An Evaluation of Life Satisfaction within the Migratory Experience According to Psychosocial Variables

doi:10.4236/psych.2012.312A185

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Psychology

2012. Vol.3, No.12A, 1248-1253

Published Online December 2012 in SciRes (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/psych) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/psych.2012.312A185

1248

An Evaluation of Life Satisfaction within the Migratory

Experience According to Psychosocial Variables

Macarena Vallejo Martín, Maria del Pilar Moreno-Jiménez

Málaga University, Málaga, Spain

Email: [email protected]

Received September 30th, 2012; revised October 31st, 2012; accepted November 26th, 2012

This study attempts to discover which psychosocial variables effect whether a displaced person evaluates

their migratory experience and their life in the new context as positive. The psychosocial variables studied

are: social support, individual self-esteem, social identity, analysis of endogroup and exogroup, assimila-

tion of host culture, and perception of the assessment of the host culture and level of retention of the

original culture. The general objective is to discover to what degree these variables predict the level of life

satisfaction in the new city of residence. Following an analysis of the data, we find that social support

predicts satisfaction in 23.3%. Furthermore, in order to generalise these findings across the overall immi-

grant population, resident in Spain, a comparison of three Spanish cities is carried out: Barcelona, Madrid

and Málaga. The results show that although an identical pattern cannot be applied to all three cities, but in

conclusion we can say that the variables with greater success in predicting life satisfaction are: social

support, assimilation and assessment of host culture and self-esteem. (1)

Keywords: Immigration; Life Satisfaction; Assimilation of Host Culture; Social Support; Retention of

Original Culture

Introduction

The migration experience is experienced by the person af-

fected, in all its dimensions: mental-conceptual, affective-emo-

tional, behavioural, relational, identity, etc. All of these have to

be understood in the pursuit of well-being, freedom and inte-

gration (Melero & Díe, 2010). Social intervention should have

an impact on each of the different dimensions in order to

achieve the overall well-being of the migrant. For this to work,

it is essential to prevent risk factors and strengthen psychoso-

cial protection factors which facilitate a positive assessment of

the migratory experience and perception of satisfaction with the

new life project.

In contrast to the general perception of the native population,

migrants have particularly resilient modes of being and dealing

with life especially in the face of difficulties and moments of

change and a special strength and flexibility to deal with ad-

verse conditions (Scott & Scott, 1989). (2) However, the ca-

pacity of adaptation and all that the process of acculturation

implies has a huge impact on a displaced person in every aspect

of their life (Martínez, García, & Martínez, 2004). (2) It is not

so strange therefore that most studies on migration in the field

of psychology have concentrated on analysing those factors

most relevant to the process of adaptation, principally those

which play a greater role in acculturative stress, and feelings of

dis- placement or migratory grief (Moreno & Vallejo, 2008;

Tizón, Salamero, Sanjosé, Pellejero, Achotegui, & Sainz, 1993).

(2) Is it therefore possible to understand these factors as poten-

tials to be developed for a better understanding of the migratory

experience?

Social Support

Among the many factors studied that lead to a positive eva-

luation of their migratory experience by the person who emi-

grates, can be found social support. This is because restructur-

ing the fabric of interpersonal relationships takes on particular

relevance as a source of psychosocial resources, essential for

facing the demands associated with the migratory experience

(Aroian, 1992; Lynam, 1985; Martínez, García, & Maya, 1999).

Having a network of support means it is possible to share prob-

lems, gain in opportunities for social participation and a sense

of belonging etc. Different studies in our country (Martínez,

1996; Martínez, García, & Maya, 2002; Lila, Gracia, Herrero,

& Robles, 2007; among others) have confirmed that a social

support network is fundamental for the reinterpretation of the

new culture, to establish new ties and to acquire new skills

which enable the development of a new social strata rooted in a

welcoming society furthering the successful outcome of the

new life project. So, within the framework of the social net-

works available to a displaced person, the degree of contact

maintained with the host culture is relevant as a way of ap-

proaching the same. These relationships can provide important

information about the country in which they find themselves

and can help to avoid feelings of segregation and marginalisa-

tion. It is not however always the case that these relationships

have a positive effect on the immigrant’s well-being. Some

research has determined negative effects deriving from experi-

ences of discrimination and ethnic prejudice (Halpern, 1993;

Liebkind & Jasinskaja-Lahti, 2000; Ryff, Keyes, & Hughes,

2003). Therefore the positive or negative effect on well-being is

at the heart of intergroup relationships between native popula-

tions and immigrates.

