Acculturating Indian Immigrant Men in New York City: Applying the Social Capital Construct to Understand Their Experiences and Health

Abstract

This study qualitatively explored social capital available to individuals (N = 17) within a community-based purposive sample of adult male immigrants from India in New York City (NYC). Analysis of in-depth interview data identified possible pathways for social capital’s influences upon acculturative stress. The study defined social capital in terms of the participants’ social relationships among peers, in the workplace, and with their ethnic community. Their relationships were assessed in terms of support, trust, and reciprocity. Among the recent immigrants, hopelessness and frustration about future work prospects were associated with symptoms of depression and substance abuse. The participants identified wealth as a distinct marker of social class and they described social class as a combination of education and occupation. Social class largely determined the particular peer and community networks each participant joined. Participants relied upon ongoing connections with family in India, despite their geographic separation, to relieve acculturative stress. Social support from peers was the participants’ most useful and immediate resource for alleviating acculturative stress. For participants of lower socioeconomic status, acculturative stress was compounded by social-relationship expectations and norms from India that persisted within NYCs immigrant community. Namely, lower-SES participants were more likely to experience frustration and setbacks when they sought out intimate social relationships with women.

Introduction

Linguistic and cultural barriers limit the access of acculturating Indian immigrants, like any immigrant group of color, to the “mainstream” US population’s resources. Indian immigrants thus rely on within-community social relationships to obtain the information on health services, behaviors, and risks that shapes their health-related attitudes and behaviors [1, 2]. Acculturative stress has been linked with mental health issues like anxiety, depression, feelings of marginality and alienation, increased psychosomatic symptoms, and identity confusion [3]. Predictors of acculturative stress include difficulty communicating in English, employment-linked financial stress, and a lack of hope for the future [4]. Individual and cultural factors from both immigrants’ birth and adopted countries are known to be critical for understanding acculturative stress and the acculturation process as a whole. Yet the role of community-level factors in acculturative stress is little understood.

This paper presents qualitative analysis of data collected from a sample of adult male immigrants from India to NYC. The overall objective is to explore the relationships in their life experiences among community-level social capital and acculturative stress. Here social capital is operationalized as trust, reciprocity, and cohesiveness in one’s social relations. This article qualitatively (1) determines the nature of social capital among Indian immigrant men in NYC; (2) assesses their acculturative stress factors; and (3) elucidates mechanisms by which social capital might alleviate acculturative stress. The data under analysis comes from a larger community-based study of the same population that aimed to identify the participants’ social relationships and acculturative stress and explore their influences upon sexual HIV risk behaviors. The present paper reports on the larger study’s findings about the participants’ social relationships. (For the larger study’s findings, including those on HIV risks, see [5]). This article will also discuss the implications of these findings for developing intervention programs that target risky health behaviors in general.

