Problems of psychological and sociocultural adaptation among Russian-speaking immigrants in New Zealand.

• Author: Maydell-Stevens, Elena

Abstract

The problems immigrants experience during the process of their psychological and sociocultural adaptation to the host culture have far-reaching effects in terms of mental health, employment and lost benefits for the whole society. General models of the acculturation process (Ward 1996) and acculturation strategies (Berry 2001) provide a basis for the analysis of those problems. The current study employed a qualitative, case-oriented design, based on the grounded theory method to analyse interviews with six Russian-speaking immigrants in New Zealand. The purpose of the study was to investigate, from a psychological perspective, the problems in adaptation as a result of migration and resettlement, and the factors that influence this process. Two distinct patterns were revealed, linked to acculturation strategies of integration and separation. All the participants experienced high levels of psychological distress in the initial stage of their resettlement, but those who later chose the integration strategy of acculturation were more successful and satisfied with their adaptation than those who chose the strategy of separation. Factors contributing to the process of adaptation were migration motivation, proportion of perceived gains and losses, and cultural identity. This study has implications for social policies in the areas of employment, education and mental health.

INTRODUCTION

Past research on immigration has conceptualised the adaptation of immigrants to their new cultural and social environment as a multifaceted process involving different patterns and strategies (Ward et al. 2001, Berry et al. 2002, Walsh and Horenczyk 2001, Aroian 1990). From a broad perspective, adaptation is a process of change and adjustment to new environmental conditions (Berry et al. 2002). Although there is no agreement in research on how to define and measure adaptation while moving from one culture to another, it has been suggested that most migrants go through initial "culture shock", which has significant consequences for their wellbeing (Ward et al. 2001). The extent and outcomes of this "culture shock" and following adaptation may depend on many factors, from cultural distance to migration motivation and expectations (Berry et al. 2002).

Adaptation of immigrants can be defined as the process of "fitting in" to the society of settlement and functioning successfully in a new environment (Ward et al. 2001). Two distinct aspects of intercultural adaptation have been identified on the basis of past research (Ward et al. 2001). The first is sociocultural adaptation, which is based on the culture learning approach and reflects the ability to engage in constructive interaction with a different culture. The other is psychological adjustment, which facilitates the individual's sense of wellbeing, positive appraisal of situations and general satisfaction with life.

Psychological adaptation has been considered an important issue for immigrants' health, as previous research has consistently demonstrated that immigrants suffer from higher levels of emotional distress and poorer mental health than the host populations. Poor adaptation patterns among immigrants relate to increased levels of depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, and other psychological problems (Aroian and Norris 2002, Pernice et al. 2000, Ward et al. 2001).

The psychological and sociocultural components of adaptation have been investigated within the framework of acculturation theory (Ward et al. 2001). In the context of immigration, acculturation has been conceptualised as a combination of cultural changes resulting from the contact of immigrants with the host population (Berry et al. 2002). The categorical model of acculturation, developed by Berry (2001), is based on two dimensions: one refers to the extent to which the culture of origin is being maintained or preferred, and the other refers to the extent to which the new host culture is adopted. On the basis of the interaction between these two dimensions, four different acculturation strategies can be employed: separation, assimilation, integration and marginalisation.

Separation involves maintaining the culture of origin and rejection of the culture of settlement. Assimilation, in contrast, is the strategy that relinquishes the ethnic heritage and substitutes it with the new, acquired cultural identity. Integration means preserving the heritage together with acquiring some characteristics of the host culture, while marginalisation refers to a rejection of the both the culture of settlement and the culture of origin (Berry et al. 2002). Past research has consistently shown that the strategy of integration predicts more positive outcomes in psychological and sociocultural adaptation (Berry 1998). The three other strategies, and especially marginalisation, are often associated with poor adaptation, which can lead to serious psychological disturbances, including clinical depression, anxiety, and other mental disorders (Berry 1998).

Although the above model can be useful in analysing the outcomes of adaptation, the model does not directly address the process of acculturation (Ward et al. 2001). An alternative model, proposed by Ward (1996), examines the different variables that play a role in the acculturation process. It takes into account personal factors, such as reasons for migration, language fluency, acculturation strategies, and cultural identity, in addition to situational factors, which include length of contact, cultural distance, and social support. This model also incorporates the stress and coping framework, various factors salient for both cultures of origin and of settlement, and psychological and sociocultural outcomes of acculturation (Ward et al. 2001). Both models have provided conceptual theoretical frameworks and have directed the current research in terms of key issues related to this process.

Immigration in New Zealand

New Zealand is one of the countries that regards immigration as an important part of its policies, essential for economic development (New Zealand Immigration Service 1991). According to the 2001 census, around 700,000 New Zealand residents were born overseas (Statistics New Zealand 2002). Over the last decade the ethnic diversity of New Zealand has been increasing due to government policies aimed at attracting skilled and highly qualified migrants. In accordance with the government objective to utilise the potentials of migrant groups, their adaptation patterns and acculturation strategies have become an issue for investigation.

A Report on Main Population Groups in the Ethnic Sector, prepared for the Ethnic Affairs Service within the Department of the Internal Affairs, used the statistical information from the 1996 Census on Population and Dwellings to summarise the main findings in relation to different ethnic communities in New Zealand. The report stated that over 200 separate ethnic identities were represented in New Zealand society, although only 28 of these had more than 4,000 members each. Though a substantive body of the research into the larger ethnic groups, such as Chinese, Samoan, Indian and others (Pernice et al. 2000, Pernice and Brook 1994, Trlin et al. 1999, Ward and Masgoret 2004), has provided New Zealand government agencies and policymakers with adequate information and recommendations, many other small constituencies escape the attention of researchers due to the small number of their members and lack of relevant training and expertise needed for such research.

The report identified two major groups of New Zealand ethnic communities according to different patterns of adaptation and settlement. The established ethnic communities, such as Dutch, Polish, German, Italian and established Indian and Chinese, were found to do well. The recent waves of immigrants, though, tend to experience significant problems, including financial uncertainty and difficulties in finding employment, which in turn cause stress and disadvantage.

Immigrants from Russia and other parts of the former Soviet Union have not been investigated in New Zealand before, although, similar populations in other countries have been a topic of thorough research. According to the 2001 New Zealand census, there were over 3,000 people who stated their place of birth to be Russia. At the same time, 5,600 people were identified as being able to speak the Russian language, with 9% of them lacking the ability to speak English (Statistics New Zealand 2002). Though not all of them would state their ethnicity as Russian (but, for example, Ukrainian, Kazakh, Jewish, and others), their main language (or quite often, the first language) would be Russian. The common language, as well as shared history and cultural traditions and values, justifies grouping all Russian-speaking migrants together for the analysis of their immigration experiences.

Research literature from other countries has stated that immigrants from the former Soviet Union comprise an important population to study in terms of mental health and other psychological issues (Aroian and Norris 2002). In comparison to other migrant groups, Russian immigrants have been found to exhibit higher levels of depression (Aroian and Norris 2002), utilise health and social services more often (Aroian et al. 2001), and fail to adopt the resilience patterns typical of other migrants (Aroian and Norris 2000). A comparison study between Russian-born and Ethiopianborn Jews who had migrated to Israel found that Russian immigrants were more distressed than their Ethiopian counterparts, although the smaller cultural distance between Israel and Russia and higher level of education of Russian Jews had predicted the opposite outcome (Ponizovski et al. 1998).

Previous research on factors influencing the acculturation and adaptation of immigrants has demonstrated that characteristics such as full-time employment, high levels of education, and facilitation of...