Migration has been a crucial global phenomenon, affecting individuals and societies for many years. According to the most recent report, as of 2020, migrants constituted 3.60% of the world's population, with an estimated 281 million (McAuliffe & Oucho, 2024). In recent years, emigration from Türkiye has also been noticeably rising in parallel with the global trend. Turkish Statistical Institute (2025) reports showed that 151,000 Turkish citizens left the country in 2024. Migration is not only a physical move; it's a process that starts long before the departure. Migrants' experiences in the pre-departure phase are unique. Due to various individual and non-individual factors, each person experiences a different process. And, they may face multiple challenges during the pre-departure phase. They experience pre-departure stress due to some challenges such as quitting jobs, arranging new accommodation, and completing detailed legal processes (Tabor & Milfont, 2011), financial factors such as high costs, recurring payments, and exchange rates (Khanal & Gaulee, 2019), getting accurate information (Khanal & Gaulee, 2019), pre-migration concerns about loneliness, unfamiliar food, accommodation quality, language barriers, and potential (Brown & Aktaş, 2011).

Mental health is a critical concern for prospective migrants, as it both influences the decision to migrate and shapes how individuals experience the pre- and post-departure processes. Research indicates that migrant candidates may experience increased levels of depression and anxiety symptoms (Sancak et al., 2023). These symptoms may either precede migration and motivating individuals to leave, or emerge as a result of the psychological demands of preparing for migration. Also, pre-departure emotional states, cognitive styles, and psychological resources are closely linked to post-migration adjustment. Studies demonstrate the role of pre-migration resources as well. Higher levels of pre-migration resources, such as self-esteem, body image, and social and school competence, were associated with lower acculturative stress and homesickness and higher loneliness and emotional or behavioral problems (Tartakovsky, 2007). Also, under-met expectations were found to be related to depression (Rogers & Ward, 1993) and having no clear goals and poorly planned migration was found to be related to mental health issues (Chou, 2009). How individuals interpret the meaning of migration itself also plays a key role in their psychological well-being during settlement (Bürgelt et al., 2008). Together, these findings suggest that psychoeducation and psychological preparation in the pre-departure period may serve a protective function. In line with this, migrant workers have emphasized the need for pre-departure programs that go beyond practical information and include structured mental health support (Regmi et al., 2020).

Given the increasing number of migrants, the migration process, which varies according to individual variables and conditions, deserves to be examined multidimensionally. To represent the multifaceted nature of pre-migration experiences, this study incorporates several theoretical stances. Push and pull theory (Lee, 1966) helps interpret participants' fundamental migration decisions, relative deprivation theory (Stark, 1984) facilitates the interpretation of the mechanisms of some factors in migration decisions, and ecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1977) provides a framework to understand the interaction between the systems they are part of and their migration decisions and processes. Drawing on this multidimensional theoretical framework, this study aims develop an understanding of how Turkish emigrant candidates experience their pre-departure period.

In this study, phenomenology, which aims to understand a phenomenon by focusing on the experiences of individuals and the phenomenon’s meaning for them, was employed. Interpretative phenomenology is adopted because it is believed that accessing participants' experiences is always possible through the researcher's perspective, and that findings cannot be independent of the researcher's interpretations (Smith & Nizza, 2022). In line with IPA, participants were recruited by using purposive and snowball sampling methods. The inclusion criteria for this study were being over 18 years old, a citizen of the Republic of Türkiye currently residing in Türkiye, having at least a bachelor’s degree or being an undergraduate student, planning to emigrate, having initiated formal migration procedures, and having received at least one official approval related to migration (e.g., a scholarship for study abroad, an acceptance letter from a foreign institution, a green card, or a visa). The sample included 11 participants aged 23 to 50. Data were collected with a semi-structured interview form developed by the researchers based on the migration literature and personal experiences. The form was revised based on three expert opinions and three cognitive interviews with three migrant candidates who evaluated the clarity and comprehensibility of the questions. The research announcement was both shared on social media and communicated to people in the researchers' network who met the criteria. All interviews were conducted online and audio-recorded with participants’ permission. Transcripts were extracted from the audio recordings taken during the interviews. The analysis process recommended for IPA was followed (Smith & Nizza, 2022). MAXQDA 2022 was used to analyze the data. To enhance the trustworthiness of the study, strategies proposed by (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) for addressing credibility, dependability, confirmability, and transferability were systematically employed throughout the research process. The analysis was shared with a research assistant who had previously conducted IPA. Also, prolonged engagement was achieved through in-depth, more than one-hour semi-structured interviews, and iterative engagement with the data was achieved during transcription and analysis, allowing for a familiarity with participants’ narratives. To provide an idea of the transferability of the research, criterion sampling was employed, and information regarding participants was presented.