Immigrants from India in NYC

Indian immigrants are one of the fastest growing ethnic groups in the US population. In the 2000 US Census, they represent the second largest Asian immigrant group in NYC (206,228 totals), after the Chinese (374,321 totals) [6]. In NYC, between 1990 and 2000, the Indian community grew by 118% compared to 71% for all Asian Americans. One in four Asian American New Yorkers were Indian American. Of total Indian American population in NYC, more than three quarters (77%) were immigrants and 71% were working-age adults—between ages 18 and 64 [7]. Because Indians have such high rates of immigration to the US, it is important to have substantive information on their adjustment and acculturation processes in the sociocultural contexts of their own community. Health knowledge, beliefs, and behaviors vary among and within ethnic groups. The design of effective, culturally competent health outreach efforts thus depends upon assessment of these psychosocial and cultural factors and the ethnic variations among them. Researchers emphasize that program developers require meaningful, useful health data on specific Asian American subgroups. To collect subgroup data, researchers should examine available demographic information to identify and conduct studies in the geographic areas where the subgroup of interest is concentrated [8]. In order to address this knowledge gap and gather research data needed for effective prevention program development, we examined the adjustment process in a sample from one Asian American subgroup: immigrants from India to New York City. While subgroup data are essential, it is also imperative to recognize that a particular immigrant community may not have a monolithic internal structure [9]. In order to convey useful health information to a single but internally diverse ethnic community, program developers need to employ strategies that take within-group diversity into account. Examining culturally specific attitudes, norms, and values in both pre- and post-immigration contexts will help us to better understand social relations and community identity among the diverse members of the Indian immigrant community in NYC. For example, pre-immigration sociocultural contexts that shape one’s reason for immigration or family relationships can also shape post-immigration contexts, like those surrounding employment prospects (or the lack of them), and feelings of attachment (or lack of it) to family back in India. To date, little research has addressed social relations, including social relations relevant to health risk behaviors, as dynamic processes within the contexts of immigration patterns in general for immigrants across the cultural/ethnic groups. The current body of research on Asian American health issues does not adequately address the needs of Indian immigrants specifically [8, 9]. Yet there is an urgent practical, humanitarian need to understand and address these needs. The findings reported in this article partly address this perceived knowledge gap.

Immigration Patterns: Opportunities in the United States

Seven of every ten Indian immigrants in America were born elsewhere [10]. For most of these immigrants, the move to the US has resulted from a voluntary personal decision; they are not war victims or refugees forced to leave their home countries. Indians have not immigrated exclusively to the U.S. for many decades, they have settled in other countries around the world—notably Guyana, Trinidad, Uganda, Dubai, and England—whenever the opportunity presented itself [11]. Starting in 1965, when severe restrictions on Asian immigrants were lifted, and continuing through the 1970s, people from the Indian subcontinent came to the US primarily to seek better educational and professional opportunities. The Immigration and Naturalization Services (INS) categorized most in this wave of Indian immigrants as either “professionals” (such as engineers, physicians, and scientists) or their sponsored and “highly qualified” relatives [12]. By 1990, however, an increasing number were falling under the INS “skilled personnel” category, or were their blue-collar family members [13]. These two waves of immigrants differ in terms of education and professional skills required to obtain white-collar professional jobs in the US. However, people in both waves came from the highest educational and economic strata of Indian society. While still in India, they acquired both higher educations and professional work experience, which were (and still are) far beyond the financial reach of most Indians. Yet they were willing to jeopardize their professional advancement by immigrating to a country where they would likely have to take “lower-status” jobs. According to Portes and Rumbaut [14], foreign professionals are not driven to immigrate by the differential between salaries in their home countries and in the US. They are motivated by “the gap between available salaries and work conditions in their own countries and those regarded there as acceptable for people with their education” (p: 18).

Links Between Social Capital and Health

Kawachi et al. [15] define social capital as “the resources available to individuals and society through social relationships,” resources ranging from the material to the psychosocial. According to this definition, the social capital construct is inherent in the structure of social relationships [16, p. 176]. Interpersonal trust, norms of reciprocity and mutual aid, and social cohesion serve not simply as resources for individuals, but facilitate collective action [17, 18]. The community norms and cultural values that shape social relationships [19, 20] are amenable to change. For this reason, social capital research may very well suggest health promotion strategies that more effectively engage targeted communities within their own sociocultural contexts.

A particular group may have high-internalized levels of trust, reciprocity, and cooperation, yet use these social capital resources to carry out a societally harmful goal. For example, a hate group may use these resources to plan and commit violent crimes. However, greater levels of social capital are usually associated with higher measures of public health [21]. Health research has consistently found an association, even a predictive one, between social isolation/lack of social affiliation and the consumption of tobacco and alcohol [22]; adolescent and adult mortality from all causes; depression; cognitive decline and dementia; and poorer psychosocial function [2, 23].