Acculturative St rategy

As Berry (1997) suggests in his Acculturation Model, an-

M. V. MARTÍN, M. DEL P. MORENO-JIMÉNEZ

other determining factor in whether a displaced person adopts

to the new context is the acculturative strategy undertaken. This

in turn is determined by two independent factors: retention of

original culture and assimilation of host culture. Both the de-

gree of retention of original culture and the assimilation of host

culture are measured relative to the evaluation of the endogroup

and the exogroup which the displaced person makes. The re-

search carried out around Berry’s model (1997) in different

countries and with distinct ethnic groups shows that practically

all groups choose the option of integration as the preferred

strategy of acculturation (assimilation of the host culture whilst

retaining their original culture) (Campani & Catani, 1985; Neto,

1993; Oriol, 1985; Partridge, 1988; Sam, 1995), although some

intergroup variations exist according to the different psychoso-

cial indicators (age, length of stay, motives and immigration

conditions etc.).

Perception Assessment and Self-Esteem

In addition a negative perception assessment on the part of

the host population can have a harmful effect on the well-being

of immigrants (Hernández, Pozo, Alonso, & Martos, 2005).

Therefore in the acculturation process the value the subject

places on their own group is vital as is the perception they have

of how they are valued as a member of that group. This as-

sessment and perception of assessment which correspond to the

social side of self-image are closely linked with individual

self-esteem and are absolutely essential to the levels of adjust-

ment and satisfaction felt by an immigrant in their new context.

This relationship between individual self-esteem and collective

self-esteem has been stressed in different studies (Luhtanen &

Crocker, 1992; Sánchez, 1999).

So, the way in which the displaced group and the native

group value each other will have repercussions for the accul-

turation strategy that each one displays. This assessment can be

influenced by various factors, among which can be found: level

of identification with the group, perceived competition between

groups, perceived cultural enrichment, the rigidity of their own

values, underlying conflicts or levels of contact between groups

etc. (Piontkowski, Florack, Hoelker, & Obdrzálek, 2000).

To sum up, in the acculturation process a multitude of vari-

ables, individual and group, come into play and all of them

have to be taken into consideration when predicting the evalua-

tion that a displaced person makes of their migratory experi-

ence. The objective of this study is to discover whether some

psychosocial variables reported in the literature as being influ-

ential for a successful adaptation and adjustment in a new con-

text are also relevant in terms of life satisfaction, positive

evaluation of the migratory process and well-being. Focus re-

search on the positive elements and meet the own evaluation

and perception of the person, and therefore, flee the “cul-

turalist” vision of the migratory experience, are the main

points of this study innovation. (5) Moreover, with the idea of

extending the results to different contexts, three cities of refer-

ence are used: Málaga, Madrid and Barcelona. This work is

based on the hypothesis that all the variables considered in

the study are important in predicting the level of life satis-

faction in the migration experience (4)

Method

Participants (6) and Procedure (8)

The study is made up of a total of 285 migrants, of whom

49.8% are men and 50.2% are women. These people come from

a total of thirty-six different countries from the five continents.

The principal geographic area is Latin America with a percent-

age of 59.7%; followed by the area of Maghreb with 21.3% and

Sub-Saharan Africa with 9.5%.

With respect to personal circumstances, 52.6% state that they

are single, 39.6% are married or live with their partner and

7.8% are separated. The average age of the participants is 32

years old. Particularly relevant is that more than half of the

participants (54%) state they are unemployed. At the same time

40% have university studies and 47% to secondary level. Only

1.8% has no studies at all.

The majority of the subjects give the main reasons for emi-

gration as being economic and the search for new opportunities.

As for the respondents’ administrative circumstances, the per-

centages are more equal in the four possible responses: pending,

temporary (according to contract or length of studies), final

documentation or undocumented.

