International Journal of Intercultural Relations 57 (2017) 42–56

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Intercultural Relations

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijintrel

Community context matters: Acculturation and

underemployment of Russian-speaking refugees
Andrey Vinokurov a,∗ , Edison J. Trickett b , Dina Birman b
a
Optimal Solutions Group, LLC, 5825 University Research Court, Suite 2800, College Park, MD 20740, USA
b
University of Miami, 5202 University Drive, NB 311-A, Coral Gables, FL 33146, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The study investigated underemployment among a sample of Russian-speaking refugee
Received 1 February 2016 adults in the U.S. resettled in two communities that differ in ethnic density. Community
Received in revised form 2 February 2017 context, acculturation, and their interaction related to underemployment. Descriptively,
Accepted 10 February 2017
residents of the dense ethnic community had higher Russian and lower American accul-
turation, greater social integration into co-ethnic networks, lower perceived support from
Keywords: American friends, were more likely to have fellow Russians help them find a job, and less
Acculturation
likely to find the job independently. Predictively, living in the dense community and lower
Underemployment
levels of American acculturation positively associated with underemployment, while Rus-
Refugees
Russian-speaking immigrants sian acculturation was unrelated to underemployment. In addition, significant interactions
Ethnic community suggested that American acculturation was beneficial for reducing underemployment in the
Ecological model dispersed community but was associated with increased underemployment in the dense
community, while greater Russian acculturation was associated with increased under-
employment in the dispersed community only. The present study demonstrated context
specificity in the relationship between acculturation and underemployment and reaffirmed
the value of an ecological approach to conceptualizing acculturative experiences and their
relationships to adaptation outcomes.
© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Globally, unemployment and underemployment of immigrants and refugees is common (Mace, Atkins, Fletcher, & Carr,
2005; Sinacore, Mikhail, Kassan, & Lerner, 2009). An investigation of factors contributing to underemployment is important
not only because of its economic consequences for individuals, families, and communities (Aycan & Berry, 1996; Gans,
2009; McGuinness, 2006; Painter, 2014; Sienkiewicz, Mauceri, Howell, & Bibeau, 2013), but also because its effects on
family functioning (Jones, Trickett, & Birman, 2012) and subjective well-being have been found to be “not far short of
those associated with unemployment” (George, Chaze, Fuller-Thomson, & Brennenstuhl, 2012), including increased rates of
depression, anxiety, alcohol abuse, social withdrawal, suicide, and mental hospitalization (Reid, 2012).
The present study investigates the role of ethnic community, acculturation, and individual factors in predicting
underemployment among a group of Russian-speaking refugees in the United States living in two communities differing
in ethnic density. We explore descriptive differences between the two communities with respect to acculturation and

∗ Corresponding author .
E-mail addresses: andreyvinok@yahoo.com (A. Vinokurov), trickett@miami.edu (E.J. Trickett), d.birman@miami.edu (D. Birman).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2017.02.002
0147-1767/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 A. Vinokurov et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 57 (2017) 42–56 43

social integration and test both main effect and interactive hypotheses about the relationships among community context,
acculturation, and underemployment.

1.1. Underemployment

In this study we focus on underemployment, defined as the degree to which individuals’ education, skills, work expe-
riences, and abilities are underutilized or not utilized by their current jobs (Guerrero & Rothstein, 2012). While numerous
studies either focus solely on unemployment (Beiser, 2009; Beiser & Hou, 2006) or view unemployment and underemploy-
ment as aspects of the same phenomenon (Guo, 2013), considerably less attention has been directed to underemployment
specifically, even though underemployment rates among immigrants in the U.S. are estimated to be over fifty percent
(Terrazas, 2011). Indeed, in most advanced economies, immigrants are more likely than the native-born to be underem-
ployed and overeducated for their jobs (Wang & Lysenko, 2014), particularly when they are highly educated and skilled
(Mace et al., 2005; Sinacore et al., 2009).
A number of factors affecting both unemployment and underemployment have been identified in the literature (Aycan
& Berry, 1996; De Jong & Madamba, 2001; Wang & Lysenko, 2014). First, differences in occupational accreditation and
education in countries of origin and the host country affect the ability of skilled workers to find jobs at the commensurate
level of education and training (Aycan & Berry, 1996; Painter, 2014). Second, foreign-trained job candidates may be required
to take occupation-specific tests, which can be demanding, expensive, and culturally biased (Gans, 2009). Third, limited
language skills provide perhaps the greatest barrier to employment comparable to that in the country of origin (Beiser,
2009; Hatami & Weber, 2013; Yost & Lucas, 2001). Further, many language courses do not concentrate on industry-specific
technical language and are not aimed at promoting social interactions and partnerships with potential employers (Derwing
& Munro, 2013; Derwing & Waugh, 2012; McHugh & Challinor, 2011). Fourth, many professions require work experience
in the host country as the final step in the certification process, a difficult barrier to overcome (Somerville & Walsworth,
2009). Fifth, lack of social connections, professional networks, as well as limited skills and experiences with job searching
and interview processes, place immigrants at a further disadvantage (Reid, 2012). In addition, some of the macro, structural,
and contextual barriers include policies of the receiving country, labor market conditions, demand for specific kinds of labor,
regional and local economy, and discrimination (Beiser & Hou, 2006; Guo, 2013; Potocky-Tripodi, 2001; Reid, 2012; Smith,
2008; Shuval & Bernstein, 1997).

1.2. Russian-speaking refugees

This study focuses on Russian-speaking refugees in the U.S. These refugees are highly educated, primarily European
and urban in origin, with high human capital, and are particularly susceptible to underemployment (Vinokurov, Birman,
& Trickett, 2000). Prior to immigration, most lived in large cities, completed a university education, and were employed
as professionals (Tress, 1998; Vinokurov et al., 2000; Vinokurov & Trickett, 2015). Their high pre-arrival occupational and
educational attainment is complemented by relatively high reserves of social capital, mostly in the form of relatives and
friends already resettled. Job status is particularly important for this population because of its strong link to their overall
sense of identity and reputation in the community (Jones et al., 2012; Vinokurov et al., 2000).
The vast majority of Russian-speaking refugees in the U.S. are Jewish and have benefitted from the resources of the
refugee resettlement system, including ESL courses and job placement efforts provided through American Jewish agencies
and communities. Consistent with U.S. resettlement policies, refugees were expected to accept jobs found by agency staff
within 4–8 months after arrival, even when these jobs were not a good match for their interests and skills (Potocky-Tripodi,
2001, 2003). In addition, refugees were expected to participate in English language classes, and may have had access to job
training opportunities. After this initial resettlement period, they may have also taken advantage of additional educational
opportunities to learn English, develop job skills, and obtain U.S. degrees, certificates or licenses. In addition, some found
jobs through informal resources within their ethnic community (Gold, 1994).
However, in spite of relatively high human and social capital, and formal and informal assistance with finding employ-
ment, the majority of Russian-speaking refugees have experienced difficulty fitting into the labor market because of a limited
knowledge of English and non-transferable skills and credentials (Maydell-Stevens, Masgoret, & Ward, 2007; Tress, 1998;
Vinokurov et al., 2000; Yost & Lucas, 2001). Russian-speaking immigrants and refugees were reported to be less likely than
other immigrant groups to assume menial jobs, likely as a result of their high education and professional status, high expec-
tations, and because the concept of upward mobility is not well understood (Race & Masini, 1996). Thus, one study reported
the underemployment rate for this group at about 50 percent (Vinokurov et al., 2000).