Despite the growing evidence of links between social capital and health, the multiple pathways through which social capital influences health behavior have not yet been fully elucidated and have been identified as an important subject for future investigation [2, 24]. A better understanding of the mechanisms by which social relations influence health outcomes can lead to the development of more effective community-based interventions, ones that fit the sociocultural contexts of particular ethnic groups.

Social Capital, Social Class, and Socioeconomic Status

Just as social capital has emerged as a predictor of individual health, poverty and income inequality have emerged as two important social determinants of the relationships between social capital and public health [25, 26]. Social relationships and affiliations are often related to social status; social and income inequalities may have critically affect the development of social relationships [27–29]. Researchers have used education, occupation, and income as markers of each participant’s socioeconomic position. In the present study, educational and occupational data were combined into a proxy for income.

Methods

This article reports data collected from a community-based qualitative study conducted in two phases. In Phase I, key informants were interviewed about the experiences and challenges that Indian immigrants face in NYC. Their knowledge of HIV/AIDS issues in this community was also assessed. The Phase I findings secured the Indian immigrant community’s participation, rendering it feasible to continue the research. Phase II guided the development of the study eligibility criteria and sampling strategy in sociocultural context appropriate for studying sexual risks to HIV in immigrants from India to NYC.

Study Participants

Development of Eligibility Criteria: The community-based exploratory study included only heterosexually identified men, who in the sociocultural contexts of immigration from India are at highest, most immediate risk for HIV infection. The purpose of this study was to examine preliminary findings and to generate ideas/directions for future research. Epidemiology, gender role and norms, and imbalance in power between the genders place both Indian men and women at risk for HIV/AIDS. The limitation of the sample to heterosexually identified men was intended to provide a meaningful starting point, for the reasons that follow.

Epidemiology

• Heterosexual transmission predominates in India’s HIV epidemic. Heterosexual married women who self-report monogamous relationships with their husbands are one of the high-risk groups for HIV in India.

• Sexual HIV-risk-taking behavior pattern holds for those who migrate within or outside India [30, 31]. Visits to sex workers, alcohol consumption before sex, and condom nonuse with multiple casual sexual partners—are reportedly more common among migrant Indian men living alone or with friends compared to those living with their families [32, 33]. Several factors influence single migrant men to practice high-risk sexual behaviors: feelings of loneliness and social isolation; lack of knowledge about HIV transmission modes; and the perception of low personal vulnerability to HIV.

• Ninety-seven percent of alcohol and drug users in India are male [34–36]. Alcohol and drug use are associated with casual sex and condom nonuse [37, 38]. Thus research needs to address Indian American heterosexual men’s substance use and any associated unsafe sexual behaviors.

Gender Role, Norms and Sexual Behavior

• Most Indian immigrants to the US are single men who come to study, seek work, and establish themselves financially in this country before they consider marriage [6, 39]. Men who were sexually active in India inside and/or outside marriage and who now live without a partner in the US are more likely to visit sex workers and practice unsafe sex [40, 41].

• Indians may harbor a pre-immigration perception of casual, nonmarital sex as socially acceptable in the US and may continue to believe and act on this belief after immigration [5, 42].

• In Indian sociocultural contexts, clearly defined gender roles often influence and shape both men’s and women’s sexual practices, although in markedly different ways. Male gender-role norms in the pre-immigration Indian sociocultural context are associated with adventure, strength, power, and entitlement to sexual pleasure [43, 44]. In turn, these beliefs are associated with sexual risk behaviors such as sex with multiple partners, nonuse of condoms, and sex with commercial sex workers (CSWs) [45, 46]. Within India, 32% of the general population have multiple sex partners but do not use condoms [47]. Casual sex with CSWs is tolerated in India for men [43, 48] as a means of preparing to become sexual decision makers. Because of the stigma associated with same-sex activities, social norms of “masculinity”, and criminalization of “homosexual” behavior in India, MSM (men who have sex with men) often identify themselves as heterosexuals, often marry, and engage in male–male, thus putting themselves and their sexual partners both females and males at risks for HIV [49, 50]. Pre-immigration sociocultural norms thus may shape Indian American men’s patterns of condom use/nonuse and their tendency to visit sex workers in the US and/or during visits to India.

