The Impact of Migration on Marital Relationships: A Study of Ethiopian Immigrants in Toronto
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little research has examined how migration affects marital relationships, or the processes by which immigrant couples adapt to their new circumstances. This paper presents data from a research project conducted with newcomer Ethiopians in Toronto, both married and divorced or separated. The objective of this paper is to document post-migration changes in the lives of newcomer couples and to examine the impact of post-migration changes on marital relationships. The study sample consisted of 25 participants, all of who were Ethiopian immigrants to Toronto. Both individual and focus group interviews were conducted. The major types of post-migration changes described by study participants were losses of household help, emotional support, income and status, and changes in gender roles. The impacts of these change on marital relationships were described as increased marital conflict, increased autonomy for women, increased mutual dependence, more joint decisionmaking, and changes in communication and intimacy. Study findings challenged the notion that the impact of post-migration changes on marital relationships is all negative. Recognising the potential for positive and negative changes in marital relationships following migration can inform the practices of settlement organizations and the development of violence prevention strategies for newcomer couples and communities. Findings also have implications for the development of theory on the etiology of IPV. However, future research is necessary to confirm study findings with other immigrant communities representing different migration and resettlement experiences to identify commonalties and synthesize results across communities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".