Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2024 Jan 19.
Published in final edited form as: Fam Consum Sci Res J. 2018 Jun 1;46(4):331–346. doi: 10.1111/fcsr.12260

Life Quality of University Students From Immigrant Families in the United States

Farin Bakhtiari 1, Aprile D Benner 1, Scott W Plunkett 2
PMCID: PMC10798651  NIHMSID: NIHMS1913979  PMID: 38249429

Abstract

The numbers of university students from immigrant families have been increasing in the United States, yet little research exists on factors influencing their life quality. Self-report data were collected from 2,210 students from one university in California. Direct effects of four contextual stressors (i.e., ethnic discrimination, parent–child cultural conflict, family disengagement, and family financial stress) were examined in relation to life quality. Also, the potential moderating and mediating role of perceived stress was examined, as well as the potential moderating role of students’ generational status. The results provided strong support for mediation, showing contextual stressors influenced students’ life quality through their perceived stress. Some evidence was found for moderation, showing the complex role of perceived stress. Generational status did not play a moderating role.

Keywords: immigrant families, life quality, stress, discrimination, family conflict

The United States is often called a “nation of immigrants” and the “land of opportunity” where many refugees and immigrants come to pursue a better quality of life. Approximately 25% of the U.S. population is either 1st generation (individual and parents are foreign-born) or 2nd generation (individual is U.S.-born with at least one foreign-born parent) (Trevelyan et al., 2016). Moreover, the number of individuals from immigrant families has been increasing faster than the overall U.S. population (Trevelyan et al., 2016). U.S. immigrant families are very diverse, with most originating from Latin America or Asia (Nwosu, Batalova, & Auclair, 2014). Given the increasing role children of immigrants play in the U.S. society and the importance of education for future life prospects, it is important that young adults from immigrant families enroll and succeed in higher education (Baum & Flores, 2011). Research has shown that university students who reported higher life quality experienced better socio-emotional adjustment (Mahmoud, Staten, Hall, & Lennie, 2012), ultimately resulting in better school retention (Douce & Keeling, 2014).

There are many contextual factors that might contribute to the life quality of university students from immigrant families. The role of contextual stressors (e.g., family and societal stressors) should not be taken lightly. This is especially true since a prominent motivation for families who immigrate is to improve life quality, especially financially, through a radical change in context (Pacheco, Rossouw, & Lewer, 2013). Also, it is important to examine the mechanisms through which contextual stressors may influence life quality. Most research has focused on how stressors influence individuals’ well-being by impacting their perceived stress level (i.e., mediating role of perceived stress) (Lorenzo-Blanco & Unger, 2015). Although this approach is theoretically valid and has some empirical support, theories that place special attention on the role of context (e.g., life course theory) suggest individuals are the product of their context and have the potential to play an active agential role in their well-being, with personal characteristics modifying contextual effects (i.e., moderating role of perceived stress) (Elder & Shanahan, 2006).

This study examined four contextual stressors in relation to life quality of university students from immigrant families—ethnic discrimination, parent–child cultural conflict, family disengagement, and family financial stress. Each was selected due to the unique role they likely play for individuals from immigrant families during young adulthood. Ethnic discrimination has long been recognized as a stressor in the lives of individuals in immigrant families (Pascoe & Richman, 2009). Also, immigration can take a toll on family dynamics (Dillon, De La Rosa, & Ibañez, 2012) and family finances (Camarota, 2012), and thus, family stressors are also important to consider. To address the mechanism behind the link between stressors and well-being, the potential mediating versus moderating role of perceived stress was examined with attention to individuals’ generational status (i.e., 1st vs. 2nd generation). A conceptual model appears in Figure 1.

Figure 1:

Figure 1:

Open in a new tab

Conceptual models contrasting perceived stress as a moderator (upper model) versus a mediator (lower model).

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Contextual Stressors and Life Quality of University Students From Immigrant Families

Young adulthood in the United States is a life stage when many individuals, including those from immigrant families, attend college (Davis & Bauman, 2013). Not surprisingly, students experience college-related and interpersonal stressors (e.g., educational and career decisions, negotiating romantic partnerships, and balancing a desire for independence with relative dependency and attachment to parent figures), which can influence their life quality (Arnett, 2000; Darling, McWey, Howard, & Olmstead, 2007). Those from immigrant families might experience these typical stressors along with other stressors tied to their culture, ethnicity, and immigration status (e.g., discrimination, acculturation stress) (Cokley et al., 2017; Schwartz et al., 2013). Such stressors are important to consider because students with greater mental health issues could have worse retention and are less likely to succeed in college (Douce & Keeling, 2014). However, those who graduate with at least a bachelor’s degree are more likely to lead healthy lives, be employed, and not live in poverty (Bonnie, Stroud, & Breiner, 2015; Camarota, 2012).

Life course theory, similar to other contextual theories (e.g., Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems theory), considers human development in relation to stressors encountered in individuals’ everyday contexts (Elder & Shanahan, 2006). Life course theory is particularly focused on the role that developmental timing plays. This is important in the current study, as it was posited that university students in immigrant families might experience unique stressors that are particularly significant at this specific life stage, one that is filled with normative stressors linked with college life.