The data was gathered in three Spanish cities in different

autonomous communities: Málaga (37.9%), Madrid (31.6%)

and Barcelona (30.5%).

The questionnaire was administered with a choice of three

languages: Spanish, English and French. The participation of

the respondents was anonymous and voluntary. To access par-

ticipants, we visited different places such as call shops, as-

sociations and offices of renewal of cards of residence, etc.

Therefore, participation in the study was random trying to

respect a balance in sex and place of origin (7).

Measurements (9)

The following instruments were used to measure the different

variables:

 SAI questionnaire—2005 version (Strategies of Accultura-

tion in Immigrants) by Moreno and Vallejo (2005). Com-

prising a total of 35 items with a four point response scale,

from 1 (“Strongly disagree”) to 4 (“Strongly agree”). This

scale measures assimilation of host culture and retention of

original culture. An example of items for each one of the

factors could be “I try to know all of the Spanish cultural

norms” and “I look for people from my culture to interact

with” The reliability analysis for each one of these factors

demonstrate a Cronbach Alpha of 0.87 for assimilation of

host culture and 0.90 for preservation of original culture.

 Rosenberg Scale of Self-esteem (1965). Comprising 10

items with a four point response from 1 (Strongly disagree”)

to 4 (Strongly agree”). This scale measures individual self-

esteem or a person’s self-evaluation. An example of this

scale item is: “I sometimes think I’m no good for any-

thing” (10) The scale has a Cronbach Alpha of 0.713.

 Adaptation of the Scale of Life Satisfaction by Diener,

Emmons, Larson and Griffen (1985) for immigrants

(Vallejo, 2009). The original scale of Life Satisfaction by

Diener et al. (1985) adapted to immigrants has been used,

finally comprising a total of 6 items with a five point re-

sponse ranging from 1 (“Totally disagree”) to 5 (“Totally

agree”). As examples of items on this scale: “almost eve-

rything in my life in Spain responds to my aspirations”

and “In Spain I have achieved things that were impor-

tant to me”. (10) The Cronbach Alpha for the adapted ver-

sion is 0.816.

 Scale of Perception of Social Support by Duke-Unc (1995).

M. V. MARTÍN, M. DEL P. MORENO-JIMÉNEZ

It is made up of eleven items with a five point response

from 1 (“Never”) to 5 (“Always”). The scale measures per-

ceived social support. Examples of items of this scale are:

“Receive visits from friends and family” and “Receipt

for help when I’m sick” (10). The reliability analysis

demonstrates a Cronbach Alpha of 0.888.

 Scale of Social Identity (Vallejo, 2009). The level of social

identity is measured by 3 items with a five point response

from 1 (“Totally disagree”) to 5 (“Totally agree”). These

items refer to: importance of group of origin, identification

with and ties to said group. An example of this scale item

is: “I identify with my original group” (10). The reliabil-

ity analysis has a Cronbach Alpha of 0.851.

 Scale of Assessment of Host Culture and Assessment of

Own Culture (Vallejo, 2009). It is made up of two subscales

of four items in each with a response format of 1 to 5, 1 be-

ing “Very bad” to 5 “Very good”. The scale measures As-

sessment of Host Culture and Assessment of Own Culture

based on four aspects: eating habits, social relationships,

cultural customs and ways of communicating. Examples of

the items for these factors are “I value how the Spanish in-

teract” and “I value the culture and customs of my country”.

The Cronbach Alpha for Assessment of host culture is

0.872 and for Assessment of Own Culture, 0.837.

 Scale of Perception of Assessment (Vallejo, 2009). It com-

prises two items with responses of 1 to 5, 1 being “Very

bad” and 5 being “Very good”. This scale measures the

subject’s perception of how the Spanish value people from

their country. An example of an item is “I think the Spanish

value the people of my country”. The reliability analysis

demonstrates a Cronbach Alpha of 0.879.

Results

1) Descriptives of the psychosocial variables. Differences

according to city of residence.

The psychosocial variables under discussion in this study are:

life satisfaction, assimilation of host culture, retention of own

culture, self-esteem, social identity, social support, assessment

of host culture, assessment of own culture and perception of

assessment of the host society. The descriptives of each one of

these variables are collected together in Table 1.

