully acknowledge the collaboration of Alkmini Boutri, Annmarie Campanella, William Concepcion, Jessica Costosa,
Penelope Giannakopoulas, Catalina Gomez, Tracy Juliao, Rosemary McCullough, Antigoni Mertika, Karen Pantzer, Catherine Sul-
livan, and Melissa Whitson. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to George V. Gushue, Box 64, Department
of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, Teachers College, Columbia University, 525 W. 120th Street, New York, NY 10027 (e-mail:
gvg3@columbia.edu).

2008 by the American Counseling Association. All rights reserved.

Journal of Counseling & Development Winter 2008 Volume 86 85

referred to the omnipresent danger of confusing culture
with dysfunction, or of ignoring dysfunction in the name of
cultural respect (p. 384), problems that Lopez (1983) termed
overpathologizing and minimizing, respectively. Although
the topic of overpathologizing often has been addressed in
the counseling literature (e.g., D. W. Sue & Sue, 2003), a
few recent studies have considered the question of minimiz-
ing in the context of clinical assessment. It is thought that a
systematic, culturally elicited minimizing bias in evaluation
might be the result of the desire of White counselors to appear
nonprejudiced (Abreu, 1999), or of differing race-based cogni-
tive schemas that create divergent expectations, which in turn
result in different mental health judgments (Gushue, 2004),
or some combination of these two. Because accurate assess-
ment provides the foundation for good treatment, continued
examination of how racial and cultural dynamics may affect
initial clinical judgments about families would seem essential
to training multiculturally competent family counselors.
Recently, Biernat and her colleagues (Biernat & Ko-
brynowicz, 1997; Biernat & Manis, 1994; Biernat, Manis, &
Nelson, 1991) have proposed a Shifting Standards Model of
how racial or cultural stereotypes could influence judgment.
These authors suggested that when making subjective judg-
ments about a member of a group for which social stereotypes
exist, evaluators unconsciously shift the standards they use to
arrive at a judgment. Specifically, the authors proposed that
judges automatically compare individuals with other mem-
bers of a salient social group and not to everyone in general,
sometimes with counterintuitive effects. For example, Biernat
and her colleagues noted that the observation that a particular
woman is tall is usually based on an implicit comparison
with other members of her social group (i.e., women), rather
than on a comparison with people in general. Thus, what is
understood in this case is that the individual in question is tall
for a woman. A man of the same height might or might not
be considered tall. This judgment is in some ways paradoxical.
The woman is judged to be tall precisely because the evaluator
expected her to be shorter based on an accurate social schema
about the average heights for women and men.
Biernat and her colleagues (Biernat & Kobrynowicz, 1997;
Biernat & Manis, 1994; Biernat et al., 1991) have found effects
consistent with the Shifting Standards Model in their research
on social stereotypes. For instance, using the stereotypes
that Whites are more verbal than Blacks and that Blacks are
more athletic than Whites, the authors found that participants
subjective ratings of athleticism or verbal ability attributed
to Black and White targets were attenuated by stereotype-
based expectations. That is to say, when using subjective (vs.
objective) rating scales, respondents gave higher scores to
Blacks on verbal ability and to Whites on athletic ability, as
the model would predict. According to the shifting standards
paradigm, this result reflects judgments that were made ac-
cording to differing stereotype-based expectations for each
group (i.e., Black vs. White) in each domain (i.e., verbal ability
86 Journal of Counseling & Development Winter 2008 Volume 86
Gushue, Constantine, & Sciarra
vs. athleticism). The authors also reasoned that the influence
of racial stereotypes on subjective judgment might be moder-
ated, to some extent, by a particular judges social attitudes.
Thus, to the extent that people do or do not endorse societal
racist stereotypes, socially learned racial schemas should have
either more or less influence in forming the set of expectations
that serve as the reference points for their judgments about a
member of a stereotyped group. Biernat and Manis reported
partial support for this hypothesis.
Although Biernat and her colleagues (Biernat & Kobryno-
wicz, 1997; Biernat & Manis, 1994; Biernat et al., 1991)
used Black Americans as an example of a group about which
(largely negative) social stereotypes exist in the dominant
culture, a similar case could be made for Latinos. For instance,
Berg (1990), in an analysis of Hollywood filmmaking, found
that Latinos were portrayed according to the following six
stereotypes: el bandido (the Mexican bandit), the half-breed
harlot, the male buffoon, the female clown, the Latin lover,
and the dark lady. In the past, studies have shown that Latinos
are perceived to be cruel and ignorant (Fairchild & Cozens,
1981) along with being aggressive and lazy (Marn, 1984).
More recently, Matthes (1992) found that employers tend to
perceive Latinos as uneducated and unqualified. In general,
when compared with a similar group of Anglo men, Latino
men are less likely to be interviewed or receive a job offer
(Kenney & Wissoker, 1994) and rated more negatively in
terms of their appropriateness for management positions
(Tomkiewicz & Adeyemi-Bello, 1997). Although it may be
expected that most people socialized in the United States will
be exposed to racist social stereotypes, it is also hypothesized
that individual differences in racial or cultural attitudes might
influence the extent to which such societal stereotypes affect
a particular persons perceptions and judgments.
