A first-generation immigrant is someone who was born in one country and moved to live permanently in another, though even that seemingly simple definition gets muddier than you might expect. Researchers, government agencies, and everyday conversation sometimes use the term differently, and those differences matter when you’re reading statistics about immigrant outcomes. The experience of being first-generation touches nearly every dimension of life: health, income, family structure, housing, mental well-being, and civic identity.
Who Counts as First Generation
In most academic and government usage, “first generation” refers to people who were born abroad and migrated to a new country as adults or older children. Their U.S.-born (or host-country-born) children are typically called the “second generation.” But there’s a wrinkle: some surveys and news outlets flip the labels, calling the children of immigrants the “first generation” because they are the first in the family born on the new country’s soil. The Census Bureau, most migration researchers, and organizations like the Pew Research Center use the foreign-born meaning, and that is the convention this article follows.
Even within that foreign-born definition, researchers have argued that lumping everyone together obscures important differences. A person who immigrated at age five has a vastly different experience from someone who arrived at forty-five. One influential framework decomposes the first generation into distinct cohorts based on age and life stage at the time of migration, because a child who grows up in the new country’s school system shares more in common with the second generation than with someone who arrived mid-career.
The “1.5 generation” label emerged to capture people who immigrated as children or young teenagers. They didn’t choose to migrate, they were brought by parents, and they tend to acculturate faster than adults who arrived with established careers and social networks. Recognizing these distinctions matters because research findings about “first-generation immigrants” can look very different depending on whether the sample includes five-year-olds or only working-age adults.1International Migration Review. Ages, Life Stages, and Generational Cohorts: Decomposing the Immigrant First and Second Generations in the United States
The Healthy Immigrant Paradox
One of the most-discussed patterns in migration research is the “healthy immigrant paradox.” First-generation immigrants tend to arrive in better health than native-born people of similar demographic and socioeconomic backgrounds. This has been documented across multiple host countries, including the United States and Germany.2PubMed Central. Recasting the Immigrant Health Paradox Through Intersections of Legal Status and Race3PubMed. A longitudinal perspective to migrant health: Unpacking the immigrant health paradox in Germany
The paradox is that this advantage erodes over time. The longer immigrants live in the host country, the more their health profiles begin to resemble, and sometimes worsen relative to, the native-born population. Researchers have attributed the decline to a combination of factors: adopting less healthy eating habits, experiencing chronic stress from discrimination or economic hardship, and picking up behaviors common in the new environment, like reduced physical activity or higher alcohol consumption.4Social Science Quarterly. Unraveling the Healthy Immigrant Paradox: The Impact of Inclusion on Immigrant Health Outcomes in the United States
This idea that longer residence leads to worse health has been called the “negative acculturation” theory. A critical review of the evidence among Asian immigrants found that the pattern is real but not universal. Some health outcomes worsen with time in the U.S., while others do not follow the expected trajectory. The picture depends on which health condition you measure, which immigrant group you study, and how acculturation itself is defined.5PubMed Central. The longer you stay, the worse your health? A critical review of the negative acculturation theory among Asian immigrants
Acculturative Stress and Mental Health
Beyond physical health, first-generation immigrants face distinct mental health pressures. Acculturative stress refers to the psychological strain that comes from navigating a new culture: language barriers, unfamiliar social norms, loss of status, separation from family, and experiences of discrimination. A scoping review found significant links between acculturative stress and depression, anxiety, substance misuse, and poor psychological well-being among immigrant youth.6PubMed Central. The Role of Acculturative Stress on the Mental Health of Immigrant Youth: A Scoping Literature Review
The effect appears to be stronger for first-generation immigrants than for later generations. A meta-analysis of studies on young people from racial and ethnic minority backgrounds found a moderate-sized link between acculturative stress and depression and anxiety, and moderation analyses suggested that the impact on both depression and anxiety was more pronounced for first-generation immigrants specifically.7PubMed. The impact of acculturative stress on internalizing problems among racially and ethnically minoritized adolescents and young adults in the U.S.: A systematic review and meta-analysis
For first-generation children between twelve and eighteen, acculturative stress was linked to lower self-esteem and higher depression. Interestingly, it was also associated with stronger family cohesion, suggesting that stress from the outside world can push immigrant families closer together as a coping mechanism.8Journal of International Migration and Integration. Experiences of Acculturation Stress in First-Generation Immigrant Children: Examining the Relationship Among Acculturation Stress, Depression, and Family Dynamics
Earnings and Economic Assimilation
A central question about first-generation immigrants is whether they close the income gap with native-born workers over time. Research using tax records linked to survey data found that the answer depends heavily on race. White and Asian immigrants were able to narrow the earnings gap with native-born white Americans more effectively than Black and Hispanic immigrants, who nonetheless approached earnings parity with native-born people of their own racial and ethnic backgrounds.9PubMed Central. Immigrants’ Economic Assimilation: Evidence from Longitudinal Earnings Records
This racially differentiated pattern is important because it complicates the classic narrative of immigrant upward mobility. The “American Dream” story in which a first-generation immigrant arrives poor and gradually climbs the economic ladder describes some groups’ experiences well but not others’. Structural barriers like discrimination in hiring and differences in credential recognition play a significant role in shaping these trajectories.