1.3. Community ethnic density and underemployment

Ethnic composition of community is an important factor influencing processes of potential relevance to underemploy-
ment (Allen & Turner, 2005; Xie & Gough, 2011). Community ethnic density refers to the proximal presence of other members
of the linguistic and/or cultural group and is manifested by the structural presence of some degree of “institutional complete-
ness” (Zhou, 2004) involving a variety of organizations, enterprises, and business entities with both employers and employees
44 A. Vinokurov et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 57 (2017) 42–56

from the same immigrant ethnicity. Such organizations, social structures and relationships have strong implications for
employment options and subsequent social mobility (Patacchini & Zanou, 2012; Zhou, 2004).
Research suggests that living in ethnic neighborhoods provides immigrants with access to cultural and social capital,
employment opportunities, instrumental and financial support (Liebkind, 1996; Tran, 1987) and protection from experiences
of discrimination (Portes & Rumbaut, 2006). Most importantly with respect to underemployment, ethnic neighborhoods are
more likely to provide residents with greater social integration into the ethnic community through increased access to ethnic
networks to obtain resources, social support, and occupational opportunities unavailable elsewhere (Pfeffer & Parra, 2009;
Portes & Zhou, 1993; Toussaint-Comeau, 2008; Wang & Lysenko, 2014; Xie & Gough, 2011). In addition, social integration
into ethnic networks is important because information about employment in certain sectors is often disseminated through
ethnic networks, sometimes causing a particular occupation to become an ethnic niche (Wang & Lysenko, 2014). Previous
literature has found that neighborhood ethnic density promoted social integration into ethnic networks and facilitated an
increased use of those networks to find employment (Patacchini & Zanou, 2012). We test the generalizability of this finding
in the present study.
However, extensive literature also suggests that the ethnic community and its resources may not be beneficial for immi-
grants’ employment outcomes (Ngo & Este, 2006; Portes & Zhou, 1993; Somerville & Walsworth, 2009; Wang & Lysenko,
2014; Xie & Gough, 2011) and may increase the chances for underemployment. Having access primarily to ethnic networks
may negatively affect host language acquisition and truncate knowledge about and access to the range of employment
options available in the broader community. This is particularly important because the types of jobs available in ethnic com-
munities are often low skill positions not matched to highly skilled immigrants and refugees (Edin, Fredricksson, & Aslund,
2000). Conversely, if social integration with Americans is enhanced in a more ethnically dispersed community; it may open
a wider set of doors for employment, potentially resulting in a lesser degree of underemployment than may be found in an
ethnic community.

1.4. Acculturation, community ethnic density, and underemployment

Another factor of importance to underemployment is acculturation, a process that occurs when “two distinct cultural
groups have continuous first-hand contact, resulting in subsequent changes in the original cultural patterns for either or
both groups” (reviewed by Miller, 2007). Acculturation involves the bilinear processes of potential acquisition of aspects of
the host culture as well as retention of aspects of the heritage culture (Birman & Simon, 2014, chap. 11). Cultural elements
most often examined include language competence, behaviors (e.g., language usage, food and media preferences, social
interactions, and traditions), identity, attitudes, values, and cultural knowledge (reviewed by Lee, Yoon, L, & Hsin-Tine,
2006).
While measures of the acculturation concept vary across studies, often prioritizing language vitality (Gaudet & Clément,
2009; Landry, Allard, & Deveau, 2007), the present study adopts the tripartite operationalization of acculturation as including
retention or acquisition of language competence, identity, and behavior (LIB) (Birman & Trickett, 2001) in both heritage and
host culture. In the present study, such a definition allows us to explore the relationships of overall American and Russian
acculturation, as well as the unique contributions of three subscales (language competence, identity and behavior in both
Russian and American culture) to both community context and underemployment. This allows us to address such questions
as whether host culture language competence per se is sufficient to predict underemployment or whether it needs to be
supplemented with “soft skills” related to behavioral participation in the host culture (Derwing & Waugh, 2012).
With respect to acculturation and community ethnic density, predictably, immigrants who reside in ethnic communities
have been found to retain their heritage culture more so than those living outside such communities (Birman, Trickett,
& Buchanan, 2005; Padilla, 1980; Vinokurov & Trickett, 2015). Furthermore, in ethnic communities, acculturation to the
heritage culture has been associated with better psychological adjustment; on the other hand, in communities with few
immigrants, acculturation to the host culture has been found to be higher and predictive of adaptation (Miller et al., 2009;
Schnittker, 2002).
With respect to acculturation and employment per se, most studies suggest that increasing acculturation to the host
culture over time is associated with greater occupational success (Beiser, 2009; Salo & Birman, 2015; Vinokurov et al., 2000;
Xie & Gough, 2011), with particular importance of proficiency in the language of the host country across multiple immigrant
groups (Aycan & Berry, 1996; Guerrero & Rothstein, 2012; Hatami & Weber, 2013), including émigrés from the former
Soviet Union (Birman, Simon, Chan, & Tran, 2014; Potocky-Tripodi, 2003; Vinokurov et al., 2000; Yost & Lucas, 2001). The
relationship of heritage culture to employment status has been mixed, depending on immigrant groups studied (Gorinas,
2014; Peeters & Oerlemans, 2009; Phythian, Walters, & Anisef, 2007; Salo and Birman, 2014). Because these studies have
focused primarily on the employed and not underemployed, and omitted ethnic community context, here we extend this
literature with respect to underemployment in different community contexts.
Finally, we assess the premise of the Ecological Acculturation Framework (EAF) (Birman & Bray, 2016; Salo & Birman,
2015) that the relationship between acculturation and adjustment interacts with the community context. Based on the
notion of ecological person-environment fit (Trickett, 1996, 2009), we expect that the type of acculturation that is adaptive
is dependent on the requirements and opportunities of the communities. For example, Miller et al. (2009) reported that for
immigrant women from the Former Soviet Union in neighborhoods with low immigrant concentration American identity
 A. Vinokurov et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 57 (2017) 42–56 45

acculturation was associated with reduced alienation, suggesting that American acculturation was more adaptive in contexts
where there were fewer immigrants.
The present study extends this ecological person-environmental fit perspective to the phenomenon of underemployment
in communities differing in ethnic density. We expect that American acculturation would be related to reduced underem-
ployment in the dispersed community, where jobs require more social integration with Americans and more American
cultural skills; but would be related to increased underemployment in the dense community, where jobs may be located
within the formal and informal economy of co-ethnic businesses and finding jobs requires ethnic contacts and immersion
in the ethnic community. The same logic suggests that Russian acculturation would relate to reduced underemployment
in the dense community and higher underemployment in the dispersed community. Thus, we predict a moderation effect
of the ethnic community on the relationship of acculturation and underemployment reflecting the ecological notion of
person–environment interdependence or fit.
In sum, the purpose of the present study is to present descriptive data from two communities differing in ethnic density,
examine predictors of underemployment for Russian-speaking Jewish refugees resettled in two communities, and assess
whether patterns of the relationship between acculturation and underemployment differ in the two communities.

1.5. Hypotheses

H1. Predictors of underemployment: We hypothesize that the following variables identified in prior research will con-
tribute unique variance to increased underemployment: (a) living in the ethnically dense community; (b) lower American
acculturation; (c) lower social integration with Americans; (d) having found the current job through Russian friends, and (e)
not seeking out additional educational experiences (English classes, courses for licenses or professional certificates). We also
explore the relationship of Russian acculturation to underemployment but in the context of mixed findings in the literature
make no directional prediction.
H2: Context specificity of acculturation effects: With respect to the impact of acculturation on underemployment, we
hypothesize that acculturation will interact with ethnic community context, such that greater American acculturation will
reduce underemployment in the dispersed community but would be related to increased underemployment in the dense
community; while Russian acculturation will have the reverse effect.