The recent focus on multicultural competence in family
counseling (Falicov, 1988, 1995; Goodwin, 1997; Halevy,
1998) suggests that counselors-in-training can be helped to
work more effectively with a diverse range of families pre-
senting for treatment. Recently, some authors (Constantine,
Gloria, & Ladany, 2002; Ponterotto, Gretchen, Utsey, Rieger,
& Austin, 2002) have suggested that the tripartite multicul-
tural competence model (D. W. Sue et al., 1992; D. W. Sue et
al., 1998) may be parsimoniously explained by two discrete
underlying dimensions: knowledge and awareness. This model
suggests that to be effective in incorporating culture into
family treatment, counselors must at least have knowledge
of broad cultural patterns (which may include race, ethnicity,
gender, sexual orientation, religion, and ability status) and how
these patterns may affect a given family. In addition, the model
indicates that in order to be culturally competent, counselors
must be aware of their own racial or cultural identity and cul-
ture-based biases, beliefs and values, and expectations about
how these issues affect treatment. It would seem plausible that
as family counselors develop multicultural knowledge and
awareness, the impact of social stereotypes on their clinical
White Family Counselors Perceptions of Family Functioning
judgments would also change. That is to say, persons with
varying levels of multicultural knowledge and awareness may
process culturally related information using different racial or
cultural cognitive schemas, which could reflect their differing
levels of multicultural counseling competence.
The preceding observations lead to two research questions
that the present study addresses. First, to what extent might
the ascribed culture of a family influence a counselors initial
clinical impressions of a family? Does the overall assessment
of family functioning differ depending on the familys race or
culture? Second, how might any such differences in assess-
ment be moderated by multicultural knowledge or aware-
ness after controlling for clinical experience as a potential
confound? In other words, might counselors multicultural
knowledge or awareness mitigate the tendency to render differ-
ing assessments based on the race or culture of a family? This
study examines the responses of 163 White family counselors
who reported their overall impressions of family functioning
based on a case report. Half of the participants were told that
the family was Latino, whereas the other half was told that the
family was White. The case was identical except for the stated
culture of the family and the names of the family members,
which were changed to reflect cultural affiliation. The data
were examined for differences in rating by reported culture
of the family as well as for the potential moderating effects
of self-reported multicultural competence.
Method
Procedure and Participants
Instrument packets were sent to 400 potential participants ran-
domly selected from a mailing list provided by the American
Association of Marriage and Family Therapists. Of these 400
individuals, 178 responded (44.5% response rate). Of the 178
respondents, six packets were incomplete and eight were from
participants who identified as family counselors of color.
The latter data were not included in the analyses because
of the small number of respondents of color relative to the
overall sample. Thus, a total of 163 completed surveys were
included in the study. Each packet contained a case study of a
family who was presenting for therapy, a global family rating
scale, a scale measuring self-reported multicultural counseling
competence, and a demographic questionnaire including age,
gender, race, ethnicity, degree, and years of clinical experi-
ence. Participants were asked to read the case, fill out the rating
form and other instruments, and return them anonymously to
us in an envelope provided for that purpose.
Of the 163 White practicing family counselors who com-
posed the sample for this study, 45.4% were men and 54.6%
were women. Respondents ranged in age from 23 to 81 years
(M = 47.20, SD = 13.11). Respondents reported a mean of 13.8
(SD = 9.96) years of clinical experience, ranging from less
than 1 year to 40 years (Mdn = 12 years). The self-reported
socioeconomic status for the sample was 2.41 (SD = 0.65) on
Journal of Counseling & Development Winter 2008 Volume 86
a scale where 2 = middle class and 3 = upper middle class.
Regarding educational background, 81.6% of the participants
reported a masters as their highest degree, 11.7% had obtained
a doctorate, 1.2% held a bachelors degree, and 3.7% reported
the highest degree held as other (1.8% of the participants
did not provide a response to this question).
Measures
Multicultural Knowledge andAwareness Scale (MCKAS; Ponterotto
et al., 2002). The MCKAS is a 32-item scale measuring self-
reported multicultural counseling knowledge and awareness.
Respondents rate each item on a 7-point Likert-type scale
ranging from 1 (not true at all) to 7 (totally true). It consists of
two subscales: Knowledge (20 items; possible range of scores =
20140) and Awareness (12 items; possible range of scores
= 1284). Ponterotto et al. (2002) reported confirmatory factor
analyses that suggest that knowledge and awareness define
two distinct dimensions of multicultural competence. The
Knowledge subscale measures general knowledge related to
multicultural counseling (e.g., I am aware of the differential
effects of nonverbal communication [e.g., personal space,
eye contact, handshakes] on different ethnic cultures). The
Awareness subscale measures subtle Eurocentric worldview
bias, assessing counselors attitudes and beliefs about work-
ing with diverse clients (e.g., I think that clients who do not
discuss intimate aspects of their lives are being resistant and
defensive). Ponterotto et al. (2002) found that the Knowl-
edge and Awareness subscales were positively correlated, as
predicted, with similar subscales of the Multicultural Counsel-
ing Inventory (Sodowsky, Taffe, Gutkin, & Wise, 1994). The
Knowledge subscale was also positively correlated with scores
on the Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (Phinney, 1992),
as expected, and negatively with social desirability (Crowne
& Marlowe, 1960). Other research has noted negative correla-
tions between social desirability and the MCKAS Awareness
subscale (Constantine et al., 2001; Constantine & Ladany,
2000). No positive correlations have been reported between
either the Knowledge or the Awareness subscales and general
measures of social desirability. In addition, Constantine et al.