Entrepreneurship
First-generation immigrants punch above their weight in business creation. Data from the Survey of Business Owners showed that first-generation immigrants created about a quarter of all new firms in the United States, and that share climbed above 40% in some states. In prominent tech clusters, the concentration of immigrant founders was especially high. However, immigrant-owned businesses tended to create fewer jobs than native-owned firms, and they offered fewer benefits to employees, though pay levels were comparable. These firms were also more engaged in international activities, likely reflecting the transnational networks that come with being foreign-born.10Research Policy. Immigrant entrepreneurship in America: Evidence from the survey of business owners 2007 & 2012
The takeaway from the entrepreneurship data is nuanced. Immigrant founders are a significant engine of business formation, but the typical immigrant-owned firm is smaller and leans on quantity rather than scale. Silicon Valley’s immigrant entrepreneurship story, for instance, appears to be driven less by a few massive companies and more by the sheer number of immigrant-founded startups.
The Role of Ethnic Enclaves
When first-generation immigrants settle near others from their home country, these communities can serve as economic springboards. Research on refugees placed in areas with larger existing co-national communities found that those refugees were more likely to enter the labor market. The benefit was strongest around three years after arrival and weakened somewhat with longer residency.11PubMed Central. Ethnic networks can foster the economic integration of refugees
That weakening effect over time hints at a more complicated story. Evidence from a German dispersal policy found that larger ethnic enclaves provided short-term job opportunities through informal networks, but this convenience reduced the incentive for immigrants to invest in new skills or language fluency. In the long run, immigrants in larger enclaves had lower employment and income compared to those who had been placed in areas with fewer co-nationals. The enclave, in other words, can be a comfortable landing pad that eventually becomes a ceiling.12IZA World of Labor. Ethnic enclaves and immigrant economic integration
Family Dynamics Across Generations
One of the more emotionally charged aspects of first-generation immigrant life is the tension that can develop within families as parents and children acculturate at different speeds. Children typically pick up the host country’s language and cultural norms faster than their parents, creating what researchers call an acculturation gap. The hypothesis is that this gap causes distress, and while findings are mixed, the pattern itself is well documented.13PubMed. When and how do parent-child acculturation gaps matter? A systematic review and recommendations for research and practice
A national study found that second-generation adolescents, who by definition have at least one foreign-born parent, acculturated faster than first-generation adolescents and their immigrant parents. This gap showed up in measurable ways: lower family cohesion, fewer shared family dinners each week, less parental oversight of daily activities, and more frequent serious arguments about behavior compared to first-generation youth and their parents.14PubMed Central. The acculturation gap of parent–child relationships in immigrant families: A national study
For first-generation parents, this can feel like losing their children to an unfamiliar culture. For the children, it can feel like their parents don’t understand the world they’re actually growing up in. The resulting friction is a recurring theme in immigrant family life, and it is distinct from the normal parent-teen conflicts that all families experience.