2. Methods

2.1. The dense and dispersed ethnic communities

Data were collected in two communities with different concentrations of Russian-speaking refugees (22% vs 4% popula-
tion with Russian or Ukrainian ancestry1 ) and availability of ethnic businesses, health and social services, and other ethnic
community organizations, institutions, and groups (see Birman et al., 2005 for a full description of the two communities).
The dense community represented a geographically small area where Russian-speaking immigrants were concentrated in a
few neighborhoods with large concentration of ethnic businesses, organizations, and services. In contrast, in the dispersed
community Russian-speaking immigrants resided in small clusters throughout the County’s multicultural neighborhoods
without readily available ethnic businesses, organizations, and services. The U.S. Census characteristics of the two communi-
ties also revealed greater racial diversity and a greater percentage of foreign-born residents within the dispersed community
(Birman et al., 2005). In addition, the communities are about an hour drive from each other, which is reported to be the
distance at which the social connections of the community fail to promote employment outcomes (Patacchini & Zanou,
2012).

2.2. Procedures

Data were collected in the two communities with the support of refugee resettlement and community agencies, drawing
from agency lists of adult refugees resettled in the two communities. Initially, a stratified random sample from these lists
was developed, subsequently supplemented with individuals identified through snowball methods to increase sample size.
Individuals were contacted by telephone by bi-lingual Russian-speaking project staff who explained the study and solicited
participation. Data were collected in participants’ homes by Russian-speaking interviewers. Participants were asked to sign
letters of informed consent and received a small monetary incentive for their participation. This process yielded a response
rate of over 85%.

1
While 22% concentration is not high, it is considered substantial for Russian-speaking communities in the U.S. For example, in one study in an urban
area with a relatively large Russian speaking community, the range of ethnic concentration was 0–18% (Miller et al., 2009).
46 A. Vinokurov et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 57 (2017) 42–56

Table 1
Demographic characteristics of participants.

Community

Dense (N = 250) Dispersed (N = 201) Total (N = 451)

Age** M = 45.8 (7.2) M = 47.6 (7.7) M = 46.6 (7.5)

Time in the U.S.** M = 5.4 (3.0) M = 6.2 (3.2) M = 5.8 (3.1)
Female 54.0% 54.2% 54.1%
Married 91.1% 87.7% 89.6%
Refugee status 97.6% 96.0% 96.9%
Consider themselves Jewish 82.4% 81.6% 82.0%
Country***
Russia 20.2% 37.3% 27.9%
Ukraine 47.0% 38.2% 43.0%
Belarus 19.8% 9.3% 15.1%
Other 13.0% 15.2% 14.0%
Education**
High school 5.7% 4.4% 5.1%
Technical school/college 27.1% 15.2% 21.7%
Partial university 5.3% 3.4% 4.4%
University 57.5% 66.7% 61.6%
Candidate or doctoral degree 4.5% 10.3% 7.1%

Note 1: t-tests and chi-squares ** p < .01, *** p < .001.

Note 2: Standard deviations are in parenthesis.

2.3. Participants

The sample included 451 Russian-speaking, refugee adults,2 250 from the dense and 201 from the dispersed ethnic
community (Table 1). Participants were an average of about 46 years of age, majority female (54.1%), mostly Jewish (82.0%),
emigrated primarily from Ukraine (43.0%) or Russia (27.9%), lived in the U.S. for an average of almost 6 years,3 most were
married (89.6%) and had university degrees (68.7%). Participants in the dense community were slightly younger, spent less
time in the U.S., and were less likely to be from Russia or to have university degrees.

2.4. Measures

Measures were translated into Russian using a method rooted in ecological theory (Vinokurov, Geller, & Martin, 2007). The
measures were initially translated by immigrants with professional experience as translators. Then, other Russian-speaking
immigrants iteratively checked the translation, rewrote items to make them more understandable and grammatically correct,
and resolved discrepancies that emerged through discussions with the researchers.

2.4.1. Underemployment
We used three indicators to operationalize different aspects of underemployment (Aycan & Berry, 1996; Hartog, 2000;
Hauser & Warren, 1997). First, we employed the established U.S. Census methodology for assessing job status using the Socio-
Economic Index (SEI) (Entwisle & Astone, 1994), which ranks the overall status of jobs based on their detailed descriptions,
including education, position, duties, skills, and type of organization (Hauser & Warren, 1997; Diemer, Mistry, Wadsworth,
Lı́opez, & Reimers, 2013). Scores vary from 0 to 100; the higher the number, the greater the job status. We used the same
metric to assign job status for the job held before immigration and calculated the difference score between the jobs before
and after immigration as an indication of degree of underemployment.4
As a second indicator of underemployment, we asked whether the current job was in the same professional specialty
as before immigration. This measure is a meaningful marker of professional success in resettlement for Russian-speaking
immigrants and refugees and was used in a prior study of this population (Vinokurov et al., 2000). Third, as an indication
of quality of the job, we asked about satisfaction with the job, using an eleven item, five-point scale that rates satisfaction
with salary, benefits, intellectual stimulation, stress, professional status, etc. (Berkowitz, 2000). The internal consistency of
the scale in the present study was .88.

2
Although the participants in the present study came from various republics of the former Soviet Union and most of them are Jews, after immigration
they describe themselves as “Russian” and therefore we used this term in the questionnaire with the appropriate explanation to the participants that it
refers to the language use and not ethnicity.
3
Research suggests that it takes an average of 5–10 years for immigrants, including Russian-speaking refugees, to achieve economic stability (Beiser,
2009; Sienkiewicz et al., 2013).
4
Underemployment is operationalized as the difference score, however the SEI status of jobs could be different in the two countries, i.e. education for
medical doctors is at the bachelor’s level in the FSU and medical professionals are not highly paid or have as high status as in the U.S. While our approach
needs to be considered with some caution and would probably underestimate the extent of underemployment among highly educated immigrants, we
know of no other established measure that can be cross-checked against our measures of underemployment.
 A. Vinokurov et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 57 (2017) 42–56 47

Table 2
Intercorrelations of underemployment indices and jobs’ SEIs.

Job SEI prior to immigration Job SEI for current job SEI difference score Working in a different specialty

Job SEI for current job .36*** 1

SEI difference score .54*** −.59*** 1
Working in a different specialty .08 −.30*** .34*** 1
Job Satisfaction .14** .53*** −.36*** −.25***

Note 1: Results calculated for the employed (N = 411).

Note 2: ** p < .01; *** p < .001; partial correlations controlling for age, gender, education, married, and time in the U.S.

2.4.2. Acculturation to American and heritage culture

The acculturation measure was the LIB (Birman & Trickett, 2001), a multidimensional measure assessing acculturation
on a four-point scale with respect to both heritage and host culture in three acculturative domains: language, identity, and
behavior. Nine language items ask participants to rate their ability to understand and speak English; and two items ask
about overall Russian language abilities. Four identity items ask participants to separately rate the degree to which they
consider themselves American/Russian, proud of being American/Russian, and feel good about being an American/Russian.
The ten-item behavioral acculturation subscale asks the extent of participation in cultural activities of each culture, such as
books, movies, music, restaurants, food, language use, and others. The total American and Russian acculturation scales had
alpha reliabilities of .93 and .83, respectively.

2.4.3. Social integration

Social integration was assessed using two measures: social network composition and social support. The questions were
designed for the present study to assess the extent of social integration with both cultures. Participants were asked to
indicate how many of the people they socialized with outside of work during the past 3 months were: Russian-speaking
immigrants, Americans, and others. Another question was asked about the number of Russian, American, and other close
friends. The social network composition was calculated as the percentage of American and Russian members in the overall
social and close friend networks.
Social support was assed using the Social Support Microsystems Scales (Seidman, Aber, Allen, & French, 1996). The
measure asked participants to rate on a three-point scale each provider of support (Russian friends, American friends,
immediate and extended family) in terms of how helpful they were when participants had a personal problem, needed
help about assistance programs or work, and needed money and other things. Internal consistency coefficients were .78 for
Russian friends, .83 for American friends, and .85 for family.

2.4.4. Employment paths and educational experiences

In addition, we assessed paths to employment and educational experiences relevant to finding employment. Paths to
employment included “on my own”, “through the resettlement agency”, “through a Russian friend”, “through an American
friend”, or “some other way”. Further, respondents indicated whether they sought any additional educational experiences
after immigration (such as English classes, university classes, professional certificates or licenses, etc.).