• Heterosexually identified Indian immigrant men may consider themselves relatively safe with multiple sex partners, including female CSWs, in the US. The false belief that only “gay men” contract HIV/AIDS still prevails in India [51, 52]. It may lead to unsafe heterosexual activities in the US.

Eligibility criteria: On the basis of the research literature discussed above, the following eligibility criteria were established in the context of the larger study—exploring sexual HIV risk behavior for immigrants from India to NYC: sexually active Indian men, self-identified as heterosexual, between the ages 22 and 45, single or wife living in India, who have immigrated to the US from India and resided in NYC for at least the past year.

Procedures

Between November 2001 and May 2002, 17 men were recruited for face-to-face, individual, 2-h (on average) audiotaped interviews in NYC. Each participant was paid 80 dollars in remuneration for his interview. An Asian Indian contact person had sent email notices to ethnic organizations and posted recruitment flyers at community festival sites and in ethnic stores, delis, and newspaper stores. The University of California at San Francisco’s Committee on Human Research and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Institutional Review Board approved both the Phase I and II studies. A professional transcribed the audiotaped interviews.

A single interviewer conducted the participant interviews, using a semistructured interview guide and gathering information on specific demographic characteristics. The interview guide identified broad topical categories for exploring the themes most culturally relevant to the participants’ social relationships and to behaviors known to either increase or reduce HIV risks. Specific items were open-ended in order to elicit information on each interviewee’s experiences in the context of his own individual situation. Each participant received cash remuneration immediately after his interview.

Measures

Participants: Selected Demographic and Social Correlates

Self-reported data from each participant included age, occupation, and number of years residing in NYC.

Socioeconomic Status

Data were collected on each man’s highest educational attainment in both India and the US. Information on occupation was obtained from all participants who were working at a paid job and who had earned an income for at least 1 year in NYC. Self-reported information on income was classified into four categories: low (below $20,000/year), low middle ($20,000–$35,000), middle ($36,000–$60,000), and high (above $60,000). Each participant’s income level was combined with his occupational status as a student, a service worker (such as cab driver or deli worker), or a professional (for example, computer technician, engineer, physician, or hospital manager). The two combined pieces of data were used as a proxy for his SES.

Social Capital

Open-ended questions on social capital explored each participant’s within-community social relations. These questions dealt with such broad themes as his perceptions of other community members’ trustworthiness, their norms of reciprocity (mutual concern), and their perceptions of within-community connectedness. The participant was also asked about his volunteer work in ethnic community organizations, participation in religious groups, and involvement in ethnic and cultural festivities.

Acculturative Stress

Each participant was asked to describe in turn the influences of peer, workplace, and ethnic-community social relationships upon the psychological distress he experienced as he adjusted to a new country. The participants themselves identified and narrated emotions like loneliness, social isolation, frustration, and depression.

Substance Abuse

Data on substance abuse were obtained for substance type (alcohol, drugs, and prescription drugs), frequency, and contexts of use. Contexts of use items included place of use (for example, at home, bars), persons with whom one used and mood at time of use (stressed out or relaxed).

Data Analysis

A research team qualitatively analyzed the interview data using the grounded theory approach [53]. Each case was examined by itself and as a part of the entire data set. Broad topical categories were initially defined through an open coding process. As the team met to discuss their multiple readings of the transcripts, they reframed these broad categories as needed. Axial coding [53] explored the interrelationships of the categories (for example, alcohol drinking and sexual HIV risks) with one another.

