Crossroads: The Psychology of Immigration in the New Century

pattern has also been found in the domains of psychological,
behavioral, and educational outcomes. U.S.-born (secondgeneration)
Latino, Asian, and Black individuals have been
found to be at greater risk than first-generation immigrants
for depression and anxiety (Alegría, Mulvaney-Day, Torres, et
al., 2007; Takeuchi, Alegría, Jackson, & Williams, 2007), suicidal
ideation (Duldulao, Takeuchi, & Hong, 2009), behavior
disorders (Corral & Landrine, 2008), conduct and eating
disorders (Pumariega, Rogers, & Rothe, 2005), and substance
abuse (Caetano, Ramisetty-Mikler, Wallisch, McGrath,
& Spence, 2008). This immigrant paradox has also been
documented in the domain of several educational outcomes
(see García Coll & Marks, 2011, for details). Compared to
their second-generation peers, immigrant students have
better attendance rates, demonstrate more positive attitudes
toward their teachers (C. Suárez-Orozco & Suárez-Orozco,
1995) and school (Fuligni, 1997), have higher attachment
to school (García Coll & Marks, 2011; C. Suárez-Orozco &
Suárez-Orozco, 1995), and demonstrate higher grades when
controlling for parental education (García Coll & Marks,
2011; Portes & Rumbaut, 2006).
Several explanatory models have been proposed to account
for the immigrant paradox, but even though several have been
tested, none fully accounts for it (see C. Suárez-Orozco &
Todorova, 2008, for a discussion). Explanations include the
notion that individuals who undertake the migration journey
are selectively healthier than those who remain in the country
of origin (Palloni & Morenoff, 2001); that continual hardships
of migration select for persistence and resilience (Abraido-
Lanza, Dohrenwend, Ng-Mak, & Turner, 1999); and that
immigrant populations bring with them cultural values and
behaviors that are health enhancing, whereas acculturation to
the host country leads to the loss of these patterns (Pumariega,
Rothe, & Pumariega, 2005).
Indeed, one pathway that accounts for the worsening of
health indicators for subsequent generations is the adoption
of high-risk behaviors that predominate in the host country,
such as drug abuse and changes in dietary practices (e.g., a
drastic increase in “supersized” fast-food meals). The stress of
racial/ethnic minority status and the concomitant experience
of discrimination—in terms of both structural obstacles and
negative social mirroring—are also potential contributors
(García Coll & Magnuson, 1997; C. Suárez-Orozco, 2000).
Other proposed cultural characteristics that contribute to
first-generation advantages include greater family cohesion
and the availability of community supports for recent
immigrant groups from countries with collectivistic traditions
INTRODUCTION
(Fuligni, Tseng, & Lam, 1999; Iannotta, 2003). It has also been
hypothesized that the optimism immigrants bring with them
as they arrive in their new nation contributes to this pattern
(Kao & Tienda, 1995; Portes & MacLeod, 1996; C. Suárez-
Orozco et al., 2008).
Despite these strengths and evident resilience, immigrants also
face a series of challenges as they arrive in the new land. Many
navigate these challenges with remarkable resourcefulness,
but others may falter and need services in the process of
adaptation. Other families will find transgenerational tensions
and difficulties emerging in the second generation. While
recognizing resilience, this report considers a number of the
challenges immigrants and the next generation face across a
variety of developmental phases and contexts.
Social-Ecological Framework
Immigrants are not all the same. Indeed, a great deal of
heterogeneity marks their experience. The social contexts
and resources of immigrants vary widely, and they settle
in an array of settings, some more welcoming than others.
This report uses a broadly defined social-ecological theoretical
framework, adapted from Bronfenbrenner (Bronfenbrenner &
Morris, 2006) and others (Serdarevic & Chronister, 2005). An
ecological framework proposes that the human experience
is a result of reciprocal interactions between individuals and
their environments, varying as a function of the individual,
his or her contexts and culture, and time. This report focuses
on contexts that immigrants encounter and interact with on
a sustained basis. Each context offers particular risks as well
as protective factors, which either detract from or enhance a
healthy adaptation that needs to be understood in framing the
immigrant experience (see FIGURE 1).
Each immigrant has his or her own set of characteristics
that in interaction with the environment may place him
or her in varying positions of resilience or vulnerability. A
comprehensive list of characteristics is too large to enumerate,
but some critical issues include age, race, ethnicity, gender,
socioeconomic status, language skills, exposure to trauma,
documentation status, sexual orientation, learning or medical
needs, and temperament. Interactions between the individual
and the environment take place within nested systems that
move from most proximal to most distal.
• Microsystems are made up of settings and systems that
the individual comes into direct contact with, such as
the workplace, schools, family, peers, and community
agencies and supports.
11