In a stratified society, university students in immigrant families may be vulnerable to unique contextual stressors, such as discrimination, that are particularly relevant to the well-being of members with certain characteristics such as generational status (Elder & Shanahan, 2006; Gee, Walsemann, & Brondolo, 2012). Ethnic discrimination can compromise mental health resources, which can result in rumination, anxiety, lower self-worth, and worse life quality (Schmitt, Branscombe, Postmes, & Garcia, 2014; Villegas-Gold & Yoo, 2014). Discrimination might directly influence individuals’ physical and psychological well-being but also indirectly affect well-being through a heightened stress response (Pascoe & Richman, 2009).

Life course theory’s principle of linked lives suggests family interactions and qualities can influence family members’ life quality (Elder & Shanahan, 2006). Family disengagement, such as lack of emotional bonding and connection among family members (Olson, 2000), undermines a key source of social support, especially in immigrant families from more collectivist cultures. Family disengagement has been linked to various mental health issues among adolescents and young adults from Latino and Asian immigrant families (Dennis, Basañez, & Farahmand, 2010; Leong, Park, & Kalibatseva, 2013). Another source of potential stress within immigrant families is parent–child cultural conflict such as arguments about traditions from the home country versus beliefs in the new country (Dennis et al., 2010; Szapoczni & Kurtines, 1993). Greater parent–child cultural conflict relates to lower self-esteem and higher depressive symptoms in Latina/o adolescents in immigrant families (Behnke, Plunkett, Sands, & B amaca-Colbert, 2011). An open question and a focus of this study is how family disengagement and parent–child cultural conflict influence young adults’ life quality.

Finally, family financial stress is a common stressor among immigrant families (Painter & Qian, 2016) as many immigrant families live in poverty (Camarota, 2012). College students’ financial stress could negatively impact life satisfaction (Xiao, Tang, & Shim, 2008), but there is little research examining family financial stress and university students’ life quality. Individual and family finances likely overlap in more collectivist cultures and/or immigrant families such as Latino families where money may be pooled (Falicov, 2001), and thus, family financial stress likely serves a key influence on young adults’ life quality.

The Moderating Versus Mediating Role of Perceived Stress

Perceived stress is defined as individuals’ perception of their ability to manage their stress and control their lives using coping resources (Lorenzo-Blanco & Unger, 2015). Life course theory emphasizes the importance of human agency and the active role of the individual in development (Elder & Shanahan, 2006). Thus, a sense of human agency may push individuals to take control of a stressful situation, which could potentially change the intensity of contextual stressors’ links to individuals’ life quality. In individualistic societies, a sense of control over stressors may be particularly important to perceived accomplishments or life satisfaction (Bradley & Corwyn, 2004). For example, studies with adults have found that self-efficacy (Matsui & Onglatco, 1992; Selenko & Batinic, 2011) and perceived control (O’Neill & Kerig, 2000) moderate the links between work-related stress, financial stress, and home violence on individuals’ well-being. In this study, individuals’ inability to manage stress (labeled perceived stress) was identified as having the potential to be a human agency factor and an individual characteristic that may moderate the link between contextual stressors and students’ life quality. Life course theory’s acknowledgement of the interactive role of context and individual agency made it a fitting theory to guide this study.

In considering the potential mediating role of perceived stress, life course theory suggests interactions between humans and their environments shape individual development. Specifically, “individuals do not develop according to their natures but, rather, they are continually produced, sustained, and changed by their social context” (Elder & Shanahan, 2006, p. 670). Thus, individuals’ perceived stress would be influenced by their interactions within various developmental contexts. In addition, research has found that individuals’ perceptions of their inability to manage stress impact socio-emotional well-being (Lorenzo-Blanco & Unger, 2015). In previous research, scholars have either considered perceived stress as the main contributor to life satisfaction (Hamarat et al., 2001) or a mediator between stressors and individuals’ physical and mental health (Lorenzo-Blanco & Unger, 2015; Pascoe & Richman, 2009). In this study, the researchers examine whether perceived stress plays a moderating or mediating role in relation to the links between contextual stressors and young adults’ life quality.

The Moderating Role of Generational Status

When studying individuals from immigrant families, it is important to take into account generational status. There are various studies showing similarities and differences in experiences and outcomes for 1st-generation (i.e., individuals and parents foreign-born) versus 2nd-generation individuals (U.S.-born individual with at least one foreign-born parent) (Marks, Ejesi, & Garc ıa Coll, 2014; Schwartz et al., 2013). For example, research on the immigrant paradox has documented that 1st-generation youth tend to fare better on behavioral outcomes (e.g., delinquency, substance use) compared to their U.S.-born counterparts, yet less clear-cut differences are found on other outcomes (Marks et al., 2014). For example, a study focused on life satisfaction among diverse college students found no difference among 1st- and 2nd-generation immigrants (Schwartz et al., 2013).

Research has shown mixed findings regarding the potential moderating role of individuals’ generational status in relation to contextual stressors and individuals’ outcomes. For example, Yoo and Lee (2008) found the relationship between discrimination, ethnic identity, and negative affect among Asian American college students from immigrant families differed based on students’ generational status. However, Kaduvettoor-Davidson and Inman (2013) found no differences between 1st- and 2nd-generation immigrants on the links between discrimination, perceived stress, and well-being among South Asian immigrant adults. Thus, contextual stressors such as discrimination may or may not influence 1st- and 2nd-generation immigrants differently, possibly depending on participants’ age or the mechanisms and the outcomes under study.