According to the results of the different psychosocial vari-

ables the respondents in the study show a pretty high level of

assimilation of the host culture and an equally high level of

retention of original culture. However they value their own

culture more and show high levels in social identity. The re-

spondents also have average levels in perception of assessment

of the host society. Furthermore they show high levels of

self-esteem and a medium/high level in life satisfaction and

social support. Below, these same descriptives are collected to-

gether according to city of residence (Table 2).

As can be seen the only variables that produce significant

differences according to city of residence are assessment of

own culture and perception of assessment on the part of the

host society. With the objective of discovering between which

cities these differences are created, the post hoc Scheffé test is

applied. Obtaining in this way that both for assessment of own

culture and for the perception of assessment of the host society,

the significant differences are found between Málaga and Ma-

drid. In both cases, the highest levels were seen in Málaga city.

It is consistent therefore that in the city where own culture is

Table 1.

Descriptives of the psychosocial variables.

Means D.T

Assimilation of host culture (1 - 4) 3.21 0.489

Retention of own culture (1 - 4) 3.17 0.533

Self-esteem (1 - 4) 3.23 0.462

Satisfaction (1 - 5) 3.31 0.850

Social Identity (1 - 5) 3.83 1.042

Social Support (1 - 5) 3.59 0.798

Ass.Host Culture (1 - 5) 3.83 0.823

Ass.Own culture (1 - 5) 4.17 0.704

Perception assessment (1 - 5) 3.39 1.058

Table 2.

Descriptives of psychosocial variables and differences according to city

of residence.

Madrid Málaga Barcelona

Assimilation of host culture

(1 - 4) 3.25 3.23 3.15

Retention of own culture (1 - 4) 3.26 3.16 3.08

Self-esteem (1 - 4) 3.26 3.24 3.20

Life satisfaction (1 - 5) 3.24 3.39 3.30

Social identity (1 - 5) 3.86 3.98 3.62

Social support (1 - 5) 3.59 3.61 3.55

Ass. of Host Culture (1 - 5) 3.76 3.94 3.76

Ass. of Own Culture (1 - 5)* 4.06 4.32 4.09

Assessment of Host Culture

(1 - 5)* 3.22 3.58 3.33

Note: *p < 0.05.

the most highly valued, the highest levels of perception of as-

sessment on the part of the host city are to be found.

2) Relationships between the different psychosocial vari-

ables.

According to the results (see Table 3) the correlation coeffi-

cients between life satisfaction and the rest of the psychosocial

variables studied, with the exception of retention of original

culture, are all statistically significant. A higher level of corre-

lation can be found between life satisfaction and social support

(0.485), assessment of host culture (0.459), assimilation of host

culture (0.437) and self-esteem (0.349). Other variables that

also correlate, although to a lesser degree are: perception of

assessment of host society (0.289), social identity (0.271) and

assessment of own culture (0.203).

On the other hand, it is clear that the variable retention of

original culture correlates with social identity (0.563) and as-

sessment of own culture (0.555). At the same time, the variable

assimilation of host culture correlates with assessment of host

culture (0.572), self-esteem (0.30) and social support (0.30).

This last variable significantly correlates with all the psychoso-

cial variables considered in this study. Finally it should be

noted that the assessment of host culture and perception of as-

sessment by them. In conclusion, it can be observed that many

of the variables studied within the process of acculturation cor-

relate with each other and in particular with life satisfaction.

Taken within the context of displacement it correlates with all

1250

M. V. MARTÍN, M. DEL P. MORENO-JIMÉNEZ

Table 3.

Correlation coefficient of the assessment of the migratory experience (life satisfaction) with other psychosocial variables.

