No^ir' ^^^' EASTERN CHEROKEE GROUPS — KUPFERER 277 



Class, although a few of the better situated Rural Whites and Gen- 

 eralized Indians also patronize private physicians. 



The findings previously discussed do not provide us with a Jourjold 

 lineal model of acculturation. The clustering which I find tends to 

 group together people who are, according to Thomas, dissimilar. 

 Rather, the data suggest both an on-going process of acculturation, 

 and an internal differentiation taking place within the more accul- 

 turated group. 



Acculturation. — Data from criteria II and III (clinic and school 

 behavior) demonstrate a two-fold acculturative differentiation, 

 "Indian and Non-Indian." Conservatives are concentrated in one 

 category. Other people, on the basis of analogous behavior, fall 

 into a second category. This illustrates the ways in which three of 

 Thomas' four types are similar to each other. 



Acculturation and internal differentiation.— Dsita, from criteria I 

 and IV (sanitation and types of medical care) also illustrate an on- 

 going process of acculturation. They show less two-way differentia- 

 tion than do criteria II and III, but there is, nevertheless, a clustering 

 of Conservatives in category 1, in each case, and a clustering of the 

 Middle Class in the last category, in each case. 



Criteria I and IV illustrate, moreover, the possibility of social 

 class differentials as well as Conservative-non-Conservative differ- 

 entials. For example, in criterion I some 52.8 percent of the General- 

 ized Indian informants fall within categories 3 and 4 and 57.1 percent 

 of the Rural Whites fall within categories 1 and 2; the former percentage 

 is higher than would be expected and the latter is lower if a good fit 

 existed between sanitary and hygienic practices and the Thomas 

 acculturation continuum. One is led to believe that much of the 

 difference in the sanitary environments of the Generalized Indian, 

 the Rural White, and the Middle Class is due to socioeconomic rather 

 than to acculturative differentials. Similarly, data from criterion IV 

 suggest that choices made by the non-Conservatives as to types of 

 medical care are made, not so much because of differences in accultura- 

 tion, but because of differences in status and styles of life. The 

 Generalized Indians and Rural Whites who use the Public Health 

 facilities and staff frequently do so because they cannot afford private 

 medical care. 



A diagram of these findings (fig. 7) shows clearly the problems 

 inherent in an assessment of both the process and the end result of 

 acculturation, and emphasizes the inconsistency of the data on health 

 as a key criterion of acculturation. 