THE CURRENT STUDY

University students from immigrant families at a diverse university in Southern California reported on various life stressors, perceived stress, and life quality. The first research aim investigated the relative effects of four contextual stressors (ethnic discrimination, parent–child cultural conflict, family disengagement, and family financial stress) on participants’ life quality (Path A in Figure 1). It was hypothesized that all four stressors would negatively influence life quality. No specific hypotheses were formed regarding which stressor would be most detrimental to their life quality as these stressors have typically been studied in different models and with unique samples and outcomes.

The second research aim investigated whether perceived stress moderated (Path B in the upper model in Figure 1) and/or mediated (Paths D1 and D2 in the lower model in Figure 1) the links between contextual stressors and life quality. This part of the study was exploratory. Based on research (Lorenzo-Blanco & Unger, 2015) and life course theory’s tenets on the importance of interactions between humans and their environments, it was expected that perceived stress would mediate the links between all four contextual stressors and life quality. There were few empirical studies related to our moderation model; however, the concept of human agency in life course theory allowed the researchers to hypothesize that perceived stress (or inability to manage stress) may moderate the links between the stressors and life quality, potentially exacerbating the effects.

The final research aim considered the potential moderating role of generational status. Life course theory posits that U.S. society is stratified and that those in positions of privilege and power reap the benefits of their contexts more (Elder & Shanahan, 2006). As such, 1st-generation students, who may face more challenges (e.g., socioeconomic; Marks et al., 2014), may be more negatively affected by contextual stressors and more susceptible to the negative effects of stress than their 2nd-generation peers. Although prior research on the immigrant paradox has shown advantages for 1st-generation youth, there is typically less support in the extant immigrant paradox research highlighting differences in more subjective outcomes such as life quality.

METHODS

Participants and Procedures

The university Institutional Review Board approved this study. Self-report survey data were collected from 2,210 students (18–29 years old) from immigrant families at one ethnically diverse, comprehensive university in Southern California (designated a minority-serving institution and Hispanic serving institution) in 2015 and 2016. See Table 1 for detailed demographic information. Most participants came from a psychology department’s subject pool, predominantly comprised of students in a lower-division, general education psychology course. As part of the course requirements, students must either participate in research studies or write a research paper. The students who decided to participate in research would sign up for studies through SONA (i.e., a subject pool management system). After they signed up, they were either sent a link to an online survey, or they could select a day and time to complete a paper-pencil survey in a group setting. In previous years, no differences were found between the two methods. Other participants completed a paper-pencil survey during an upper-division, general education course. Specifically, researchers went to the class to recruit participants. Almost all of the students agreed to participate. No incentive was provided. For both groups, participation was voluntary, the survey was anonymous, and the survey took approximately 10–12 min to complete.

TABLE 1:

Sample Demographics

Variable N %
Age (18–29 years) M = 19.37, SD = 1.56 2,210 100
Classification
 Freshman 1,025 46.4
 Sophomore 740 33.5
 Junior 321 14.5
 Senior 124 5.6
Gender
 Men 700 32.0
 Women 1,489 68.0
Living with parent(s) 1,748 79.4
Ethnicity
 Latina/o 1,523 68.9
 Mexican American 940 42.5
 Non-Latina/o 687 31.1
 Asian 335 15.2
 Armenian 111 5.0
 Middle Eastern 74 3.3
 European American/White 54 1.4
 African American/Black 33 1.5
 Other or mixed 80 3.6
Generational status
 1st generation (participant and parents born outside the United States) 353 16.0
 2nd generation (participant U.S.-born, at least one parent foreign-born) 1,857 84.0
Birth country of mothers (fathers)
 Mexico 947 (963) 42.9 (43.8)
 El Salvador 245 (235) 11.1 (10.6)
 Philippines 170 (143) 7.7 (6.5)
 USA 150 (157) 6.8 (7.1)
 Guatemala 131 (147) 5.9 (6.7)
 Armenia 77 (69) 3.5 (3.1)
 Iran 51 (59) 2.3 (2.7)
 South Korea 46 (36) 2.1 (1.6)
 Vietnam 34 (31) 1.5 (1.4)
 Other (73 other countries) 358 (370) 16.2 (16.5)
Open in a new tab

Measures

Life quality.

A single item was used to measure life quality: “In general, how would you rate your overall quality of life during the last six months?” (Zimmerman et al., 2006). The response options follow: 0 = very bad, my life could hardly be worse, 1 = pretty bad, most things are going poorly, 2 = the good and bad parts are about equal, 3 = pretty good, most things are going well, and 4 = very good, my life could hardly be better.

Contextual stressors.

Ethnic discrimination was measured using a 9-item scale (Essed, 1991). The stem was “How often have any of the following happened to you because of your race, culture, language, and/or skin color?” An example item is “You are treated with less courtesy than others.” Response choices ranged from 1 = never to 6 = almost every day. Items were averaged with higher scores representing more perceived discrimination (α = .92).