3. Results

3.1. Preliminary analyses

We first explored employment status among participants in the two communities. Overall, 91.1% (N = 411) were
employed; 87.2% in the dense community and 96.0% in the dispersed community.5 Then, we conducted analyses only
for the employed participants to assess the relationship among the three measures of underemployment and to provide a
descriptive overview of the differences between the two communities.

3.1.1. Underemployment
The three underemployment indices were correlated in the expected directions (Table 2). Underemployment based on the
SEI difference score was significantly negatively correlated with job satisfaction and positively with working in the different
professional specialty. In addition, SEI for the job prior to immigration positively correlated with the SEI underemployment
difference score, suggesting that the higher the status of jobs prior to immigration, the greater the degree of underemploy-
ment in the U.S. While the correlations among three underemployment variables are not high, they are significant and show
the same pattern of relationships with the SEI of the current job, suggesting construct validity among these measures. We
retained each of these three variables in the analyses as together they provide a comprehensive assessment of different
aspects of underemployment.

5
Exp(B) = 0.28, p = .002, the logistic regression controlling for age, gender, education, married, and time in the U.S.
48 A. Vinokurov et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 57 (2017) 42–56

Table 3
Jobs’ SEIs and underemployment in the two communities.

Community

Dense (N = 218) Dispersed (N = 193) Total (N = 411)

Job SEI prior to immigration** M = 71.06 (19.88) M = 76.18 (18.01) M = 73.34 (19.22)
Job SEI for current job*** M = 44.05 (17.66) M = 56.24 (20.67) M = 49.78 (20.05)
Average SEI difference score*** M = 26.82 (21.91) M = 19.93 (22.17) M = 23.59 (22.27)
SEI difference score >0*** 85.8% 75.6% 81.0%
SEI difference score distribution*
<=0 14.2% 24.4% 19.0%
>0 to <25 35.8% 39.4% 37.5%
25 to <50 30.3% 22.3% 26.5%
50+ 19.7% 14.0% 17.0%
Job satisfaction (5-point scale)*** M = 3.18 (0.85) M = 3.54 (0.81) M = 3.35 (0.85)
Working in the different specialty*** 79.4% 67.9% 74.0%

Note 1: Results calculated for the employed (N = 411).

Note 2: Standard deviations are in parenthesis.
Note 3: * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001; ANCOVAs and logistic regressions controlling for age, gender, education, married, and time in the U.S.

Table 4
Paths to employment in the two communities.

Community

Dense (N = 218) Dispersed (N = 193) Total (N = 411)

Found the current job

By (her)himself** 21.1% 35.2% 27.7%
With help from a Russian friend* 33.5% 23.8% 29.0%
With help from an American friend 6.4% 8.3% 7.3%
With help from the resettlement agency 22.0% 19.7% 20.9%
Some other way 17.0% 13.0% 15.1%
Additional education
Attended English classes in the U.S.** 95.0% 86.0% 90.8%
Attended college, university, or courses in the U.S.* 36.7% 24.9% 31.1%
Received a U.S. degree 3.2% 2.1% 2.7%
Attended courses to prepare for a professional exam* 11.9% 6.2% 9.2%
Took the exam to work in the same professional field** 18.3% 9.3% 14.1%
Received a professional certificate or license 17.0% 13.5% 15.3%

Note 1: Results calculated for the employed (N = 411).

Note 2: * p < .05; ** p < .01; logistic regressions controlling for age, gender, education, married, and time in the U.S.

Participants in the dense community had on average significantly larger SEI difference scores between their formal job
before immigration and their current job in the U.S. (Table 3). Residents of the dense community were also significantly less
likely to work in their former professional specialty and were less satisfied with their current job.

3.1.2. Paths to employment

With respect to paths to employment, residents in the dense community were more likely to have a Russian friend help
them find the job and less likely to find the job independently (Table 4). There were no community differences in proportion
of participants who relied on other strategies to find jobs (American friends, resettlement agency, or other). The Russian-
speaking refugees also took considerable efforts to develop relevant job skills. Nine out of 10 took English classes, almost
three out of 10 took additional professional classes or courses, and sizable proportions took the exam to work in the same
field or received a professional certificate or license. Participants in the dense community were more likely to take additional
steps to improve their employment opportunities.

3.1.3. Acculturation
With respect to acculturation, participants on average reported high overall Russian and moderate overall American
acculturation (Table 5).6 Overall American acculturation was higher in the dispersed community while overall Russian
acculturation was higher in the dense community. Furthermore, greater English language competence and greater American
behavioral acculturation were found in the dispersed community and greater Russian behavioral acculturation in the dense
community.

6
Overall Russian and American acculturation were significantly, but not strongly negatively correlated (−.26, p < .001).
 A. Vinokurov et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 57 (2017) 42–56 49

Table 5
Means for American and Russian acculturation in the two communities.

Community

Dense (N = 218) Dispersed (N = 193) Total (N = 411)

M (SD) M (SD) M (SD)

Total American acculturation (4-point)*** 2.38 (0.52) 2.61(0.52) 2.49 (0.53)

American language acculturation*** 2.47 (0.58) 2.77 (0.59) 2.61 (0.61)
American behavioral*** 2.49 (0.48) 2.73 (0.46) 2.61 (0.48)
American identity acculturation 2.18 (0.87) 2.32 (0.84) 2.25 (0.86)
Total Russian acculturation (4-point)** 3.26 (0.39) 3.12 (0.40) 3.19 (0.40)
Russian language acculturation 3.99 (0.08) 3.97 (0.15) 3.98 (0.12)
Russian behavioral acculturation*** 2.79 (0.48) 2.57 (0.46) 2.69 (0.48)
Russian identity acculturation 3.00 (0.92) 2.80 (0.98) 2.90 (0.95)

Note 1: Results calculated for the employed (N = 411).

Note 2: * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001; ANCOVAs controlling for age, gender, married, education, married, and time in the U.S.

Table 6
Mean of social integration measures in the two communities.

Community

Dense (N = 218) Dispersed (N = 193) Total (N = 411)

M (SD) M (SD) M (SD)

Percentage of Americans socialize with* 15.18 (18.19) 19.60 (20.64) 17.26 (19.48)
Percentage of Russians socialize with* 76.19 (27.14) 70.41 (28.12) 73.48 (27.72)
Percent of American close friends* 7.17 (14.30) 12.55 (20.63) 9.69 (17.74)
Percentage of Russian close friends*** 84.36 (28.42) 72.02 (33.81) 78.57 (31.64)
Social support (3-point scale)
American friends*** 1.62 (0.51) 1.84 (0.57) 1.73 (0.55)
Russian friends 2.48 (0.42) 2.41 (0.50) 2.45 (0.46)
Extended family 2.61 (0.37) 2.55 (0.42) 2.58 (0.39)

Note 1: Results calculated for the employed (N = 411).

Note 2: * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001; ANCOVAs controlling for age, gender, education, married, and time in the U.S.

3.1.4. Social integration

The overall social and close friends’ networks were comprised mostly of Russian-speaking immigrants (73% and 79%,
respectively; Table 6). In addition, social support from Russian friends and family was high (2.5 and 2.6 on a 3-point scale),
and much higher than for American friends (1.7). Participants in the dense community had a significantly smaller percentage
of Americans in both their social and close friends’ networks, and perceived these relationships as less supportive than those
residing in the dispersed community. However, there were no community differences in the amount of perceived support
from Russian friends or extended family.