The analysis yielded four group experiential themes that are motivators for migration, challenges, facilitators, and returning decision. When the motivations of participants to migrate were examined, economic factors, societal and political factors, education and career-related factors, and individual factors seemed to be effective in migration decisions. Participants mentioned that a lack of quality education or the inability to meet the requirements of their jobs were reasons for migration. Also, it was seen that all participants had at least two of these four motivators. Participants also talked about what challenged them during the preparation process. They frequently mentioned how decision-making, uncertainty, and anxiety, to be leaving, and formal procedures challenge them. They have a lot of “what if” questions and scenarios that they do not want to experience. While there were things that challenged the participants, there were also things that helped them. Some individual facilitators, social support, researching and planning, and seeing what others have done facilitated this process for them. These factors helped them by motivating them, helping them overcome difficulties, or making the process easier. The decision to return also emerged as a salient consideration among participants. Most participants established a self-defined "trial period," and identified economic, sociopolitical, educational/career-related factors, and factors related to loved ones, as influential in shaping their decisions regarding whether to return. Participants were found to compare themselves to their parents' circumstances and feel despair due to perceived decline in economic welfare. Interpreted within the framework of relative deprivation theory, individuals engage in intergenerational comparison not only with those in their immediate environment but also across generations. Furthermore, it was observed that while participants generally made migration decisions due to macroeconomic factors, they maintained their well-being during this process through microeconomic factors. This could indicate that initiatives to support migrants need to be increased.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32(7), 513–531. Brown, L., & Aktas, G. (2011). Fear of the unknown: A pre-departure qualitative study of Turkish international students. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 39(4), 339–355. https://doi.org/10.1080/03069885.2011.576314 Bürgelt, P. T., Morgan, M., & Pernice, R. (2008). Staying or returning: Pre‐migration influences on the migration process of German migrants to New Zealand. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 18(4), 282–298. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.924 Chou, K. L. (2009). Pre-migration planning and depression among new migrants to Hong Kong: The moderating role of social support. Journal of Affective Disorders, 114(1-3), 85–93. https://doi.org//10.1016/j.jad.2008.06.005 Khanal, J., & Gaulee, U. (2019). Challenges of international students from pre-departure to post-study: A literature review. Journal of International Students, 9(2), 560-581. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v9i2.673 Lee, E. S. (1966). A theory of migration. Demography, 3, 47–57. Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage Publications. McAuliffe, M. and L.A. Oucho (eds.), 2024. World Migration Report 2024. International Organization for Migration (IOM), Geneva. Regmi, P. R., Aryal, N., van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P., & Adhikary, P. (2020). Nepali migrant workers and the need for pre-departure training on mental health: A qualitative study. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 22, 973–981. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-019-00960-z Rogers, J., & Ward, C. (1993). Expectation-experience discrepancies and psychological adjustment during cross-cultural reentry. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 17(2), 185–196. Sancak, B., Selek, S. N., & Sarı, E. (2023). Depression, anxiety, stress levels, and five‐factor personality traits as predictors of clinical medical students' migration intention: A cross‐sectional study of brain drain. The International Journal of Health Planning and Management, 38(4), 1015–1031. https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.3646 Smith, J. A., & Nizza, I. E. (2022). Essentials of interpretative phenomenological analysis. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000259-000 Stark, O. (1984). Discontinuity and the theory of international migration. Kyklos, 37(2), 206–222. Tabor, A. S., & Milfont, T. L. (2011). Migration change model: Exploring the process of migration on a psychological level. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 35(6), 818–832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2010.11.013 Tartakovsky, E. (2007). A longitudinal study of acculturative stress and homesickness: High-school adolescents immigrating from Russia and Ukraine to Israel without parents. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 42, 485–494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-007-0184-1 Turkish Statistical Institute (2025, June 24). International Migration Statistics, 2024 (54083). https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Uluslararasi-Goc-Istatistikleri-2024-54083