A single item was used to measure frequency of parent–child cultural conflict: “How frequent are the disagreements you have with your parents on cultural traditions (e.g., not wanting to follow your parents’ traditions)?” (Behnke et al., 2011). Response choices ranged from 1 = never to 5 = most of the time.

Family disengagement was measured with a 9-item scale (Bakhtiari, Plunkett, & Alpizar, 2017). A sample item follows: “We avoid each other at home.” Response choices ranged from 1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree. Items were averaged with higher scores representing greater family disengagement (α = .91).

A single item (i.e., “what is your family’s level of financial stress?”) was used to measure participants’ perceptions of their families’ financial stress. Response choices ranged from 0 = no financial stress to 100 = extreme financial stress.

Perceived stress.

The 10-item Perceived Stress Scale (Cohen, Kamarck, & Mermelstein, 1983) was used to measure students’ ability to manage stress. The stem for the items was “In the last month, how often have you…” Two sample items follow: “Found that you could not cope with all the things that you had to do?” and “Felt confident about your ability to handle your personal problems?” (reverse coded). Response choices ranged from 0 = never to 4 = very often. Items were averaged with higher scores representing more inability to manage stress (α = .86).

Control variables.

Ethnicity (0 = non-Latina/o, 1 = Latina/o), gender (0 = men, 1 = women), and students’ living status (0 = not living with parent(s), 1 = living with parent(s)) were included in all models as covariates. Students’ generational status (i.e., 0 = 2nd generation, 1 = 1st generation) was included as a covariate in all models except when it was the moderator. See Table 2 for descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations between the primary constructs of interest.

TABLE 2:

Bivariate Correlations, Means, and Standard Deviations (N = 2,210)

1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Life quality –
2. Ethnic discrimination −.16*** –
3. Parent–child cultural conflict −.14*** .19*** –
4. Family disengagement −.29*** .11*** .16*** –
5. Family financial stress −.21*** .20*** .05** .15*** –
6. Perceived stress −.50*** .20*** .20*** .29*** .32*** –
M 2.62 1.82 1.66 1.74 55.63 2.00
SD 0.73 0.83 1.02 0.56 27.08 0.63
Open in a new tab

NOTE:

*

p < .05,

**

p < .01,

***

p < .001.

Analysis Plan

Analyses were conducted in Mplus Version 7.4 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2012). As data were collected across multiple semesters using various forms, only students with data for all the study’s main constructs were selected. Missing data associated with the covariates were addressed using full information maximum likelihood (FIML). FIML is one preferred method for handling missing data (Enders, 2010). To answer the first research question examining the main effects of the four contextual stressors on life quality, regression analyses were conducted.

For the second research question regarding potential moderating versus mediating role of perceived stress, two set of analyses were conducted. To test whether perceived stress moderated the links between contextual stressors and life quality (upper portion of Figure 1), the researchers conducted a set of hierarchical models. First, the direct effects of the contextual stressors and perceived stress on life quality were included, and then, the four interaction terms between each contextual stressor and perceived stress (e.g., ethnic discrimination-by-perceived stress) were included. All contextual stressors and perceived stress were centered for these analyses. Procedures outlined by Aiken and West (1991) were used to probe statistically significant interactions using simple slopes analyses.

The mediation model was tested using path analysis in a structural equation modeling framework (Kline, 2015). As seen in the lower portion of Figure 1, besides the direct relations between the contextual stressors and life quality, the links between the contextual stressors and perceived stress and a link between perceived stress and life quality were included. Indirect effects were tested using the Mplus estimation of indirect effects.

The final set of analyses examined whether the patterns of results were consistent for 1st- versus 2nd-generation participants. Multiple group analyses were conducted to determine whether the strength of associations within each set of models (i.e., basic regression, moderation, mediation) was similar for 1st- versus 2nd-generation participants from immigrant families. For the multiple group analyses, a model was conducted where all paths were free to vary across the two groups. Next, a model was conducted where all focal paths were constrained to be equal across groups. Chi-square test of parameter constraints determined whether the inclusion of these constraints resulted in a poorer fitting model. If the constrained model fit the data more poorly than the unconstrained model, then paths would be constrained one-at-a-time to determine the specific differences between 1st- versus 2nd-generation immigrants.

RESULTS

First, the extent to which the four contextual stressors impacted life quality of university students from immigrant families was examined. As hypothesized, the regression analysis showed all four stressors were significantly and negatively related to life quality (see Model 1 in Table 3). After controlling for students’ gender, ethnicity, living status, and generational status, family disengagement had the highest standardized coefficient, followed by family financial stress, ethnic discrimination, and parent–child cultural conflict.