(2001) reported that, for a sample of White family therapists,
the Awareness subscale was negatively correlated with overt
racism, and the Knowledge subscale was positively related
to progressive White racial attitudes. Ponterotto et al. (2002)
reported alphas as .90 for the Knowledge subscale and .80 for
the Awareness subscale. For the current sample, Cronbachs
alphas were .77 for the Knowledge subscale and .80 for the
Awareness subscale.
Global Family Rating Scale (GFRS; Ivey, Wieling, &
Harris, 2000). The GFRS and the Global Couple Rating
Scale were developed by Ivey et al. to measure counselors
evaluations of families or couples, respectively. The differ-
ence between the two scales is that in the GFRS, the word
couple has been changed to family throughout. The GFRS is
a 10-item measure designed to assess judgments of overall
87

family functioning. The items are scored on a Likert-type
scale ranging from 1 (most unhealthy functioning) to 10
(healthiest functioning). Respondents noted their evaluations
of family functioning for 10 areas: communication, conflict
negotiation, support and nurturance, roles, promotion of in-
dividual development, closeness, stability, ability to change,
mood, and global family adjustment. Total scores range from
10 to 100, with higher scores indicating more overall family
health. The authors reported a Spearmans rho coefficient of
.85 between scores on the Global Couple Rating Scale and a
rank ordering of healthy and unhealthy couple descriptions in
a validation study. Ivey et al. found coefficient alphas ranging
from .90 to .92 for the total score. The coefficient alpha for
the sample used in the present study was .93.
Family case. A composite six-paragraph family case was
constructed for this study by the third author, who has exten-
sive family counseling experience. The case was further devel-
oped by the first two authors and a panel of advanced graduate
students engaged in research on families and multicultural
psychology. The case presents a family of six who have been
mandated for treatment because the 14-year-old daughter
refuses to attend school. The family includes the mother and
father (30 and 34 years old, respectively), two daughters by
the mothers previous marriage (14 and 12 years old), and two
younger sons of both parents (7 and 5 years old). The case
offers brief descriptions of the parents, their courtship, their
relationship to extended family, and the current functioning
of the other children. The case also offers the clinicians
impressions of the familys presentation during the consulta-
tion, nonverbal communication, admission of conflict between
the parents and disagreements regarding parenting, as well as
the familys response to a trial intervention. Except for cultural
designation in the first sentence (Latino vs. White) and names
of the family members, the case is identical in both the Latino
and White conditions.
Demographic questionnaire. A personal data sheet was
used to investigate participants personal characteristics.
Participants were asked to indicate their age, sex, racial or
ethnic designation, citizenship, number of years of clinical
experience, highest degree earned, and self-reported socio-
economic status.
Results
Preliminary Analyses
Preliminary analyses compared participants responses on
the principal variable of interest in this study: impressions of
family functioning. A univariate analysis of variance revealed
no significant main effects for participant gender, F(1, 151)
= 0.33, ns, or self-reported socioeconomic status, F(3, 151)
= 1.41, ns. Tests for interactions between these demographic
variables and impressions of family functioning were also
not significant. As expected, there was a moderate correlation
between multicultural knowledge and multicultural awareness.
88 Journal of Counseling & Development Winter 2008 Volume 86
Gushue, Constantine, & Sciarra
Although years of clinical experience was only weakly cor-
related with global family functioning, we decided to leave
it in the model tested, given the wide variability in clinical
experience reported by the participants. Table 1 presents the
correlations, means, and standard deviations of the variables
included in the analyses.
Perceptions of Family Functioning
Subsequent analyses addressed the question of differential
clinical judgments (i.e., perceptions of family functioning)
by family culture and the possible moderating influence of
self-reported multicultural competence. Following the analytic
strategy used by Biernat (Biernat & Manis, 1994), we per-
formed a median split on each of the two dimensions of mul-
ticultural competence: knowledge and awareness. As a result,
each dimension was divided into two groups of participants
who had scored high or low on these dimensions relative to
each other. The data were analyzed using a 2 2 2 analysis
of covariance. The score on the GFRS served as the criterion
variable. Because of the broad range of clinical experience
for the sample (i.e., from less than 1 year to 40 years), years
of participants clinical experience was included in the model
as a covariate. The reported culture of the family (Latino vs.
White), level of self-reported multicultural knowledge (high
vs. low), and level of self-reported multicultural awareness
(high vs. low) served as the predictor variables. Interactions
between reported family culture, level of multicultural knowl-
edge, and level of multicultural awareness were included in
the model to test for moderating effects.
After controlling for years of counseling experience,
we found that the full model including the familys culture,
multicultural knowledge, and multicultural awareness was
significant overall, F(8, 154) = 2.65, p < .01, 2 = .12, where
2 represents the effect size. The covariate (years of clinical
experience) was not significantly related to perceptions of fam-
ily functioning at the .05 level, F(1, 154) = 1.14, ns. A main
effect was found for family culture, F(1, 154) = 9.27, p < .01,
2 = .06, but not for high versus low multicultural knowledge,
Table 1
Correlations, Means, and Standard Deviations of
the Variables Used in the Present Study
Variable 1 2 3 4
1. Multicultural
knowledge
2. Multicultural
awareness .36**
3. Global family
functioning .13 .09
4. Years of clinical
experience .17* .09 .07
M 00.16
1 67.39 36.32 13.76
SD 16.48 9.20 10.35 9.96
*p < .05. **p < .01.