Factor Here

Factor

There Self-Esteem Social

Identity

Social

Support

Assessment

Host Culture

Assessment

Own Culture

Perception

Assessment

Satisfaction 0.437(**) 0.076 0.349(**) 0.271(**) 0.485(**) 0.459(**) 0.203(**) 0.289(**)

Factor Here 1 0.088 0.330(**) 0.170(**) 0.330(**) 0.572(**) 0.155(**) 0.263(**)

Factor There 1 0.060 0.563(**) 0.211(**) 0.035 0.555(**) −0.040

Self-Esteem 1 0.269(**) 0.240(**) 0.149(*) 0.155(**) 0.059

Social Identity 1 0.294(**) 0.150(*) 0.518(**) 0.009

Social Support 1 0.406(**) 0.354(**) 0.242(**)

Assessment Host

Culture 1 0.316(**) 0.462(**)

Assessment Own

Culture 1 0.236(**)

Note: **The correlation is significant to a level 0.01 (bilateral); *The correlation is significant to a level 0.05 (bilateral).

the factors with the exception of retention of own culture.

3) Variables predictive of life satisfaction in the migratory

experience.

In order to know which factors predict life satisfaction in the

process of acculturation of immigrants, and as a way that a

displaced person has of assessing their life in the new context, a

regression analysis is done according to the stepwise method.

The results are shown in Table 4.

As can be seen, the main predictive factors of life satisfaction

considered in the study are: social support, assimilation of host

culture, self-esteem and assessment of host culture. These four

factors explain 37.1% of life satisfaction in the acculturation

process, with the emphasis on social support, as by itself it

explains 23.3% of the assessment of the migratory experience

in the new context.

However when the regression model for predicting life satis-

faction according to city of residence is applied, it is discernible

how the variance percentage indicated is different in each case.

So, in the city of Málaga the variables social support, self-es-

teem, assessment of host culture, social identity and percep-

tion of assessment explain 42.6% of life satisfaction. Madrid,

on the other hand, has three significant variables which would

explain a greater self-evaluation in the new context in 48.3%:

assimilation of host culture, social support and assessment of

host culture. Lastly, for the city of Barcelona the variables assi-

milation of host culture, self-esteem and social support explain

life satisfaction in 33.8%. As shown in the following table,

although for all three cities of residence, social support appears

as one of the factors for predicting life satisfaction in the host

country; in the cities with greater density of population (Madrid

and Barcelona) the principal factor is assimilation of host cul-

ture (Table 5).

Discussions and Conclusions

The migratory experience can be understood as an organic

process which implies important changes in the individual’s

surroundings (García, Martínez, Albar, & Santolaya, 2002;

Martínez, 1997). The person who emigrates from one country

to another should incorporate themselves into a new context, in

which they change their customs, values, rules, positions of

power, language etc. This process has been studied using dif-

ferent models of acculturation with different group and psy-

Table 4.

Regression coefficients of life satisfaction.

Variables of model 　 R2

Social support 0.485** 0.233

Social support 0.382**

Factor Here 0.311** 0.317

Social support 0.356**

Factor Here 0.261**

Self-esteem 0.178**

0.342

Social support 0.299**

Factor Here 0.145*

Self-esteem 0.196**

Assessment of host culture 0.225**

0.371

chosocial variables determinant in assessing the migratory pro-

ject of a person who has moved away, and in the end their

well-being in the new context.

In the study, four different psychosocial variables have been

taken into account, and have proven to be relevant in the adap-

tation process for the acculturation models, previously men-

tioned. According to the results, four of the principal factors

that predict a more positive assessment of the migratory ex-

perience and provide a greater level of life satisfaction in the

new context are: social support, the assimilation and assessment

of the host culture, and self-esteem. In other words, among this

group of factors that explain levels of life satisfaction of an

immigrant, is the factor that the immigrant perceives that they

can count on a social network of support contact with the soci-

ety to which they move, value themselves and value positively

the host society. This pattern, although not in the same way, can

also be applied to those factors that predict life satisfaction

according to city of residence; Málaga, Barcelona or Madrid.

The common factor of all three cities is social support, as it is

also the factor that is by far the greatest predictive of life satis-

faction in the city with least inhabitants. Furthermore, the level

of social support perceived, correlates with the rest of the vari-

ables considered: assimilation of host culture and retention of

original culture, self-esteem, social identity, assessment of host

culture and of own culture and perception of assessment. These

M. V. MARTÍN, M. DEL P. MORENO-JIMÉNEZ

Table 5.