TABLE 3:

Regressions Examining Contextual Stressors and Stress on Life Quality (N = 2,210)

Life quality
Model 1 β (SE) Model 2 β (SE) Model 3 β (SE)
Gender (0 = men, 1 = women) −.05 (.02)* .02 (.02) .02 (.02)
Ethnicity (0 = non-Latina/o, 1 = Latina/o) .05 (.02)* .03 (.02) .03 (.02)
Living status (0 = not with parent, 1 = with parent) .03 (.02) .04 (.02) .03 (.02)
Generational status (0 = 2nd, 1 = 1st) .02 (.02) .01 (.02) .01 (.02)
Ethnic discrimination −.10 (.02)*** −.05 (.02)* −.05 (.02)***
Parent-child cultural conflict −.08 (.02)*** −.02 (.02) −.01 (.02)
Family disengagement −.24 (.02)*** −.14 (.02)*** −.13 (.02)***
Family financial stress −.15 (.02)*** −.05 (.02)* −.04 (.02)*
Perceived stress −.45 (.02)*** −.44 (.02)***
Ethnic discrimination × Stress .03 (.02)
Parent-child cultural conflict × Stress −.02 (.02)
Family disengagement × Stress −.06 (.02)***
Family financial stress × Stress .01 (.02)
R 2 .13 .24 .29
Open in a new tab

NOTES: Standardized coefficients are reported. Gender, ethnicity, students’ living status, and generational status were included in all models as covariates.

*

p < .05,

**

p < .01,

***

p < .001.

Next, the potential moderating role of perceived stress was examined (see Models 2 and 3 in Table 3). Model 2, which introduced the main effect of perceived stress, showed perceived stress was a strong contributor to students’ life quality. Model 3, which added the interaction terms, indicated one significant interaction that was between family disengagement and perceived stress. As shown in Figure 2, simple slopes analyses showed that although family disengagement was linked to poorer life quality for all students, students who reported higher perceived stress were more negatively influenced by family disengagement.

Figure 2:

Figure 2:

Open in a new tab

Perceived stress moderating the association between family disengagement and life quality of university students from immigrant families.

Moving to the mediation model, evidence of mediation for all contextual stressors was observed. Specifically, greater ethnic discrimination, family disengagement, family financial stress, and parent–child cultural conflict were related to higher perceived stress, and higher levels of perceived stress, in turn, were related to poorer life quality (see Figure 3 and Table 4). Above and beyond the indirect effects of the contextual stressors on life quality, three of the four contextual stressors (ethnic discrimination, family disengagement, and family financial stress) continued to have a significant and negative direct effect on life quality.

Figure 3:

Figure 3:

Open in a new tab

Perceived stress as a mediator of the effects of contextual stressors on life quality of university students from immigrant families. Covariates were gender, ethnicity, living status, and generational status. Standardized coefficients are reported. Dashed lines indicate nonsignificant effects. *p < .05. ***p < .001.

TABLE 4:

Indirect Effects from the Mediation Model: Perceived Stress Mediating the Effects of Contextual Stressors on Life Quality (N = 2,210)

Life Quality
β SE
Ethnic discrimination → perceived stress → life quality −.05*** .01
Parent-child cultural conflict → perceived stress → life quality −.06*** .01
Family disengagement → perceived stress → life quality −.10*** .01
Family financial stress → perceived stress → life quality −.11*** .01
Open in a new tab

NOTE:

*

p < .05,

**

p < .01,

***

p < .001.

Finally, multiple group analyses were run for all models (i.e., basic regression, moderation, mediation models) to determine whether relations of interest varied by student generational status. No significant differences were found between 1st- and 2nd-generation immigrants in the direct associations between contextual stressors and life quality (v2(4) = 4.89, p = .299). Similar results were found when comparing the free versus constrained models for the moderation model (v2(8) = 11.98, p = .152) and the mediation model (v2(9) = 9.38, p = .403). Thus, the relationships under study did not appear to vary for 1st- versus 2nd-generation immigrants.

DISCUSSION

University students from immigrant families are a growing population in the United States (Zong & Batalova, 2016), but the stressors they face may differ from their nonimmigrant peers. This study examined four contextual stressors uniquely important to life quality of university students in immigrant families.

Many young adults continue to live with their parents while in college (Fry, 2013), and thus, family dynamics often play a significant role in their well-being. These findings were consistent with the concept of linked lives in the life course theory (Elder & Shanahan, 2006) and previous empirical research about the role of parent–child cultural conflict (Behnke et al., 2011) and family cohesion (Scott et al., 2015) in young people’s well-being. When university students in immigrant families feel emotionally distant from family members (i.e., disengaged) or have conflict with parents over cultural values, they may feel isolated and less valued in their family. This may be especially damaging in immigrant families where families and parents are generally important sources of support (Ong, Phinney, & Dennis, 2006).

This study expanded on prior research that linked personal financial stress to university students’ life satisfaction (Xiao et al., 2008) by providing evidence that family financial stress is also related to life quality of university students in immigrant families. Young adults in immigrant families may feel responsible for contributing to family finances (Sánchez, Esparza, Colón, & Davis, 2010); therefore, it is possible that university students in immigrant families may perceive their college attendance as a potential burden on the family that may be contributing to family financial stress. It is clear that families play an important role in these students’ lives.

A key contribution of the current study was examining the mediating versus moderating role of perceived stress. These findings largely confirmed previous empirical research in which perceived stress mediated the links between contextual stressors and individuals’ well-being (Lorenzo-Blanco & Unger, 2015; Pascoe & Richman, 2009), such that experiencing contextual stressors diminished students’ ability to manage their stress, which translated into lower life quality. This suggests that individuals’ inability to manage stress may be a reaction to contextual stressors rather than a personal characteristic inherent to the individual. As such, reducing or reframing the contextual stressors as means for improving students’ ability to manage stress (labeled perceived stress) may be effective.

