Funciones y actividades de seguimiento y evaluación que realiza la Unidad Responsable

In this section, various models of migration are presented, with the ultimate aim of depicting the possible relation between migration and immigrants’ personality. An individual’s personality is the “combination of genetic (innate) tendencies and characteristics plus behaviours acquired through learning and experience” (Jay, 2000, p. 81). When moving into a new culture it

is crucial for immigrants to be able to adapt their personal attitudes to the new culture and meet the many challenges that come with immigration, including language. Thus, migration could represent by itself a strong emotional and psychological discomfort (Dewaele, 2013). When people migrate, they cross the borders and it seems to cross the individual inner self-borders takes longer time compared to geographical ones (Dewaele & Stavans, 2014). The challenges migrants have to face include not only the matter of settling into a new country and pre-existing personality traits, but also the cultural and linguistic differences between migrants and the host group.

In addition, the experience of migrating into a new language often makes individuals become aware that feelings that were previously considered to be purely personal are, at least partly, dependent on cultural forms. Also, bilinguals may be faced with the struggle to choose between different ways of feeling and differing cultural norms of expression, therefore with the possibility of going beyond a particular emotional world (Besemeres, 2006). That is a complex and challenging experience that potentially every immigrant has to deal with. In what follows, the major models of migration are being summarized in order to clarify what immigrants are experiencing, the emotions they are trying to convey, and the possible relations to their personality. This will help to frame the present research by articulating possible linkages between migration, personality traits, and language use.

Papastergiadis (2000) proposed two models for migration: the voluntarist push-pull

model and the structuralist centre-periphery model. The voluntarist model sees “rational choice

and individual agency as the driving force behind migration […] People move from one place to another in order to improve their economic lot” (Block, 2007a, p. 31). However, the structuralist centre-periphery model draws on “Marxist economic theory. It sees world capitalism as the driving force behind migration, which serves the function of providing an everlasting supply of cheap and dispensable labour to the developed economies of the world” (Block, 2007a, p. 31). Although these two models account for important aspects of the migration experience, they provide an overly simplified view of what is, arguably, a complex experience. Thus, in addition to these two models of migration, a third model has been proposed, the “multilevel migration

system theory” (Block, 2007a, p. 31). This theory distinguishes between three levels: macro,

among countries. At the micro level, human values, desires, and expectations have a crucial role (Block, 2007a). The meso level refers to “the different networks that intervene between macro and micro level, such as families, occupational networks, ethnic groups, nationalities, political groups, religious affiliations, or access to resources” (Block, 2007a, p. 31). Given that this theory accounts for a range of factors related to the migration experience, from individual to global, it provides a comprehensive way to frame the topic and it makes perfect sense in our current era.

Millions of people change their home country, cross cultural boundaries and settle into a new country. Some immigrants may be inclined to completely assimilate into a new culture, due to personal interests, political or economic constraints, or even social situations. Others may maintain their own culture while actively respecting and participating with the host group. Beyond social, political and other kinds of external constraints, it could be argued that personal attitudes and other aspects of personality influence how immigrants interact with their new culture; for instance, those with rigid attitudes or strong prejudices toward the host culture’s values and norms may be inclined to segregate, avoiding entry into social networks with the host group or being active in their new environment. In fact, research showed that those with rigid attitudes could see the impact of the new culture as a threat and prefer to stick to their own heritage culture, which is the most trusted one (Pavlenko, 2008; van Oudenhoven & van der Zee, 2000). Moreover, research showed that individuals could understand LX emotions as they learn the socio-cultural impact they communicate through socialization (Dewaele, 2013; Pavlenko, 2008). Therefore, individuals with rigid attitudes see the impact of their new culture as a warning and threat and will not be willing to socialize into the new culture. Overall, this research suggests that aspects of personality shape the way in which immigrants engage with the heritage and the new culture, which influences the language socialization process.

Typically, immigrants have to deal with preserving their cultural norms and fitting into a new environment. Individuals react differently to this situation. They must become able to appropriately use the norms and language of the host group, which is not an easy task. In fact, individuals make purposeful choices with respect to the limitations imposed on them by social structures (Bucholtz, 1999). These different responses by immigrants to the new culture motivate social psychologists to investigate if individual personality traits have any significant impact on how immigrants fit into their new culture.

In one such study, Xiaohua Chen, Benet-Martinez, and Harris Bond (2008) examined the effects of bilingualism, bicultural identity, and social context on the psychological adjustment of Filipino domestic workers, mainland Chinese students, and mainland Chinese immigrants in Hong Kong. The personality traits investigated were self-efficacy and Neuroticism. Results showed that bilingual competence and identification of an individual’s two cultural identities as integrated were crucial antecedents of beneficial psychological outcomes. Similarly, Benet- Martinez and Haritatos (2005) found a relationship between personality traits and immigrants’ identification with their cultures. The authors argue that individuals who consider their dual cultural identities in harmony scored high in Openness to experience and low in Neuroticism. Those who are Neurotic feel more vulnerable and anxious and stressed in intercultural relations. Also, those who scored high in Agreeableness are less likely to report to have struggled in their intercultural relationships and they are more relaxed. Finally, those rated high in Extraversion are sociable and outgoing and feel less strained living in multicultural environments. Kim (2001) also focused on whether immigrants’ individual characteristics, such as social background and psychological profile, are linked to successful cross-cultural adaptation. Kim (2001) found out that Openness enabled migrants’ to minimise their resistance and interpret various situations without any ethnocentric judgments; openness also had a significant effect on their willingness to attend to new and changed circumstances and contributed to successful cross-cultural adaptation. The author argued that personality is shaped by constant interactions between internal

psychological and external social factors. Therefore, changes in the environment (e.g., the effect of new cultural contact) as well as changes in internal tendencies (e.g., the use of LX for

particular purposes), all could have significant effects on personality (Kim, 2008). Moreoever, related to the interaction between internal tendencies and external events, Kim (2008) discussed the notion of personality strength, defined as the “internal capacity to absorb shocks from the environment and to bounce back without being seriously damaged by them” (Kim, 2008, p. 85).

In short, the research reviewed here suggests that, despite the common belief that

personality is stable, cultural change may be sufficient enough to make corresponding changes in personality in the path of the mainstream culture (Ryder et al., 2000) and that there is a

relationship between personality traits and linguistic behaviour. Past research also revealed a positive relation between Openness and accepting or embracing a new culture. Specifically, immigration contributed to individuals being more open-minded, unbiased, and increasingly

aware of different cultural norms and values. As such, individuals may differ in the extent to which they are able to identify with the host culture or switch between their heritage and host culture (van der Zee & van Oudenhoven, 2013). Based on this evidence for the interrelations between personality, immigration and language use, this thesis argues in favor of the inclusion of personality traits variables in cross cultural and cross linguistic research since it can better

present the complex relations between social and psychological factors with regards to immigrants’ experiences.