Use of an iterative process ensured adequate intra-coder and inter-coder reliability [54]. First, the same transcripts were assigned to different coders. The team then compared the results during a series of coding meetings. This comparison process ensured that all coders would have a similar understanding of each individual code and apply the overall coding system consistently. Inter-coder agreement for the final list of codes and their definitions was 85%. To further safeguard against coding unreliability, an outside researcher independently coded six randomly chosen transcripts. The agreement rate was 90%.

Findings

Participant Characteristics

Of the 17 Indian immigrant men in the study, 75% were younger than 35 years, with a mean age of 29, and over half (53%) had resided in NYC for 6 years or less (mean: 4 years). The mean length of residence for the other 47% was 12 years. Professionals made up 54% of the sample, and service providers 30%. The participants had earned graduate credentials in India, and 70% of them also had been or then were graduate students in the US.

Social Capital

Trust

Sixty-five percent of the participants reported a trusting relationship with their peers. They confided personal problems to those peers who were personally familiar with the same adjustment process that they were undergoing. They met their peers, who were primarily Indian immigrants of similar age and SES, through mutual friends. They socialized with their peers after work and during weekends and holidays. This emotional closeness (“someone can understand me”) fostered trust in their peers to give them practical advice for personal difficulties.

Twenty-four percent of participants mentioned a total distrust of Indian coworkers. The competitiveness they faced in getting and keeping jobs, especially in the service industries, contributed to the participants’ distrust in their equally competitive peers. Twelve percent of the participants who were struggling to get a job reported they distrusted other Indians. The reasons cited as of Indian community people’s inquisitiveness into other’s matters (see Table 1).

You know, it’s kind of contradictory, I mean. NYC to me is very small, even though it’s so big. Because you can run into so many Indian people that you would think you’d never meet again. Especially, within the Indian community, you’ll see certain groups at almost every same function/festivals. And then, you know, everyone will know who I am and who my friends are! Like, “oh, yeah, so and so hangs out with this group.” (Communications professional, 32)

Table 1 Indian immigrant men respondents reporting social capital in their community (N = 17) (Selected item s)

Reciprocity

Seventy-one percent of the participants reported reciprocity as their mutual concern in peer relationships. As one mentioned the reason: “I’m little scared because if I get sick, you know, I have to go to the doctor myself. Who else can I ask to come with me?” (Receptionist, 31). The emotional connection provided “togetherness” and the expectation that peers would offer reciprocal help in this adjustment process. Twenty-four percent of the participants wished they could help each other more, but recognized that the busy life in NYC often did not allow them to do so.

But in New York, it’s very, very busy life—you don’t have one minute to think about other people. Because you are so involved or so busy or life is so strenuous that you don’t even give a damn to others, you know. (Health professional, 29)

Within-Community Connectedness

Fifty-nine percent of the participants revealed that they did not feel a sense of belonging to the Indian community. “I feel, I am not included in the group. You know it when you are not accepted in the group. They won’t tell you but you know it.” (Blue-collar worker, 29) They linked their disconnection to the social class structure that prevailed in NYC. As one cab driver [32] disclosed: “Indians are very class-conscious–same here as they were in India.”

For these men, wealth was a distinct marker of social status that accentuated a divide between long-ago and more recent immigrants. Community definitions of “success” influenced social relations among community members.

The new Indians are now coming in, they might not have the same kind of education level and I can definitely see them being looked down upon by the older generation or people who are more, have the respect, more of “respected” professions.

…………..

I see a lot of “discrimination” over here in New York. I would say, class system or social class system of some sort. The Indian bankers over here look down upon the Indian cab drivers, for example. (Computer engineer, 29).

The participants informed of separate organizations that Indian immigrants have in NYC for each of Indian states (like Gujarat, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh). Furthermore, they also have several sub organizations formed on the basis of religious affiliations. No participants were dues-paying members of any community organizations. Only 18% followed religious rites. Thirty-five percent attended the India Independence Day parade. Eighty-two percent of the sample participated in ethnic festivals to enjoy being around customary Indian dress, food, and language and to meet women. However, they participated as members of their peer groups, not out of a strong sense of belonging to the Indian immigrant community as a whole.