Regression coefficients for life satisfaction according to the city of residence.

Málaga  Madrid

 Barcelona 

Variables

in model  R2 Variables

in model  R2

Social support 0.495** 0.238 Assim. Host culture 0.618** 0.375 Assim. Host culture 0.448** 0.191

Social support 0.444** 0.313 Assim. Host culture 0.493** 0.457 Assim. Host culture 0.322* 0.268

Self-esteem 0.288** Social support 0.320** Self-esteem 0.316*

Social support 0.364** 0.369 Assim. Host culture 0.335* 0.483 Assim. Host culture 0.200* 0.338

Self-esteem

A.C. Host

0.270**

0.262* Social support

A.C.Host

0.273*

0.255* Self-esteem

Social support

0.305*

0.303*

Social support

Self-esteem

A.C Host

Social Identity

0.302**

0.232*

0.278**

0.191*

0.395

Social support

Self-esteem

A.C Host

Social Identity

Perc. Assessment

0.279**

0.243*

0.190*

0.224*

0.212*

0.426

results are in agreement with other distinct studies in our coun-

try (Martínez, 1996; Martínez, 1997; Martínez et al., 1999;

2002; Lila et al., 2007) who also confirm that a social support

network is fundamental to reinterpret the new culture, establish

new ties and acquire new skills that allow a development of a

new social strata, rooted in a welcoming society, encouraging

success with their life project within the new context. Moreover

according to various studies social support occupies a central

position as a determinant social factor in health and psycho-

logical well-being (Cobb, 1976; Cohen, Gottlieb, & Underwood,

2000; Eckersley, Dixon & Douglas, 2001; Gracia, 1997; Mon-

tero, 2003; Ramírez & Cusmille, 1997). This means that if

support resources are important mediators between stressful life

events and health and well-being, in the case of immigrants this

relationship takes on particular relevance (Aroian, 1992; Cohen

& Wills, 1985; Delgado & Humm-Delgado, 1982; Golding &

Baezconde-Garbanati, 1990; Martínez, García, Maya, Rodríguez

& Checa, 1996). From among the diverse mechanisms that

have been proposed in an attempt to explain the beneficial ef-

fects of social support three stand out as having a greater im-

plication during the migratory experience, a sense of belonging,

the exchange of resources and information and the role of pro-

tector, buffer of social support (Hernández et al., 2005).

Another of the main conclusions that can be extracted from

this study is that the assessment of the migratory experience

does not correlate with retention of original culture. Namely,

the act of retaining the culture of the country of origin in the

new place of residence does not related to whether the person

feels more satisfied in the new context. These results contradict

the commonly held view expressed in the classic literature on

models of acculturation, in which the strategy of integration

(retention of original culture and assimilation of host culture) is

the most positive, satisfactory and functional for the immigrant

in this regard. Ward, Bochner and Furham, (2001) maintain that,

certainly in the case of the first generation, that cultural assimi-

lation is associated with fewer problems of adaptation to the

host society and a better emotional state. Moreover as sug-

gested by Basabe, Zoblina and Páez (2004) the bicultural option

(retention of original culture and assimilation of host culture) is

associated with a proper adjustment but requires a greater effort,

that from the beginning it is important to learn about the new

culture. In fact, in two of the three cities (with large populations)

the main factor for life satisfaction is assimilation of the host

society. For this reason, questions such as how to relate to the

native population, speak the language, conform to the cultural

norms of the host country all appear to favour life satisfaction

in the place in question.

To conclude, we determine that those factors which have a

bearing on the level of adaptation in the process of accultura-

tion can also provide clues as to the self-evaluation as person

makes about their migratory experience. However if we only

wish to stress the positive aspects of the process of accultura-

tion, we see some differences. These differences are principally

derived from taking as the central focus, the displaced person

and the perception that they have of their own migratory ex-

perience. Therefore, as Perkins, Palmer and García-Ramírez

(2011), have stated that they reached the conclusion that power

and contextual factors are crucial in the processes and problems

that the three communities involved face, in the migratory

process (migrants, from origin and destination) and as such any

investigation on migrants should respond to the necessities of

the community, be focused on action and positive social change.

