Migration and Integration

International migration has recently reached unprecedented levels, resulting in approximately 214 million people presently residing in countries different from where they were born (IOM, 2010). It is likely that, as a result of aging populations and low fertility rates, nearly all industrialized societies will require more large-scale immigration in order to support their economies and social welfare services (Saunders, 2010).

What happens to individuals when there is a change in their cultural context, or when they come to live next to a group of different ethnic and cultural background? What are the conditions for successful integration into a new society? Does integration concern only minority group members? How do, or should, people of different cultural backgrounds live together? These questions have become very urgent in the face of increasing immigration, recent economic crises, and social and political stratifications that have the potential of creating tensions among different ethnic and cultural groups (Landis & Albert, 2012).

Understanding how people of diverse cultural background live harmoniously is particularly relevant to psychology, considering that human behavior is seen as an adaptation to cultural context (Berry, Poortinga, Breugelmans, Chasiotis, & Sam, 2011). The processes involved in migration and intercultural contact are of concern not only to the migrating individual and group but also to the communities and societies that immigrants settle in. There is, therefore, a need to expand the psychological perspective on migration by understanding how intercultural encounters take shape and influence outcomes at the individual, intergroup, and societal levels. Whereas the process of acculturation is mutual, much of the psychological research has mainly focused on how minority ethnic group members deal with the culture change (see Sam & Berry, 2006). In recent years, however, the focus on how the two parties involved in intergroup contact impact each other and the dynamics of these influences are taking center stage (see Brown & Zagefka, 2011). Understanding these issues forms the basis of this topical issue of the Zeitschrift für Psychologie on migration and integration.

This issue begins with an integrative paper covering various models used to address the interactional nature of acculturation by Horenczyk, Jasinskaja-Lahti, Sam, and Vedder (2013). In this paper, the authors identify the commonalities and differences in these models and evaluate their contribution to a better understanding of intercultural relations in plural societies. This review paper also brings closer the links between fields of acculturation and social psychological research on immigrant integration.

The contributors of the following five original papers empirically address the mutuality of intergroup relations in the process of immigrant integration from different angles.

Fleischmann, Phalet, and Swyngedouw (2013) analyze the dual identification with ethno-religious groups and mainstream organizations among Turkish and Moroccan second-generation immigrants in Belgium. Their study found that participation in organizations beyond the ethno-religious community was more likely among high civic and low ethnic identifiers than among dual identifiers. Perceived discrimination was found to be related to higher levels of participation in both ethno-religious and mainstream organizations. The perception of Islamic and Western ways of life as incompatible with each other predicted greater support for religious political assertion and lower trust in civic institutions. The study results emphasize positive relationships between immigrant and national majority groups as a precondition for positive development of national and civic identity among immigrants.

The study by Mähönen, Ihalainen, and Jasinskaja-Lahti (2013) squares the premises of contact hypothesis – that interpersonal contacts between in- and out-groups have the potential to reduce prejudice and stereotypes under the appropriate conditions – with the context of inter-minority relations (i.e., Russians and other immigrants) in Finland. Their results indicate that negative contact experiences were related to lower ethnic identification (Russian) and more negative attitudes toward other immigrants only among those Russian-speaking immigrant adolescents who perceived negative norms regarding intergroup attitudes. These findings point to the importance of perceived social norms prevailing in the environment for low in-group identifiers.

The qualitative study by Dandy and Pe-Pua (2013) further illustrates the complexity of intergroup relations in a context involving two different minority groups – immigrants and indigenous peoples – both interacting with a majority group, that is, Anglo-Australians. In spite of reporting low social conflicts, some underlying tones of intergroup tensions were observed: Indigenous Australians felt they were being pushed aside as more services and programs were directed toward refugees and other recently-arrived groups. Competition for affordable housing, employment, and healthcare seemed to worsen the tensions and seemed to underline the fear that multiculturalism will further disadvantage indigenous Australians. Some Anglo-Australians also expressed the belief that immigrants and refugees received preferential treatment, and these beliefs seemed to result in feelings of anger and resentment toward immigrants and refugees.

The final two articles show how ethnic composition, value climate, and societal ideologies may shape intergroup attitudes among majority and minority group members. The study by Fasel, Green, and Sarrasin (2013) suggests that high minority proportion combined with a particular value climate may polarize intergroup attitudes. Particularly, the study indicates that community-level conservative climate increases anti-veil attitudes among majority group members in Switzerland with a high minority proportion. In turn, attitudes were found to be more tolerant among nonconformist majority group members in progressive communities.

The Research Spotlight paper by Christ, Asbrock, Dhont, Pettigrew, and Wagner (2013) is innovative in demonstrating that attitudinal climate in a particular societal context may be related to the acculturation preferences of immigrants living in this context, and these go beyond individual-level predictors (i.e., religiosity and national identification), which have previously been shown to be related to the acculturation preferences of immigrants.

The guest editors hope that this issue will equally find its readership among academics as well as stakeholders and practitioners interested in and responsible for finding ways to promote harmonious intergroup relations and immigrant integration in the diverse European societies.

The guest editors would also like to draw your attention to a recently released special issue of European Psychologist on “Multiculturalism in Europe” (Berry & Sam, 2013) that makes a good companion to the papers published in the present issue. That special issue includes integrative papers focusing on key conceptual issues from a European perspective and empirical review papers on research findings on these issues in different regions of Europe and beyond.