Acculturative Stress Factors

Social Isolation and Loneliness

Fifty-nine percent of the participants attributed their feelings of loneliness to social isolation from the Indian immigrant community in NYC. As a health care professional explained, when Indians first come to the US, “they come here to work and make dollars, dollars, and dollars. So, in the beginning, say one year, they just see dollars. But after making some money, then they start life—start thinking where we are now.” Loneliness, however, was not linked to missing family in India. Although geographically apart, all participants maintained regular contacts with their families in India via telephone, e-mail, postal mail, and visits. Often by taking part in family decisions and sending money, the participants felt connectedness and a sense of belonging to the family.

The participants related two reasons for feeling lonely. Community pressure to “succeed” expectations was one reason. The other, as a cab driver pointed out, is social isolation: “Money is not the issue here. If I want to take a day off, I can take, but I have nothing to do at home, and you go crazy around home. So, it’s better to be in work, that’s why I’m working seven days.” Loneliness, however, was not only limited to peer relations. “Every human being eventually finds somebody who is special for him or her [meaning life partner]. So that process also goes on, and that will solve the loneliness too” (see Table 2).

Table 2 Indian immigrant men respondents reporting psychological distress (N = 17) (Multiple responses)

Hopelessness and Frustration

Seventy-one percent of the participants self-reported feelings of frustration, which they attributed primarily to the following sources. (1) Participants’ frustrations towards peers concerned the experiences of struggling members who had lost hope in their prospects for future accomplishment. These experiences most negatively impacted the feelings of self-efficacy held by service workers, followed by professionals and finally students. Learning from their peers’ experiences, the participants increasingly doubted their own ability to succeed in the US, especially in the current economic and political situation. Detrimental influences of peer norms upon social relationships included substance abuse and sometimes, sexual HIV risk behaviors. (2) Participants felt that if they did not have girlfriends, the community looked down upon them as personal and professional failures. Working long hours did not allow them enough time to socialize with women. They were also hindered by common attitudes among Indians that dating is associated with marriage, and young women should not casually “talk” with men. In addition, the participants reported, women themselves judged a man’s suitability on the basis of his social class.

Indian women want all—handsome men, big house, social status. How could a recent immigrant who is struggling to build up his career have all these right away? They [meaning women] don’t even talk to cab drivers. (Construction worker, 32)

Feelings of Personal Failure and Depression

Eighteen percent of the participants—students, service workers, and professionals reported two reasons for feeling depressed. First, they understood that they would not be able to fulfill the “American dream” that originally drew them to the US. They considered themselves “failures” and blamed themselves for “incompetence.” As a construction worker [32] mentioned: “Time is hard now—few good jobs, so many people out there—it is hard to make money now. I am talking about big money, you know.” Second, they could not discuss their sense of failure with coworkers. The resulting feeling of isolation often led them to drink alcohol and engage in other sexual risk behaviors.

Anxiety and Job Stress

Seventy-one percent of the participants described their work environment as stressful and disclosed that they kept distant from their coworkers. The primary reasons were distrust, anxiety, and a sense of helplessness arising from the perception of lacking control over the future. They felt subordinated, as their employers could decide “who is to do what and for how long” and “handed it down to us.” In this controlling sort of work environment, being a recent immigrant hindered a participant’s hiring prospects, salary, and freedom from employer expectations of unpaid work or excessive job responsibilities. The participants preferred to work for Americans rather than Indian employer. Indian bosses expected unquestioning gratitude in return for hiring them and demanded unpaid work during weekends. Some participants reported that Indian employers gave preferential treatment to workers from their region of India, religion, or other subgroup.

