Psychological Wellbeing in Three Groups of Skilled Immigrants to New Zealand

IF 0.7 Q3 Medicine
F. Alpass, R. Flett, A. D. Trlin, Anne Henderson, N. North, M. Skinner, Sarah Wright
{"title":"Psychological Wellbeing in Three Groups of Skilled Immigrants to New Zealand","authors":"F. Alpass, R. Flett, A. D. Trlin, Anne Henderson, N. North, M. Skinner, Sarah Wright","doi":"10.1375/JRC.13.1.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present study sought to investigate the current levels of psychological wellbeing in three immigrant groups to New Zealand. In addition, we sought to determine whether aspects of the acculturation process were related to mental health outcomes. This is a cross-sectional study from the fifth wave of annual in-depth interviews with three groups of recently arrived skilled immigrants from India, the People's Republic of China and South Africa. Interviews focused on international contacts and the migration of relatives and friends, housing, language, qualifications and employment, and social participation. Participants were also asked about health difficulties, homesickness, and whether they felt settled in New Zealand. The SF-36 Health Status Questionnaire (Ware, 1997), assessed the respondent's functional status and wellbeing in relation to four health concepts: vitality, social functioning, role limitations due to emotional health, and general mental wellbeing. The immigrant group differed significantly from the New Zealand population on only one of the four mental health scales, Vitality, with immigrants reporting higher levels. Different acculturation factors were found to predict different mental health subscales in regression analyses. Gender, home contact and health difficulty explained 22% of the unique variance in Vitality; employment status and health difficulty explained 18% of the variance in Social Functioning; health difficulty significantly contributed to the explained variance (14%) in the Role limitations due to emotional health subscale; gender, home contact and health difficulty explained 27% of the variance in the Mental Health subscale. There was little evidence for lower levels of psychological wellbeing for the three immigrant groups compared to the general New Zealand population, nor for differences between the three groups. However, results highlight the importance of differential predictors in the understanding of psychological health in migrant groups.","PeriodicalId":43415,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Rehabilitation Counselling","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2007-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1375/JRC.13.1.1","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Rehabilitation Counselling","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1375/JRC.13.1.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

The present study sought to investigate the current levels of psychological wellbeing in three immigrant groups to New Zealand. In addition, we sought to determine whether aspects of the acculturation process were related to mental health outcomes. This is a cross-sectional study from the fifth wave of annual in-depth interviews with three groups of recently arrived skilled immigrants from India, the People's Republic of China and South Africa. Interviews focused on international contacts and the migration of relatives and friends, housing, language, qualifications and employment, and social participation. Participants were also asked about health difficulties, homesickness, and whether they felt settled in New Zealand. The SF-36 Health Status Questionnaire (Ware, 1997), assessed the respondent's functional status and wellbeing in relation to four health concepts: vitality, social functioning, role limitations due to emotional health, and general mental wellbeing. The immigrant group differed significantly from the New Zealand population on only one of the four mental health scales, Vitality, with immigrants reporting higher levels. Different acculturation factors were found to predict different mental health subscales in regression analyses. Gender, home contact and health difficulty explained 22% of the unique variance in Vitality; employment status and health difficulty explained 18% of the variance in Social Functioning; health difficulty significantly contributed to the explained variance (14%) in the Role limitations due to emotional health subscale; gender, home contact and health difficulty explained 27% of the variance in the Mental Health subscale. There was little evidence for lower levels of psychological wellbeing for the three immigrant groups compared to the general New Zealand population, nor for differences between the three groups. However, results highlight the importance of differential predictors in the understanding of psychological health in migrant groups.
新西兰三组技术移民的心理健康状况
本研究旨在调查三个新西兰移民群体目前的心理健康水平。此外,我们试图确定文化适应过程的各个方面是否与心理健康结果有关。这是对来自印度、中华人民共和国和南非的三组最近抵达的技术移民进行的第五次年度深度访谈的横断面研究。访谈的重点是国际接触和亲戚朋友的迁移、住房、语言、资格和就业以及社会参与。参与者还被问及健康问题、思乡之情以及他们在新西兰是否安定下来。SF-36健康状况问卷(Ware, 1997年)评估了被调查者与四个健康概念相关的功能状况和健康状况:活力、社会功能、由情绪健康引起的角色限制和一般心理健康。在四个心理健康量表中,移民群体仅在活力这一项上与新西兰人口存在显著差异,移民报告的水平更高。在回归分析中发现不同的文化适应因素可以预测不同的心理健康分量表。性别、家庭接触和健康困难解释了22%的“活力”独特差异;就业状况和健康困难解释了18%的社会功能差异;健康困难显著影响情绪健康角色限制子量表的解释方差(14%);性别、家庭联系和健康困难解释了心理健康亚量表中27%的差异。几乎没有证据表明这三个移民群体的心理健康水平低于新西兰总人口,也没有证据表明这三个群体之间存在差异。然而,研究结果强调了差异预测因子在理解流动人群心理健康方面的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信