3.2. Hypothesis testing

3.2.1. Predictors of underemployment (H1)

The first set of hypotheses involved main effect predictors of underemployment. To explore these hypotheses, we con-
ducted a hierarchical logistic regression for working in a different specialty and hierarchical OLS regressions for SEI difference
score and job satisfaction. The first step included the control variables: age, gender, education level, and time in the U.S.
Ethnic community was then added, followed by social integration variables, job seeking paths, and additional education
experiences. In the last step, Russian and American acculturation was added.
For ease of presentation, Table 7 shows only those variables that were significant in the last step of the hierarchical models
for each of the three measures of underemployment. Among the hypothesized relationships, across all three measures
of underemployment, living in the dispersed community and greater American acculturation were associated with less
underemployment over and above effects of all other variables in the models. In addition, one of the control variables,
gender, was predictive of all of the underemployment measures, with females more likely to be underemployed. Level of
Russian acculturation was not a significant contributor to any measure of underemployment
Other control and job seeking variables predicted some of the underemployment outcomes but not all. For example,
underemployment as assessed by the SEI difference score was more likely to be experienced by older immigrants and those
with higher education. Finding a job on one’s own was a predictor of lower underemployment, reflected in smaller SEI
difference scores and higher job satisfaction, though not in working in a different specialty.
Hypotheses predicting underemployment as resulting from lower social integration with Americans, finding a job through
Russian social networks, and not seeking additional job-relevant educational experiences were not confirmed in the final
model. However, some were significant in earlier steps. Before American acculturation was added in the final step, greater
underemployment as defined by SEI difference scores was predicted by less support from American friends (ˇ = −.12, p = .026),
50 A. Vinokurov et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 57 (2017) 42–56

Table 7
Logistic and OLS regressions of underemployment: significant predictors.

Work in a different specialty SEI difference score Job satisfaction

R2 = .12 R2 = .24 R2 = .25

B SE B Exp(B) B SE B ˇ B SE B ˇ

Age 0.01 0.02 1.01 0.52 0.16 .17** −0.01 0.01 −.06
Male −0.48 0.24 0.62* −4.94 2.01 −.11* 0.15 0.08 .09*
Education −0.03 0.12 0.97 16.22 2.27 .34*** 0.12 0.09 .06
Married −0.38 0.42 0.69 −1.12 3.25 −0.02 0.25 0.12 .09*
Dense community 0.56 0.23 1.74* 7.11 2.05 .16** −0.21 0.08 −.12**
Found the job by self −0.27 0.26 0.76 −8.80 2.37 −.18*** 0.34 0.09 .18***
American acculturation −0.78 0.31 0.46** −7.14 2.40 −.17** 0.49 0.09 .30***

Note 1: Results calculated for the employed (N = 411).

Note 2: * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .0001.
Note 3: Also controlling for time in the U.S. and Russian acculturation; both non-significant.

Fig. 1. SEI difference score interaction.

a smaller proportion of American friends in the network (ˇ = −.11, p = .037), not having received a professional certificate or
license (ˇ = −.09, p = .049), and finding a job with help from Russian friends (ˇ = .10, p = .037). Working in a different specialty
was predicted by less social support from American friends (Exp(B) = 0.51, p = .001) and a smaller proportion of American
friends in the network (Exp(B) = 0.98, p = .014). Job satisfaction was lower for those finding a job with help from Russian
friends (ˇ = −.11, p = .028), and higher for those with greater social support from American friends (ˇ = .13, p = .016) and
those who received a professional certificate or license in the U.S. (ˇ = .12, p = .011). In addition, time in U.S., an oft-used
proxy for acculturation, predicted lower underemployment on all three underemployment measures: SEI difference score
(ˇ = −.19, p < .001); working in a different specialty (Exp(B) = 0.91, p = .023); and job satisfaction (ˇ = .17, p = .002). However, all
these relationships became non-significant after American acculturation was added to each model on the last step (Table 7).
We also conducted regressions to explore the relationship of language, identity, and behavior subscales of acculturation
to underemployment (not reported in Tables), while controlling for all other significant predictors. The results revealed that
only American behavioral acculturation predicted all three underemployment indexes (SEI difference score, ˇ = −.17, p = .004;
work in a different specialty, Exp(B) = 0.52, p = .047; and job satisfaction, ˇ = .17, p = .005). Neither host language (English)
competence nor identity subscales of American and none of Russian acculturation subscales were significant independent
predictors of underemployment.

3.2.2. Community specificity of acculturation effects on underemployment (H2)

For the second set of hypotheses, we tested interactions of ethnic community and acculturation on underemployment,
controlling for demographics. Three significant interactions in the predicted direction were found, partially supporting the
hypothesis that Russian and American acculturation would have differential effects in the dense and dispersed commu-
nities. For the SEI difference score, the simple slope analysis (Fig. 1) showed that greater American acculturation reduced
underemployment in the dispersed community (ˇ = −.12, SE = .08, t = −2.00, p = .047), but was associated with increased
underemployment in the dense community (ˇ = .14, SE = .09, t = 1.99, p = .047).
For working in a different specialty, the simple slope analysis (Fig. 2) showed that increased Russian acculturation
was related to increased underemployment in the dispersed community (ˇ = .13, SE = .06, t = 2.02, p = .044), but was not
significantly related to underemployment in the dense community (ˇ = −.08, SE = .06, t = −1.12, p = .261).
 A. Vinokurov et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 57 (2017) 42–56 51

Fig. 2. Working in a different specialty interaction.

Fig. 3. Job satisfaction interaction.

For job satisfaction, the simple slope analysis (Fig. 3) showed that greater Russian acculturation was associated with
decreased job satisfaction in the dispersed community (ˇ = −.22, SE = .06, t = −3.07, p = .002), but was not significantly related
to it in the dense community (ˇ = .01, SE = .05, t = 0.17, p = .861).

4. Discussion

The purpose of the study was to assess community and acculturative influences on underemployment among Russian-
speaking refugees living in communities differing in ethnic density. The focus on underemployment rather than the more
frequently addressed topic of employment per se was justified conceptually in the particular situation facing this highly
trained and educated group of refugees entering a culture and economy with significant structural, linguistic, and professional
impediments to resuming the kinds of work and level of work status attained before immigration.
Descriptive data on the overall sample confirmed the importance of addressing underemployment. Although less than
10 percent of the sample was unemployed, among the ninety one percent of employed participants, the degree of under-
employment was substantial. For example, less than a quarter reported being employed in the same profession as prior to
immigration. Perhaps the most dramatic sign of underemployment was found in the differences in the socioeconomic index,
or SEI score, between the jobs held prior to immigration and the current jobs in the U.S. While the comparability of job status
scores in the two countries is a source of some uncertainty, overall, over 80 percent of the participants had a lower SEI score
in the U.S. than prior to immigration and the average difference score was about 25 points on a 100 point scale.7 In general,
these results are similar to other studies of Russian-speaking immigrants in the U.S., highly educated Chinese immigrants

7
An example of an average drop of about 25 SEI points is an engineer working as an electrician. Furthermore, a substantial proportion of the sample
(17%) had the drop in SEI scores of at least 50 points, which is a doctor working as a health aid or an economist employed as a cook.
52 A. Vinokurov et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 57 (2017) 42–56

in Canada, and well-educated immigrants in Australia in terms of reduced work status and underemployment (Guo, 2013;
Reid, 2012; Terrazas, 2011; Vinokurov et al., 2000).
At the same time, however, our data show considerable efforts of the participants to increase their employment options
through seeking out additional professional training, courses, and exams, as well as classes related to English language
acquisition. Further, the mean job satisfaction ratings in the present study suggest a moderate degree of satisfaction with
the job even under these circumstances of underemployment. Such findings suggest the importance of further research on
the process of job hunting and highlight resilience and persistence in coping with being underemployed.

4.1. Community context and acculturation

While the overall findings supported the importance of focusing on underemployment, the primary findings of the study
suggest the power of community context and acculturation, as well as their interaction, as predictors of underemployment.