White Family Counselors Perceptions of Family Functioning

F(1, 154) = 0.65, ns, nor for high versus low multicultural Key. Low Multicultural Awareness
42
awareness, F(1, 154) = 0.17, ns. However, the interaction High Multicultural Awareness
between high and low levels of multicultural knowledge and
reported family culture (see Figure 1) was significant, F(1, 40

Perceived Level of Family Functioning

154) = 4.48, p < .05, 2 = .03. The interaction between high
and low levels of multicultural awareness and reported family
culture, F(1, 154) = 6.07, p < .05, 2 = .04, was also significant 38
(see Figure 2). Neither of the other two interactions in the full
model was significant. 36
Overall, these results indicate that, after differences in years
of counseling experience were controlled for, participants
judgments of family functioning were significantly higher 34
when the family was reported to be Latino. Said another way,
this sample rated the White family as being significantly more
32
symptomatic than the Latino family. However, participants
levels of self-reported multicultural knowledge and awareness
were found to be significant moderators of these differing 30
perceptions of family functioning. Regarding self-reported Latino White
multicultural knowledge, the interaction indicates that al- Culture of Family
though both those with high and low perceived levels of FIGURE 2
multicultural knowledge tended to rate the Latino family as
Interaction Between High and Low Levels of
more healthy than the White family, this trend was significantly
Multicultural Awareness and Reported
more pronounced for those with higher self-reported levels
Family Culture
of multicultural knowledge (see Figure 1). Conversely, lower
levels of self-reported multicultural awareness were associ- Note. F(1, 154) = 6.07, p < .05.
ated both positively and significantly with the tendency to indicate greater differences by condition (White vs. Latino) in
skew impressions of healthier family functioning in favor of the ratings of participants with higher levels of multicultural
the Latino family (see Figure 2). Thus, the interaction effects knowledge and in the ratings of those with lower levels of
multicultural awareness.
Key. Low Multicultural Knowledge
42 High Multicultural Knowledge Discussion
A significant main effect was found for reported family cul-
Perceived Level of Family Functioning

40 ture. Overall, participants judged the family to be significantly

higher functioning when it was said to be Latino than when it
was said to be White. This result is in the direction predicted
38 by the Shifting Standards Model (Biernat & Kobrynowicz,
1997; Biernat & Manis, 1994; Biernat et al., 1991) of social
judgment discussed earlier. According to the Shifting Stan-
36 dards Model, when making subjective judgments about people
from groups about which social stereotypes exist, evaluators
make comparisons with their internalized stereotype-based
34
expectations for that group. Thus, one plausible explanation
for this culture-based discrepancy in evaluation is that the
participants in each condition (Latino vs. White) were using
32 different criteria to make their judgments. From a shifting
Latino White standards perspective, the Latino family would be judged
Culture of Family healthier if the evaluator making a subjective judgment had
FIGURE 1 lower expectations for this social group, reflecting societal
racism. In this case, the judgment is really healthy for a La-
Interaction Between High and Low Levels tino family. At the same time, the Shifting Standards Model
of Multicultural Knowledge and Reported would predict that, to the extent that evaluators held higher
Family Culture stereotype-based expectations for a White family, they might
Note. F(1, 154) = 4.48, p < .05. judge the White family presented to be not as healthy.

Journal of Counseling & Development Winter 2008 Volume 86 89


Two interaction effects with domains of multicultural
counseling competence were found to moderate the overall
effect (i.e., judging the Latino family as healthier). In the first
instance, after controlling for years of clinical experience, we
found that the culture-based shift in judgment just described
was significantly more in evidence for participants with higher
levels of self-reported multicultural counseling knowledge
(see Figure 1). This result is similar to another recent finding
with a sample of White counseling and clinical psychology
graduate students in which those with higher cognizance of
racism were also seen to rate a client of color as significantly
more healthy than a White client as compared with those who
showed greater denial of the existence of racism (Gushue,
2004). In each case, an intellectual appreciation of either the
reality of racism or multicultural issues appears to be related
to a tendency to use different criteria in making mental health
judgments about people of color and Whites in such a way
that clients of color are rated as more healthy.
How might this possible overcompensation among people
with higher levels of self-reported multicultural knowledge
be understood? It is conceivable that as people become more
mindful of racism and acquire a greater fund of multicultural
knowledge, these facts are incorporated into the cognitive
schemas through which they interpret racial and cultural in-
formation. Thus, perhaps a rater who is intellectually aware
of the reality of racism in the United States may include this
knowledge in the schema against which he or she judges the
family functioning of a Latino family as healthy considering
all they have to contend with. Or, perhaps, an evaluator who
reports high levels of general multicultural knowledge may be
aware of the influence of racism on mental health diagnosis
and treatment, and the differential ratings reflect a more skepti-
cal view of the quality and completeness of the information
available in the brief case report of the Latino family.