Substance Use/Abuse

Alcohol was the drug of choice for all participants (N = 17), whether they were students, service workers, or professionals. Beer and wine were the favorite drinks for 94%, and hard liquor, especially rum and vodka, for 29%, mainly service workers and professionals. Although drinking at home and in clubs was equally preferred, students and professionals socialized and drank at bars or local restaurants during weekends. Service workers, however, generally used alcohol in their apartments.

Students, service workers, and professionals also differed in their moods at time of alcohol use, as well as in the contexts and extent of use. Although 82% described alcohol as a way to relax and socialize, the different SES groups experienced different stress-related emotions in association with drinking. Hopelessness about the future, boredom, and workplace-related tensions were the reasons service workers gave for drinking. Alcohol was a way to forget their emotional distress. This was also why 41% of them drank and became intoxicated at home. Service workers had the greatest extent of alcohol use, followed by students, then professionals. Participants also mentioned habitual use of alcohol in conjunction with their sexual experiences. Only the students reported occasional use of marijuana and experimentation with ecstasy (the synthetic amphetamine MDMA). No participants reported illegal use of prescription drugs like painkillers.

Discussion

This in-depth qualitative study examined within-community social capital and acculturative stress factors. It elucidated the influences of social capital upon acculturative stress among Indian immigrant men in NYC. This study defined social capital in terms of trust, reciprocity, and social cohesiveness. The data yielded at least three critical findings. (1) The social capital resource of family attachment provided important relief for loneliness and depression; (2) Peer bonding/connectedness in the forms of trust and mutual support was the most immediately helpful resource in negotiating the acculturation process; (3) The social class hierarchy within the Indian immigrant community contributed to participants’ alienation from that community and resulted in social discrimination that hindered immigrants with low SES to develop social relationships, especially with women.

Our study explores the mechanisms by which social capital influences acculturative stress. The study data suggest the following possibilities. (1) The kinds and degrees of social capital resources available to an individual depend on social relationships in multiple domains, namely family, peers, workplace, and community and (2) Social capital needs to be understood in sociocultural context. Social relationships do not occur outside a particular context that defines and reinforces its own social expectations and cultural norms for such relationships.

Repeatedly during the interviews, the participants themselves brought up family attachment as an important resource. They described how family attachment enhanced their feelings of family pride and contentment, thus reducing the stress of adjusting to a new country. Families helped the participants by including them in crucial family decisions such as a property purchase or a sister’s marriage plans. When they felt involved in and trusted by their families, the participants’ feelings of isolation eased. Family care and concern, expressed through advice on practical matters like cooking Indian food and staying healthy, gave the participants a sense of importance and belonging. The participants gained these benefits also when they reciprocated their families’ help by sending money home, or traveled back to India for visits with extended family. These various ways of sustaining their family ties gave the men the hope that they could persist through the difficult challenges of acculturation. In this ethnic immigrant community, any interventions to prevent and relieve acculturative stress and its adverse health effects need to take the importance of family relationships into account.

Trust and reciprocity among peers also served as important social capital resources for participants, alleviating their acculturation-related feelings of isolation. The participants disclosed how peers shared encouraging informational, instructional and emotional supports with them. Peers’ informational support guided them, for example, in developing job search skills, learning American social mannerisms (like saying “thank you,” “good morning,” or “excuse me”) and negotiating medical insurance plans and the health care system and medical insurance policies. Instructional support helped to educate the men about daily living skills like grocery shopping, cooking, and living with roommates. Emotional support in the forms of bonding and mutual concern offered participants the most relief for their acculturative stress. When their peers shared personal experiences of coping successfully with acculturation stressors, the participants felt a sense of solidarity and appreciation for their friends’ knowledge. In this way, participants’ hopelessness was reduced.