This debate aims to draw attention to the necessity of over-

coming certain “culturalism” in research agendas and make

way for studies on psychosocial issues such as psychological

well-being, social integration or reducing discrimination and

prejudice. Therefore, the conclusions drawn from this study

will be relevant for more appropriate social intervention and

successful community service. By knowing which factors are

important for an immigrant to positively evaluate the migratory

experience we can advance in this direction.

REFERENCES

Aroian, K. J. (1992). Sources of social support and conflict for Polish

immigrants. Quali-tative Health R esearch, 2, 178-207.

doi:10.1177/104973239200200205

Basabe, N., Zoblina, A., & Paéz, D. Socio-cultural integration and

psychological adaptation of immigrants in the Basque Country.

Vitoria-Gasteiz: Servicio Central de Publicaciones del Gobierno

Vasco.

Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation and adaptation. Applied

Psychology: An International Review, 46, 5-61.

1252

M. V. MARTÍN, M. DEL P. MORENO-JIMÉNEZ

Cobb, S. (1976). Social support as a moderator of life stress. Psycho-

somatic Medicine, 38, 300-314.

Cohen, S. Gottlieb, B. H., & Underwood, L. G. (2000). Social relation-

ships and health. In S. Cohen, L. G. Underwood, & B. H. Gottlieb

(Eds.), Social support measurement and intervention: A guide for

health and social scientists (pp. 3-25). Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support and the buffer-

ing hypothesis. Psychologi c a l Bulletin, 98, 310-357.

doi:10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.310

Campani, G., & Catani, M. (1985). Associative networks in France and

Italian youth. Revue Européenne des Migrations Internationales, 1,

143-160. doi:10.3406/remi.1985.986

Delgado, M., & Humm-Delagado, D. (1982). Natural support systems:

Source of strength in Hispanic communities. Social Work, 27, 83-89.

Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The

satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49,

71-75. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13

Eckersley, R., Dixon, J., & Douglas, B. (Eds.) (2001). The social ori-

gins of heath and well-being. Nueva York: Cambridge University

Press.

García, M., Martínez, M. F., Albar, M. J., & Santolaya, F. J. (2002).

Immigrants and social natural resources. The application of the social

convoy method in the acculturation process. Migraciones, 11, 83-

111.

Golding, M. J., & Baezconde-Garbanati, L. A. (1990). Ethnicity, cul-

ture and social resources. American Journal of Community Psychol-

ogy, 18, 359-370. doi:10.1007/BF00938118

Gracia, E. (1997). Social support in community intervention. Barcelona:

Paidós.

Halpern, D. (1993). Minorities and mental Health. Social Sciences and

Medicine, 36, 597-607. doi:10.1016/0277-9536(93)90056-A

Hernández, S., Pozo, C., Alonso, E., & Martos, M. J. (2005). Structure

and functions of social support in a group of moroccan immigrants.

Anales de Psicología, 21, 304-315.

Liebkind, K., & Jasinskaja-Lahti, I. (2000). The influence of experi-

ences of discrimination on psychological stress: A comparison of

seven immigrant groups. Journal of Community and Applied Social

Psychology, 10, 1-16.

doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1298(200001/02)10:1<1::AID-CASP521>3.

0.CO;2-5

Lila, M. Gracia, E., Herrero, J., & Robles, M. (2007). Indicators of

social intergration in latin american immigrants.Perspectives and

retrospectives in Social Psychology at the outset of the XXI century.

Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva.

Luhtanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1992). A collective self esteem scale: Self

evaluation of one’s social identity. Personality and social Psychol-

ogy Bulletin, 18, 302-318. doi:10.1177/0146167292183006

Lynam, M. J. (1985). Support networks developed by immigrant

women. Social Science and Medicine, 21, 327-333.

doi:10.1016/0277-9536(85)90109-1

Martínez, M. C. (1996). Psycosocial analysis of prejudice. Madrid:

Síntesis.

Martínez, M. F. (1997). Stress and social support in the migratory

process. In M. Hombrados (Ed.), Stress and health (pp. 297-318).

Valencia: Promolibro.