A different pattern may be observed with self-reported
multicultural awareness. In contrast to what was observed
for multicultural knowledge, the dramatic difference in
judgment standards (seeing the Latino family as healthier)
is associated with lower (not higher) levels of multicultural
awareness (see Figure 2). At the same time, those with higher
levels of self-reported multicultural awareness tend to rate
family functioning equally, regardless of the culture attrib-
uted to the family. Perhaps the key difference is between what
is being measured in the scales of multicultural knowledge
and multicultural awareness. As noted earlier, whereas the
Knowledge subscale is related to general multicultural con-
structs, the Awareness subscale assesses subtle Eurocentric
worldview bias. The Awareness subscale focuses on respon-
dents cultural values and beliefs, especially because these
might be expressed through expectations for the relationship
between counselor and client, the counseling process, or
goals for treatment. Whereas the Knowledge subscale ap-
pears to tap a persons perceived store of information, the
Awareness subscale is more self-reflective, measuring a per-
90 Journal of Counseling & Development Winter 2008 Volume 86
Gushue, Constantine, & Sciarra
ceived degree of integration, insight into ones own bias, and
capacity for application. That the different emphases in these
two dimensions may account for the different moderating
effects they have on the influence of culture in perceptions
of family functions is not surprising.
Thus, the data suggest that participants with higher levels
of self-reported multicultural counseling awareness tended to
judge comparable Latino and White families as having similar
levels of functioning, whereas those with lower levels of self-
reported multicultural awareness tended to assess the Latino
family as healthier than the White family. Seen from a shifting
standards perspective, those with higher levels of multicultural
awareness appear to be using equivalent standards to judge
the level of functioning of the Latino and White families. On
the other hand, the differential judgments rendered by those
with lower levels of multicultural awareness may reflect very
different expectations based on differing cognitive schemas
for White and Latino families. Again, the direction of the
shift would indicate that this group (i.e., low awareness) may
have had higher expectations for the White family than for
the Latino family. It is consistent with Biernats (Biernat &
Kobrynowicz, 1997; Biernat & Manis, 1994; Biernat et al.,
1991) theory that those who perceive themselves as having
a more developed capacity for cultural self-reflection and
greater awareness of potential bias in an applied counseling
situation might be less influenced by racist societal stereotypes
(seen in the use of equivalent standards of judgment). These
results suggest that the dimension represented by self-reported
multicultural awareness (e.g., a more internalizedvs. more
intellectualawareness of values, beliefs, and their potential
impact on counseling) may be related to a capacity to form
initial clinical impressions that are less influenced by stereo-
type-based expectations.
In summary, the findings of this study indicate that the
unique aspects of the dimensions of self-reported multicul-
tural competence (i.e., knowledge and awareness) may have
a differing effect on the way in which schema-driven cultural
expectations influence family counselors initial impressions
of family functioning. On the one hand, those counselors
who report that they are more knowledgeable regarding mul-
ticultural models, general theory, and racism appear to alter
their cognitive schemas in some way. Their more favorable
judgments about the Latino family may result from their in-
corporation of their knowledge of the challenges that racism
poses for families of color into the schemas through which
they process information about such families. On the other
hand, those with high levels of self-reported awareness of
differences in worldview and potential bias in the counseling
process appear to be less likely to shift the standards they
use in making subjective clinical judgments. The similarity
in ratings, regardless of the culture attributed to the family,
would suggest that these participants were less influenced
by stereotypes in formulating their impressions of family
functioning. Thus, self-reported multicultural counseling
White Family Counselors Perceptions of Family Functioning
knowledge and awareness may affect the formation of clinical
impressions in very different ways. It may be the case that
these two dimensions reflect different developmental tasks in
the acquisition of multicultural competence.
Implications
The results just discussed have important implications for
practice, training, and future research in counseling. Echoing
Falicovs (1995) observation that in family assessment there is a
danger that culture may be viewed as pathology or that pathol-
ogy may be construed as culture, the findings reported here call
attention to the possibility that cultural bias in evaluation may
be expressed in a variety of ways. In the present case, it would
appear that either the Latino family is judged more leniently
or the White family is judged more critically. Neither of these
possibilities is particularly desirable. The goal for training in
multicultural family counseling competence is not to abdicate
clinical judgment, but to help practitioners and trainees alike
develop norms that will enable them to make clinical assess-
ments from within a familys cultural frame of reference.
The differing effect that self-reported multicultural knowl-
edge and self-reported multicultural awareness had on culture-
based perceptions of family functioning in these data highlight
the complex process of developing multicultural competence.
Potentially, the attainment of knowledge and awareness may
represent two distinct moments in the development of multi-
cultural counseling competence. For instance, in her models
of racial identity, Helms (1995) postulated a more externally
defined and intellectualized racial identity status for Whites
(Pseudo-Independence) and for people of color (Immer-
sion/Emersion) before they arrive at the more complex and
internalized statuses of Autonomy and Integrative Awareness,
respectively. Perhaps, as individuals initially begin to acquire
multicultural knowledge, they simply may replace one set of
biases for another. It could be the case that cognitive schemas
recently enriched by knowledge of multicultural models and
theories tend to override the data presented. As counselors
increase their multicultural awareness, they might develop
more flexible schemas for general family functioning that
are less influenced by cultural preconceptions. As with other
aspects of counseling training, multiculturally competent
supervisors and educators must be attentive to the differing
needs of students at varying stages of development. Because
these data came from a sample of family practitioners, they
may also underscore that the dialectic between growth in
multicultural knowledge and awareness needs to continue
beyond graduate school.