Only limited evidence was found for moderation, with students who reported more inability to manage their stress being more susceptible to the negative effects of family disengagement. In contrast, perceived stress did not moderate the links between ethnic discrimination, parent–child cultural conflict, or family financial stress with life quality. In this study, family disengagement was the strongest predictor of life quality. Previous research has found that university students in immigrant families place particular importance on family interdependence (e.g., family obligation), and researchers have suggested that young adults’ knowledge of their parents’ sacrifices and investments may drive these values (Tseng, 2004). Family is often an important source of social support for individuals in immigrant families, particularly when the immigrant families are from collectivistic cultures (Kia-Keating, Capous, Juang, & Bacio, 2016). Thus, given the particular importance of family cohesion to young adults in immigrant families, it was not surprising that individuals’ inability to manage stress (labeled perceived stress) exacerbated the negative effects of family disengagement in particular.

Although one of the main transitions in young adulthood is developing autonomy from the family unit (Arnett, 2000), this developmental task may look different for young adults in immigrant families who are more likely to maintain strong family ties due to family obligation demands and the values placed on family cohesion (Kwak, 2003). Overall, the mediation and moderation findings suggest perceived stress is a strong contributor to life quality of university students from immigrant families above and beyond ethnic discrimination and family stressors.

Finally, this study examined the role of generational status (i.e., 1st vs. 2nd generation). Contrary to the hypothesis, no differences were identified between 1st- and 2nd-generation immigrants for the relations under study. These findings suggest that university students from immigrant families are likely to be susceptible to the negative effects of ethnic discrimination, parent–child cultural conflict, family disengagement, and family financial stress regardless of being foreign-born or U.S.-born. It also suggests that perceived stress tends to work similarly among both groups (i.e., 1st- and 2nd-generation immigrants), all of which is consistent with prior research identifying no differences by generational status (Kaduvettoor-Davidson & Inman, 2013). U.S.-born students with at least one foreign-born parent likely share some of the challenges that foreign-born students face. Thus, it seems that immigration-related contextual stressors such as discrimination and family stressors are likely to be tied to membership in an immigrant family rather than being an immigrant per se.

IMPLICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS

This study contributed to the literature by documenting the importance of contextual stressors in the lives of university students from immigrant families and shedding light on the mechanisms through which they influence life quality. Despite these contributions, some limitations should be acknowledged. First, the cross-sectional nature of the study does not allow conclusions about directionality. Future studies using longitudinal designs can more carefully examine directionality among central constructs while taking advantage of temporal sequencing. Second, there were not sufficient numbers of participants from each ethnic group (e.g., Middle Eastern, Asian) to examine ethnic differences. Immigrant families often have commonalities (e.g., moving for education or career opportunities, acculturative stress, greater family cohesion; Bush, Abrams-Muruthi, Bohon, & Kim, 2017) as well as differences (e.g., differing experiences of ethnic discrimination; Bush et al., 2017), and future research should examine potential ethnic differences to verify the generalizability of these findings across racial/ethnic groups.

Also, this study did not assess whether these models operated similarly for individuals who are not from immigrant families. Thus, future studies may want to compare students from immigrant families to third generation families. This study used four contextual stressors that were uniquely relevant to life quality of university students in immigrant families, but future research should examine potential differences between shared stressors among all college students such as quality of friendships, love relationships, and so forth (Darling et al., 2007) with stressors that are particularly relevant to students in immigrant families (e.g., parent–child cultural conflict).

Additionally, the measures were self-report from a single respondent. Future studies may want to consider measuring family stressors from multiple perspectives (e.g., child and parents) as there is evidence that congruence versus incongruence between parent–child informants can have differential impacts on young people’s well-being (Hou, Kim, & Benner, 2017). Although young adults’ appraisals of family dynamics do not fully represent objective family processes, the constructs were meant to tap into young adults’ subjective perceptions and the impact they have on their life quality.

The findings are important to family life educators, university counselors, and other mental health practitioners working with university students from immigrant families. Practitioners and educators working with university students with low life quality should assess levels of perceived stress and what contextual stressors are contributing to the stress. University counseling services or freshmen orientation courses could teach mindfulness techniques and positive strategies to manage stress such as active coping, reframing, and accessing social support. Practitioners may want to consider targeting university students from immigrant families for services to help them learn strategies to deal with common contextual stressors (e.g., discrimination, cultural conflict with parents). It is important to note that practitioners working with individuals from immigrant families may need training in cultural competency, and programs targeted toward immigrant families should be culturally appropriate (Zagelbaum & Carlson, 2011).

Additionally, students from immigrant families may have less knowledge about funding their education, so workshops could be provided by financial aid offices. And finally, mental health practitioners can teach university students conflict resolution skills as well as family bonding strategies. Clearly, students from immigrant families are susceptible to many contextual stressors, but there is much that educators and practitioners can do to support these students’ well-being.