4.1.1. Community context matters

Controlling for demographic characteristics and time in the U.S., many differences were found between the dense and dis-
persed communities. These included all three measures of underemployment, level of acculturation to Russian and American
cultures, degree of integration into Russian and American social networks, including number of close friends and acquain-
tances, perceived support from American friends, and paths to employment. In each instance the dense community provided
a more Russian-oriented8 context for the lives of the refugees. Residents of the dense community were more acculturated
into Russian culture and less acculturated into American culture; had more Russians and fewer Americans in the social
networks; and were more likely to find employment with the aid of fellow Russian refugees and were less likely to find a
job on their own.
Such results are congruent with other studies that found that the higher the percentage of a given ethnic group living
nearby, the higher the probability of finding a job through ethnic social contacts (Patacchini & Zanou, 2012). Furthermore,
consistent with prior literature on the down side of living in an ethnic enclave (Somerville & Walsworth, 2009; Wang
& Lysenko, 2014; Xie & Gough, 2011), participants from the dense community were more likely to be unemployed and
underemployed, even though they had made more efforts to gain educational experiences to increase employability than
their counterparts in the dispersed community.
There were, however, some instances where community differences were not evident. First, though residents of the
dense community had more Russian acquaintances and close friends, the appraisal of social support from Russian friends
and extended family was equivalent in the two communities, suggesting that the centrality of friends and family is so
important in Russian culture that it is generally maintained and, in this instance, transcends geographical proximity. This
finding also suggests a more complex notion of community and cross-community influences and social interactions that
may not be adequately captured through a singular focus on community as a geographic entity (Newbold & Spindler, 2001;
Zhou, 2004). For example, the internet and social media may facilitate social integration, ethnic interaction and support
across communities and indeed countries.

4.1.2. Acculturation matters

The power of the acculturation concept is found not only in its significant and unique contribution to predicting each
of the three measures of underemployment but also in its ability to override related constructs used in other studies as
predictors of better employment. Before acculturation was entered into the regression models, greater social support from
American friends, the extent of social networks involving American friends, receiving a professional certificate or license,
and not finding a job with a help of other Russian refugees were significant predictors of lower underemployment. How-
ever, these predictors became non-significant when American acculturation was entered into the model. This suggests that
acculturation may serve as a powerful mediator of social and job finding processes reported by other studies. Thus, studies
that reported on such variables as lack of credentials, degrees, social and professional networks, and job hunting experiences
(Guo, 2013; Potocky-Tripodi, 2001; Reid, 2012) but did not assess acculturation may have missed an important construct in
the conceptualization of predictors of underemployment.
In like manner, time in the country, often used as a proxy for level of American acculturation (e.g. Escobar & Vega, 2000),
was initially a significant predictor of reduced underemployment, but became non-significant after American acculturation
was added. Thus, while time in the country may serve as a rough proxy for acculturation, these findings suggest that it does
not substitute for the lived acculturative experiences of immigrants and refugees (Birman & Simon, 2014, chap. 11; Birman
et al., 2014).

8
In the sample, the country or origin (or former republic of the USSR) did not have an impact on post-migration adaptation. Most Soviet Jews have
origins that can be traced back to when Jewish people were restricted to live in the Pale of Settlement under the Russian Empire, which today corresponds
to areas in Ukraine; though many moved to Russian parts of the Russian empire after the 1917 Revolution. As our sample is 82% Jewish (which was defined
as ethnicity in the FSU), they were considered neither Russian nor Ukrainian, but shared the Russian language and Russian/Soviet culture. However, we
also conducted analyses comparing these two groups and did not find differences in social integration, acculturation, or underemployment.
 A. Vinokurov et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 57 (2017) 42–56 53

Additionally, when the overall Russian and American acculturation scores were broken down into their three component
parts (language, identity, and behavior), only American behavioral acculturation predicted each of the three measures of
underemployment. This finding differs from the literature on the importance of host language skills and language accul-
turation for employment (Beiser, 2009; Maydell-Stevens et al., 2007; Potocky-Tripodi, 2003; Yost & Lucas, 2001) and
underemployment (De Jong & Madamba, 2001; Gorinas, 2014). The present study suggests that securing employment com-
mensurate with one’s skills, education, and experience may require “soft skills” gained through cultural participation that
promotes cultural knowledge, involvement and social interactions (Derwing & Waugh, 2012).

4.1.3. Community and acculturation interactions

In addition to the power of both community context and acculturation to predict underemployment, the Ecological
Acculturation Framework (EAF) (Birman & Bray, 2016; Salo & Birman, 2015) posited interactions between acculturation and
community context with respect to underemployment. Higher American acculturation was related to less underemployment
(SEI difference score) in the dispersed community, but in the dense community it was related to greater underemployment.
In contrast, higher Russian acculturation was related to increased underemployment (working in the different specialty)
and lower job satisfaction in the dispersed community, but was unrelated to them in the dense community. This supports
the ecological premise of the EAF that the same construct could have opposing effects on adaptation depending on context.
American acculturation was an asset for occupational success in the dispersed community but was a liability in the dense
community where it may steer residents to American-oriented resources that are not helpful in that community.
Such interactions suggest that the relationship of acculturation to underemployment outcomes is contextualized and
dependent on the ethnic community context and the acculturative status of the individual (Arevalo, Tucker, & Falcon,
2015; Birman et al., 2014). Overall, the pattern of both main effects and interactions suggests caution in collapsing par-
ticipants across diverse community contexts. It further highlights that lack of consideration of community factors may lie
beneath apparently inconsistent findings or non-findings reported in the literature examining relationships of host and
native acculturations to employment-related outcomes.

4.2. Unanticipated findings and future research

The overall pattern of results replicated some previous findings while others were unanticipated. For example, the lack
of relationship between Russian acculturation and underemployment replicated findings from a previous study of Russian-
speaking refugees (Vinokurov et al., 2000), but is contrary to research with other adult refugee populations (Peeters &
Oerlemans, 2009; Salo & Birman, 2015). In addition, in the present study there was no relationship between ethnic social
support and underemployment. This differs from studies in other refugee communities involving the significant positive
role of ethnic supports in gaining employment per se (Edin et al., 2000; Pfeffer & Parra, 2009; Toussaint-Comeau, 2008;
Wang & Lysenko, 2014; Xie & Gough, 2011). This may be another instance where obtaining employment involves somewhat
different processes than finding a job of comparable status to one’s pre-immigration position.
In addition, although consistent with findings from other studies involving other immigrant groups (De Jong & Madamba,
2001; Potocky-Tripodi, 2001, 2003; Race & Masini, 1996), the finding that males were less likely to be underemployed by
all three measures of underemployment was surprising because in our sample both genders have high educational and
occupational statuses prior to immigration. Gender inequality in the U.S. may be a relevant consideration for why women
were less likely to secure jobs consistent with their level of education. In addition, gender inequality in the households may
have contributed to this as well, since almost 90% of those in our study were married. Our ongoing qualitative work with
families suggests that spouses negotiate and strategize employment as a family level issue both before and after arriving
in the U.S. As a result, families may prioritize better employment of men while women take jobs that provide financial
support for the family but do not match their educational level. Further qualitative inquiry about these processes and their
potentially gendered nature is an important next step in understanding these findings.