Transnational Ties and Remittances
First-generation immigrants rarely sever connections with their home country. They send money, own property abroad, visit, vote in home-country elections, and maintain regular contact with relatives. A study comparing generations of Turkish migrants in Europe found that first-generation migrants were more likely than later generations to visit, send remittances, own property, and vote in home-country elections. Contact frequency, however, stayed roughly the same across generations, perhaps because technology has made staying in touch cheap and easy regardless of generation.15Comparative Migration Studies. Comparing generations of migrants’ transnational behaviour: the role of the transnational convoy and integration
Remittances can carry a hidden health cost. Among sub-Saharan African women immigrants, sending money home was associated with poorer health, and this effect was especially strong for mothers who were separated from their children. For men, the same association did not appear. The financial pressure of supporting a household abroad while building a new life can weigh particularly heavily on women who bear dual caregiving expectations.16PubMed. Transnational ties and the health of sub-Saharan African migrants: The moderating role of gender and family separation
Housing and Homeownership
Homeownership is often treated as a milestone of immigrant integration, and first-generation immigrants face a steeper path to it than the native-born. A cross-national analysis of five European countries found that immigrants, especially those from non-European countries, were less likely to transition into homeownership and more likely to move into social or private rental housing compared to natives. Some of those disparities narrowed across generations, but descendants of certain immigrant groups still showed lower rates of homeownership and higher rates of social renting.17PubMed Central. Residential Mobility and Housing Tenure Among Immigrants and Their Descendants: a Cross-National Analysis of Five European Countries
In the American context, the trajectory varies by origin. Research on U.S. immigrant homeownership found that Asian immigrants achieved high rates of homeownership relatively quickly after arrival, while Hispanic immigrants started from very low levels but showed sustained upward movement over time.18International Migration Review. Immigrant Trajectories into Homeownership: A Temporal Analysis of Residential Assimilation
Building Credit and Financial Visibility
A less-discussed barrier for first-generation immigrants is the lack of a credit history in their new country. A study of newly landed immigrants in Canada found that those who had been in the country for under two years were about twice as likely to be “credit invisible,” meaning they lacked enough credit history to generate a score, compared to Canadian-born families. That gap disappeared after about two years, and immigrants who had been in Canada for two to four years were actually slightly more visible in the credit system than comparable native-born families. The catch: much of that early visibility came from credit cards rather than higher-limit instruments like mortgages or vehicle loans. So immigrants were entering the credit system quickly, but not yet accessing the types of credit that build major wealth.19Statistics Canada. Immigrant credit visibility: Access to credit over time in Canada
Crime Rates and Public Perception
Few topics generate as much heat and as little light as immigrant crime. A study using comprehensive data from Texas compared arrest rates across three groups: undocumented immigrants, legal immigrants, and native-born U.S. citizens. Native-born citizens were over two times more likely to be arrested for violent crimes, two and a half times more likely for drug crimes, and over four times more likely for property crimes compared to undocumented immigrants. Legal immigrants fell between the two groups but still had lower rates than the native-born.20PubMed Central. Comparing crime rates between undocumented immigrants, legal immigrants, and native-born US citizens in Texas
These findings are consistent with a broader pattern in criminology: immigration tends to be associated with lower, not higher, crime rates. The gap between perception and data on this topic remains one of the starkest disconnects in public policy debates about immigration.
Civic and Political Participation
First-generation immigrants who become naturalized citizens tend to engage politically more than you might assume. A study that took advantage of close referendum outcomes in Switzerland found that naturalization led to considerable improvements in formal political participation, political knowledge, and a sense of political effectiveness among immigrants. The act of gaining citizenship itself, rather than simply living in a country for a long time, appeared to be the catalyst that drew people into civic life.21PubMed Central. Naturalization fosters the long-term political integration of immigrants
Aging as a First-Generation Immigrant
Growing old far from one’s country of origin introduces a distinct set of challenges. First-generation immigrants consistently report lower levels of social support and poorer self-rated health compared to non-migrants, even after accounting for demographics and socioeconomic factors. And here is where it gets counterintuitive: while social support is generally associated with better health in the general population, that relationship weakens or even reverses among first- and second-generation migrants. Researchers have described this as an “isolation paradox,” where immigrants appear healthiest at very low levels of social support and do not get the same health boost from social connections that non-migrants do.22PubMed. The isolation paradox: A comparative study of social support and health across migrant generations in the U.S.
For immigrants who arrived later in life, particularly those who moved at age forty-five or older, loneliness is strongly tied to depressive symptoms. That link grows even stronger when the older immigrant perceives family relationships as strained or spends little time actively helping family members, suggesting that not just the existence but the quality and direction of family ties matters for mental health in old age.23PubMed Central. Loneliness, age at immigration, family relationships, and depression among older immigrants: A moderated relationship
Navigating Health and Social Services
A practical challenge that often goes unnoticed by native-born populations is the sheer effort required for first-generation immigrants to access basic health and social services. A study of first-generation immigrants aged forty-one to sixty-seven in Finland, Sweden, and Norway described access as ongoing, cumulative work: interpreting official letters, monitoring digital channels, booking appointments, explaining medical needs, following referrals, and constantly weighing whether pursuing another round of contact was worth the effort. The repetitive nature of this bureaucratic navigation generated fatigue and uncertainty. Family members often helped bridge the gap but at the cost of the immigrant’s privacy. Some immigrants simply postponed or abandoned attempts to get care.24International Journal of Migration, Health and Social Care. Cumulative navigation burden in health and social care among First-Generation immigrants aged 41–67 in Finland, Sweden and Norway
This “navigation burden” compounds over a lifetime. It is not a one-time obstacle that clears once you learn the system. Systems change, forms update, and each new health concern requires a fresh round of advocacy. For aging first-generation immigrants who may face cognitive decline, reduced mobility, or shrinking social networks, the burden only intensifies. Understanding the first-generation experience means recognizing that integration is not a single event but an ongoing process that never fully resolves, even decades after arrival.