REFERENCES

  1. Aiken LS, & West SG (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  2. Arnett JJ (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55, 469–480. 10.1037/0003-066x.55.5.469. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bakhtiari F, Plunkett SW, & Alpizar D (2017). Family qualities, self-deprecation, and depressive symptoms of Zoroastrian young adults in immigrant families. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 19, 645–654. 10.1007/s10903-016-0476-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Baum S, & Flores SM (2011). Higher education and children in immigrant families. The Future of Children, 21, 171–193. 10.1353/foc.2011.0000. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Behnke AO, Plunkett SW, Sands T, & B amaca-Colbert MY (2011). Latino adolescents’ perceptions of discrimination, neighborhood risk, and parenting on their own feelings of self-esteem and depression. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42, 1179–1197. 10.1177/0022022110383424. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Bonnie RJ, Stroud C, & Breiner H (2015). Investing in the health and well-being of young adults. Washington, DC: National Academic Press. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bradley RH, & Corwyn RF (2004). Life satisfaction among European American, African American, Chinese American, Mexican American, and Dominican American adolescents. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 28, 385–400. 10.1080/01650250444000072. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bush KR, Abrams-Muruthi BA, Bohon SA, & Kim HK (2017). Adaptation among immigrant families: Resources and barriers. In Price CA, Bush KR & Price SJ (Eds.), Families and change: Coping with stressful events and transitions (5th ed., pp. 179–202). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  9. Camarota SA (2012, August). Immigrants in the United States A profile of America’s foreign-born population. Washington, DC: Center for Immigration Studies. Retrieved April 4, 2017, from http://cis.org/sites/cis.org/files/articles/2012/immigrants-in-the-united-states-2012.pdf [Google Scholar]
  10. Cohen S, Kamarck T, & Mermelstein R (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 386–396. 10.2307/2136404. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Cokley K, Smith L, Bernard D, Hurst A, Jackson S, Stone S, et al. (2017). Impostor feelings as a moderator and mediator of the relationship between perceived discrimination and mental health among racial/ethnic minority college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 64, 141–154. 10.1037/cou0000198. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Darling CA, McWey LM, Howard SN, & Olmstead SB (2007). College student stress: The influence of interpersonal relationships on sense of coherence. Stress and Health, 23, 215–229. 10.1002/smi.1139. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Davis D, & Bauman K (2013). School enrollment in the United States: 2011 (No. P20–571). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Retrieved April 4, 2017, from https://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/p20-571.pdf [Google Scholar]
  14. Dennis J, Basanez T, & Farahmand A (2010). Intergenerational conflicts among Latinos in early adulthood: Separating values conflicts with parents from acculturation conflicts. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 32, 118–135. 10.1177/0739986309352986. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Dillon FR, De La Rosa M, & Ibanez GE (2012). Acculturative stress and diminishing family cohesion among recent Latino immigrants. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 15, 484–491. 10.1007/s10903-012-9678-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Douce LA, & Keeling RP (2014). A strategic primer on college student mental health. Washington, DC: American Council on Education, Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education & American Psychological Association. [Google Scholar]
  17. Elder GH, & Shanahan MJ (2006). The life course and human development. In Lerner RM (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (pp. 665–715). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. [Google Scholar]
  18. Enders CK (2010). Applied missing data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
  19. Essed P (1991). Understanding everyday racism. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 10.4135/9781483345239. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Falicov CJ (2001). The cultural meanings of money: The case of Latinos and Anglo-Americans. American Behavioral Scientist, 45, 313–328. 10.1177/00027640121957088. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Fry R (2013, August 1). A rising share of young adults lives in their parents’ home. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Retrieved April 4, 2017, from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/files/2013/07/SDT-millennials-living-with-parents-07-2013.pdf [Google Scholar]
  22. Gee GC, Walsemann KM, & Brondolo E (2012). A life course perspective on how racism may be related to health inequities. American Journal of Public Health, 102, 967–974. 10.2105/ajph.2012.300666. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Hamarat E, Thompson D, Zabrucky KM, Steele D, Matheny KB, & Aysan F (2001). Perceived stress and coping resource availability as predictors of life satisfaction in young, middle-aged, and older adults. Experimental Aging Research, 27, 181–196. 10.1080/036107301750074051. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Hou Y, Kim SY, & Benner AD (2017). Parent–adolescent discrepancies in reports of parenting and adolescent outcomes in Mexican immigrant families. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47, 430–444. 10.1007/s10964-017-0717-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Kaduvettoor-Davidson A, & Inman AG (2013). South Asian Americans: Perceived discrimination, stress, and well-being. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 4, 155–165. 10.1037/a0030634. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. Kia-Keating M, Capous D, Juang L, & Bacio G (2016). Family factors: Immigrant families and intergenerational considerations. In Patel S & Reicherter D (Eds.), Psychotherapy for immigrant youth (pp. 49–70). Cham: Springer Verlag. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-24693-2_3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Kline RB (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). New York, NY: Guilford. [Google Scholar]