5. Limitations and conclusions

A primary limitation of the present study is similar to much research in the area, namely the cross-sectional nature of the
research design that precludes any causal inferences. Furthermore, although we controlled for the demographic, social, and
educational factors, it is possible that the two communities might have differed on some other unmeasured variables. Though
our response rate was over 85%, the sample was not random. Future research should further explore the acculturative, social,
educational, and employment experiences, and their effects on various life domains outcomes among immigrants residing
in other immigrant communities.
The pattern of findings also suggests issues of measurement that need additional investigation. For example, the inclusion
of three related but different measures of underemployment did not always yield similar results. The difference score
between SEI prior to immigration and the current job was predicted by more demographic and job-related variables than
was “finding a job in the same specialty”, a measure used in a previous study (Vinokurov et al., 2000). Such patterns remind
us that findings may be measure dependent and that multiple ways of assessing constructs, especially underemployment
(Aycan & Berry, 1996; Hartog, 2000; Hauser & Warren, 1997), can serve a useful scientific purpose.
54 A. Vinokurov et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 57 (2017) 42–56

In addition, given the power of the acculturation construct to reduce significant social integration, educational expe-
riences, and paths to better employment to non-significance, future studies should conceptually attempt to disentangle
acculturation and social integration, while acknowledging methodological and conceptual overlap of the two constructs
(Doucerain, Varnaamkhaasti, Segalowitz, & Ryder, 2015; Gaudet & Clément, 2009; Smith, 1999; Zhou, 2004).
In conclusion, the present study reaffirms the value of an ecological approach (Trickett, 1996, 2009) to conceptualizing
acculturative experiences and their relationships to adaptation outcomes as specific to community contexts. The ecological
acculturation framework (EAF) exemplifies one way of enacting such an approach (Birman & Bray, 2016; Salo & Birman,
2015), suggesting that acculturation both reflects and interacts with context. Much acculturation research utilizes Berry’s
(1997) four-fold measure of acculturation, assuming it to be an individual’s choice and search for the “best” acculturative
strategy across cultural contexts. However, our findings suggest that acculturation may be viewed less as a strategy con-
sciously employed by individuals and more within a coping and adaptation perspective that views behavior as involving
person–environment transactions and fit. This is not to suggest that acculturation is not an individual level construct, but
rather that it is always constrained by context and its acculturative presses and opportunities. Thus, interventions aimed at
improving immigrants’ adaptation should involve multilevel, ecologically based, collaboratively conducted, and community
empowered approaches (García-Ramírez, De la Mata, Paloma, & Hernández-Plaza, 2011; Schensul & Trickett, 2009; Trickett,
2009a; Trickett et al., 2011).

References

Allen, J. P., & Turner, E. (2005). Ethnic residential concentrations in United States metropolitan areas. Geographical Review, 95, 2.
Arevalo, S. P., Tucker, K. L., & Falcon, L. M. (2015). Beyond cultural factors to understand immigrant mental health: Neighborhood ethnic density and the
moderating role of pre-migration and post-migration factors. Social Science and Medicine, 138, 91–100.
Aycan, Z., & Berry, J. W. (1996). Impact of employment-related experiences on immigrants’ psychological well-being and adaptation to Canada. Canadian
Journal of Behavioural Science, 28(3), 240–251.
Beiser, M. (2009). Resettling refugees and safeguarding their mental health: Lessons learned from the Canadian refugee resettlement project.
Transcultural Psychiatry, 46(4), 539–583.
Beiser, M., & Hou, F. (2006). Ethnic identity, resettlement stress and depressive affect among Southeast Asian refugees in Canada. Social Science and
Medicine, 63(1), 137–150.
Berkowitz, M. (2000). Strategies for better jobs in post-Soviet immigration. A study conducted by Federation Employment and Guidance Services, funded by
a grant form United Jewish Appeal-Federation of New York, NY. Unpublished manuscript.
Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology, 46, 5–34.
Birman, D., & Bray, E. (2016). Immigration, migration and community psychology. In M. Bond, C. Keys, & I. Serrano Garcia (Eds.), APA handbook of
community psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.
Birman, D., & Simon, C. (2014). Acculturation research: Challenges, complexities and possibilities. In F. T. L. Leong, L. Comas-Diaz, G. C. Nagayama Hall, V.
C. McLoyd, & J. E. Trimble (Eds.), APA handbook of multicultural psychology. Vol. 1. Theory and research (pp. 207–230). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association Press.
Birman, D., Simon, C. D., Chan, W. Y., & Tran, N. (2014). A life domains perspective on acculturation and psychological adjustment: A study of refugees
from the Former Soviet Union. American Journal of Community Psychology, 53, 60–72.
Birman, D., & Trickett, E. J. (2001). Cultural transitions in first-generation immigrants:Acculturation of Soviet Jewish refugee adolescents and parents.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(4), 456–477.
Birman, D., Trickett, E., & Buchanan, R. M. (2005). A tale of two cities: Replication of a study on the acculturation and adaptation of immigrant adolescents
from the Former Soviet Union in a different community context. American Journal of Community Psychology, 35(1/2), 83–101.
Diemer, M. A., Mistry, R. S., Wadsworth, M. E., Lı́opez, I., & Reimers, F. (2013). Best practices in conceptualizing and measuring social class in psychological
research. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 13(1), 77–113.
De Jong, G. F., & Madamba, A. B. (2001). A double disadvantage? Minority group, immigrant status, and underemployment in the United States. Social
Science Quarterly, 82(1), 117–130.
Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J. (2013). The development of L2 oral language skills in two L1 groups: A 7-year study. Language Learning, 63, 163–185.
Derwing, T. M., & Waugh, E. (2012). Language skills and the social integration of Canada’s adult immigrants. Institute for Research on Public Policy, Study, 31.
Doucerain, M. M., Varnaamkhaasti, R. S., Segalowitz, N., & Ryder, A. G. (2015). Second language social networks and communication-related acculturative
stress: The role of interconnectedness. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1111.
Edin, P., Fredricksson, P., & Aslund, O. (2000). Ethnic enclaves and the economic success of immigrants: Evidence from a natural experiment. Working Paper,
IFAU-Institute for Labour Market Policy Evaluation, 9, Upssala, Sweden.
Entwisle, D. R., & Astone, N. M. (1994). Some practical guidelines for measuring youth’s race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Child Development, 65,
1521–1540.
Escobar, J., & Vega, W. (2000). Mental health and immigration’s AAAs: Where are we and where do we go from here? The Journal of Nervous and Mental
Disorders, 188, 736–740.
Gans, H. J. (2009). First generation decline: Downward mobility among refugees and immigrants. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 32(9), 1658–1670.
García-Ramírez, M., De la Mata, M., Paloma, V., & Hernández-Plaza, S. (2011). A liberation psychology approach to acculturative integration of migrant
populations. American Journal of Community Psychology, 47, 86–97.
Gaudet, S., & Clément, R. (2009). Forging an identity as a linguistic minority: Intra-and intergroup aspects of language, communication and identity in
Western Canada. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 33(3), 213–227.
George, U., Chaze, F., Fuller-Thomson, E., & Brennenstuhl, S. (2012). Underemployment and life satisfaction: A study of internationally trained engineers in
Canada. Journal of Immigrant and Refugee Studies, 10, 407–425.
Gold, S. J. (1994). Soviet Jews in the United States. American Jewish Yearbook, 94, 3–57.
Gorinas, C. (2014). Ethnic identity, majority norms, and the native–immigrant employment gap. Journal of Population Economics, 27, 225–250.
Guerrero, L., & Rothstein, M. G. (2012). Antecedents of underemployment: Job search of skilled immigrants in Canada. Applied Psychology: An International
Review, 61(2), 323–346.
Guo, S. (2013). Economic integration of recent Chinese immigrants in Canada’s second-tier cities: The triple glass effect and immigrants’ downward social
mobility. Canadian Ethnic Studies, 45(3), 95–115.
Hartog, J. (2000). Over-education and earnings: Where are we, where should we go? Economics of Education Review, 19, 131–147.
Hatami, S., & Weber, D. (2013). Identifying barriers to the English language training of underemployed immigrants in Edmonton. Alberta Journal of
Educational Research, 58(4), 710–713.
Hauser, R. M., & Warren, J. R. (1997). Socioeconomic indexes for occupations: A review, update, and critique. Sociological Methodology, 27, 177–298.
 A. Vinokurov et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 57 (2017) 42–56 55