Following from this, the results reported earlier have impli-
cations for training in family counseling. Family counseling
has rightly focused on the racial and cultural contexts in which
family systems are nested and cultural variations in family
self-definition (nuclear vs. extended), patterns of interaction
(hierarchical vs. communal), boundaries (rigid vs. permeable),
and so on. Because of the potential tendency for some family
Journal of Counseling & Development Winter 2008 Volume 86
counselors with higher levels of self-reported multicultural
knowledge to minimize family dysfunction, the didactic em-
phasis on cultural differences in family patterns should also
include attention to behaviors or patterns that are not consid-
ered normative for particular cultures. That is, what might
a nonadaptive family look like through a particular cultural
lens? Second, given the findings on self-reported multicultural
awareness reported earlier, exploration of the counselors
bias would also seem to be an important component of fam-
ily training. This would include not only an examination of
trainees own assumptions of what normal family functioning
might be, but also an examination of their assumptions about
how to conduct the sessions. What might need to be altered in
the counselors standard repertoire of techniques for joining,
unbalancing, creating enactments, and so on? Whom does the
counselor address and how, given the culture of this family?
Are the goals for treatment of this particular family (e.g., more
open communication) culturally syntonic?
The results also suggest a number of implications for future
research in counseling. Further research is needed both to
confirm and to better understand the potential link between
higher multicultural knowledge and the tendency toward over-
compensation in clinical judgment. Future research could also
examine how self-reported multicultural knowledge
and awareness might be related to family treatment outcomes and
to the experience of families in treatment. Qualitative research
is needed to determine not only the core experience of cultural
family patterns but also, as discussed previously, the boundar-
ies between what is considered normative and what is viewed
as pathological within those patterns. Much has been written
about maladaptive family patterns from the point of view of
White European culture, but how do families from a variety
of cultures describe what brings them into treatment? From
within their own cultural frame of reference, exactly what is
it that is not functioning for a particular family?
Limitations
This study has a number of important limitations, and the
findings reported must be interpreted with caution. First,
the study uses a measure of self-reported multicultural com-
petence, and so the findings reflect practitioners beliefs about
their competence, but not competence itself (Constantine &
Ladany, 2000). Thus, the findings reported earlier are related
to counselors perceptions of their multicultural knowledge
and awareness.
Second, this study did not directly examine social desir-
ability. Several measures of self-reported multicultural com-
petence have been reported to be positively related to social
desirability (Constantine & Ladany, 2000, 2001). However,
as noted previously, the MCKAS has been found to be nega-
tively related to social desirability (Constantine et al., 2001;
Ponterotto et al., 2002). That is to say, higher levels of self-
reported multicultural knowledge and awareness have been
found to be related to a greater tendency not to respond in
91

socially desirable ways. Perhaps something about self-reported
multicultural knowledge and awareness as measured by the
MCKAS is related to wanting to be seen as not going along
with the crowda contrarians version of desirability. It is
not clear what direct result this might have on the findings,
but again caution is warranted. Future studies might combine
tests of both cognitive (differing schemas) and motivational
(social desirability) aspects of minimalization.
Third, the study used an analogue task, which may not be
similar in many important ways to a face-to-face family as-
sessment. Some of the effects reported here might be altered
(either strengthened or attenuated) in a live family session.
Thus, these results may have more implications for family
case reports read by counselors than for the assessment pro-
cess itself. Fourth, it cannot be assumed that the statistically
significant differences seen here in global ratings would nec-
essarily lead to actual differences in diagnosis or treatment.
Fifth, insofar as this was a mail survey, self-selection for
participation is an issue. The results reported here cannot be
generalized to the population of family counselors who did
not respond. These respondents may have been unique in some
waysthose particularly willing to take extra time to respond
to such a survey. Sixth, the participants were not asked for their
place of residence, so it was not possible to assess potential
regional differences in the responses. Seventh, given concerns
expressed in the literature, the sample examined here was
White. The relationship between self-reported multicultural
awareness and perceptions of family functioning reported
here cannot be presumed to be the same for counselors of
color. How might the results have been different for a sample
of Latino family counselors? Further research is needed to
address these limitations.
Conclusion
This study examined significant differences in ratings of
overall family functioning in a fictional case that varied solely
according to the cultural designation assigned to the family.
Overall, the family counselors sampled gave higher (i.e.,
healthier) ratings to the family when identified as Latino than
when identified as White, offering some support for the Shift-
ing Standards Model (Biernat & Kobrynowicz, 1997; Biernat
& Manis, 1994; Biernat et al., 1991) of social judgment applied
to family assessment. This effect, however, was moderated by
self-reported multicultural counseling competence. Variability
in rating by family culture was found to be more associated
with higher levels of perceived multicultural knowledge and
lower levels of perceived multicultural awareness.
