Background: The merging of cultures has led to a more diverse workforce in organizations which has implications that should be taken into account, especially regarding occupational health. Studies undertaken worldwide have found that immigrant workers are subject to less well-being than their native counterparts. Very little is known about the determinants of those differences at the individual level. The present study explores the prediction of psychological health as a function of the origin of the worker (immigrant vs. native) with the ‘Big Five’ personality traits and the perception of safety climate as predictors. Method: Three hundred and ten workers (42.6% immigrants, 57.4% natives) participated in the study. Predictors, criterion, and biographical variables were assessed by means of a self-administrated questionnaire. Multiple regression models were subsequently performed. Results: We found no relevant differences between immigrants and natives in well-being, but there were differences in the predictors. Immigrants’ well-being (R2 adj =.23) was explained mainly by emotional stability (β =.41, p =.000) and extraversion (β =.22, p =.004), whereas natives’ well-being (R2 adj =.37) was determined only by emotional stability (β =.35, p =.000). Perception of safety climate was not involved in any model. Conclusions: The differential profile between immigrant and native workers provides support to the consideration of immigration as a risk factor, recommending the organizations to develop action plans to facilitate the acculturative process. © 2018 Sociedad Española para el Estudio de la Ansiedad y el Estrés - SEAS

Perception of safety climate Migrant personality Native workers Immigrant workers Immigration Well-being

controlled study perception human prediction immigrant risk factor psychological well-being organization questionnaire climate indigenous people Article multiple regression immigration emotional stability extraversion human experiment worker