Jones, C. J., Trickett, E. J., & Birman, D. (2012). Determinants and consequences of child culture brokering in families from the Former Soviet Union.
American Journal of Community Psychology, 50, 182–196.
Landry, R., Allard, R., & Deveau, K. (2007). A macroscopic intergroup approach to the study of ethnolinguistic development. International Journal of the
Sociology of Language, 185, 225–253.
Lee, R. M., Yoon, E., Liu-Tom, & Hsin-Tine, T. (2006). Structure and measurement of acculturation/enculturation for Asian Americans using the ARSMA-11.
Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 39, 42–55.
Liebkind, K. (1996). Acculturation and stress: Vietnamese refugees in Finland. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27, 161–180.
Mace, K. A., Atkins, S., Fletcher, R., & Carr, S. C. (2005). Immigrant job hunting, labour market experiences, and feelings about occupational satisfaction in
New Zealand: An exploratory study. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 34(2), 97–109.
Maydell-Stevens, E., Masgoret, A., & Ward, C. (2007). Problems of psychological and sociocultural adaptation among Russian-Speaking Immigrants in New
Zealand. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 30, 178–198.
McGuinness, S. (2006). Overeducation in the labour market. Journal of Economic Surveys, 20(3), 387–418.
McHugh, M., & Challinor, A. D. (2011). Improving immigrants’ employment prospects through work-focused language instruction. Washington, DC: Migration
Policy Institute.
Miller, M. J. (2007). A bilinear multidimensional measurement model of Asian American acculturation and enculturation: Implications for counseling
interventions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(2), 118–131.
Miller, A., Birman, D., Zenk, S., Wang, E., Sorokin, O., & Connor, J. (2009). Neighborhood immigrant composition, acculturation, and cultural alienation in
former Soviet immigrant women. Journal of Community Psychology, 37, 88–105.
Newbold, K. B., & Spindler, J. (2001). Immigrant settlement patterns in metropolitan Chicago. Urban Studies, 38, 1903–1919.
Ngo, H. V., & Este, D. (2006). Professional re-entry for foreign-trained immigrants. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 7(1), 27–50.
Padilla, A. (Ed.). (1980). Acculturation: Theory, modes, and some new findings. American Association for the Advancement of Science, Symposium Series, 39.
Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Painter, M. A. I. I. (2014). Educational–occupational mismatch, race/ethnicity, and immigrant wealth attainment. International Migration and Integration,
15, 753–776.
Patacchini, E., & Zanou, Y. (2012). Ethnic networks and employment outcomes. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 42, 938–949.
Peeters, M. C. W., & Oerlemans, W. G. M. (2009). The relationship between acculturation orientations and work-related well-being: Differences between
ethnic minority and majority employees. International Journal of Stress Management, 16(1), 1–24.
Pfeffer, M. J., & Parra, P. A. (2009). Strong ties, weak ties, and human capital: Latino immigrant employment outside the enclave. Rural Sociology, 74(2),
241–269.
Phythian, K., Walters, D., & Anisef, P. (2007). The acculturation of immigrants: Determinants of ethnic identification with the host society. Canadian
Review of Sociology, 44(1), 37–64.
Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R. G. (2006). Immigrant America: A portrait (3rd ed.). University of California Press.
Portes, A., & Zhou, M. (1993). The new second generation: Segmented assimilation and its variants. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social
Science, 530, 74–96.
Potocky-Tripodi, M. (2003). Refugee economic adaptation: Theory, evidence, and implications for policy and practice. Journal of Social Service Research,
30(1), 63–91.
Potocky-Tripodi, M. (2001). Micro and macro determinants of refugee economic status. Journal of Social Service Research, 27(4), 33–60.
Race, K. E. H., & Masini, B. E. (1996). Factors associated with early employment among refugees from the Former Soviet Union. Journal of Employment
Counseling, 33, 87–93.
Reid, A. (2012). Under-use of migrants’ employment skills linked to poorer mental health. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 36(2),
120–125.
Schnittker, J. (2002). Acculturation in context: The self-esteem of Chinese immigrants. Social Psychology Quarterly, 65(1), 56–76.
Salo, C. D., & Birman, D. (2015). Acculturation and psychological adjustment of Vietnamese refugees: An ecological acculturation framework. American
Journal of Community Psychology, 56(3), 395–407.
Schensul, J. J., & Trickett, E. (2009). Introduction to multi-level community based culturally situated interventions. American Journal of Community
Psychology, 43, 232–240.
Seidman, E., Aber, J., Allen, L., & French, S. E. (1996). The impact of the transition to high school on the self-esteem and perceived social context of poor
urban youth. American Journal of Community Psychology, 24(4), 489–515.
Shuval, J. T., & Bernstein, J. H. (1997). Immigrant physicians: Former Soviet doctors in Israel, Canada and the United States. Westport, CO: Praeger.
Sienkiewicz, H. C., Mauceri, K. G., Howell, E. C., & Bibeau, D. L. (2013). Untapped resources: Refugee employment experiences in Central North Carolina.
Work, 45, 17–24.
Sinacore, A., Mikhail, A., Kassan, A., & Lerner, A. (2009). Cultural transitioning of Jewish immigrants: Education, employment and integration. International
Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 9, 157–176.
Smith, L. R. (1999). Intercultural network theory: A cross-paradigmatic approach to acculturation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23(4),
629–658.
Smith, R. S. (2008). The case of a city where 1 in 6 residents is a refugee: Ecological factors and host community adaptation in successful resettlement.
American Journal of Community Psychology, 42, 328–342.
Somerville, K., & Walsworth, S. (2009). Vulnerabilities of highly skilled immigrants in Canada and the United States. American Review of Canadian Studies,
39(2), 147–161.
Terrazas, A. (2011). The Economic Integration of Immigrants in the United States: Long- and Short-Term Perspective. Washington, DC: Migration Policy
Institute.
Toussaint-Comeau, M. (2008). Do ethnic enclaves and networks promote immigrant self-employment? Economic Perspectives, 4Q, 30–50.
Tran, T. V. (1987). Ethnic community supports and psychological well-being of Vietnamese refugees. International Migration Review, 21(3), 833–844.
Tress, M. (1998). Welfare state type, labour markets and refugees: A comparison of Jews from the former Soviet Union in the United States and the Federal
Republic of Germany. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 21(1), 116–137.
Trickett, E. J. (2009). Community Psychology: Individuals and interventions in community context. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 395–419.
Trickett, E. J. (2009a). Multilevel community-based culturally situated interventions and community impact: An ecological perspective. American Journal
of Community Psychology, 43, 257–266.
Trickett, E. J. (1996). A future of community psychology: The context of diversity and diversity of contexts. American Journal of Community Psychology, 24,
209–234.
Trickett, E. J., Beehler, S., Deutsch, C., Green, L. W., Hawe, P., McLeroy, K., et al. (2011). Advancing the science of community-level interventions. American
Journal of Public Health, 101(8), 1410–1419.
Vinokurov, A., Birman, D., & Trickett, E. (2000). Psychological and acculturation correlates of work status among Soviet Jewish refugees in the United
States. International Migration Review, 34(2), 538–559.
Vinokurov, A., Geller, D., & Martin, T. L. (2007). Translation as an ecological tool for instrument development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
6(2) (Article 3).
Vinokurov, A., & Trickett, E. (2015). Ethnic clusters in public housing and independent living of elderly immigrants from the former Soviet Union. Journal
of Cross-Cultural Gerontology, 30, 353–376.
Wang, Q., & Lysenko, T. (2014). Immigrant underemployment across US metropolitan areas: From a spatial perspective. Urban Studies, 51(10), 2202–2218.
56 A. Vinokurov et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 57 (2017) 42–56

Xie, Y., & Gough, M. (2011). Ethnic enclaves and the earnings of immigrants. Demography, 48, 1293–1315.
Yost, D. A., & Lucas, M. S. (2001). Adjustment issues affecting employment for immigrants from the Former Soviet Union. Journal of Employment
Counseling, 39, 153–170.
Zhou, M. (2004). Revisiting ethnic entrepreneurship: Convergencies, controversies, and conceptual advancements. The International Migration Review,
38(3), 1040–1074.