Crossroads: The Psychology of Immigration in the New Century

Considerations for the Field
The United States today is host to its largest number
of new immigrants in history. But as a nation of
immigrants, the United States has successfully
negotiated larger proportions of newcomers
in its past, and it is not alone among OECD nations in
encountering immigrant populations today (see The Why
and Who of Immigration). In this time of economic crisis,
immigrants are routinely becoming the subjects of negative
media coverage, hate crimes, and strict legislation on
the municipal, state, and federal levels (see Introduction).
This adverse climate can have negative repercussions for
immigrants themselves and for their citizen children, many
of whom, as previously mentioned, are U.S. citizens (see the
Social Context of Reception and Immigrant Adaptation).
In comparison to the disciplines of sociology, demography,
and economics, psychology has been slow to recognize the
growth in the immigrant population over the last few decades
(C. Suárez-Orozco & Carhill,
2008; C. Suárez-Orozco
& Qin, 2006). Yet these
individuals and their children
are an ever-growing presence
in U.S. schools, communities,
clinics, and the larger society.
Scholarship in psychology has
only recently acknowledged
this demographic shift, often confounding immigrants with
other ethnic minority populations and rarely considering
first- or second-generation distinctions (see the Introduction).
Given the demographic imperative, the field of psychology is
long overdue to take stock of the situation.
In this report, the APA Presidential Task Force on
Immigration aimed to provide an account of what is
known and what needs to be known about immigrant
adults (including older adults), children and adolescents, and
families. We were particularly interested in addressing the
psychological experience of immigration by considering
factors that both facilitate and impede adjustment and
using ecological and strength-based perspectives. We
concurred with the surgeon general’s recommendation that
a culturally congruent perspective is essential when working
with diverse populations. The intent was to provide clear
guidelines to frame research, practice, education, and policy
agendas. The literature, however, revealed that evidence in
the field is flawed for a variety of reasons. Summaries of
these limitations and recommendations to move the field of
psychology forward in its approach to immigration follow.
Methodological Challenges
It is not sufficient to conduct research
on ethnically diverse populations
without documenting the diversity
of patterns across groups.
In many studies, immigration status or generation is
ignored or omitted. When it is considered at all, it is
often confounded with race or ethnicity or used as a
“controlled variable.” To do so is misleading, as immigration,
culture, race, and ethnicity are separate categories and
are embedded within the
context of several potential
mediators, moderators, and
outcomes (APA, 2010c).
While constructs may be
shared across groups, their
expression may be culturally
and socially defined. Thus, it
is not sufficient to conduct
research on ethnically diverse
populations without documenting the diversity of patterns
across groups.
Further, much of the research with immigrants has not
considered the heterogeneity within different immigrant
communities (García Coll & Marks, 2011; C. Suárez-Orozco
& Carhill, 2008). Research should examine similarities
and differences in mental health and use of services across
immigrant generations (i.e., first, 1.5, second, and third), and
by gender, race, heritage, age, sexual orientation, religion,
social class, education, English language proficiency, and
disability/ability, as well as country of origin. To conduct
valid research with immigrant-origin populations and
74 Report of the APA Presidential Task Force on Immigration