Relocating to a new country is often framed as a positive life step… an expansion, an opportunity, a form of growth.
What receives less attention is the psychological cost of inhabiting more than one cultural world at once.
For many people, the experience is not simply one of adaptation, but of internal division, a subtle and ongoing negotiation between identities, values, and ways of being.
Acculturation is not just adaptation – it is psychological work
In psychological literature, the process of adapting to a new cultural environment is referred to as acculturation. Contemporary models describe this not as a linear process, but as a dynamic negotiation between maintaining one’s original cultural identity and engaging with the new one (Berry, 1997; Schwartz et al., 2010).
This negotiation carries a psychological cost.
More recent research continues to show that acculturative stress is associated with increased levels of anxiety, depressive symptoms, and emotional exhaustion, particularly when individuals feel pressure to adapt quickly or lack adequate support (American Psychological Association, 2021; Torres et al., 2012).
The difficulty lies not only in learning a new culture, but in holding two frameworks simultaneously.
The fragmentation of identity
Living between cultures often disrupts the continuity of identity.
Identity, in psychological terms, is not fixed, it is constructed through context, relationships, and repeated experiences. When these change, identity must reorganise.
Research on bicultural identity highlights that individuals may experience identity conflict when cultural expectations differ or feel incompatible (Benet-Martínez & Haritatos, 2005).
This can lead to:
- A sense of being “different” in every context
- Difficulty locating a stable sense of self
- Emotional fatigue from constant adjustment
- The feeling of performing rather than being
Over time, this can produce a subtle form of disconnection – not only from others, but from one’s own internal experience.
Belonging and the nervous system
The experience of not fully belonging is not only cognitive – it is physiological.
Current research in psychology and neuroscience indicates that social belonging is a fundamental human need, closely linked to emotional regulation and wellbeing (Baumeister & Leary, 1995; updated discussions in Cacioppo & Cacioppo, 2018). When belonging is unstable or unclear, the nervous system may remain in a state of low-level vigilance:
- Increased sensitivity to social cues
- Fear of misunderstanding or rejection
- Emotional exhaustion after interactions
- Difficulty fully relaxing in social environments
This is often misinterpreted as personal insecurity, when it is in fact a context-driven response.
Migration grief: what is lost but rarely acknowledged
Another dimension often overlooked is migration-related grief. This is not limited to the loss of people or places, but includes:
- Loss of familiarity
- Loss of language nuances
- Loss of spontaneous identity (who you are without effort)
- Loss of cultural mirroring
Recent literature describes this as a form of ambiguous loss, where what is lost is not always visible or socially recognised (Boss, 2016). Because these losses are often minimised (“you chose this”, “it’s a good opportunity”), they may remain unprocessed, contributing to emotional weight over time.
Why “just adapting” is not the solution
There is a common assumption that the goal is to adapt as quickly and efficiently as possible.
However, research consistently shows that forced assimilation suppressing one’s original identity in favour of the new culture, is associated with poorer psychological outcomes (Berry, 1997; Nguyen & Benet-Martínez, 2013).
In contrast, individuals who develop an integrated identity, where both cultural experiences are acknowledged and allowed, tend to show better emotional wellbeing.
This process is not immediate. It requires reflection, time, and often support.
A different way of approaching the experience
Rather than treating this experience as something to “fix”, it can be understood as a process of reorganisation and integration.
This involves:
- Recognising the psychological impact of living between cultures
- Allowing complexity, rather than forcing clarity too quickly
- Making space for both loss and growth
- Reconnecting with a sense of self that is not dependent on one context
This is not about eliminating discomfort, but about understanding it and creating a more stable internal position within it.
Holding the complexity of this experience
Living between cultures is not a simple transition. It is a layered psychological experience that involves identity, belonging, and adaptation at multiple levels. When understood in this way, the emotional weight many people carry begins to make sense – not as a personal limitation, but as a reflection of the complexity of the experience itself.
FYI.REFERENCES
-
American Psychological Association (2021). Stress in America Report (sections on minority and cultural stress).
-
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong. Psychological Bulletin.
-
Benet-Martínez, V., & Haritatos, J. (2005). Bicultural identity integration. Journal of Personality.
-
Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology.
-
Boss, P. (2016). The Context and Process of Theory Development: The Story of Ambiguous Loss.
-
Cacioppo, S., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2018). Loneliness in the modern age. Annual Review of Psychology.
-
Nguyen, A. M. D., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2013). Biculturalism and adjustment. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology.
-
Schwartz, S. J. et al. (2010). Rethinking the concept of acculturation. American Psychologist.
-
Torres, L. et al. (2012). Acculturative stress and mental health. Journal of Clinical Psychology.