These results offer some initial support for the idea that
differences in self-reported multicultural competence may
be associated with differences in the cognitive schemas that,
in turn, influence how racially or culturally related clinical
information is processed. The findings of this study indicate
that counselors who report that they are more knowledgeable
92 Journal of Counseling & Development Winter 2008 Volume 86
Gushue, Constantine, & Sciarra
about the details of multicultural theory and racism may have
clinical perceptions that are strongly influenced by compen-
satory racial or cultural schemas. At the same time, those
who report more awareness of differences in worldview and
potential bias in the counseling process may be less influenced
by cultural stereotypes in formulating their impressions of
family functioning. It would appear, then, that one way in
which multicultural knowledge and awareness may influence
the family counseling process is by altering the cognitive
schemas that influence how clinicians perceive and evaluate
the families who come to see them. It may be that as one
develops multicultural competence, some growth, especially
in knowledge, may lead initially to alternative kinds of bias in
judgment. Insofar as the counseling profession is committed
to fostering multicultural competence in family counseling,
it would seem important that, as trainers, we continue to do
all we can to better understand the varied ways in which those
in counselor preparation may respond to training. Moreover,
as practitioners, we would do well to gain better insight into
how our own beliefs about our multicultural competence may
affect both what we observe and the conclusions we draw.
References
Abreu, J. M. (1999). Conscious and nonconscious African American
stereotypes: Impact on first impression and diagnostic ratings
by therapists. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
67, 387393.
Aponte, J. F., & Wohl, J. (Eds.). (2000). Psychological intervention
and cultural diversity (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Berg, C. (1990). Stereotyping in films in general and of the Hispanic
in particular. Howard Journal of Communications, 2, 286300.
Biernat, M., & Kobrynowicz, D. (1997). Gender- and race-based
standards of competence: Lower minimum standards but higher
ability standards for devalued groups. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 72, 544557.
Biernat, M., & Manis, M. (1994). Shifting standards and stereotype-based
judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 520.
Biernat, M., Manis, M., & Nelson, T. E. (1991). Stereotypes and
standards of judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology, 60, 485499.
Boyd-Franklin, N. (1989). Black families in therapy: A multisystems
approach. New York: Guilford Press.
Congress, E. P. (1994). The use of culturagrams to assess and
empower culturally diverse families. Families in Society, 75,
531540.
Constantine, M. G. (2001). Predictors of observer ratings of
multicultural counseling competence in Black, Latino, and
White American trainees. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
48, 456462.
Constantine, M. G., Gloria, A. M., & Ladany, N. (2002). The factor
structure underlying three self-report multicultural counseling
competence scales. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psy-
chology, 8, 334345.
White Family Counselors Perceptions of Family Functioning
Constantine, M. G., & Gushue, G. V. (2003). School counselors
ethnic tolerance attitudes and racism as predictors of their multi-
cultural case conceptualization of an immigrant student. Journal
of Counseling & Development, 81, 185190.
Constantine, M. G., Juby, H. L., & Liang, J. (2001). Examining
multicultural counseling competence and race-related attitudes
among White marital and family therapists. Journal of Marital
& Family Therapy, 27, 353362.
Constantine, M. G., & Ladany, N. (2000). Self-report multicultural
counseling competence scales: Their relation to social desirability
attitudes and multicultural case conceptualization ability. Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 47, 155164.
Constantine, M. G., & Ladany, N. (2001). New visions for defin-
ing and assessing multicultural counseling competence. In J. G.
Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.),
Handbook of multicultural counseling (2nd ed., pp. 482498).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desir-
ability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting
Psychology, 24, 349354.
Fairchild, H. H., & Cozens, J. A. (1981). Chicano, Hispanic, or
Mexican-American: Whats in a name? Hispanic Journal of
Behavioral Sciences, 3, 191198.
Falicov, C. J. (Ed.). (1983). Cultural perspectives in family therapy.
Rockville, MD: Aspen.
Falicov, C. J. (1988). Learning to think culturally in family therapy
training. In H. A. Liddle, D. C. Breunlin, & R. C. Schwartz
(Eds.), Handbook of family therapy and training supervision (pp.
335357). New York: Guilford Press.
Falicov, C. J. (1995). Training to think culturally: A multidimensional
comparative framework. Family Process, 34, 373388.
Falicov, C. J. (1998). Latino families in therapy: A guide to multicul-
tural practice. New York: Guilford Press.
Flores, L. Y., & OBrien, K. M. (2002). The career development
of Mexican American adolescent women: A test of social
cognitive career theory. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
49, 1427.
Fouad, N. A. (1993). Cross-cultural vocational assessment. The
Career Development Quarterly, 42, 413.
Gomez, M. J., Fassinger, R. E., Prosser, J., Cooke, K., Mejia, B., &
Luna, J. (2001). Voces abriendo caminos (Voices forging paths):
A qualitative study of the career development of notable Latinas.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48, 286300.
Goodwin, B. J. (1997). Multicultural competence in family practice.
In D. T. Marsh & R. D. Magee (Eds.), Ethical and legal issues
in professional practice with families (pp. 7593). New York:
Wiley.
Greeley, A. T., Garcia, V. L., Kessler, B. L., & Gilchrest, G. (1992).
Training effective multicultural group counselors: Issues for a
group training course. Journal for Specialists in Group Work,
17, 197209.
Gushue, G. V. (1993). Cultural-identity development and family as-
sessment: An interaction model. The Counseling Psychologist,
21, 487513.