Martínez, M. F., & García, M. M. J. (2004). Immigration and inter-

group conflict: A psycho-social attitudes and racist prejudices ap-

proximation. Inmigración, Sociedad y Estado: Una cuestión abierta.

Sevilla: Junta de Andalucía.

Martínez, M. F., García, M., & Maya, I. (1999). The role of natural

social resources in the migratory process. Psycosocial Intervention, 8,

221-232.

Martínez, M. F., García, M., & Maya, I. (2002). Social support and

locus of control as predictors psychological well-being in Moroccan

and Peruvian immigrant women in Spain. International Journal of

Intercultural Relatio ns, 26, 287-310.

doi:10.1016/S0147-1767(02)00005-6

Martínez, M. F., García, M., Maya, I, Rodríguez, S., & Checa, F.

(1996). The social integration of African immigrants in Andalucia,

needs and resources. Sevilla: Junta de Andalucía.

Melero, L., & Díe, L. (2010). The psicosocial focus in migrations. In L.

Melero (coord.), The person beyond migration: Manual of psyco-

social intervention with migrants (pp. 71-114). Fundación CeiMigra.

Montero, M. (2003). Theory and Practice of community psychology:

Tension between community and so c iety. Barcelona: Paidós.

Moreno, M. P., & Vallejo, M. (2005). Strategies of acculturation in

immigrant populations. Results with questionnaire EAI-2005; Stra-

tegies of Acculturation in Immigrants. In J. M. Sabucedo, J. Romay,

& A. López-Cortón (Eds.), Psychological, political, cultural, im-

migration and social communication (pp. 123-130). Biblioteca

Nueva.

Moreno, M. P., & Vallejo, M. (2008). Immigration from a psychosocial

perspective. Inmigración e Integración: Aspectos sociales y legales

(pp. 39-54). Sequitur.

Neto, F. (1993). Some contributions to psychological research in

understanding the Portuguese migratory phenomenon. In M. Rey-

Von Allmen (Ed.), Clinical psychology and cultural questions. París:

L’Harmattan.

Oriol, M. (1985). Lorde identities. Revue Européenne des Migrations

Internationales, 1, 171-184. doi:10.3406/remi.1985.988

Partridge, K. (1988). Acculturation attitudes and stress of Westerners

living in Japan. In J. W. Berry, & R. C. Annis (Eds.), Ethnic psy-

chology (pp. 105-113). Amsterdam: Swets and Zeitlinger.

Perkins, D. D., Palmer, N. A., & García-Ramírez, M. (2011). Psycho-

logical studies on migrations and community. Psychosocial Interven-

tion, 20, 1-7.

Ramírez, V., & Cumsille, P. (1997). Evaluating the efficiency of a

community support program for adolescent motherhood. Revista

Latinoamericana de Psicología , 29, 267-286.

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Self-image of the adolescent and society. Bue-

nos Aires: Paidós.

Ryff, C. D., Keyes, C. L., & Hughes, D. L. (2003). Status inequalities,

perceived discrimination, and eudaimonic well-being: Do the chal-

lenges of minority life hone purpose and growth? Journal of Health

and Social Behavior, 44, 275-291. doi:10.2307/1519779

Sam, D. L. (1995). Acculturation attitudes among young immigrants as

a function of perceived parental attitudes to cultural change. Journal

of Early Adolescence, 15, 238-258.

doi:10.1177/0272431695015002004

Sánchez Santa-Bárbara, E. (1999). Relationship between personal

self-esteem, collective self-esteem and participation in the commu-

nity. Annals of Psychology, 15, 251-260.

Scott, W., & Scott, R. (1989). Adaptation of immigrants: Individual

differences and determinants. International Series in Experimental

Social Psychology, 18. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Tizón, J., Salamero, M., Sanjosé, J., Pellejero, N., Achotegui, J., &

Sainz, F. (1993) Migration and Mental health. Barcelona: PPU.

Vallejo M. (2009) Life satisfaction in the acculturation process in im-

migrants: Proposal of a model. Doctural Thesis unpublished, Málaga:

University of Málaga.

Ward, C., Bochner, S., & Furrham, A. (2001). The psychology of cul-

ture chock. East Sussex: Routledge.