However, in some instances, prevailing peer norms increased health risks. The participants on the whole regarded alcohol as an acceptable means to relieve their feelings of frustration, social isolation, and personal failure. This study’s findings point out a potentially fruitful direction for future research: the interactions among the health-promoting and health-hindering effects that trust and bonding may have on alcohol and drug abuse and related sexual risks. From a health intervention standpoint, high levels of social capital (defined in the Indian community context as trust and reciprocity) can be used to promote rapid diffusion of risk prevention messages. Community-based outreach efforts can be extended through peers’ willingness to reciprocate.

The participants described the influences of the workplace upon their social relationships with coworkers, influences that can aggravate their acculturative stress. Study participants reported that humiliation from employers, competition among coworkers, and a feeling of little to no control resulted in distrust and emotional distress that hindered the establishment of workplace social relationships. They used alcohol as a coping response to these alienating situations.

Studies in the psychopathology of work have demonstrated that monotony arising from time constraints, work pressure, and lack of leisure opportunities adversely influence mental health, most notably through psychological distress, depression, burnout and increased alcohol and drug consumption [55, 56]. On the other hand, workplaces that foster such positive effects as feelings of control over the environment and the use of independent decision making skills have employees with higher self-esteem and confidence in their own abilities [57]. Social connectedness at work has been linked to social connectedness elsewhere. In this manner, workplace social connectedness strengthens a community’s overall social capital [58]. Further development of the social capital construct will require further studies of the complex interactions among workplace and peer relationships [59].

Participants in this study themselves mentioned that wealth and social or occupational prestige determined one’s position in NYCs Indian immigrant community. Because it so heavily influenced social criteria for including people in or excluding them from the community, SES could reinforce connection to or disengagement from the group. The blue-collar participants themselves noted that their lack of connectedness to the community hindered their efforts to establish social relationships with women and to participate as a member in community activities. The findings of this study challenge the assumption of immigrant communities as internally monolithic. Indian immigrant New Yorkers vary in occupational, educational, and income status. The participants were keenly aware that these variables took priority over shared Indian nationality itself in the establishment of social bonds. Unless they first assess any social capital differences among subgroups, community-based interventions will not fully meet the needs of any targeted group. Unless it refines community-level variables in sociocultural context, future research will not shed more light on the mechanisms that link social capital and acculturative stress.

Limitations of the Study

This study contributes to the emerging but still limited knowledge of the mechanisms by which social capital influences acculturative risks in Indian sociocultural context. It should be noted, however, that this study is exploratory and its results preliminary. Further research is necessary to delineate the causal relationships between social capital and acculturative risk. The findings’ generalizability is limited by the use of a purposive sampling technique that does not capture the entire spectrum of Indian immigrants’ behaviors and demographic characteristics. The small sample size further limits generalization beyond the participants in terms of education, occupation, and number of years in the US. This study only included men who identified themselves as heterosexuals and who resided in NYC. In India, clearly defined gender roles and expectations differ markedly for men and women. Thus different sociocultural contexts may influence and shape the social and intimate relations and practices of men and women. For example, the belief that the man is the “provider” and the woman the maintainer of the home which is still quite strong and widely adhered to—rationalizes the practice why if a whole family cannot immigrate at once, then the man goes abroad first to work while the woman stays at home in India with any children they may have. Also because of these gender roles it is more acceptable and frequent for men, both married and single, to engage in various risky behaviors alleviate the stresses [loneliness, isolation] of living without a partner. To understand the ways that pre-immigration sociocultural norms shape post-immigration social behavior and practices, future studies must explore and compare the social relationships, social capital, and acculturative stress in transnational contexts of both men and women, married as well as single. To convey comprehensive and meaningful information on community, future studies will need to integrate qualitative and quantitative measures and use a larger, more representative sample.

Conclusions

This study highlights the importance of sociocultural contexts in understanding the pathways by which social capital influences acculturative stressors in different subgroups within one particular community. Community-specific social norms and attitudes, along with SES, characterize the operation of social capital through social relations. Community-based health promotion needs to target intervention points with greater precision and cultural competence. It must take into account the subgroup variations in social capital that may exist within the same ethnic community.