Journal of Counseling & Development Winter 2008 Volume 86
Gushue, G. V. (2004). Race, color-blind racial attitudes, and judg-
ments about mental health: A shifting standards perspective.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 398407.
Gushue, G. V., & Sciarra, D. T. (1995). Culture and families: A
multidimensional approach. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L.
A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural
counseling (pp. 586606). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Halevy, J. (1998). A genogram with an attitude. Journal of Marital
and Family Therapy, 24, 233242.
Helms, J. E. (1995). An update of Helmss White and People of
Color racial identity models. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L.
A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural
counseling (pp. 181198). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hoffman, M. A. (1993). Multiculturalism as a force in counseling
clients with HIV-related concerns. The Counseling Psychologist,
21, 712731.
Ivey, D. C., Wieling, E., & Harris, S. M. (2000). Save the youngThe
elderly have lived their lives: Ageism in marriage and family
therapy. Family Process, 39, 163175.
Jencius, M., & Duba, J. D. (2002). Creating a multicultural family
practice. The Family Journal: Counseling & Therapy for Couples
& Families, 10, 410414.
Kenney, G. M., & Wissoker, D. A. (1994). An analysis of the cor-
relates of discrimination facing young Hispanic job-seekers.
American Economic Review, 84, 674683.
Lopez, S. (1983). The study of psychotherapy bias: Some concep-
tual issues and some concluding comments. In J. Murray & P.
R. Abramson (Eds.), Bias in psychotherapy (pp. 353365). New
York: Praeger.
Mailick, M. D., & Vigilante, F. W. (1997). The Family Assessment Wheel:
A social constructionist perspective. Families in Society, 78, 361369.
Marn, G. (1984). Stereotyping Hispanics: The differential effect
of research method, label, and degree of contact. International
Journal of Intercultural Relations, 8, 1727.
Matthes, K. (1992). Attracting and retaining Hispanic employees.
HR Focus, 69, 7.
McGoldrick, M., Giordano, J., & Pearce, J. K. (1996). Ethnicity and
family therapy (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
Merta, R. J. (1995). Group work: Multicultural perspectives. In J. G.
Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.),
Handbook of multicultural counseling (pp. 567585). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Newcomb, M. D., Wyatt, G. E., Romero, G. J., Yucker, M. B., Way-
ment, H. A., Carmona, J. V., et al. (1998). Acculturation, sexual
risk taking, and health promotion among Latinas. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 45, 454467.
Paniagua, F. (2001). Diagnosis in a multicultural context: A casebook
for mental health professionals. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Phinney, J. S. (1992). The Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure: A
new scale for use with diverse groups. Journal of Adolescent
Research, 7, 156176.
Ponterotto, J. G., Casas, J. M., Suzuki, L. A., & Alexander C. M.
(Eds.). (2001). Handbook of multicultural counseling (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
93

Ponterotto, J. G., Gretchen, D., Utsey, S. O., Rieger, B. P., & Austin,
R. (2002). A revision of the Multicultural Counseling Awareness
Scale. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development,
30, 153180.
Richie, B. S., Fassinger, R. E., Linn, S. J., Johnson, J., Prosser, J.,
& Robinson, S. (1997). Persistence, connection, and passion: A
qualitative study of the career development of highly achieving
African American-Black and White women. Journal of Counsel-
ing Psychology, 44, 133148.
Sanchez, A. R. (2001). Multicultural family counseling: Toward
cultural sensibility. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki,
& C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counsel-
ing (2nd ed., pp. 672700). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sciarra, D. T. (1999). Multiculturalism in counseling. Itasca, IL:
Peacock.
Sciarra, D. T. (2001a). Assessment of diverse family systems. In L. A. Su-
zuki, J. G. Ponterotto, & P. J. Meller (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural
assessment (2nd ed., pp. 135168). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Sciarra, D. T. (2001b). School counseling in a multicultural society.
In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexan-
der (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (2nd ed., pp.
701728). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
94 Journal of Counseling & Development Winter 2008 Volume 86
Gushue, Constantine, & Sciarra
Sciarra, D. T. (2004). School counseling: Foundations and contem-
porary issues. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Sodowsky, G. R., Taffe, R. C., Gutkin, T. B., & Wise, S. L. (1994).
Development of the Multicultural Counseling Inventory: A
self-report measure of multicultural competencies. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 41, 137148.
Sue, D., Sue, D. W., & Sue, S.
(2003). Understanding abnormal
behavior (7th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Sue, D. W., Arredondo, P., & McDavis, R. J. (1992). Multicultural coun-
seling competencies and standards: A call to the profession. Journal
of Multicultural Counseling and Development 20, 6468.
Sue, D. W., Carter, R. T., Casas, J. M., Fouad, N. A., Ivey, A. E.,
Jensen, M., et al. (1998). Multicultural counseling competen-
cies: Individual and organizational development. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (2003). Counseling the culturally diverse:
Theory and practice (4th ed.). New York: Wiley.
Tomkiewicz, J., & Adeyemi-Bello, T. (1997). Perceptual differences
in racial descriptions of Euro-American and Hispanic persons.
Psychological Reports, 80, 13391343.
Tseng, W., & Hsu, J. (1991). Culture and family: Problems and
therapy. New York: Haworth Press.