  28. Kwak K (2003). Adolescents and their parents: A review of intergenerational family relations for immigrant and non-immigrant families. Human Development, 46, 115–136. 10.1159/000068581. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  29. Leong F, Park YS, & Kalibatseva Z (2013). Disentangling immigrant status in mental health: Psychological protective and risk factors among Latino and Asian American immigrants. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 83, 361–371. 10.1111/ajop.12020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Lorenzo-Blanco EI, & Unger JB (2015). Ethnic discrimination, acculturative stress, and family conflict as predictors of depressive symptoms and cigarette smoking among Latina/o youth: The mediating role of perceived stress. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 44, 1984–1997. 10.1007/s10964-015-0339-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Mahmoud JSR, Staten R, Hall LA, & Lennie TA (2012). The relationship among young adult college students’ depression, anxiety, stress, demographics, life satisfaction, and coping styles. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 33, 149–156. 10.3109/01612840.2011.632708. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Marks AK, Ejesi K, & Garc ıa Coll C (2014). Understanding the U.S. immigrant paradox in childhood and adolescence. Child Development Perspectives, 8, 59–64. 10.1111/cdep.12071. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  33. Matsui T, & Onglatco M-L (1992). Career self-efficacy as a moderator of the relation between occupational stress and strain. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 41, 79–88. 10.1016/0001-8791(92)90040-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  34. Muthén LK, & Muthén BO (1998–2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muth en & Muthén. [Google Scholar]
  35. Nwosu C, Batalova J, & Auclair G (2014, April 28). Frequently requested statistics on immigrants and immigration in the United States. Migration Information Source. Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute. Retrieved April 4, 2017, from http://www.migrationpolicy.org/print/4221 [Google Scholar]
  36. Olson DH (2000). Circumplex model of marital and family systems. Journal of Family Therapy, 22, 144–167. 10.1111/1467-6427.00144. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  37. O’Neill ML, & Kerig PK (2000). Attributions of self-blame and perceived control as moderators of adjustment in battered women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15, 1036–1049. 10.1177/088626000015010002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  38. Ong AD, Phinney JS, & Dennis J (2006). Competence under challenge: Exploring the protective influence of parental support and ethnic identity in Latino college students. Journal of Adolescence, 29, 961–979. 10.1016/j.adolescence.2006.04.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Pacheco GA, Rossouw S, & Lewer J (2013). Do non-economic quality of life factors drive immigration? Social Indicators Research, 110, 1–15. 10.1007/s11205-011-9924-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  40. Painter MA, & Qian Z (2016). Wealth inequality among immigrants: Consistent racial/ethnic inequality in the United States. Population Research and Policy Review, 35, 147–175. 10.1007/s11113-016-9385-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  41. Pascoe EA, & Richman LS (2009). Perceived discrimination and health: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 531–554. 10.1037/a0016059. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Sánchez B, Esparza P, Colon Y, & Davis KE (2010). Tryin’ to make it during the transition from high school: The role of family obligation attitudes and economic context for Latino-emerging adults. Journal of Adolescent Research, 25, 858–884. 10.1177/0743558410376831. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  43. Schmitt MT, Branscombe NR, Postmes T, & Garcia A (2014). The consequences of perceived discrimination for psychological well-being: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 921–948. 10.1037/a0035754. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Schwartz SJ, Waterman AS, Umana-Taylor AJ, Lee RM, Kim SY, Vazsonyi AT, et al. (2013). Acculturation and well-being among college students from immigrant families. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 69, 298–318. 10.1002/jclp.21847. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Scott SM, Wallander JL, Elliott MN, Grunbaum JA, Chien AT, Tortolero S, et al. (2015). Do social resources protect against lower quality of life among diverse young adolescents? Journal of Early Adolescence, 36, 754–782. 10.1177/0272431615588367. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  46. Selenko E, & Batinic B (2011). Beyond debt. A moderator analysis of the relationship between perceived financial strain and mental health. Social Science & Medicine, 73, 1725–1732. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.09.022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Szapoczni KJ, & Kurtines WM (1993). Family psychology and cultural diversity. Opportunities for theory, research, and application. American Psychologist, 48, 400–407. 10.1037/0003-066x.48.4.400. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  48. Trevelyan E, Gambino C, Gryn T, Larsen L, Acosta Y, Grieco E, et al. (2016, November). Characteristics of the U.S. population by generational status: 2013 (No. P23–214). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Retrieved April 4, 2017, from https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2016/demo/P23-214.pdf [Google Scholar]
  49. Tseng V (2004). Family interdependence and academic adjustment in college: Youth from immigrant and U.S.-born families. Child Development, 75, 966–983. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00717.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Villegas-Gold R, & Yoo HC (2014). Coping with discrimination among Mexican American college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 61, 404–413. 10.1037/a0036591. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Xiao JJ, Tang C, & Shim S (2008). Acting for happiness: Financial behavior and life satisfaction of college students. Social Indicators Research, 92, 53–68. 10.1007/s11205-008-9288-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  52. Yoo HC, & Lee RM (2008). Does ethnic identity buffer or exacerbate the effects of frequent racial discrimination on situational well-being of Asian Americans? Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55, 63–74. 10.1037/0022-0167.55.1.63. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  53. Zagelbaum A, & Carlson J (Eds.) (2011). Working with immigrant families. New York, NY: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  54. Zimmerman M, Ruggero CJ, Chelminski I, Young D, Posternak MA, Friedman M, et al. (2006). Developing brief scales for use in clinical practice: The reliability and validity of single-item self-report measures of depression symptom severity, psychosocial impairment due to depression, and quality of life. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 67, 1536–1541. 10.4088/jcp.v67n1007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Zong J, & Batalova J (2016, February 3). College-educated immigrants in the United States. Migration Information Source. Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute. Retrieved April 4, 2017, from http://www.migrationpolicy.org/print/15546 [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES